Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> The format of access maps and header_body_checks is:
>
> Key Value
> === =
> pattern action
>
> As documented, there can be only ONE action per pattern, and there
> can be only ONE match per table lookup.
>
&
The format of access maps and header_body_checks is:
Key Value
=== =
pattern action
As documented, there can be only ONE action per pattern, and there
can be only ONE match per table lookup.
When more than one PREPEND action executes (as the result of more
than one
Wietse:
> Indeed, a FILTER action takes precedence over other Postfix routing
> mechansms.
>
> You'd use a rule like:
>
> Key Value
> === ===
> pattern FILTER smtp:nexthop
>
> Where 'nexthop' equals the sender_dependent_relayhost_maps info for
> the
spi via Postfix-users:
> Hi all
>
> My users have a local mail address user@internal.local with different
> aliases (virtual_mailbox_maps, virtual_alias_maps). Receiving and
> sending mails through different relay hosts (am using
> sender_dependent_relayhost_maps) works without issues. As MDA I
Jerome BECOT via Postfix-users:
> Thank you it works fine !
>
> Here is what I did (I'd like your confirmation on the first that I do
> not make a mistake):
>
> - added the virtual_mailbox_maps LDAP config to virtual_alias_maps as
> well (thus generating $u...@abc.com -> $u...@abc.com alias,
cepting
non-existent recipients.
Wietse
> Thank you
>
> Le 07/06/2023 ? 17:00, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users a ?crit?:
> > J?r?me BECOT via Postfix-users:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I know that this may have been asked a few times, but I need
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Victor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to prevent that sendmail milter rejections generates bounces
> > messages. Reading sendmail documentation I see "-N" option:
> >
> > echo
Victor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
> I want to prevent that sendmail milter rejections generates bounces
> messages. Reading sendmail documentation I see "-N" option:
>
> echo "HELLO" | sendmail -N 'never' t...@test.es; echo $?
>
> 0
>
> Jun 8 13:51:30 server.test
J?r?me BECOT via Postfix-users:
> Hello,
>
> I know that this may have been asked a few times, but I need some help:
>
> I manage a server for the domain abc.org. The mx points to my server and
> it is configured to:
>
> - lookup virtual mailboxes and virtual aliases from LDAP
> - send mails
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Geert Hendrickx via Postfix-users:
> > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 09:48:11 -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
> > wrote:
> > > * Optional: harden a Postfix SMTP server against remote SMTP
> > > clients that violate RFC
Geert Hendrickx via Postfix-users:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 09:48:11 -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> > * Optional: harden a Postfix SMTP server against remote SMTP
> > clients that violate RFC 2920 (or 5321) command pipelining
>
[An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
https://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-3.8.1.html]
These updates fix minor bugs, and introduce optional features to
address changes in OS platforms and network abuse.
Optional or fixed with Postfix 3.8.1, 3.7.6, 3.6.10, 3.5.20:
Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users:
> On Friday, June 2, 2023 7:29:49 PM EDT raf via Postfix-users wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 11:15:23PM +, wesley--- via Postfix-users
> wrote:
> > > when will postfix use /etc/mailname? thank you.
> >
> > Only when you tell it to, and only on debian.
Patrice Go via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
> I ve a problem with my postfix/(dovecot?) configuration.
> When i send a message to aliases, it is going to internal mailboxes
> directory better than going to the external emails.
>
> here my configuration :
> https://paste.debian.net/1281818/
If this is
Tom Reed via Postfix-users:
>
> Hello
>
> If I set up backup MX just the same weight as primary MX, can the two MX
> servers work as load balancer for incoming emails?
The backup MX will need a transport map to route mail to the primary MX.
See:
Gary Aitken via Postfix-users:
> New install of postfix on a freebsd 12.4 system.
> I have milter-greylist installed, set up in main.cf as:
>
>milter_protocol = 6
>milter_default_action = accept
>smtpd_milters = local:/var/milter-greylist/milter-greylist.sock
>
> The socket to
Ken Peng via Postfix-users:
> If the MX hostname has only IPv6 resolved,
> does it have problems in mail functions?
Does every legitimate sender have IPv6 connectivity?
