Am 12.01.2013 00:07, schrieb mo...@arcor.de:
Please note that catchall addresses are evil and strongly discouraged.
Whys that? Im the only recipient of all mail directed at domainA.org (so no
spying) and as such can use websiteisignedupw...@domaina.org so I can
always tell which site
Am 12.01.2013 01:50, schrieb mo...@arcor.de:
From another reply from a different person:
hopefully you NEVER bounce because an internal error
I don't see the difference between catchall and not-catchall for this. if
postfix accepts a mail which then bounces with dovecot for... say quota
Am 12.01.2013 01:50, schrieb mo...@arcor.de:
found the section about chroot, remembered I had that turned on for some
parts
turned them all of for testing. :x, postfix reload
went for coffee (mainly saying this because there was a 5 minute break here)
came back tried again (as before with
Am 08.01.2013 17:44, schrieb Mark Goodge:
On 08/01/2013 16:38, Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wrote:
Em 08/01/2013, às 14:21, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org
escreveu:
Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
Why keep trying when we have a clear signal of a temporary
error?
As Victor noted Postfix does
Am 08.01.2013 17:48, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
Instead, Postfix tries to deliver a DIFFERENT message. It would be
incorrect IN THE GENERAL CASE to postpone ALL deliveries to a site
just because FIVE recipients were unavailable.
Thats why it would be interesting to
Am 08.01.2013 19:08, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
Configurable, perhaps. But it would a mistake to make this the
default strategy.
That would make Postfix vulnerable to a trivial denial of service
attack where one bad recipient can block all mail for all other
Am 08.01.2013 20:16, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Reindl Harald:
Big deal. Now I can block all mail for gmail.com by getting 100
email messages into your queue
how comes?
how do you get gmail.com answer to any delivery from you with 4xx?
He wants to temporarily suspend delivery when site has
Am 08.01.2013 20:51, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 02:39:17PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni:
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 01:08:21PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
I could add an option to treat this in the same manner as failure
to connect errors (i.e.
Am 08.01.2013 21:40, schrieb Wietse Venema:
My conclusion is that Postfix can continue to provide basic policies
that avoid worst-case failure modes, but the choice of the settings
that control those policies is better left to the operator. If the
receiver slams on the brakes, then Postfix
Am 08.01.2013 21:48, schrieb Titanus Eramius:
This raises the question (or at least I think it do), if it's
possible to force the users onto 587 by denying relay access to 25?
it's more a human problem than a technically to force a large amount
of users to change their for a long time wrong
Am 08.01.2013 22:03, schrieb Titanus Eramius:
But it raises a question (like i wrote in the reply to Noel), and that
is (as far as i know) that I need to ensure the use of 587 so users
can't go around rate limiting on 587 by using 25 for relaying.
Would such a thing be possible to do?
Am 09.01.2013 02:57, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:02:31PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 08.01.2013 21:40, schrieb Wietse Venema:
My conclusion is that Postfix can continue to provide basic policies
that avoid worst-case failure modes, but the choice of the settings
Am 09.01.2013 03:17, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
the request was after 20 temp fails to the same destination
retry the next delivers to THIS destination FIVE MINUTES later
That's not what happens when a destination is throttled, all mail
there is deferred, and is retried some indefinite time
Am 04.01.2013 12:38, schrieb Michael Blessenohl:
Well, it doesn't: all this discussion was about receiving e-mails of that
kind.
Not about sending them. Sending them is supported by postfix by default.
nonsense
how do you send a message which is not received from the MUA first?
MUA -
Am 04.01.2013 21:41, schrieb Hannes Lau:
Dear Postfix users,
I am trying to bounce all messages to a specific domain with a multi-line
message. To do so, I added the error
mailer to my /etc/postfix/transport and specified a bounce reason like this:
domainname.tld error: first line of
Am 03.01.2013 22:03, schrieb martijn.list:
On 01/03/2013 09:48 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
I'm sorry, I'll try not to use my smartphone again to answer mails from
this list.
