* LuKreme krem...@kreme.com:
It's in 2.7 only, yes? I'm still running 2.6.
It's in the snapshots
Just add:
postscreen_dnsbl_sites zen.spamhous.org
To a 2.7 config?
No, you really have to read the README, since there are changes to
master.cf as well!
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
* Nataraj incoming-post...@rjl.com:
How does rate limiting work in conjunction with postscreen?
Just like without postscreen
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
Noel Jones wrote:
On 5/26/2010 11:55 AM, Giovanni Mancuso wrote:
Hi,
I would disable in my postfix installation the sending of bounce mail.
Solve the right problem; don't accept mail you can't deliver.
I can't do it, because my antispam server return 550 to my postfix that
is a MX record of
Hi Everyone,
I'm currently in the middle of watching a customer's mail.log file. He
is trying to send an email to a lot of people at once (Something like
5000), however the logs don't reflect this. Instead I'm seeing:
May 27 10:32:41 server1 postfix/smtpd[8144]: connect from
On 27/05/10 10:41, Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I'm currently in the middle of watching a customer's mail.log file. He
is trying to send an email to a lot of people at once (Something like
5000), however the logs don't reflect this. Instead I'm seeing:
May 27 10:32:41 server1
too many errors after...
raise the soft_error_limit and/or the hard_error_limit
Ah! So my postfix server has a limit then. Where can I put these
settings? In main.cf ?
* Jonathan Tripathy jon...@abpni.co.uk:
too many errors after...
raise the soft_error_limit and/or the hard_error_limit
Ah! So my postfix server has a limit then. Where can I put these
settings? In main.cf ?
Yes, like almost all settings...
smtpd_hard_error_limit = 1000
* Jonathan Tripathy jon...@abpni.co.uk:
Even after removing those 2 address from the list, we are still
getting the too many errors after RCPT from
office1.domain.local[10.86.1.101] (Of course, the 2 email addresses
aren't mentioned anymore)
And what's it complaining about now (BTW, that's
On 27/05/10 11:11, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Jonathan Tripathyjon...@abpni.co.uk:
too many errors after...
raise the soft_error_limit and/or the hard_error_limit
Ah! So my postfix server has a limit then. Where can I put these
settings? In main.cf ?
Yes, like almost
On 2010-05-26 9:50 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
Do not, as suggested by another poster, simply requeue ALL messages
-- unless, of course, that is what you really intend.
Ooops, thanks for catching that Sahil. I have a fairly low volume
server, so my queue is essentially always empty - so I can
Hello,
I see sometimes the following error in the logfile :
May 27 13:04:43 smtp-1 postfix/smtpd[28724]: too many errors after UNKNOWN from
mail.everbridge.net[63.236.8.147]
May 27 12:32:42 smtp-1 postfix/smtpd[20935]: too many errors after UNKNOWN from
paradis.cirad.fr[193.51.113.1]
and I
On 2010-05-27 5:19 AM, Giovanni Mancuso wrote:
Noel Jones wrote:
On 5/26/2010 11:55 AM, Giovanni Mancuso wrote:
I would disable in my postfix installation the sending of bounce
mail.
Solve the right problem; don't accept mail you can't deliver.
I can't do it,
Yes, you can, you just need
Pascal Maes:
May 27 02:32:36 smtp-1 postfix/smtpd[7464]: paradis.cirad.fr[193.51.113.1]:
220 smtp1.sgsi.ucl.ac.be ESMTP
smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP
May 27 02:32:36 smtp-1 postfix/smtpd[7464]: paradis.cirad.fr[193.51.113.1]:
paradis.cirad.fr
May 27 02:32:36 smtp-1
I've been investigating postscreen, as we've been address probed/bombed
for years, as we have a few domains that are very old (well, early 90s)
that had a lot of users back in the dialup days. Our approach was to just
throw hardware at the problem, and we've had a whole cluster of servers
Hello, all.
I'm using a mailrelay and an internal server setup.
The mailrelay receives mail from the internet, runs a number of checks +
spamassassin + clamav then passes mail to the internal mail server.
One of the checks enforced on the mailrelay is
check_recipient_access
Am 27.05.2010 15:34, schrieb Andy Dills:
I've been investigating postscreen, as we've been address probed/bombed
for years, as we have a few domains that are very old (well, early 90s)
that had a lot of users back in the dialup days. Our approach was to just
throw hardware at the problem,
On 5/26/2010 8:21 PM, LuKreme wrote:
On 26-May-2010, at 17:01, Noel Jones wrote:
On 5/26/2010 5:34 PM, LuKreme wrote:
postscreen is currently available in the postfix 2.8 snapshots. Instructions
for activating postscreen are included in the RELEASE_NOTES. eg.
Andy Dills:
I've been investigating postscreen, as we've been address probed/bombed
for years, as we have a few domains that are very old (well, early 90s)
that had a lot of users back in the dialup days. Our approach was to just
throw hardware at the problem, and we've had a whole
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 16:52, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote:
On 2010-05-26 4:12 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
Is there a way to get it to be remapped now that it is in the
delivery queue? Or should I just create a mailbox for f...@example.com
and mv the file over to
On 5/27/2010 8:47 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
Hello, all.
I'm using a mailrelay and an internal server setup.
