sts in *.mail.protection.outlook.com
>reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
>
>Exhibit A)
>
>host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452 4.5.3 Too
>many recipients (AS780090)
>[YQBCAN01FT018.eop-CAN01.prod.protection.outlook.com 2023-10-11T02:11:41
On 11.10.23 15:06, Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users wrote:
Since this morning, various MX hosts in *.mail.protection.outlook.com
reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
Exhibit A)
host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452 4.5.3 Too
many recipients
Dnia 11.10.2023 o godz. 15:11:27 Josef Vybíhal via Postfix-users pisze:
> Hi, no clue about MS service, but it does not seem postfix related.
> You might want to direct this to the mailop list -
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
It can be possibly related to some failure at Microsoft,
reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
Exhibit A)
host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452 4.5.3 Too
many recipients (AS780090) [YQBCAN01FT018.eop-CAN01.prod.protection.outlook.com
2023-10-11T02:11:41.144Z 08DBC99CDEC51952] (in reply to RCPT TO command
11.10.23, 15:06 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users:
> Since this morning, various MX hosts in *.mail.protection.outlook.com
> reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
>
> Exhibit A)
>
> host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452
>
> Since this morning, various MX hosts in *.mail.protection.outlook.com
> reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
>
> Exhibit A)
>
> host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452 4.5.3
> Too many recipients (AS780090) [
> YQBCAN01FT018.eop-CAN01.p
Hi!
Since this morning, various MX hosts in *.mail.protection.outlook.com
reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
Exhibit A)
host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452 4.5.3 Too
many recipients (AS780090) [YQBCAN01FT018.eop-CAN01
Hi,
Thank you for your prompt reply!
I got the terminology mixed up, ofcourse milters are for incoming emails
:)
But well, hopefully someone lurking here knows a solution.
--
Jonathan Sélea
On 2022-07-21 20:33, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 08:26:37PM +0200, Jonathan Sélea
> On 26 Apr 2022, at 9:27 pm, Dan Mahoney wrote:
>
> So, alternate question then -- is there any level of debug logging that
> postfix can emit that would let one construct these reports based a log trawl?
I think the answer is still no.
--
Viktor.
> On Apr 19, 2022, at 6:08 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 05:33:50PM -0700, Dan Mahoney wrote:
>
>> Does postfix have any support for TLS reporting (RFC8460)?
>>
>> Technically, one need not be using MTA-STS to benefit
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 05:33:50PM -0700, Dan Mahoney wrote:
> Does postfix have any support for TLS reporting (RFC8460)?
>
> Technically, one need not be using MTA-STS to benefit from this. We
> get monitoring of this with our dmarc monitoring provider, and it
> feels like it
Hey there,
Does postfix have any support for TLS reporting (RFC8460)?
Technically, one need not be using MTA-STS to benefit from this. We get
monitoring of this with our dmarc monitoring provider, and it feels like it
would be useful to send these reports as well.
-Dan
Gomes, Rich:
> Does anyone have a good way of reporting on this?
> I see a great deal in the maillog with either an incorrect format (no @
> symbol) or just completely blank ( message-id=<>).
According to RFC,the Message-ID header is optional, and therefore,
email without
Does anyone have a good way of reporting on this?
I see a great deal in the maillog with either an incorrect format (no @ symbol)
or just completely blank ( message-id=<>).
We would like to be able to do the following:
Have a WARN message written to the log so we can report and investiga
On 10/28/20 2:38 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
One possible way out is to skip the Postfix sendmail command, and
to use a "mini sendmail" program that submits mail via SMTP.
adding an msmtp sender as the VirusAction script in clamav milter, though a bit
of 'extra', certainly is the simplest.
easy
On 10/28/20 2:38 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
One possible way out is to skip the Postfix sendmail command, and
to use a "mini sendmail" program that submits mail via SMTP.
i've typically got msmtp rattling around.
Obviously that will fail when Postfix is down.
noted.
not ideal, but not
PGNet Dev:
> my clamav-milter.conf includes
>
> VirusAction /usr/local/etc/clamav/scripts/virus-alert.sh
>
> where that script _does_ invoke sendmail.