I ment using a remote machine as client to connect to the postfix server
as opposed to connect to the machine
Am 02.01.2013 23:40, schrieb Michael Sloan:
One of the users has sent mail with a return address using the FQDN of the
mail server, namely
u...@mail.dept.university.edu and now Postfix is rejecting this as it
believes the user does not exist.
Currently I have the following defined:
Am 03.01.2013 04:02, schrieb Michael Blessenohl:
I tried using an e-mail address @@example.com in postfix. When I try to
deliver a mail to it, postfix rejects it
with the error message
501 5.1.3 Bad recipient address syntax (state 13)
I defined an alias, so in theory it should work.
Am 03.01.2013 04:13, schrieb Michael Blessenohl:
Am 03.01.2013 04:06, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 03.01.2013 04:02, schrieb Michael Blessenohl:
I tried using an e-mail address @@example.com in postfix. When I try to
deliver a mail to it, postfix rejects it
with the error message
501 5.1.3
Am 28.12.2012 18:38, schrieb John Allen:
A resident LMTP daemon uses fewer CPU cycles than a process that
is created once for each delivery, but with 30 users the difference
matters only if you have a 15-year old computer (i.e. the technology
that was available when I started work on
do it yourself or what makes you to a IT manager?
List-Post: mailto:postfix-users@postfix.org
List-Help: http://www.postfix.org/lists.html
List-Unsubscribe: mailto:majord...@postfix.org
List-Subscribe: mailto:majord...@postfix.org
Am 28.12.2012 22:49, schrieb Andres Bastidas:
remove
Am 23.12.2012 16:24, schrieb John Allen:
I am using Dovecot as my mail delivery mechanism for both local and virtual
users, plus using it as my SASL auth agent.
My setup is for a small business (average 30 users).
The mail system is on a single server.
Which would be better unix/pipes and
Am 24.12.2012 02:38, schrieb Alex:
It also looks like mail originates from IPs other than those listed as
an MX record for alice.it
MX record has nothing to do with sending IP's
it is only the incoming server
in nearly any larger setup they are different
because you have incoming servers
Am 22.12.2012 23:10, schrieb Andrew Edelstein:
I have an issue where some of our web servers are passing bad email addresses
to a Postfix server, which is then
doing some sort of re-write on the address to make it compliant, then passing
it to our outbound server (PowerMTA).
PowerMTA is
Am 21.12.2012 01:19, schrieb John Allen:
I am doing the admin work for a small group, about 30 people.
While this setup works I have the feeling that I am missing something in the
Submission stanza of master.cf which
might leave me vulnerable
and how do you imagine anybody can help you
Am 21.12.2012 13:23, schrieb /dev/rob0:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 06:52:21AM -0500, John Allen wrote:
On 21/12/2012 6:25 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.12.2012 01:19, schrieb John Allen:
I am doing the admin work for a small group, about 30 people.
While this setup works I have the feeling
Am 21.12.2012 18:25, schrieb motty cruz:
Hello,
I have the following in my configuration but does not seem to make any
difference on the connection errors I see in
the logs
smtpd_error_sleep_time=1h
smtpd_soft_error_limit=10
smtpd_hard_error_limit=20
log:
Dec 21 09:22:53 mas
but it continues
to accept connections from that
spammer IP Ads.
I may be confuse with another setting? is there a way to refuse connection
when spammer is trying to farm user list?
Thanks,
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net
Am 20.12.2012 00:31, schrieb /dev/rob0:
We don't know what you want. What is this certificate to be used for?
Do you want a self-signed certificate, or to run your own CA, or to
submit your CSR to an external CA?
there is no difference between self-signed and submit to external CA
the
Am 14.12.2012 22:36, schrieb Valone:
I have Postfix/DoveCot/SASL with mysql setup up running on Ubuntu Server
10.04. I believe that when the mail comes
in, something in the settings is not allowing the data to be parsed correctly
resulting in the User unknown error.
