Hi,
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 3:14 AM Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > I have a postfix-3.2.6 system that acts as a mail server and
> > pop/imap using dovecot for a small domain. The problem is that
> > people are increasingly using it as a relay to a personal account,
> > such as Gmail and Yahoo.
>
> pe
> but note in the DMARC record that you quote: ' p=none': Gmail is
> telling other servers *not* to block (or quarantine) emails from
> @gmail.com that do not obey SPF or DKIM rules. Yahoo by contrast:
>
> # dig +short _dmarc.yahoo.com TXT
> "v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc_y_...@yaho
use SRS when forwarding mail. look for postsrsd or postforward --
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Despite the cost of living,
>
> use SRS when forwarding mail. look for postsrsd or postforward --
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
> Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
> Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
> Despite the
On 11.09.19 22:12, John Regan wrote:
I have a postfix-3.2.6 system that acts as a mail server and pop/imap using
dovecot for a small domain. The problem is that people are increasingly
using it as a relay to a personal account, such as Gmail and Yahoo.
do you mean, they use gmail and yahoo From
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 10:24, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> > I have a postfix-3.2.6 system that acts as a mail server and
> > pop/imap using dovecot for a small domain. The problem is that
> > people are increasingly using it as a relay to a personal account,
> > such as Gmail and Yahoo.
>
> perhaps
> I have a postfix-3.2.6 system that acts as a mail server and
> pop/imap using dovecot for a small domain. The problem is that
> people are increasingly using it as a relay to a personal account,
> such as Gmail and Yahoo.
perhaps i misunderstand
they are sending email from gmail/yahoo addresses
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 05:14, John Regan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a postfix-3.2.6 system that acts as a mail server and pop/imap
> using dovecot for a small domain. The problem is that people are
> increasingly using it as a relay to a personal account, such as Gmail and
> Yahoo.
>
> This is resul
Hi,
I have a postfix-3.2.6 system that acts as a mail server and pop/imap using
dovecot for a small domain. The problem is that people are increasingly
using it as a relay to a personal account, such as Gmail and Yahoo.
This is resulting in the receiving system rejecting the message due to SPF
fa
s and as i already i had a Postfix mail server working i
> decided
> > to set it up on my MTA system.
> >
> > The issue i'm looking to solve is related to Google Mail forwarding
> system.
> > Some days ago i enabled automatic email forwarding for f...@mydomain.
apps
installed on the server which needs to send email messages on behalf
mydomain.es and as i already i had a Postfix mail server working i decided
to set it up on my MTA system.
The issue i'm looking to solve is related to Google Mail forwarding system.
Some days ago i enabled automatic email
On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 11:42:30AM -0700, wa6vvv wrote:
> I think I have it working now. Typos are killers. I added
> @lafn.org to each of the keys in the virtual_alias_maps file. That
> seems to have worked. I am not sure why I needed (or if I needed)
> the virtual_mailbox_domains table.
>
in which order?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Mail-Forwarding-tp91078p91095.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Doug Hardie:
> 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in
> virtual alias table
The domain name 'lafn.org' matches $virtual_alias_domains, but the
address 'ref...@lafn.org' does not match $virtual_alias_maps.
Should domain name 'lafn.org' match $virtual_alias_domains? If so,
make an
I thought I had everything working, but something broke. What I need to do is
to accept mail for local delivery for several users on a couple domains
(sermon-archive.info and one other) and relay mail for a number of users on
domain (lafn.org) to a variety of different locations. Each user coul
header, and it doesn't
> describe Postfix's logic for producing "mail forwarding loop", e.g. does
> it only check on final delivery so if it's a relay then it doesn't care?
The Postfix code that ADDS the delivered-to header will
report a loop if that header alr
Hi Bill,
> > If not, what's the closest to a specification?