>
> found this process
>
> ps ax | grep virus
> 15670 ?S 0:00 /bin/bash
>
On 10/28/20 11:36 AM, PGNet Dev wrote:
On 10/28/20 11:30 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
You might start with:
# grep -r NoNewPrivileges /etc/systemd
i couldn't find any direct, relevant postdrop/maildrop, or NoNewPrivileges,
references i chased sendmail usage instances instead.
i've
On 10/28/20 11:30 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
You might start with:
# grep -r NoNewPrivileges /etc/systemd
and all other directories with systemd unit files.
yup. already done.
nothing --other than the now "=false" (need to double check if that's the same
as _removing_ it ) in
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:22:55AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> On 10/28/20 10:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > Indeed a process with "no_new_privs" will not be able to run sendmail(1)
> > to submit new email.
>
> noted.
>
> that said, this _just_ reappeared here,
>
>postfix/postdrop[15673]:
On 10/28/20 10:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
Indeed a process with "no_new_privs" will not be able to run sendmail(1)
to submit new email.
noted.
that said, this _just_ reappeared here,
postfix/postdrop[15673]: warning: mail_queue_enter: create file
maildrop/678088.15673: Permission
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 06:19:10PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Barring interference from SELinux or AppArmour, ... this should not
> > happen unless file permissions change.
>
> Maybe this was true ten years ago, but it is not longer. The OP even
> mentioned something called "no new
Hi Viktor
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 01:00:35PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:01:38AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> > Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
> > mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/553726.64624: Permission denied
> > Oct 28
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 10:13:23AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> > For reference, on my system:
> >
> > $ postconf setgid_group
> > setgid_group = maildrop
> > $ ls -ld /var/spool/postfix/maildrop
> > drwx-wx--- 2 postfix maildrop 2 Oct 28 12:52
> >
On 10/28/20 10:00 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:01:38AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/553726.64624: Permission denied
Oct 28 15:02:45 svr019
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:01:38AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
> mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/553726.64624: Permission denied
> Oct 28 15:02:45 svr019 postfix/postdrop[32688]: warning:
> mail_queue_enter: create file
on a new, from-distro-pkgs install of Postfix, i've noted an intermittent perms
problem
it'll run just fine for quite awhile, then I start seeing a steady stream of
...
Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
mail_queue_enter: create file
Greg Sims:
> This is a typical 5 minute interval of Connection Cache data:
>
> scache Aug 15 01:49:18 - Aug 15 01:54:18,
> domain hits=52 miss=69 success=42%,
> address hits=0 miss=117 success=0%,
> max simultaneous domains=7 addresses=7 connection=22
>
> The README says:
This is a typical 5 minute interval of Connection Cache data:
scache Aug 15 01:49:18 - Aug 15 01:54:18,
domain hits=52 miss=69 success=42%,
address hits=0 miss=117 success=0%,
max simultaneous domains=7 addresses=7 connection=22
The README says: "Connection cache lookups by
Thank you; this is much appreciated!
On 2019-06-21 19:49, Wietse Venema wrote:
> jbwli...@hilltopgroup.com:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm running postfix 3.2.3 on FreeBSD, with a separate submission service
>> receiving connections via haproxy and using the
>> smtpd_upstream_proxy_protocol=haproxy
jbwli...@hilltopgroup.com:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm running postfix 3.2.3 on FreeBSD, with a separate submission service
> receiving connections via haproxy and using the
> smtpd_upstream_proxy_protocol=haproxy flag. When haproxy performs its
> checks every 30 seconds, I get the following in my
Hi everyone,
I'm running postfix 3.2.3 on FreeBSD, with a separate submission service
receiving connections via haproxy and using the
smtpd_upstream_proxy_protocol=haproxy flag. When haproxy performs its
checks every 30 seconds, I get the following in my log (I've made it
more verbose as
In message <3qjzc32dcxzj...@spike.porcupine.org>
Wietse Venema writes:
>
> > > No-one can connect to this from outside.