--main.cf
Am 13.12.2012 23:42, schrieb David Hubbard:
Hi all, was wondering if anyone has a handy tool,
cat -v and pipe to something, perl class, etc. for
outputting a queued message file to stdout but
have the line breaks display rather than the
control characters?
postcat
signature.asc
Am 13.12.2012 07:26, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 12/12/2012 6:05 PM, Tony Nelson wrote:
I think it's in my best interest to get TLS operational again.
So, you encrypt the transmission from the internal corporate groupware
server to the gateway server via a private network that you
Am 09.12.2012 03:16, schrieb Grant:
Each of my systems sends alerts to my mail server for delivery to my email
address through a special user account
on my mail server with no shell account which is only used for this purpose.
Can I limit all mail sent by
authenticating through this user
Am 08.12.2012 13:26, schrieb Robert Sander:
You assume that all response lines will have the same reply code,
but that is not necessarily true. If Postfix were to log the first
reply code only, then you would never be aware of the discrepancy.
RFC821 Appendix E states:
The format for
Am 08.12.2012 17:14, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Reindl Harald:
the problem is that nearly all clients are only display the LAST
respsonse-line which is as example currently a real problem with
smtpd_reject_footer because the user wil never see anything except
the footer, AFAIK
Am 08.12.2012 20:01, schrieb Noel Jones:
On 12/8/2012 10:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
i know, but i am really unsure if i can use the devel-release
for production, technically the update is done in 5 minutes and
the same time i am impressed about the way you are not breaking
backward
Am 07.12.2012 09:37, schrieb Muzaffer Tolga Özses:
do not accept mail unless you deliver it.
now, if you have queued mail to remove, you can use
# postsuper -d $queueid
The domain exists, but not the user. How do I achieve your suggestion?
in my setup local_recipient_maps must contain
Am 07.12.2012 12:26, schrieb Muzaffer Tolga Özses:
On 12/07/2012 12:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
BEFORE any mailserver will be connected to the internet it
is a basic task to make 100% sure not accept messages which
can not be finally delivered - either you will get blacklisted
because
Am 05.12.2012 22:02, schrieb jug...@lavabit.com:
Consider reading Postfix documentation.
The error message is described there.
I haven't found it. Could you paste it?
While the Postfix documentation Dr. Venema referred to has the necessary
clues, you can find Debian-specific ones in the
Am 04.12.2012 08:54, schrieb Tomas Macek:
Everyone here says me, that MUAs should send their mails through 587.
I can't do that without iptables, because all
the people here have Outlook Expresses setup with port 25 for sending
emails from default configuration
so stop your whole project
Am 03.12.2012 14:42, schrieb Tomas Macek:
I have line like this
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:24575, ...
in my main.cf
I would like the $smtpd_client_restrictions to override in master.cf,
something like:
submission inet n - n -
Am 04.12.2012 07:58, schrieb Tomas Macek:
2) why would you setup a submission service that doesn't require auth
from MUAs?
It's because they never had to. It is a historical problem. Now we have
thousands of customers, that never had to
authenticate, so there is no power to force them
Am 01.12.2012 02:21, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 11/30/2012 6:08 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Stan Hoeppner:
That said, given the ongoing clock issues that all the guest/hypervisor
combos have always experienced to some degree, and will forever
experience no matter how good the mitigation hacks,
Am 01.12.2012 03:03, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 11/30/2012 5:24 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.12.2012 00:19, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
In the real world most road warriors use POP, not IMAP, and those with
consistent connectivity that do make use of IMAP do it via web mail. So
the sent items
Am 30.11.2012 22:57, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
Simply physically separate your inbound public SMTP traffic from your
user submission relay traffic. I.e. setup a separate dedicated box that
ONLY performs submission on TCP 587 with auth and outbound relay. I.e.