>
> The documentation in the software that adds it. In this case
> specifically the man page for postconf(5)
I'd already read that, e.g. prepend_delivered_header, and it doesn't
describe Postfix's l
On 16 Nov 2016, at 7:43, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
Does an RFC cover Delivered-To?
No.
If not, what's the closest to a
specification?
The documentation in the software that adds it. In this case
specifically the man page for postconf(5)
e"
command.)
Postfix complains of a "mail forwarding loop" by return.
Return-Path: <>
X-Original-To: ra...@inputplus.co.uk
Delivered-To: ra...@inputplus.co.uk
Received: by orac.inputplus.co.uk (Postfix)
id 2DF9D27E4C; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:29:55 +
Wietse Venema wrote:
> Bob Proulx:
> > Nov 18 12:08:16 havoc postfix/cleanup[27515]: 910CE4A0: reject: header
> > X-X-Delivered-To: b...@proulx.com from localhost[127.0.0.1];
> > from= to= proto=ESMTP
> > helo=: 5.7.1 mail forwarding loop detected
>
> This
Bob Proulx:
> Nov 18 12:08:16 havoc postfix/cleanup[27515]: 910CE4A0: reject: header
> X-X-Delivered-To: b...@proulx.com from localhost[127.0.0.1];
> from= to= proto=ESMTP
> helo=: 5.7.1 mail forwarding loop detected
This message is logged by the CLEANUP daemon while doing header
m the wisdom of the list.
If I re-mail a message by any of several methods I run into a
rejection on the new outbound server "mail forwarding loop detected"
due to Delivered-To header detection. Of course the new server havoc
has never seen this message before. I am running into Delivered-To
On 12 Feb 2015, at 08:25 , Noel Jones wrote:
> On 2/12/2015 12:43 AM, LuKreme wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>>
>>> LuKreme:
Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
>>
On 2/12/2015 12:43 AM, LuKreme wrote:
>
>> On Feb 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>
>> LuKreme:
>>> Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
>>>by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
>>>for <*bob*@covisp.net>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:5
> On Feb 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> LuKreme:
>> Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
>>by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
>>for <*bob*@covisp.net>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:53:22 -0700 (MST)
>> Delivered-To: *bob*@covis
LuKreme:
> Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
> by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
> for <*bob*@covisp.net>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:53:22 -0700 (MST)
> Delivered-To: *bob*@covisp.net
> Received: by 170.130.246.215 with SMTP id
> 998S7h4.
On Feb 6, 2015, at 3:43 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 06 Feb 2015, at 15:05 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>> NORMALLY, that header is present AFTER mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net.
>>
>> If it is present BEFORE mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net, then you have
>> a loop (or the sender has added this h
On 06 Feb 2015, at 15:05 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> NORMALLY, that header is present AFTER mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net.
>
> If it is present BEFORE mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net, then you have
> a loop (or the sender has added this header to trigger an error).
Ah, right. I’ve added
LuKreme:
>
> > On 05 Feb 2015, at 15:53 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > LuKreme:
> >> On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> >>> Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
> >>> bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
> >>> added by Postf
Only other thing I can think of is that this is somehow related to always_bcc?
--
A dyslexic walks into a bra...
> On 05 Feb 2015, at 15:53 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> LuKreme:
>> On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>>> Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
>>> bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
>>> added by Postfix).
>>
>> Yes, but I'm
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
LuKreme:
On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
added by Postfix).
Yes, but I'm unsure how to diagnose that.
LuKreme:
> On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
> > bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
> > added by Postfix).
>
> Yes, but I'm unsure how to diagnose that.
header_checks:
/^Delivered-To:
On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
> bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
> added by Postfix).
Yes, but I’m unsure how to diagnose that.