Wietse
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To
Tom Reed via Postfix-users:
> Hello list,
>
> Given the case that:
>
> 1. postfix is a backup MX for foo.com
> 2. this postfix uses other MTA as relay_host
Please don't do that. By design a Postfix backup MX host will deliver
to an MX host with a 'better' MX preference. You are frustrating that
Alex via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
> > > > > internet -> front-end Postfix instance -> filter -> back-end
> > > > Postfix
> > > > > > instance
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The front-end Postfix instance uses transport_maps to select a
> > suitable
> > > > > > filter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
Alex via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 4:41?PM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
> postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
>
> > Alex via Postfix-users:
> > > > > I'd say, start with one instance per domain. The 'cost' of doing so
> >
Alex via Postfix-users:
> > > I'd say, start with one instance per domain. The 'cost' of doing so
> > > is really small.
> >
> > Once you run out of IP addresses, you will need policy selection
> > based on the recipient domain. For example:
> >
> > internet -> front-end Postfix instance ->
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Alex via Postfix-users:
> > Hi,
> > I'm using multi-instance postfix-3.7.2 on fedora37 and would like to be
> > able to control which header and body checks apply to which domain in a
> > specific instance. I'm looking for a
Alex via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
> I'm using multi-instance postfix-3.7.2 on fedora37 and would like to be
> able to control which header and body checks apply to which domain in a
> specific instance. I'm looking for advice on the best way to do this.
>
> I have about ten domains right now, and
Alex via Postfix-users:
> May 18 18:24:00 cable postfix-120/smtpd[2919509]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
> from send106.emailfilter.io[185.54.163.144]: 450 4.1.8 :
> Sender address rejected: Domain not found; from= to=<
> vojisla...@example.com> proto=ESMTP helo=
This is the result of
Tom Reed via Postfix-users:
>
> Hello,
>
> multiple items for a given directive, "," or space or "," + space all are
> valid delimiters. Am I right? Such as the following.
No, it is different for some.
> smtpd_relay_restrictions =
>
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users:
[ Charset ISO-8859-2 converted... ]
> >On 2023-05-16 at 12:19:03 UTC-0400 (Tue, 16 May 2023 18:19:03 +0200)
> >V?ctor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users
> >is rumored to have said:
> >>For example for imap/pop login failures dovecot log email account
>
You are ignoring my response. That is rude. Stop spamming
the postfix-users list with your repeated information.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Alex:
> Hi,
>
> > I have a postfix-3.7.3 fedora37 system and have a few users who want me to
> > > disable reject_non_fqdn_sender because it seems many of their users have
> > > DNS problems. For example, email from nore...@info.apr.gov.rs fails to
> > > resolve with:
> > >
> > > $ host
mailmary--- via Postfix-users:
>
> In all honesty, the current situation of logging the base64 string
> "UGFzc3dvcmQ6" does not help us.
>
> Maybe we could reconsider, and actually log the data (raw or base64-decoded)?
Absolutely not. As a matter of security principle, one does not
log the
Alex via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
> I have a postfix-3.7.3 fedora37 system and have a few users who want me to
> disable reject_non_fqdn_sender because it seems many of their users have
> DNS problems. For example, email from nore...@info.apr.gov.rs fails to
> resolve with:
>
> $ host info.apr.gov.rs
mailmary--- via Postfix-users:
>
> I am talking about the authentication email, not MAIL FROM or RCPT TO.
>
> hmm, when using the -v parameter, just above the "SASL LOGIN
> authentication failed: UGFzc3dvcmQ6" log entry, I can clearly see
> the email/password
>
> thus postfix knows the email
lty--- via Postfix-users:
> SMTP server og:
>
> May 16 08:41:14 smtp3 postfix-sen/qmgr[27776]: 3420CA2062F:
> from=, size=56791841, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> May 16 08:41:31 smtp3 postfix-sen/smtp[10076]: 3420CA2062F:
> to=, relay=x.x.x.x[x.x.x.x]:25, delay=18,
> delays=0.52/0/0.1/17, dsn=5.0.0,
mailmary--- via Postfix-users:
>
> Out of curiosity, why does postfix display the base64 encoded "Password:"
> string on failed authentication, instead of the user/email that actually
> failed?
>
> eg:
> warning: unknown[59.2.250.144]: SASL LOGIN authentication failed: UGFzc3dvcmQ6
...
>
>
Patrice Go via Postfix-users:
> the problem would be from the authentication dovecot's configuration ?
> i did think that it was only postfix which could do that with the mysql
> link !
