[pfx] Re: improving SRS support

2024-03-06 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 07:30:01PM -0500, Christophe Kalt via Postfix-users wrote: > Hi, > > The two options I've seen for implementing SRS are milter and > [sender_]canonical_maps but it seems to me that neither are a good fit when > rewriting the envelope From as they happen early on (smtpd

[pfx] Re: 25 years today

2023-12-19 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 10:56:58AM +0100, "Jan P. Kessler via Postfix-users" wrote: > > As a few on this list may recall, it is 25 years ago today that the > > "IBM secure mailer" had its public beta release. This was accompanied > > by a nice article in the New York Times business section. >

[pfx] Re: 25 years today

2023-12-14 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 08:20:26AM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: > As a few on this list may recall, it is 25 years ago today that the > "IBM secure mailer" had its public beta release. This was accompanied > by a nice article in the New York Times business section. > > There

[pfx] Re: TAKE NOTE 3: Upcoming new Let's Encrypt intemediate issuer CAs.

2023-12-08 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 02:00:55PM -0500, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > My previous post on this topic noted that covered Let's Encrypt are > planning to *randomise* the choice of intermediate issuer CA used with > each renewal. > > It now turns out that they will also be

[pfx] Re: TAKE NOTE: "2 1 1" TLSA records vs. apparent change of Let's Encrypt default certificate chain

2023-11-15 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 09:44:18PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG via Postfix-users wrote: > Thank you for notifying us. Also i'm using 211 TLSA record. > > Honestly, 311 it was not easy to set up to me. > > Sincerely, Byung-Hee As Viktor pointed out, you're not affected, but if you want to use "3 1

[pfx] Re: FOLLOW-UP Re: Re: [ext] list.sys4.de fails with starttls

2023-11-14 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 03:56:25PM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users wrote: > * Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users : > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 04:24:55PM +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter via > > Postfix-users wrote: > > > > > > Do you have SMTP client TLS connection reuse enabled? If

[pfx] Re: FW: Wrong email in DMARC dns

2023-11-01 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Szymon Malinowski via Postfix-users wrote: > Hello > > We've just launched postfix with Mailscanner and spamassasin on our mail > server. > > Everything is working great, but we've encountered very funny and strange > problem. > > We've recieved an

[pfx] Re: forward_path setting not being processed correctly after upgrade

2023-10-26 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 03:16:04PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > What's notable here, is how rare actual compatibility breaks are in > Postfix. Wietse has managed to maintain essentially backwards > compatible behaviour for over 20 years, which speaks to both design >

[pfx] Re: IP protocol inconsistency

2023-09-26 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 02:01:24PM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users: > > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users: > > > It's a rather long explanation for "why not do X". like several > > > times longer than the text that explains what protocol preferences

[pfx] Re: IP protocol inconsistency

2023-09-26 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:35:39AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: > > Sadly, I need smtp_address_preference = ipv4 because some > > reputation systems (spamhaus, I think) don't realise > > that an entity might only have a single ipv6 address. > > Then you should disable IPv6, in

[pfx] Re: IP protocol inconsistency

2023-09-25 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 06:25:36PM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users: > > It's a rather long explanation for "why not do X". like several > > times longer than the text that explains what protocol preferences > > do. And this is the only place where

[pfx] Re: Troubleshooting mail loop issue

2023-08-16 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 08:48:35AM -0400, Bill Cole via Postfix-users wrote: > Your task is to fix Microsoft's mishandling of email. (giggles insanely...) :-) ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email

[pfx] Re: server does not pick up new certificates

2023-07-24 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 09:49:58AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: > Bernardo Reino via Postfix-users: > > >> I cannot imagine why/when the cerbot client would fail to run the > > >> post-hooks (in a sane environment). > > > > > > Systems crash. What are the reliability

[pfx] opendmarc question about many Undeliverable messages

2023-06-06 Thread raf via Postfix-users
Hi, I use OpenDMARC and I have it sending failure reports with "FailureReports true". Unfortunately, one organisation that sends me emails has a bug in their SPF record, and they no longer have the postmaster@ email address needed to receive DMARC reports, and I'm not sure that they know how to