> >
> > That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in
> > this configuration.
>
> If someone can connect from outside to your 127.0.0.1 port, then
> you
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016, at 06:42 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > No-one can connect to this from outside.
> >
> > That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in
> > this configuration.
>
> If someone can connect from outside to your 127.0.0.1 port, then
> you have a serious
> > No-one can connect to this from outside.
>
> That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in
> this configuration.
If someone can connect from outside to your 127.0.0.1 port, then
you have a serious infrastructure problem.
Wietse
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 05:40 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Who cares?
Obviously you don't.
But I do. That's why I'm asking. That's good enough for me.
> No-one can connect to this from outside.
That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in this
configuration.
> But, if
jaso...@mail-central.com:
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 02:25 PM, jaso...@mail-central.com wrote:
> > I think that's "in postfix". Looking around to see.
>
> is the issue of changing
>
> ... MTA(smtp:[127.0.0.1]:13002) ...
Who cares? No-one can connect to this from outside.
But, if you must,
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 02:25 PM, jaso...@mail-central.com wrote:
> I think that's "in postfix". Looking around to see.
is the issue of changing
... MTA(smtp:[127.0.0.1]:13002) ...
to something descriptive that I specify
... MTA(my_internal_server_A) ...
a matter of
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016, at 11:49 AM, jaso...@mail-central.com wrote:
> If it's seeing the 550, how can I stop exposing/reporting back "from
> MTA(smtp:[127.0.0.1]:13002):" ? If it's just internal to my setup, then I
> don't care.
It's definitely being reported
ing server? Or only to my internal server doing the
handoff?
If it's seeing the 550, how can I stop exposing/reporting back "from
MTA(smtp:[127.0.0.1]:13002):" ? If it's just internal to my setup, then I
don't care.
Jason
* Wietse Venema postfix-users@postfix.org:
Patrick Ben Koetter:
Perhaps the list of recommendations could be expanded to recommend sending
postconf -M output along with postconf -n. I'd expect this to complement
the overall picture.
It is as if it was added yesterday, but in reality it
Perhaps the list of recommendations could be expanded to recommend sending
postconf -M output along with postconf -n. I'd expect this to complement
the overall picture.
p@rick
--
[*] sys4 AG
https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft:
Patrick Ben Koetter:
Perhaps the list of recommendations could be expanded to recommend sending
postconf -M output along with postconf -n. I'd expect this to complement
the overall picture.
It is as if it was added yesterday, but in reality it was introduced
with Postfix 2.9, three years ago.
Hello,
While adding the new client restriction class to block the new Intro App
accessing our mail server, I noticed a tiny/minor discrepancy in
postconf -n output of used vs unused parameters/arguments. Not even sure
it is worth mentioning, but decided to do so anyway...
The first thing I
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 12:01:47PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
But... in the postconf -n output, used parameters have only ONE
space between the parameter name and the parameter argument (in
spite of the fact that there are actually two spaces in main.cf),
while unused parameter have two
On 2013-10-27 12:35 PM, Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org wrote:
Parameters understood by Postfix are reported on stdout in a
normalized form with all runs of whitespace characters replaced by
a single space.
Parameters not understood by Postfix are reported as warnings on
stderr
After looking at past logs an seeing the errors only began after the
email gateway had been running for a few weeks, I deleted the
/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache.db.
Restarting postfix now has a happy postscreen+bdb again.
--
Robert Lopez
Unix Systems Administrator
Central New Mexico
It would not surprise me in the least to find out I did something wrong. :-}
I know I did yum install db4-devel as part of packages I believed
were prerequisites to installing Postfix.
My recall is that I was missing a /usr/include file when test building
a Postfix and I did a yum provides that
Robert Lopez:
It would not surprise me in the least to find out I did something wrong. :-}
I know I did yum install db4-devel as part of packages I believed
were prerequisites to installing Postfix.
My recall is that I was missing a /usr/include file when test building
a Postfix and I did
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
I suggest that you install a compiled version of Postfix, and that
you use a simpler program to become familiar with the process of
building your own binaries.
