the problem is that with Victor's PCRE:
smtpd_data_restrictions =
check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/add_header.pcre
add_header.pcre:
# Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address:
/[^\d.:]/ DUNNO
# Otherwise:
/^(.*)$/PREPEND X-Send-IP:
Iker Perez de Albeniz wrote:
the problem is that with Victor's PCRE:
Please do not top post. put your reply after the text you reply to.
smtpd_data_restrictions =
check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/add_header.pcre
add_header.pcre:
# Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6
On 7 Nov 2008, at 02:54, mouss wrote:
Neil wrote:
By pure luck, I had an epiphany and figured it out.
good. Can you provide details so that other people who get into the
same problem find the answer in the archives?
Well, it's very setup-specific...
The short of it is that I used to
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 09:49:43AM +0100, mouss wrote:
# Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address:
/[^\d.:]/ DUNNO
Viktor probably meant
/[^\d\.:]/ DUNNO
No need to escape things in character classes.
sosogh wrote:
Hi All
There are two rules in my header_checks PCRE lookup tables :
/From:.*sosogh.cn/ OK
/^Received:/ HOLD
But why the following mail still be hold :
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:29:17 +0800
From: sosogh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sosogh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
# ldd /usr/libexec/postfix/smtpd
linux-gate.so.1 = (0xb7fa)
libmysqlclient.so.15 =
/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.15 (0xb7f23000)
libm.so.6 = /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libm.so.6 (0xb7efe000)
libsasl2.so.2 = /usr/local/lib/libsasl2.so.2
Hi,
i have tried something like this (in main.cf http://main.cf):
smtp_data_restrictions = check_lcient_acces cidr:/etc/postfix/add_header
and add_header file is like :
0.0.0.0/0 http://0.0.0.0/0 PREPEND X-Send-IP: ${client_addr}
Perhaps you can do it with header_checks:
Josep M. wrote:
Hello.
I have Postfix running since some years ago and always ok, now when
upgraded to Debian Lenny started giving to me these error messages when
tested port 465
Nov 7 09:15:57 140 postfix/smtpd[26674]: fatal: bad boolean
configuration: smtpd_tls_auth_only =
Nov 7
In my main.cf for example i have added:
smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre
and in that example access file i have putted:
/^(.*)$/ PREPEND X-Sender-IP: ${1}
the problem is that check_client_access matches against client
hostname no against
mouss wrote:
Henrik K wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 09:49:43AM +0100, mouss wrote:
# Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address:
/[^\d.:]/ DUNNO
Viktor probably meant
/[^\d\.:]/ DUNNO
No need to escape things in character classes.
Indeed. I am so
I suppose the 2nd link is correct.
How did you install cyrus-sasl2?
I followed this howto;
http://www.postfixvirtual.net/postfixvirtual.html#cyrussasl
Don't use this howto at all. It's a .!
New discovery, on manually running;
# su - amavis -c
Linux Addict wrote:
Steven King wrote:
Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on
RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage.
I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress
test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a bit sluggish but
Noel Jones:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Iker Perez de Albeniz:
In my main.cf for example i have added:
smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre
It is not called smtps_data_restrictions.
and in that example access file i have putted:
/^(.*)$/
Wietse Venema wrote:
Iker Perez de Albeniz:
In my main.cf for example i have added:
smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre
It is not called smtps_data_restrictions.
and in that example access file i have putted:
/^(.*)$/ PREPEND
Justin,
Even after using:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg11500.html
I still get these occasionally, both from localhost and other (real) hosts:
13:28:27 p34 postfix/smtpd[21926]:
timeout after END-OF-MESSAGE from localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1]
Is there another
I wouldn't sweat it. About the worst that would happen is that your
filesystem might get gummed up for a while.
The mail will end up in a queue and the queue will br processed until
all the mail as been handled.