Here is a full dump of one of these files (with onl
LuKreme:
>
> > On Feb 4, 2015, at 9:20 AM, Miles Fidelman
> > wrote:
> >
> > LuKreme wrote:
> >> I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop
> >> errors, which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
LuKreme wrote:
I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop errors,
which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[44147]: 7020950D4D4: to=<*bob*@covisp.net>,
relay=local, delay=0.65, delays=0.59/0/0/0.06, dsn
On 04 Feb 2015, at 07:38 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> LuKreme:
>> I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop
>> errors, which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
>>
>> Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[441
LuKreme:
> I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop errors,
> which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
>
> Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[44147]: 7020950D4D4:
> to=<*bob*@covisp.net>, relay=local, delay=0.65, delays=
I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop errors,
which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[44147]: 7020950D4D4: to=<*bob*@covisp.net>,
relay=local, delay=0.65, delays=0.59/0/0/0.06, dsn=5.4.6, status=b
Hello,
I have a working setup with a dedicated MX inbound which deliver via transport
to a postfix / dovecot backend server.
I found some mail, probably with forged "Delivered-To" header that make the
backend bounce with "mail forwarding loop"
Here is the log of the backend
sendu:
> On 18 Oct 2013, at 18:29, "Wietse Venema [via Postfix] [Masked]"
> wrote:
> >
> > > At this point I don't care about absolute correctness. I just want
> > > to receive my email.
> > >
> > > How do I disable the D flag?
> >
> > The D flag exists only in the pipe(8) daemon and ADDS d
nt domain names in them? Can I just lie to Postfix about what my
domain is, but still have it deliver mail correctly?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62354.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
age for pipe.
> I would suggest that you start over with non-verbose logs (and
> perhaps mail headers) which illustrate the problem, and current
> "postconf -n" output.
Please read the thread; these have already been supplied.
--
View this message in context:
http:
ecd60...@opayq.com:
Sendu:
> But in any case, the messages in Google's quarantine do indeed
> already have the Delivered-To header prior to delivery.
Wietse:
> And what put that header in there?
Sendu:
> Google's spam system is adding the header. It is outside of my
> control.
If you are passing
pient.
> > > >
> > > > Postfix adds this header upon delivery. The above error
> > > > normally means that you have an email fordwading loop.
> > >
> > > Yes, I already understood that I have a mail forwarding loop
> > > according
Wietse:
> Does the Delivered-To: header already exist in the message? If that
> is the case, you have been forwarding mail back and forth between
> Postfix and some other server. That is a mail delivery loop.
Sendu:
> Well not back and forth between my Postfix server. But in any case,
> the mess
On 18 Oct 2013, at 17:45, "Wietse Venema [Masked]" wrote:
> Wietse:
>> Does the Delivered-To: header already exist in the message? If that
>> is the case, you have been forwarding mail back and forth between
>> Postfix and some other server. That is a mail delivery loop.
>
> Sendu:
>> Well not b
messages in Google's quarantine do indeed already have the Delivered-To header
prior to delivery. Their suggestion to me was that I turn off the D flag to
avoid this problem.
How do I turn off the D flag?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62342.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Wietse
>
> Yes, I already understood that I have a mail forwarding loop
> according to the error - see the subject line. My question is what
> is causing it, and how do I solve it? Why didn't the other email
> suffer the same problem?
Does the Delivered-To: header al
sage in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62231.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
FE: to=,
relay=local, delay=0.6, delays=0.56/0.02/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced
(mail forwarding loop for se...@x.me.uk)
(with X instead of sendu to make life harder for scrapers).
You mail is bounced because it contains a Delivered-To: header
with the address of the recipient.
P
On 2013-10-15 10:01 AM, sendu wrote:
Here's another delivery attempt, this time with all verbose logging turned
off:
http://pastebin.com/TtyDXKBX
Please post such things inline in the email body, many people will not
click on links to unknown destinations...
It bounces; I don't know why.