disable the smtpd server on TCP
Am 01.12.2012 00:19, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 11/30/2012 4:48 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
in the real world submission is useless if IMAP is down
because the client will fail to store in sent messages
In the real world most road warriors use POP, not IMAP, and those with
consistent
Am 29.11.2012 13:18, schrieb Muhammad Yousuf Khan:
i created a public namespace in dovecot on root (/public) there are
two folders inside public. /public/HR and /public/News
i want, when only HR send email to hr.annou...@mydomain.com it will
deliver to the /public/HR
when other users try
Am 28.11.2012 14:55, schrieb vi...@vheuser.com:
I am receiving spam from ever changing client IP addresses. Each spam has
other tiny variations that prevent
string matching. The one thing they all have in common is the owner of the
IP addresses. Is there any way to do
lookup of the
Am 28.11.2012 19:55, schrieb Brian Huffman:
I'm migrating to a new mail server and I want to suspend incoming mail for
just one user. Is there an easy way to
do it?
We're migrating a few users at a time, so after the migration I intend to
create an alias for the user that goes to
the
Am 29.11.2012 06:57, schrieb Andy Brody:
Maybe the host lookup issues here will help
http://www.postfix.org/LINUX_README.html
Thanks for the pointer. I'd seen that page, though, and multi on is
already set in /etc/host.conf
what about dnsmasq which is a very easy to setup dns-server
which
Am 29.11.2012 07:40, schrieb Andy Brody:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 29.11.2012 06:57, schrieb Andy Brody:
Maybe the host lookup issues here will help
http://www.postfix.org/LINUX_README.html
Thanks for the pointer. I'd seen that page
Am 29.11.2012 08:09, schrieb Andy Brody:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 29.11.2012 07:40, schrieb Andy Brody:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
what about dnsmasq which is a very easy to setup
Am 29.11.2012 08:24, schrieb Andy Brody:
don't get me wrong but a network without DNS is not a network
your troubles are facing why
DNS was developed decades ago to not distribute hostfiles
and is not a security risk at all if it is not open on
the WAN interface
It really works just
Am 22.11.2012 10:02, schrieb Patric Falinder:
I need to configure Postfix to be an open relay on a specific port, lets say
3326. I already have Postfix
configured like a normal mailserver that requires authentication etc. but I
need it to not ask for authentication
on port 3326. How do I
Am 22.11.2012 15:06, schrieb Patric Falinder:
Right now I have added their IP to 'mynetworks' and it's working fine for now,
but it's not reliable as they have a dynamic IP like I said
so make a different open-relay port is the same problem
So either I need to be able to add a
frist: do NOT reply off-list!
Am 22.11.2012 15:56, schrieb Patric Falinder:
Reindl Harald skrev 2012-11-22 15:20:
Am 22.11.2012 15:06, schrieb Patric Falinder:
Right now I have added their IP to 'mynetworks' and it's working fine for
now,
but it's not reliable as they have a dynamic IP
Am 20.11.2012 21:44, schrieb Rosenbaum:
We have some scripts that run to check that important processes like Postfix
are running. The Postfix check does a
‘ps ax’ and looks for ‘/postfix/master’, ‘qmgr’, ‘pickup’, and ‘tlsmgr’.
Should we be checking for all 4 of these
or are there normal
223.199.129.073
223.199.129.202
223.199.130.046
223.199.131.114
223.199.139.229
--
Reindl Harald
the lounge interactive design GmbH
A-1060 Vienna, Hofmühlgasse 17
CTO / CISO / Software-Development
p: +43 (1) 595 3999 33, m: +43 (676) 40 221 40
icq: 154546673, http://www.thelounge.net/
http
Am 18.11.2012 20:19, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Jim Reid:
On 18 Nov 2012, at 17:40, Michael Monnerie
lists.michael.monne...@is.it-management.at wrote:
Nothing should have problems with leading zeroes.