Terry
Linux Addict wrote:
We have a java mailer application which was hung
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 04:38:41PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (test)
2008-11-06T13:13:35-0500 amnesiac postfix/cleanup[10832]: AF24675A3D:
message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] (test)
postfix logs both the id and the comment. This is perhaps more
We track the number of messages in each postfix queue on our
mailservers using a program I've written. For most queues,
it simply does a readdir() and counts all files whose names don't
begin with ., which is quick and efficient. For the deferred queue,
it does a find-style walk through the
Postfix hash_queue_names uses one-character (letter or digit)
directory names. This is sufficient to implement a tree.
Current queue file names are longer than 1, because they have two
parts (inode number and time).
A future queue implementation may use a different organization:
one tree that
Victor Duchovni:
On the other hand, for well-formed headers, the
comment is not part of the message-id: for example:
2008-11-06T01:11:19-0500 amnesiac postfix/cleanup[13756]: AE620EF8001:
message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] (added by [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Should Postfix
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:42:49PM -0500, Ofer Inbar wrote:
We track the number of messages in each postfix queue on our
mailservers using a program I've written. For most queues,
it simply does a readdir() and counts all files whose names don't
begin with ., which is quick and efficient.
Ofer Inbar:
Postfix hash_queue_names uses one-character (letter or digit)
directory names. This is sufficient to implement a tree.
Current queue file names are longer than 1, because they have two
parts (inode number and time).
Thanks!
A future queue implementation may use a
Victor Duchovni:
How would one decide that a (message-id) header is not mangled?
This would require parsing the string, counting the address
tokens, and if there is only one address token, use that as the
logged message ID, otherwise log the entire original string.
Real-life
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:42:49PM -0500, Ofer Inbar wrote:
We track the number of messages in each postfix queue on our
mailservers using a program I've written. For most queues,
it simply does a readdir() and counts all files whose names don't
begin with ., which is
Linux Addict [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven King wrote:
Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on
RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage.
I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress
test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a
I have Postfix blacklisting relay servers in front of Barracuda spam relay
filters relaying to a CommuniGate mail host for about 100 domains. The
Postfix blacklisters work great to reduce the load on the Barracuda relay
filters but the queue accumulates bounce messages for invalid recipients.
David Koski wrote:
I have Postfix blacklisting relay servers in front of Barracuda spam relay
filters relaying to a CommuniGate mail host for about 100 domains. The
Postfix blacklisters work great to reduce the load on the Barracuda relay
filters but the queue accumulates bounce messages for
eldom have to deal with REALLY large queues but I use this I hacked
up real quick to see if anything is starting to build up:
#!/bin/bash
echo ACTIVE
echo
find /var/spool/postfix/active/. ! -name . ! -name '?' -print |wc -l
echo
echo DEFERRED
echo
find /var/spool/postfix/deferred/. ! -name . !
Sahil Tandon wrote:
Linux Addict [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven King wrote:
Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on
RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage.
I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress
test. The load on the
Martin Strand wrote:
We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can
delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email
accounts with a web interface.
I figured it would be a good idea to reserve the postmaster@ and
abuse@ addresses for hosted domains and
On 7 Nov 2008, at 20:08, Martin Strand wrote:
We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can
delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email
accounts with a web interface.
I figured it would be a good idea to reserve the postmaster@ and
abuse@
On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 20:58:25 -0600 Gerald V. Livingston II
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Strand wrote:
We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can
delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email
accounts with a web interface.
I figured it would be a
On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 03:58:25 +0100, Gerald V. Livingston II [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Martin Strand wrote:
We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can
delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email
accounts with a web interface.
I figured it would be
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 04:26:54PM -0600, Gerald V. Livingston II wrote:
I seldom have to deal with REALLY large queues but I use this I hacked
up real quick to see if anything is starting to build up:
#!/bin/bash
echo ACTIVE
echo
find /var/spool/postfix/active/. ! -name . ! -name '?'
Terry Carmen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
Linux Addict [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven King wrote:
Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on
RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage.
I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once.
Bill Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not use -type f to tell find to only show files, which does not
include directories? That is how I did it when I was using the brute
force method. Nice advantage in that you can have any amount of
hashing in a directory and still get an accurate
36 matches
Mail list logo