Depending on how Postfix is configured, Postfix forwards SASL
requests to Dovecot or the Cyrus SASL library
Patrice Go via Postfix-users:
> hi,
>
> I ve a problem somewhere in my configuration, cause with the actual
> configuration i ve to configure the imap/smtp identification with just the
> "user" and not with "user@domain". I think it is on "mysql-virtual*" files
> that something is wrong, but i
Patrice Go via Postfix-users:
> i modified rights 755 to /etc/postfix, change owner group to postfix to
> /etc/postfix. and it is better now. but problem is always here.
Please DO NOT change Postfix permissions.
Run these commands:
postfix set-permissions
postfix check
Wietse
Patrice Go via Postfix-users:
> sorry, the message was sent before i finished it.
> When i connect, there's no output on logs.
> There's output just when I send a message , by example :
>
> https://paste.debian.net/1280153/
That is Postfix loggging where it receives a test message, and
delivers
Tom Reed via Postfix-users:
> Hello
>
> my postfix has SSL certificates deployed.
>
> Can I setup only port 25 open to the world? If port 465/587 are filtered
> by iptables which only permit internal users to connect, does this make
> sense to external MTAs (such as google, MS's)?
Port 25 is
Patrice Go via Postfix-users:
> hi,
>
> I ve a problem somewhere in my configuration, cause with the actual
> configuration i ve to configure the imap/smtp identification with just the
> "user" and not with "user@domain". I think it is on "mysql-virtual*" files
> that something is wrong, but i
We're thinking of adding a few new settings to the stable Postfix
releases that allow Postfix to regain some control over crypto
policies that do not necessarily improve matters for SMTP where
the main result would be more plaintext communication.
With stable releases, it would not be
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Sean Gallagher via Postfix-users:
> > ADDRESS_CLASS_README:
> >
> > The most misleading place for me was the ADDRESS_CLASS_README
> >
> > For "The virtual alias domain class" it says:
> > "Valid reci
Sean Gallagher via Postfix-users:
> ADDRESS_CLASS_README:
>
> The most misleading place for me was the ADDRESS_CLASS_README
>
> For "The virtual alias domain class" it says:
> "Valid recipient addresses are listed with the virtual_alias_maps
> parameter"
> which is of course true, but there is
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users:
> I looked at docs (*README) and haven't found any.
>
> I'd still prefer to explicitly note that virtual_alias_maps are applied
> even for non-local e-mail
> ...you use "all email deliveries", I wonder if something like
> "all emails processed (even
Mihaly Zachar via Postfix-users:
> On Sun, 7 May 2023 at 13:59, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
> postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
>
> > > > Look at output from:
> > > >
> > > > (postconf -n; postconf -P) | grep soft_bounce
> > > >
Mihaly Zachar via Postfix-users:
> On Sun, 7 May 2023 at 03:12, Mihaly Zachar wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 7 May 2023 at 03:05, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
> > postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Look at output from:
> &g
Mihaly Zachar:
> On Sun, 7 May 2023 at 03:05, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
> postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > Look at output from:
> >
> > (postconf -n; postconf -P) | grep soft_bounce
> >
>
> this gives an empty set...
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Mihaly Zachar via Postfix-users:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Here is my postscreen section of my config:
> >
> > # POSTSCREEN
> > postscreen_access_list = permit_mynetworks,
> > cidr:/etc/postfix/postscreen_access.
Mihaly Zachar via Postfix-users:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is my postscreen section of my config:
>
> # POSTSCREEN
> postscreen_access_list = permit_mynetworks,
> cidr:/etc/postfix/postscreen_access.cidr
> postscreen_denylist_action = enforce
> postscreen_greet_wait = 10s
>
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> > So I would assume from that setting inet_interfaces to empty has the
> > same effect as setting it to all (it will listen on all interfaces)?
>
> No, it does not. Rather, it leaves zero listener addresses enabled,
> which only works if all "inet" services
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users:
> On 05.05.23 11:52, Sean Gallagher via Postfix-users wrote:
> >While Wietse has his word processor open, I'd like to share a few of
> >my greatest misdirects in my evolving understanding of Postfix.
> >
> >To quote a like minded individual
> >
> >I
Andrew Athan via Postfix-users:
> Thanks Viktor:
>
> > welcome to the internet
>
> Yeah :) I've been here for 30 years.