Sometimes reality intrudes on ideals. There is legacy software out
there which will not
Am 05.11.2012 03:45, schrieb Brian Schang:
What is the best way to handle a problem like this? Right now I'm
soft_bouncing until I find a more permanent solution. The best I've
found on the net is to set up a header_check. Is this a good solution?
If so, are there any tricks in setting this
Am 05.11.2012 23:22, schrieb thorso...@lavabit.com:
Because you sign your own Postfix public key certificate, you get TLS
encryption but no TLS authentication. [0]
Could you explain the above?
Does TLS encryption mean that all connections between my client
machine and my server machine
Am 04.11.2012 14:53, schrieb Jeroen Geilman:
On 11/01/2012 03:57 PM, we...@zackbummfertig.de wrote:
hello list,
hello everyone.
is it possible to rewrite the From: header on outgoing Mails for only a few
chosen accounts?
Yes.
See
Am 04.11.2012 18:16, schrieb Christian Rößner:
Would it technically possible to have a smtpd_to_lmtp_proxy option (or
however it could be called), that would receive on smtpd and open a
connection to its LMTP server, doing cleanup and Co. in memory and wait for
the result of the LMTP
Am 04.11.2012 19:05, schrieb Christian Rößner:
Hi,
Would it technically possible to have a smtpd_to_lmtp_proxy option (or
however it could be called), that would receive on smtpd and open a
connection to its LMTP server, doing cleanup and Co. in memory and wait for
the result of the
Am 02.11.2012 08:38, schrieb Jamie Paul Griffin:
/ Han Boetes wrote on Thu 1.Nov'12 at 15:15:51 +0100 /
Consider setting up a caching nameserver like unbound on your server.
Having a local cache on a mailserver is good thing™
I do have a name server running on my lan. I wouldn't set up
Am 01.11.2012 17:44, schrieb Michal Kurka:
Dne 1.11.2012 v 15:56 Viktor Dukhovni napsal(a):
I need accept incoming mails with invalid envelope sender address. But
Postfix reject these mails:
MAIL FROM: @168.1.150
501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax
Am 28.10.2012 17:47, schrieb thorso...@lavabit.com:
I don't want to send emails directly from my server. (I'm going to
connect from a client.)
so simply do not
I have the following settings in main.cf:
mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
Am 29.10.2012 00:01, schrieb Jimmy Stewpot:
I want to know if the TLS validation is done based on the public IP
which has a reverse resolve of the hostname when the server answers
the connect/session.
the client looks always if the cert matchs the hostname he is connecting to
that is
Am 22.10.2012 15:29, schrieb Tom Kinghorn:
On 18/10/2012 14:41, Noel Jones wrote:
On 10/18/2012 5:04 AM, Tom Kinghorn wrote:
DO NOT send debug log files unless specifically requested. Normal
log files are sufficient.
And a friendly reminder that splitting required troubleshooting
Am 22.10.2012 21:45, schrieb thorso...@lavabit.com:
Hello,
The above generated a 1024 bit RSA private key. How to create a 4096 bit key?
the following is for 2048 bit
replace 2048 by whatever you want
alter the template for your needs (partly german)
this is a script/remplate i am using
Am 21.10.2012 13:22, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
The logical debate to this point have not favored proponents of the
two crude and sloppy techniques that I mentioned. But, I'm open for
good rationale; both for my benefit and the OPs.
what is so difficult to undestand?
if you are
Am 21.10.2012 13:28, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
On 2012-10-20, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
With mailman one can deactivate receiving mails but still be a member
(during vacation for example)
a proper mailserver will not respond to messages wtih a
Precedence: bulk
Am 21.10.2012 16:21, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
The RFC certainly does not insist that senders buy a domain name.
Who said anything about buying a domain name? Any server connected to
the Internet can have a host name,
If you use the FQDN format for the EHLO, it cannot be just any
Am 20.10.2012 14:28, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
How do subscribers turn off the email distribution?