Here's another delivery attempt, this time with all verbose logging turned
off:
http://pastebin.com/TtyDXKBX
It bounces; I don't know why. Is there any way to find out?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-l
On 2013-10-14 sendu wrote:
> I'm using Google's Postini replacement as a spam filter before mail
> gets to my smtp server. I currently have a problem where most emails
> that get spam trapped by Google disappear when I attempt to have them
> delivered. Google gives me the ability to reattempt deliv
empt to deliver the same problematic email, this time with
-v verbosity added to just about everything in /etc/postfix/master.cf:
http://pastebin.com/ENkgTXz6
AFAICT, everything seems to go normally but then I get:
send attr reason = mail forwarding loop for se...@sendu.me.uk
and it eventual
Wondering if anyone else has had this issue with Yahoo.
I have a user who setup his mail to forward to his yahoo account. All of his
mail (he changed his forwarding from gmail to yahoo) went to yahoo for about a
month.
About a week after the forward was setup, all mail to yahoo is rejected with
Le 30/01/2013 13:13, Fernando Maior a écrit :
> Hello All,
>
> In the area where my office is, internet providers cannot offer us links
> with fixed ip, only dhcp. I wonder if someone in the list knows about a
> mail forwarder server that can receive emails from my server and forwards
> them to the
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:13:58AM -0200, Fernando Maior wrote:
> In the area where my office is, internet providers cannot offer us
> links with fixed ip, only dhcp. I wonder if someone in the list
> knows about a mail forwarder server that can receive emails from my
> server and forwards them
On 1/30/2013 6:13 AM, Fernando Maior wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> In the area where my office is, internet providers cannot offer us links
> with fixed ip, only dhcp. I wonder if someone in the list knows about a
> mail forwarder server that can receive emails from my server and forwards
> them to the
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:13:58 -0200
Fernando Maior articulated:
> In the area where my office is, internet providers cannot offer us
> links with fixed ip, only dhcp. I wonder if someone in the list knows
> about a mail forwarder server that can receive emails from my server
> and forwards them to
Am 30.01.2013 13:13, schrieb Fernando Maior:
> In the area where my office is, internet providers cannot offer us links with
> fixed ip, only dhcp. I wonder if
> someone in the list knows about a mail forwarder server that can receive
> emails from my server and forwards them to
> the internet
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 04:02:57PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 11/28/2012 1:17 PM, Will Yardley wrote:
> > I'm having a problem where messages are accepted but then seem to
> > generate a mail forwarding loop. It seems to happen a lot with mail
> > from a particular
* Noel Jones :
> On 11/28/2012 1:17 PM, Will Yardley wrote:
> > [Apologies in advance for the less than complete information below;
> > hoping someone may have an idea of what's happening anyway]
> >
> > I'm having a problem where messages are accepted
On 11/28/2012 1:17 PM, Will Yardley wrote:
> [Apologies in advance for the less than complete information below;
> hoping someone may have an idea of what's happening anyway]
>
> I'm having a problem where messages are accepted but then seem to
> generate a mail for
[Apologies in advance for the less than complete information below;
hoping someone may have an idea of what's happening anyway]
I'm having a problem where messages are accepted but then seem to
generate a mail forwarding loop. It seems to happen a lot with mail from
a particular spamme
On 10/11/2012 17:52, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 16:09:24 +0100, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>> ...
>> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a
>> forged Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a
>> mail forwardin
On 10/11/2012 23:58, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 9:09 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>>
>> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a forged
>> Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a mail
>> forwarding loop. The local(8)
On 11/10/2012 9:09 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>
> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a forged
> Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a mail
> forwarding loop. The local(8) daemon bounces the messages, but
> those messages are sp
On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 16:09:24 +0100, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> ...
> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a
> forged Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a
> mail forwarding loop. The local(8) daemon bounces the messages, but
> tho
y
unrelated to spamassassin.