>
> > unlikely to be productive
>
> I simply want to help others avoid my points of confusion, in the belief I
> am not a uniquirely incapable or unintelligent reader.
>
> I
Sean Gallagher via Postfix-users:
> It was more a rhetorical question in the context of documentation
> improvement. Specifically, the documentation doesn't actually say what
> [blank] means. I think something like the following would be an
> improvement..
>
> Specify "all" to receive mail on
Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users:
> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-05-04 15:28:
> > Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users:
> >> [OT] answer, when postfix maillist was on cloud9, it had 3 ipv4, 3
> >> ipv6, and i have newver seen mails that was remotely temp
Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users:
> [OT] answer, when postfix maillist was on cloud9, it had 3 ipv4, 3
> ipv6, and i have newver seen mails that was remotely tempfailed used
> another ip in cloud9, why this ?
Because each host had its own mail queue. Only the majordomo
related files were
Sean Gallagher via Postfix-users:
> how is "inet_interfaces = all" different to "inet_interfaces = " (i.e.
> blank)?
One says that Postfix will provide network service on all IP
addresses, the other does not, and all this is subject to
overrides in master.cf.
Neither constrains the SMTP client
Corey Hickman via Postfix-users:
> Hello list,
>
> another more question, does postfix support domain based vhosts?
> such as different vhost has different policies, routes, milters etc.
For near-complete isolation of queues, policies, and so on,
Peter via Postfix-users:
> Is this behavior of inet_interfaces overridden by smtp_bind_address?
> From the way it's worded it looks to me like the inet_interfaces
> setting overrides smtp_bind_address but this isn't clear to me. Can
> that be clarified (one way or the other)?
In the mean
I updated the inet_interfaces documentation anmd clarified its
relationship with smtp_bind*_address and system-chosen source IP
addresses.
Wietse
When smtp_bind_address and/or smtp_bind_address6 are not specified, the
inet_interfaces setting may constrain the source IP address
Paul Menzel via Postfix-users:
> Dear Postfix users,
>
>
> Some of our users, that relocate, ask for a custom message over the
> current one:
>
> user has moved to new_location
>
> For example:
>
> This address is out of service. For business please contact
>
SATOH Fumiyasu (TSUCHIDA Fumiyasu) via Postfix-users:
> I see the following problems.
>
> 1. `postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix ...'` will duplicates entries in master.cf.
> 2. `postconf -M foo/unix='foo unix ...' get segfault if multiple entries
> exist in master.cf.
Both problems with master.cf
Ken Peng via Postfix-users:
> Hello
>
> iCloud mail has two MX RR:
>
> icloud.com. 3600IN MX 10 mx01.mail.icloud.com.
> icloud.com. 3600IN MX 10 mx02.mail.icloud.com.
>
> But these two MX have the same IPs included.
>
> mx01:
>
kwoody--- via Postfix-users:
> The local recipient table has a list of all valid users in the format
> u...@citytel.net. This is rebuilt when needed.
>
> Postifx is appending mail.citytel.net, not citytel.net.
Over the last 25+ years, Postfix appends the domain that is configured
in the myorigin
Kolusion K:
> Good point. Now that I think about that TCP dump, it did use 192.168.2.2.
>
> I can't see why there is no route. The firewall on the other side
> is set to allow traffic through and it logged blocking traffic
> before I allowed it. Maybe there is a problem with routing.
One reason
Kolusion K via Postfix-users:
Yesterday you sent a tcpdump trace where Postfix fails to make a
connection from 192.168.2.2:
23:11:38.333669 IP 192.168.2.2.40415 > 47.246.137.47.smtp: Flags
[S], seq 3300139944, win 65280, options [mss 1360,sackOK,TS val
912086021 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7],
Corey Hickman via Postfix-users:
> Hello list,
>
> Some clients abuse the outgoing smtp server for sending bulk messages.
> The messages have the same content of business promotion letter.
> Do you know how to stop this behavior?
Perhaps you can use postfwd (www.postfwd.org) to limit the number
Alex via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
> I have postscreen implemented on postfix-3.7.3 on fedora37, and not sure I
> understand if it's working properly. Sometimes I see the postscreen/dnsblog
> combination ending with a simple DISCONNECT. In this case, it met the
> 8-point threshold to be rejected,
Jon LaBadie via Postfix-users:
>
> I've been getting a lot of spam with Date: headers
> containing future dates, typically 1 year.