[pfx] Re: DANE and DNSSEC

2023-05-19 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:11:41AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:22:34PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG via Postfix-users > wrote: > > > And now i added TLSA record for only *outbond* smtp server, > > . > > It is also your secondary MX host: > >

[pfx] Re: DANE and DNSSEC

2023-05-19 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 08:54:16PM +0200, Joachim Lindenberg via Postfix-users wrote: > For Letsencrypt certificates I´d definitely go with 2 1 1 > 8D02536C887482BC34FF54E41D2BA659BF85B341A0A20AFADB5813DCFBCF286D and > optionally the R4 derivate and add their successors when these are about

[pfx] Re: A strange DMARC failure

2023-05-16 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:15:35PM -0400, Bill Cole via Postfix-users wrote: > On 2023-05-16 at 21:09:35 UTC-0400 (Wed, 17 May 2023 09:09:35 +0800) > Tom Reed via Postfix-users > is rumored to have said: > [...] > > Since the message was sent to mailing list which rewrites envelope > > address

[pfx] Re: Postsrsd question

2023-05-16 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 08:40:50PM +0800, Tom Reed via Postfix-users wrote: > Hello list, > > for Postsrsd, it rewrite all the sender addresses even if messages should > be delivered locally. > > how to setup it to not rewrite sender for local addresses? > > Thanks If you only forward

[pfx] Re: how to implement plus address

2023-05-12 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 07:09:41PM +0800, Tom Reed via Postfix-users wrote: > Hello > > How can I implement the following feature? > the messages sent to: > > foo+la...@sample.com > foo+lab...@sample.com > ... > > all them will be delivered into: > f...@sample.com > > Thanks. > Tom Hi,

[pfx] Re: DANE and DNSSEC

2023-05-11 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 03:17:21PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG via Postfix-users wrote: > Hellow Postfix hackers, > > I have a questions while reading DANE docs. Is DNSSEC mandotary? For > making DANE mail server. > > For now i'm running two postfix servers in public. Actually i'm beginner > in

[pfx] Re: www.postfix.org certificate expired

2023-04-24 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 11:25:14AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 01:08:06PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via > Postfix-users wrote: > > > >You should set a POST_HOOK in certbot renew (assuming you're using > > >certbot, that is) that restarts or

[pfx] Re: invalid and non-fqdn hostname

2023-04-07 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 11:28:07AM +1000, Sean Gallagher wrote: > On 6/04/2023 10:39 am, raf via Postfix-users wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 07:33:28AM +0800, Corey Hickman via Postfix-users > > wrote: > > > > > Hello > &g

[pfx] Re: invalid and non-fqdn hostname

2023-04-05 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 07:33:28AM +0800, Corey Hickman via Postfix-users wrote: > Hello > > for these two statements, > > reject_invalid_helo_hostname > reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname > > what are the differences between them? does the second one hold the first > one already? > > Thanks.

[pfx] Re: Requesting A Sanity Check, Please, + A Couple Of Qs

2023-03-27 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 05:58:13PM +1100, duluxoz via Postfix-users wrote: > Hi All, > > TL:DR: Could someone(s) please have a look-see at our config as a sanity > check for us, and also answer the questions at the end of this post - > thanks. Hi, I probably can't help with everything but

[pfx] Re: [P-U] Re: New List Host and Reply-to Header

2023-03-26 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 01:05:10PM +1300, Peter via Postfix-users wrote: > On 25/03/23 11:50, raf via Postfix-users wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 09:11:58AM +1300, Peter via Postfix-users > > wrote: > > > > > * Don't add a Reply-To:. I actually que

[pfx] Re: [P-U] Re: New List Host and Reply-to Header

2023-03-24 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 09:11:58AM +1300, Peter via Postfix-users wrote: > * Don't add a Reply-To:. I actually question if this is really needed as we > likely want replies to go to the list the vast majority of time anyways. I > have seen other lists explicitly exclude this step and it works

[pfx] Re: [P-U] Re: Postfix lists are migrating to a new list server

2023-03-24 Thread raf via Postfix-users
On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 01:21:02PM -0500, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote: > > I am still seeing DKIM fails and two DKIM-Signatures. > > Is this correct? Haven´t seen this with other mails but I cannot rule out a > > config issue on my side. Is someone else observing that? > > Yes there