There existed a project goal to install a postfix with
wrt: mail_version = 2.10.0
I am trying to understand the cause/causes of these log lines:
1) postfix/postscreen[]: fatal: error [-30986] seeking
/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache.db: Success
2) postfix/master[4070]: warning: process
/usr/libexec/postfix/postscreen pid 4366 exit status 1
Robert Lopez:
I am trying to understand the cause/causes of these log lines:
1) postfix/postscreen[]: fatal: error [-30986] seeking
/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache.db: Success
Your Berkeley DB is screwed up.
Code fragment from src/util/dict_db.c:
/*
* Database lookup.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Robert Lopez:
I am trying to understand the cause/causes of these log lines:
1) postfix/postscreen[]: fatal: error [-30986] seeking
/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache.db: Success
Your Berkeley DB is screwed up.
Robert Lopez:
1) postfix/postscreen[]: fatal: error [-30986] seeking
/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache.db: Success
Wietse:
Your Berkeley DB is screwed up.
Code fragment from src/util/dict_db.c:
status =
dict_db-cursor-c_get(dict_db-cursor, db_key, db_value,
db_function);
wie...@porcupine.org skrev den 2013-06-15 02:36:
My advice is to avoid installing multiple Berkeley DB copies, and
to use the Berkeley DB that comes with the operating system.
locate postfix/postscreen
ldd result-path
will show the problem why it fails
under gentoo its ldd
Le 1 mai 2013 à 17:15, Simon Waters a écrit :
[...]
Secondary question - can I force the output of sendmail -bv to go to a
specific email address - seems always to go to the invoker - e.g. can I
easily send this to the end users email address (which I know). Since an
option to get a
On 02/05/13 08:12, Axel Luttgens wrote:
Le 1 mai 2013 à 17:15, Simon Waters a écrit :
[...]
Secondary question - can I force the output of sendmail -bv to go
to a specific email address - seems always to go to the invoker -
e.g. can I easily send this to the end users email address (which I
doesn't care, and indeed does slightly more work
because there are 4 maps instead of 2.
I now want to produce some reporting based on these mappings.
The output I want initially is what sendmail -bv was invented for, the
mapping from role email to actual email.
I'm assuming from the sendmail -bv
Simon Waters:
doesn't allow me to make this query, in general, without simply feeding
an email through the system? e.g.. sendmail -bv works in exactly that
way, presumably for similar reasons? Or is there an exposed API
somewhere that answers the same question?
sendmail -bv is useful
On 01/05/13 15:31, Wietse Venema wrote:
Is there any problem with using sendmail -bv? The output format
(the second and thord part) is meant to be machine-readable.
I want to report the value of 30 or 40 redirects in a single web page.
I want to generate that report when someone requests
Am 16.03.2013 22:11, schrieb Reinaldo Gil Lima de Carvalho:
We need a structured log to avoid parsing. I talk with Wietse in the year
2011 at FISL conference (Porto Alegre/Brasil).
The second problem is load this data to a database. Rsyslog put the data in a
single column, and use full
(linux machine with mysql )
Now the requirement is of realtime reporting.
I tried using rsyslog with a mysql table. But the performance is far too
bad. Rsyslog seems to have some memory leak and it brings down the machine.
I guess realtime logging should be a very common requirement. What
the maillogs using a couple of perl cron scripts
(linux machine with mysql )
Now the requirement is of realtime reporting.
I tried using rsyslog with a mysql table. But the performance is far too bad.
Rsyslog seems to have some memory leak and it brings down the machine.
I guess realtime
I have a postfix server sending out mails and we are creating reports by
parsing the maillogs using a couple of perl cron scripts
(linux machine with mysql )
Now the requirement is of realtime reporting.
I tried using rsyslog with a mysql table. But the performance is far too
bad. Rsyslog
On 3/15/2013 1:59 AM, Ram wrote:
I have a postfix server sending out mails and we are creating reports by
parsing the maillogs using a couple of perl cron scripts
(linux machine with mysql )
Now the requirement is of realtime reporting.