What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a forged
Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a mail
forwarding loop. The local(8) daemon bounces the messages, but
those messages are spam and the from addresses are invalid, therefo
/ Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 11:01:54 +0100 /
> On 09/11/2012 10:35, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > / Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 10:06:14 +0100 /
> >
> >> On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If you want to use content filtering with postfix, y
On 09/11/2012 10:35, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> / Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 10:06:14 +0100 /
>
>> On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
>>>
>>> If you want to use content filtering with postfix, you might have
>>> better results if you use amavisd-new + spamassassin + cl
/ Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 10:06:14 +0100 /
> On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > / David Rees wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 14:59:01 -0800 /
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi
> >> wrote:
> >>> I think I have a problem with my simple mail ser
On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> / David Rees wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 14:59:01 -0800 /
>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>>> I think I have a problem with my simple mail server. I noticed several
>>> bounce mails in the queue, which postfix in unable t
/ David Rees wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 14:59:01 -0800 /
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> > I think I have a problem with my simple mail server. I noticed several
> > bounce mails in the queue, which postfix in unable to deliver.
>
> You're seeing the same issue as was
you for your reply, but I do not follow you. My problem is that a
mail forwarding loop is detected where I suppose there should be none,
not the opposite. The same log you quite, imho shows that a proper FROM
was indeed provided by sendmail, as I believe that Postfix reports the
envelope sendere and
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> I think I have a problem with my simple mail server. I noticed several
> bounce mails in the queue, which postfix in unable to deliver.
You're seeing the same issue as was posted the other day in the thread
"Best way to handle a Delivered-
m@work.
>
> Note the "nobody" above.
Hello Jeroen,
thank you for your reply, but I do not follow you. My problem is that a
mail forwarding loop is detected where I suppose there should be none,
not the opposite. The same log you quite, imho shows that a proper FROM
was indeed prov
spamassassin as content filter, which re-injects
the mail into postfix after scanning it via local delivery. Spam is then
discarded via a sieve rule (not bounced).
It looks like postfix detects a mail forwarding loop when the mail is
re-injected by spamassassin via local delivery. Why isn't the
spamassassin as content filter, which re-injects
the mail into postfix after scanning it via local delivery. Spam is then
discarded via a sieve rule (not bounced).
It looks like postfix detects a mail forwarding loop when the mail is
re-injected by spamassassin via local delivery. Why isn't the loop
det
re-injects
the mail into postfix after scanning it via local delivery. Spam is then
discarded via a sieve rule (not bounced).
It looks like postfix detects a mail forwarding loop when the mail is
re-injected by spamassassin via local delivery. Why isn't the loop
detected when the mail is rece
Hello,
I am replying to myself, because I found the problem:
> smtp inet n - - - - smtpd
> 25025 inet n - - - - smtpd
>-o smtpd_tls_auth_only=no
>-o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
>-o smtpd_sasl_security_options=noanon
On 7/9/2011 10:10 AM, Christoph Scheurer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a mail server with postfix 2.5.5 (Debian lenny) which is serving mail
> forwarding domains as described in VIRTUAL_README.html without any problems.
> The respective part in main.cf contains (doma
Hello,
I have a mail server with postfix 2.5.5 (Debian lenny) which is serving mail
forwarding domains as described in VIRTUAL_README.html without any problems.
The respective part in main.cf contains (domain name removed):
virtual_alias_domains =
virtual_alias_maps = cdb:/etc/postfix
On 26/05/11 21:46, mouss wrote:
Le 26/05/2011 18:41, pch0317 a écrit :
Hi,
I want to forward mail only for one user u...@mydomain.tld to
u...@otherdomain.tld.
I try do it in this way:
/etc/postfix/virtual:
...
u...@mydomain.tld u...@mydomain.tld, u...@otherdomain.tld
...
When I send m
Le 26/05/2011 18:41, pch0317 a écrit :
> Hi,
> I want to forward mail only for one user u...@mydomain.tld to
> u...@otherdomain.tld.
>
> I try do it in this way:
> /etc/postfix/virtual:
> ...
> u...@mydomain.tld u...@mydomain.tld, u...@otherdomain.tld
> ...