How can post acknowledgements be turned on?
Sender: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: mailto:postfix-users@postfix.org
List-Help:
Am 20.10.2012 15:14, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
crude and sloppy cost-cutting approaches:
* dnsbl
* reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname
The crude and sloppy approaches are used by:
1) corporations maximizing profits. Their market consists of naive
users who have no idea
Am 20.10.2012 19:43, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
On 2012-10-20, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 20.10.2012 14:28, schrieb Mike's unattended mail:
How do subscribers turn off the email distribution?
How can post acknowledgements be turned on?
Sender: owner-postfix-us
Am 16.10.2012 15:20, schrieb James Day:
I use the following to do just that. I'm sure there is a better way but I
fudged this together myself
Script 1:
#!/bin/bash
/usr/bin/mailq | /usr/bin/tail -n1 | /usr/bin/gawk '{print $5}'
/etc/postfix/mailq_count
Script 2:
#!/bin/bash
Am 20.10.2012 22:08, schrieb Jan P. Kessler:
Hey guys,
if [ `$mailq_count` -gt 50 ]; then echo Mail count on Server is
`$mailq_count`|/usr/sbin/sendmail -f r...@example.com repo...@example.com ;
fi
I'm not sure, if sending an e-mail about a full mailqueue-condition is
the best way to
Am 20.10.2012 22:38, schrieb Ralf Hildebrandt:
* Larry Stone lston...@stonejongleux.com:
It answers it the way I am interpreting the first question which how
do you unsu*sc*ibe?. Perhaps the question you're asking is not clear
to us. The language you are using is a bit awkward. What do you
i am not soo familar with dnsmasq but have a good expierience
with it to do tricks like i need the content of /etc/hosts
via DNS for apache trafficserver without breaking the normal
dns-resolution of the host
maybe place the rbl-program on a virtual interface and
some tricks with dnsmasq can be
Am 15.10.2012 14:11, schrieb Dominique:
On 15/10/2012 13:57, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dominique:
want to continue to add more domains in the future. However, I am not
sure how to convert from our basic setup to a virtual domain setup,
especially since I cannot find where and how to configure
Am 15.10.2012 15:25, schrieb Dominique:
On 15/10/2012 14:20, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dominique:
I am trying to secure the mail service we have for other domains we
have, as all mail users will not access all mail domains. We have a
certificate for the current mail server connections (TLS).
Am 14.10.2012 16:37, schrieb Schnobs:
Hello,
one of our systems features an ever-growing list of deferred messages.
Undeliverable mail remains in the queue, and is being retried, seemingly
without end.
I cannot figure out why messages are being kept that long.
What is supposed to
Am 12.10.2012 12:56, schrieb Noel Jones:
On 10/11/2012 11:34 PM, The Stovebolt Geek wrote:
--On October 11, 2012 4:38:12 PM -0500 Noel Jones
njo...@megan.vbhcs.org wrote:
On 10/11/2012 4:05 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8,IP.Of.Fortimail.Firewall
While that may mask the
Am 12.10.2012 13:55, schrieb /dev/rob0:
I don't think open relay is likely to be the result, but again,
there's no reason why a relayhost should EVER be in $mynetworks
surely it is
* barracuda as MX
* postfix as mail-server
* check_recipient_access
Am 11.10.2012 10:40, schrieb Frank Bonnet:
hello
I would like to set up a small auxiliary mail server.
I would like it use STARTTLS + SASL AUTH to send
and SMTP without STARTTLS to receive emails.
Do I have to use
smtp_use_tls = yes
and
smtpd_use_tls = no
smtp_* is always
Am 11.10.2012 11:22, schrieb Frank Bonnet:
On 10/11/2012 10:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.10.2012 10:40, schrieb Frank Bonnet:
hello
I would like to set up a small auxiliary mail server.