I tried using rsyslog with a mysql table
Am 15.03.2013 07:59, schrieb Ram:
I have a postfix server sending out mails and we are creating reports by
parsing the maillogs using a couple of perl cron scripts
(linux machine with mysql )
Now the requirement is of realtime reporting.
I tried using rsyslog with a mysql table
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt r...@sys4.de wrote:
* Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com:
and mime_header_checks with:
/filename=\(.*)\.(...)\$/ WARN Attachment $1.$2
Thanks for the help. but any suggestion for the attachment size.
Not possible with postfix alone.
Muhammad Yousuf Khan:
[cut]
Postfix has built-in WARN actions in header_checks that can log
message subjects and attachment names, but there is no built-in
support to log details such as attachment sizes.
if not built-in then any workaround would you like to suggest.
That was the next
Please help your experience advice is required.
my management is interested to see some reports from postfix logs,
is there any way that i can collect reports in which i can check who
is the sender who is the receiver what was the mail subject, if
there is any attachment then what was the size and
Am 21.11.2012 15:51, schrieb Muhammad Yousuf Khan:
Please help your experience advice is required.
my management is interested to see some reports from postfix logs,
is there any way that i can collect reports in which i can check who
is the sender who is the receiver
pflogsumm or logwatch
Robert Schetterer:
Am 21.11.2012 15:51, schrieb Muhammad Yousuf Khan:
Please help your experience advice is required.
my management is interested to see some reports from postfix logs,
is there any way that i can collect reports in which i can check who
is the sender who is the receiver
* Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com:
is there any way that i can collect reports in which i can check who
is the sender who is the receiver what was the mail subject, if
You can log this using
header_checks with:
/^Subject:/ WARN
and mime_header_checks with:
/filename=\(.*)\.(...)\$/
[cut]
Postfix has built-in WARN actions in header_checks that can log
message subjects and attachment names, but there is no built-in
support to log details such as attachment sizes.
if not built-in then any workaround would you like to suggest.
[cut]
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt r...@sys4.de wrote:
* Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com:
is there any way that i can collect reports in which i can check who
is the sender who is the receiver what was the mail subject, if
You can log this using
header_checks with:
* Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com:
and mime_header_checks with:
/filename=\(.*)\.(...)\$/ WARN Attachment $1.$2
Thanks for the help. but any suggestion for the attachment size.
Not possible with postfix alone. If you put Amavis in the loop, you
get to see the attachment names
Hello All,
Does anyone know of a reporting tool which allows you to search email
logs and show the results in a web interface?
I see that cpanel has a pretty nice one showing success and failure
along with details of the delivery in a very simple clean interface.
--
Thanks!
Joey
Jack S skrev den 24-09-2012 23:19:
Hello All,
Does anyone know of a reporting tool which allows you to search email
logs and show the results in a web interface?
ulogd, then make a webpage that uses sql
or syslogd-ng where it logs direct to sql
I see that cpanel has a pretty nice one
Jack S wrote:
Hello All,
Does anyone know of a reporting tool which allows you to search email
logs and show the results in a web interface?
I see that cpanel has a pretty nice one showing success and failure
along with details of the delivery in a very simple clean interface.
rsyslog (http
error message.
When the MIME processor was added to Postfix, there was no way to get
the error message back to the SMTP client.
I suppose that the following patch brings Postfix MIME error
reporting up to the same level as reject messages from Postfix
header/body_checks.
Wietse
diff -cr
only got the 554 permanent error message.
When the MIME processor was added to Postfix, there was no way to get
the error message back to the SMTP client.
I suppose that the following patch brings Postfix MIME error
reporting up to the same level as reject messages from Postfix
header
Recently I upgraded to postfix-2.7.1. Something changed in the pflogsumm
reporting system because now each day's report appears to accumulate for the
entire week before resetting. It used to report for only the previous day's
maillog, which is why the local file, /etc/cron.daily/1pflogsumm
Rich Shepard put forth on 11/21/2010 9:56 AM:
Recently I upgraded to postfix-2.7.1. Something changed in the pflogsumm
reporting system because now each day's report appears to accumulate for
the
entire week before resetting. It used to report for only the previous day's
maillog, which
On 10/04/2010 06:25 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
On 10/04/2010 02:48 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
Are there any existing scripts out there, that report connection counts by cidr
network?