The mailrelay receives mail from the internet, runs a number of checks +
spamassassin + clamav then passes mail to the internal mail server.
One of the checks enforced on the mailrelay
Dear all, I've just made a test from Gmail and my Thunderbird mail
client sending a mail to a non-real IDN mail user:
alejan...@años.com.ar
- My Thunderbird says: An error ocurred while sending mail. Tha mail
servers responded: 5.1.3 Bad recipient address syntax (THIS IS A
SERVER RESPONSE)
-
On 5/27/2010 2:29 PM, Alejandro Cabrera Obed wrote:
Dear all, I've just made a test from Gmail and my Thunderbird mail
client sending a mail to a non-real IDN mail user:
alejan...@años.com.ar
- My Thunderbird says: An error ocurred while sending mail. Tha mail
servers responded: 5.1.3 Bad
OK, this is in case of my Thunderbird Debian lenn package, but what
about the Gmail syntax error warning ??? In Hotmail is the same, it
tells me that the recipient address just must have 1-9, a-z and @
charactersin this case with my IDN domain I wiil remain isolate of
the Hotmail, Yahoo, Gmail
Alejandro Cabrera Obed wrote:
Dear all, I've just made a test from Gmail and my Thunderbird mail
client sending a mail to a non-real IDN mail user:
alejan...@años.com.ar
- My Thunderbird says: An error ocurred while sending mail. Tha mail
servers responded: 5.1.3 Bad recipient address
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 04:01:41PM -0300, Alejandro Cabrera Obed wrote:
OK, this is in case of my Thunderbird Debian lenn package, but what
about the Gmail syntax error warning ??? In Hotmail is the same, it
tells me that the recipient address just must have 1-9, a-z and @
charactersin
Per Jessen wrote:
So, I think the IDN domain name support is not complete nowadays,
neither by mail servers nor by mail clients. So it's not convenient
the IDN mail implementation in this bad situation.
What do you think about this matter ???
I think you're wrong - my thunderbird and my
Andy Dills wrote:
I've been investigating postscreen, as we've been address probed/bombed
for years, as we have a few domains that are very old (well, early 90s)
that had a lot of users back in the dialup days. Our approach was to just
throw hardware at the problem, and we've had a whole
Wietse, thanks...but in Postfix I have to work with the ?o?o.com.ar
domain name or with the xn--oo-yjab.gov.ar punycode domain name ???
The MAIL CLIENT must tranform non-ASCII domain names before
sending MAIL FROM or RCPT TO commands.
ICANN did not really consider the security and
On 27-May-2010, at 07:34, Andy Dills wrote:
I've been investigating postscreen, as we've been address probed/bombed
for years, as we have a few domains that are very old (well, early 90s)
that had a lot of users back in the dialup days. Our approach was to just
throw hardware at the
On 27-May-2010, at 13:36, Pat wrote:
we are not interested in
experimental code and do not want to use a version of bind or postfix that
cannot
be compiled to refuse IDNs.
If you refuse properly delegated IDNs then you are broken, pure and simple.
This is WHY punycode exists, as it
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 03:36:19PM -0400, Pat wrote:
ICANN did not really consider the security and portability of IDNs
before permitting them. The reasons for this are many, and speak
poorly to ICANN's management structure. It is important to remember
that ICANN's action does not mean that
At Tue, 25 May 2010 16:00:36 -0400, Phil Howard ttip...@gmail.com wrote:
Subject: Re: which port to use for SSL/TLS?
At this point I'm just not going to support SMTP wrapped/tunneled over
SSL/TLS ... on any port. But just in case something comes up where I
have to support it, I do have the
Jan-Kaspar Münnich a écrit :
Hello,
I've setup Postfix 2.7.0 to relay all mails to the local proxy spampd:
smtp inet n - n - 25 smtpd
-o smtpd_proxy_filter=127.0.0.1:10025
-o smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
127.0.0.1:10026 inet n -
Razvan Cosma a écrit :
Hi everyone,
I am trying to get message bounces/delays piped into a script while
keeping the user-visible From: header intact. To do this, I have asked
the senders to relay through me and include a header of the form
X-bounces-to: scriptal...@mydomain.com
Razvan Cosma:
/^Return-Path: (.*)/REPLACE X-Original-Return-Path: $1
/^X-bounces-to: (.*)/REPLACE Return-Path: $1
The Return-Path: header DOES NOT CONTROL delivery of bounce messages.
Instead, bounce messages are sent to the envelope sender address
(the address in the
On 28.05.2010, at 24:12, mouss wrote:
check your spampd: as there any cases where it would pass mail without
checking it Example: wrong whitelisting mechanism. a common error in
spamassassin is to use whitelist_from (which is easily abused by sender
forgery).
I'm sure it can't be a
Jan-Kaspar M?nnich:
Hello,
I've setup Postfix 2.7.0 to relay all mails to the local proxy spampd:
smtp inet n - n - 25 smtpd
-o smtpd_proxy_filter=127.0.0.1:10025
-o smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
127.0.0.1:10026 inet n - n
On 28.05.2010, at 02:45, Wietse Venema wrote:
The pastebin logging does not prove that spam came in on this port 25.
Thanks a lot, that was the hint!
I had recently misconfigured port 587. Now I changed it to:
587 inet n - n - - smtpd -o
38 matches
Mail list logo