I would like it use STARTTLS + SASL AUTH to send
and SMTP without STARTTLS to receive emails
Am 11.10.2012 13:23, schrieb Tom Kinghorn:
Good afternoon list
Today, i have started seeing alot of connection time-outs on queued mail.
I have noticed miss-typed domain names, which have all been regsitered
elsewhere, with NO MX records, but A records.
as such, the mails are just
Am 11.10.2012 13:32, schrieb Ralf Hildebrandt:
* Tom Kinghorn thomas.kingh...@gmail.com:
Good afternoon list
Today, i have started seeing alot of connection time-outs on queued mail.
I have noticed miss-typed domain names, which have all been
regsitered elsewhere, with NO MX records, but
Am 11.10.2012 14:08, schrieb Tom Kinghorn:
On 11/10/2012 13:38, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net:
but be careful remove the error-transport if the domain
becomes active mail-services!
Oh yes!
looking at the domains, they all have a SOA record as
ns1
Am 11.10.2012 14:20, schrieb Michael Storz:
Am 2012-10-11 13:36, schrieb Reindl Harald:
i do this via mysql and a daily php-script which is
removing error-transport if the domain get a MX record
which is NOT fakemx.net
currently the table has some thousand recors from the last 2 years
Am 11.10.2012 15:06, schrieb Jacqui Caren:
On 11/10/2012 12:33, Tom Kinghorn wrote:
On 11/10/2012 13:30, Reindl Harald wrote:
the side-effect is domains without any mail-address and a a-record
are deferred for 5 days until the message bounces
Thats exactly as i thought..
one can
Am 11.10.2012 19:39, schrieb staticsafe:
That has fixed the issue. Thanks for all the help. I do find it a bit weird
that the Debian postfix maintainer
decided to leave that turned on in the default master.cf that ships with the
squeeze package.
make a bugreport!
Wietse has blamed him
Am 06.10.2012 18:20, schrieb Steffen Schebesta:
Using Wietse's first approach (adding a custom id to the MAIL FROM address
as an extension) I have tried to output the sender's address in the same
line of the mail.log as the bounce message.
I believe I would need to change the
Am 05.10.2012 15:43, schrieb Titanus Eramius:
Slightly off topic. I hope it's OK when the mail is marked as such.
I was just wondering if the users of this list use SPF in any way, and
if so, to what extend?
yes because it is no additional work since our admin-backend adding
them with a
forgot to mention you should use BOTH types
TXT and SPF
thelounge.net. 43200 IN SPF v=spf1 ip4:91.118.73.0/24
ip4:89.207.144.27 -all
thelounge.net. 43200 IN TXT v=spf1 ip4:91.118.73.0/24
ip4:89.207.144.27 -all
_-
TXT RR Format
Am 05.10.2012 16:04, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Titanus Eramius tita...@aptget.dk:
Slightly off topic. I hope it's OK when the mail is marked as such.
I was just wondering if the users of this list use SPF in any way, and
if so, to what extend?
We have considered SPF some
Am 03.10.2012 16:53, schrieb Steffen Schebesta:
I deliver mails to my Postfix through smtpd. Postfix then takes it and sends
it out to the recipient.
Now I'm trying to change the |queue_id| for each email in Postfix 2.9 source
code so that it is equal to
the |Message-ID| (it is unique,
Am 02.10.2012 02:56, schrieb Jason T. Slack-Moehrle:
So it looks like incoming e-mail might be working now, outgoing
not so much.
Oct 1 16:34:03 www postfix/smtp[3362]: connect to
gmail.com[74.125.224.149]:25: Connection timed out
This looks quite like a disable_dns_lookups=yes issue.
Am 01.10.2012 16:54, schrieb achal:
I want to add a line in body of every email sent from my postfix centos 5
smtp server
postfix is a MTA and does not mangle messages
We want to add welcome to our company we offer free SMTP services to those
who do not spam.
This is done to prevent
201 - 300 of 1003 matches
Mail list logo