Input:?
parse.pl /var/log/mail cidr_list.zone
Output:?
network count
On 10/05/2010 11:14 AM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
Great!
By saving one version with:
if ($line =~ ' connect from .*\[([\d\.]+?)\]') {
And another with:
if ($line =~ 'smtpd.*client=.*\[([\d\.]+?)\]') {
I can compare attempts vs success, from specific networks.
Rather than use an
Are there any existing scripts out there, that report connection counts by cidr
network?
Input:?
parse.pl /var/log/mail cidr_list.zone
Output:?
network count
10.10.128.0/19 983
10.144.48.0/20 121
On 10/04/2010 02:48 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
Are there any existing scripts out there, that report connection counts by
cidr network?
Input:?
parse.pl /var/log/mail cidr_list.zone
Output:?
network count
10.10.128.0/19 983
10.144.48.0/20 121
On 10/04/2010 02:48 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
Are there any existing scripts out there, that report connection counts by cidr
network?
Input:?
parse.pl /var/log/mail cidr_list.zone
Output:?
network count
10.10.128.0/19 983
10.144.48.0/20 121
On
On 10/04/2010 06:25 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
On 10/04/2010 02:48 PM, pf at alt-ctrl-del.org wrote:
Are there any existing scripts out there, that report connection counts by
cidr network?
Input:?
parse.pl /var/log/mail cidr_list.zone
Output:?
network count
On Sunday, October 18, 2009 at 05:23 CEST,
Mark Johnson csps6...@yahoo.com wrote:
I created a fake email address and testing on postfix about how did it
bounce back or report any error on any invalid email address. It
seemed the postfix just deferred the message.
Here is setup on
Mark Johnson:
Oct 15 03:27:38 postfixmailer postfix/smtp[11216]: 1AF94249A8A:
to=donotrep...@donotreply.us, relay=none, delay=46316,
delays=46296/0.24/20/0, dsn=4.4.3, status=deferred (Host or domain
name not found. Name service error for name=donotreply.us type=MX:
Host not found, try again)
=donotreply.us type=MX: Host not found, try
again)
Thanks.
MJ
--- On Fri, 10/16/09, Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com wrote:
From: Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com
Subject: Re: How can I has postfix reporting errors with an email address
To: postfix-users
Is there any way to config postfix reporting errors with an invalid email
address?
Thanks.
MJ
Mark Johnson:
Is there any way to config postfix reporting errors with an invalid email
-address?
Choose one of the following:
1) A client sends a non-existent address to the Postfix SMTP server.
2) A client sends a malformed address to the Postfix SMTP server.
3) A local program passes
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 01:32:11PM -0700, Mark Johnson wrote:
Is there any way to config postfix reporting errors with an invalid
email address?
Unfortunately, given the very brief description of the problem, no
answer is possible. You need to describe your problem in more detail,
giving
Justin C. Le Grice a écrit :
I'm sorry if this has already been done to death but I have searched
high and low and have found scant discussion of this.
I have been running Postfix for three weeks now and have reduced spam to
just one or two messages getting through a day.
I have implemented
mouss wrote:
Justin C. Le Grice a écrit :
I'm sorry if this has already been done to death but I have searched
high and low and have found scant discussion of this.
I have been running Postfix for three weeks now and have reduced spam to
just one or two messages getting through a day.
I
I'm sorry if this has already been done to death but I have searched
high and low and have found scant discussion of this.
I have been running Postfix for three weeks now and have reduced spam to
just one or two messages getting through a day.
I have implemented recommended anti spam settings
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 15:30 +1200, Justin C. Le Grice wrote:
I'm sorry if this has already been done to death but I have searched
high and low and have found scant discussion of this.
I have been running Postfix for three weeks now and have reduced spam to
just one or two messages getting
98 matches
Mail list logo