>
> I don't find any header checks that would look for
> this type of message. Have I over looked it?
>
> In the meantime I've implemented a script and procmail
>
Kolusion K:
> Ok, I did what you asked and I got this:
>
> reading from file dump.txt, link-type LINUX_SLL (Linux cooked v1)
> 23:11:23.019120 IP 192.168.2.2.40415 > 47.246.137.47.smtp: Flags [S], seq
> 3300139944, win 65280, options [mss 1360,sackOK,TS val 912070706 ecr
> 0,nop,wscale 7],
Kolusion K via Postfix-users:
> Hello
>
>
> So I have a problem sending and receiving e-mail from some people.
>
> The problem I have sending e-mail to some people is that Postfix
> says the connection times out when attempting to connect to the
> server.
>
> This is my setup:
>
[amazing
Intrigued by a complaint about poor logging from Postfix, I decided
to investigate.
What was logged?
Apr 30 14:32:16 generalpurpose postfix/smtp[2299]: 78D1D80AD7:
to=, relay=none, delay=414074, delays=413981/0.19/93/0,
dsn=4.4.1, status=deferred (connect to
Andrew Athan via Postfix-users:
> I have a postfix based AWS on-demand instance but I can save some $ by
> running it as a spot instance ... after all, I don't mind brief delays
> delivering mail.
>
> To do this, I need to determine any and all directories that may get
> written to by postfix so
Eray Aslan via Postfix-users:
> Some links seem to be broken in postfix.org downloads page
> http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/index.html. Example:
> http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/experimental/postfix-3.9-20230419.tar.gz
>
> I also do not see a link to
SATOH Fumiyasu (TSUCHIDA Fumiyasu) via Postfix-users:
> I see the following problems.
>
> 1. `postconf -M bar/unix='foo unix ...'` will duplicates entries
> in master.cf.
Nice find: postconf should reject this request, because the key
(bar/unix) does not match the content (foo unix ...).
> 2.
Mihaly Zachar via Postfix-users:
> Dear All,
>
> I am building a new server where I would like to build the best spam filter
> possible :)
> I am checking postscreen these days. I am planning to turn on the "deep
> tests" as well, but it seems to be really scary to me :)
Don't do it unless you
PGNet Dev via Postfix-users:
> fedora 38/rhel pkg builds carry a few patches
>
> i'm trying to figure out what still needs to be carried
>
> one was reported @ distro
>
> Bug 1977732 - [Regression] postfix "cleanup" crashes when processing
> messages containing a "whitespace-only"
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Andreas Cieslak via Postfix-users:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > i want to achieve that my postfix relay will modify the subject based on
> > the recipients.
> > The postfiy relay is receiving email from other internal systems and
>
Andreas Cieslak via Postfix-users:
> Hi list,
>
> i want to achieve that my postfix relay will modify the subject based on
> the recipients.
> The postfiy relay is receiving email from other internal systems and
> forwards all mail to a mail group (testgroup) on another internal mail
> system.
Gino Ferguson via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I'm wondering why is the qmgr process count set to 1 by default in master.cf
Because there MUST be only one scheduler.
> Does it make any sense to increase this number to 2 or 5 or 10?
> There are a couple of million emails are going through our
Ue netcat (nc) instead of putty.
I suspsect that putty is sending telnet protocol options, even when
it connets to a server on a non-telnet port. That would be a putty
bug.
Wietse
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To
Jos Chrispijn via Postfix-users:
> Running mailservice with Postfix
> PTR record is set to myserver.mydomain.com (1.2.3.4)
>
> Every time I receive external e-mail, my logfile shows:
> Apr 25 15:01:39 terra postfix/smtpd[12479]: 073416D2:
> client=unknown[1.2.3.4], sasl_method=LOGIN,
Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users:
>
> imho a bug
Insifficient
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
David Roe via Postfix-users:
> I was doing some work with postfix logrotation as part of a recent
> project and ran across what seems to be unintended behavior.
>
> When running postfix logrotate the maillog_file is created with
> 600 permissions which was tripping up a log tail system of ours.