>
> When I send mail to u...@mydo
Hi,
I want to forward mail only for one user u...@mydomain.tld to
u...@otherdomain.tld.
I try do it in this way:
/etc/postfix/virtual:
...
u...@mydomain.tld u...@mydomain.tld, u...@otherdomain.tld
...
When I send mail to u...@mydomain.tld it receive message but user
u...@otherdomain.tld
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 09:14:08AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Sending a mail to the test-account with a full mailbox results in
> >
> > postfix/smtpd[29666]: 5A32115CEAA: client=localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1]
> > postfix/cleanup[29651]: 5A32115CEAA:
> > message-id=<20101024125249.gb29...@.
> Try without soft bounce (and without EX_TEMPFAIL).
Postfix will NOT forward the message when delivery fails with soft
bounce or temporary exit status, because that would result in
repeated mail forwarding.
~/.forward
xxx...@porcupine.org
"|exit 75"
Oc
Axel Freyn:
> Hi Wietse,
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 09:26:43AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > Well, the problem was that PROCMAIL delivered to mailbox BEFORE
> > forwarding, so don't make that same mistake with ~/.forward.
> >
> > Instead, deliver to mailbox AFTER forwarding.
> >
> > ~/.forw
Hi Wietse,
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 09:26:43AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Well, the problem was that PROCMAIL delivered to mailbox BEFORE
> forwarding, so don't make that same mistake with ~/.forward.
>
> Instead, deliver to mailbox AFTER forwarding.
>
> ~/.forward:
> axel-fr...@gmx.de
> # P
Wietse:
> PROCMAIL updates the mailbox (and fails because of the limit) before
> PROCMAIL forwards the message.
Axel Freyn:
> Thanks for your fast reply!
> Probably my mail was not clear: I agree, there is now error due to
> Postfix. It probably behaves as it is configured and as it should (but:
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 08:02:08AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > We are using both mail forwarding (with an alias_database and
> > $HOME/.forward - files), and a mailbox_size_limit for the user
> > mailboxes. The local delivery is done by postfix/local.
> >
> &
On 10/23/2010 01:15 PM, Axel Freyn wrote:
Hi,
We are using both mail forwarding (with an alias_database and
$HOME/.forward - files), and a mailbox_size_limit for the user
mailboxes. The local delivery is done by postfix/local.
No it's not.
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procma
Axel Freyn:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> We are using both mail forwarding (with an alias_database and
> $HOME/.forward - files), and a mailbox_size_limit for the user
> mailboxes. The local delivery is done by postfix/local.
>
> The problem now is: If the mailbox is full, also t
Hi,
We are using both mail forwarding (with an alias_database and
$HOME/.forward - files), and a mailbox_size_limit for the user
mailboxes. The local delivery is done by postfix/local.
The problem now is: If the mailbox is full, also the forwarding does not work
anymore -- postfix/local
j...@scusting.com:
> Hi,
>
> I have inherited a postfix MDA that I'm just trying to understand and we
> currently have a problem with the forwarding of emails using LDAP lookups.
>
> Currently an email is forwarded if it matches the below map:
>
> virtual_alias_maps = ldap:ldapforward
> ldapfor
Hi,
I have inherited a postfix MDA that I'm just trying to understand and we
currently have a problem with the forwarding of emails using LDAP lookups.
Currently an email is forwarded if it matches the below map:
virtual_alias_maps = ldap:ldapforward
ldapforward_query_filter =
(&(|(mail=%s)(
* Wietse Venema wrote:
> Stefan Förster:
> > This is working as expected. If I create a new mail and forcibly
> > insert the above header before I submit it, I get a NDR saying that
> > there is a mail forwarding loop for c...@example.net - which is
>
> As documented
, I get a NDR saying that
> there is a mail forwarding loop for c...@example.net - which is
As documented, Postfix uses Delivered-To: headers for loop detection.
Local delivery agent:
=
prepend_delivered_header (default: command, file, forward)
The message deliver
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