>
natan via Postfix-users:
> W dniu 19.04.2023 o?17:23, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users pisze:
> > natan via Postfix-users:
> >> Hi
> >> I have question about *_error_limit and postfix
> >>
> >> I have separated services like
> >> smtp in
Steffen Nurpmeso:
> Wietse Venema wrote in
> <4q2khr57flzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
> |Steffen Nurpmeso:
> |> Wietse Venema wrote in
> |> <4q21sp16m7zj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
> |>|Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
> |>|> On
Steffen Nurpmeso:
> Wietse Venema wrote in
> <4q21sp16m7zj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
> |Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
> |> On 3.8.0 services managed via spawn(8) now produce
> |>
> |> Apr 19 01:03:04 postfix/spawn[8485]: warning: /usr/libexec/s-po
White, Daniel E. (GSFC-770.0)[AEGIS] via Postfix-users:
> Is there any chance that SPF and DKIM records could be added to
> appear in the headers ?
The list server adds its own DKIM-Signature: on behalf of the domain
postfix.org, AND it adds ARC headers and Authentication-Results:
for the message
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
> Hello.
>
> On 3.8.0 services managed via spawn(8) now produce
>
> Apr 19 01:03:04 postfix/spawn[8485]: warning: /usr/libexec/s-postgray:
> process id 8486: command time limit exceeded
> Apr 19 14:43:56 postfix/spawn[19651]: warning:
[An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
https://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-3.7.5.html]
This will be the last update for Postfix version 3.4.
Fixed with Postfix 3.7.5, 3.6.9, 3.5.19:
* Bugfix (problem introduced in Postfix 3.5): check_ccert_access
did not
natan via Postfix-users:
> Hi
> I have question about *_error_limit and postfix
>
> I have separated services like
> smtp incomming and smtp outgoing and webmail
>
> I have roudcube which is used by several thousand users
>
> On smtp outgoing in main.cf:
> ...
>
Demi Marie Obenour via Postfix-users:
> > While Postfix can to some extent enforce envelope to sender mismatches,
> > the real concern is usually the "From:" header, ... whose content is not
> > the MSAs job to enforce.
>
> A milter must be used for this. Since this, along with DMARC, is a
>
Gerald Galster via Postfix-users:
>
> > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users :
> >
> > And here is a more conservative patch for MySQL client retries.
> >
> > It closes the server connection after every error, and it delays
> > making a new serve
And here is a more conservative patch for MySQL client retries.
It closes the server connection after every error, and it delays
making a new server connection only after specific errors.
Closing the connection eliminates the possibility that the client
becomes stuck.
Wietse
20230417
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Gerald Galster via Postfix-users:
> >
> > > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users :
> > >
> > >>> My conclusion to hard-solve this issue on my system is transform all
> > >>> tables to utf8mb4.
> > >
Gerald Galster via Postfix-users:
>
> > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users :
> >
> >>> My conclusion to hard-solve this issue on my system is transform all
> >>> tables to utf8mb4.
> >>>
> >>> But:
> >
> >>> -
Postfix stable release 3.8.0 is available. Postfix 3.4..3.7 will
be updated soon; after that, Postfix 3.4 will no longer be updated.
The main changes are below. See the RELEASE_NOTES file for further
details.
* Support to look up DNS SRV records in the Postfix SMTP/LMTP
client, Based on
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> > My conclusion to hard-solve this issue on my system is transform all
> > tables to utf8mb4.
> >
> > But:
> > - I don't see any option to change default charset on mysql_table
> > connector, maybe should be interest
V?ctor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users:
> Hi, I have more info and I try to explain it better:
>
> First of all I have smtputf8_enable = no (disabled).
>
> I have several databases related with several mysql_virtual maps:
>
> - Some with utf8 + utf8_general_ci collation
>
> - Another ones
Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users:
> Dnia 16.04.2023 o godz. 16:32:41 Gerald Galster via Postfix-users pisze:
> >
> > Mails classified as spam or external forwards seemingly take another route
> > via mout-xforward.web.de. These servers are SBL-listed by intention, most
> > likely because the spam
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 01:06:16PM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> > > As for the temp error becoming persistent, the Postfix pgsql: client
> > > code returns an err
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> As for the temp error becoming persistent, the Postfix pgsql: client
> code returns an error when it gets an error from all of the hosts
> configured in the Postfix pgsql: client configuration file, or when
> all hosts have been flagged as 'down
501 - 600 of 13107 matches
Mail list logo
