Troy Piggins wrote:
Wondering how you're solving this for emails sent with Date: headers
way in the past or future. What do you think is a reasonably
acceptable in terms of dates. 3 days each side of the correct
date? 3 months? Years?
How do you keep the header_checks updated as time
On Thu, April 21, 2011 7:11 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dominik Schulz:
because my transport is special crafted to return a default value
for
non-existing users, i.e. it can never fail.
Your table does not satisfy Postfix requirements.
I'm not trying to be mean, I'd just like to use
Hello.
I come across a situation when an almost-hitting-limit
message has been retried and retried multiple times
and was finally returned to the sender.
The receiving side uses a milter (antivirus application).
Here's how it looks like on the sending side:
postfix/qmgr: E7749E064:
Zitat von Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Wietse Venema:
Homer Wilson Smith:
Is there a way to set a mail server to only open one connection
to another, and send all mail over that one connection keeping it alive?
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtp_destination_concurrency_limit = 1
Hi All,
I've just noticed that some domains have MX records like this:
example.com.IN MX 10 mail.
The problem: I have search ourowndomain.tld in /etc/resolv.conf. This
causes that postfix tries to look up mail.ourowndomain.tld as well when
someone tries to send email to domain example.com
Am 28.04.2011 10:58, schrieb Gábor Lénárt:
Hi All,
I've just noticed that some domains have MX records like this:
example.com. IN MX 10 mail.
The problem: I have search ourowndomain.tld in /etc/resolv.conf. This
causes that postfix tries to look up mail.ourowndomain.tld as well when
Michael Tokarev:
postfix/cleanup: warning: milter8_message: vstream_fseek
incoming/4BE085028D: File too large
Why is this reported as a 450 4.3.0 error? This should
be a permanent error instead.
Wietse
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
Zitat von Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Wietse Venema:
Homer Wilson Smith:
Is there a way to set a mail server to only open one connection
to another, and send all mail over that one connection keeping
28.04.2011 15:08, Wietse Venema wrote:
Michael Tokarev:
postfix/cleanup: warning: milter8_message: vstream_fseek
incoming/4BE085028D: File too large
Why is this reported as a 450 4.3.0 error? This should
be a permanent error instead.
No it shouldn't. Ok, _this_ very condition - EFBIG -
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:26:03AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 28.04.2011 10:58, schrieb Gábor Lénárt:
Hi All,
I've just noticed that some domains have MX records like this:
example.com.IN MX 10 mail.
The problem: I have search ourowndomain.tld in /etc/resolv.conf.
Barracuda does this all the time. It drives me fruit, it requires that I
use my webmail to send the message. The administrator on the other end
never knows how to fix their Barracuda box.
On 4/27/2011 9:34 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
On 4/27/2011 9:16 PM, Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
When I send
Thursday, April 28, 2011, 1:19:11 AM, you wrote:
Troy Piggins wrote:
Wondering how you're solving this for emails sent with Date: headers
way in the past or future. What do you think is a reasonably
acceptable in terms of dates. 3 days each side of the correct
date? 3 months? Years?
Michael Tokarev:
28.04.2011 15:08, Wietse Venema wrote:
Michael Tokarev:
postfix/cleanup: warning: milter8_message: vstream_fseek
incoming/4BE085028D: File too large
Why is this reported as a 450 4.3.0 error? This should
be a permanent error instead.
No it shouldn't. Ok, _this_
G?bor L?n?rt:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:26:03AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 28.04.2011 10:58, schrieb G?bor L?n?rt:
Hi All,
I've just noticed that some domains have MX records like this:
example.com. IN MX 10 mail.
The problem: I have search ourowndomain.tld
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:55:53PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Of course, I could simply mandate that people run only the latest
systems and that they always set all the flags that disable SUN,
SGI etc. default backwards compatibility (meaning it may not work
with third-party libraries that
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this system and the rest of the user mailboxes for
these domains are on respective external hosts. In order to deliver
the mails being sent by
Victor Duchovni:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:55:53PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Of course, I could simply mandate that people run only the latest
systems and that they always set all the flags that disable SUN,
SGI etc. default backwards compatibility (meaning it may not work
with
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this system and the rest of the user mailboxes for
these domains are on respective external hosts. In order to deliver
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this system and the rest of the user mailboxes
Em 28/04/2011 13:51, Wietse Venema escreveu:
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this system and the rest of the user mailboxes for
these domains are on
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Julio Cesar Covolato ju...@psi.com.br wrote:
Em 28/04/2011 13:51, Wietse Venema escreveu:
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to
Wietse Venema:
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this system and the rest of the user mailboxes for
these domains are on respective external hosts. In
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Wietse Venema:
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this system and the rest of
Hello,
Looks like one of our clients are trying to email us but their emails are
getting rejected. I'm sorry I will not display customers ip
Apr 28 11:11:12 host postfix/smtpd[48962]: warning: hostname mail.tld.com
does not resolve to address xxx.xxx.xxx
Apr 28 11:11:12 host
Manish Kathuria:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Wietse Venema:
Manish Kathuria:
I have configured some domains as a virtual domains on a Linux system
running Postfix. For each of these virtual domains, only a few users
happen to be on this
Am 28.04.2011 20:20, schrieb motty.cruz:
Hello,
Looks like one of our clients are trying to email us but their emails are
getting rejected. I’m sorry I will not
display customers ip
Apr 28 11:11:12 host postfix/smtpd[48962]: warning: hostname mail.tld.com
does not resolve to address
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:20:16 -0700
motty.cruz motty.c...@gmail.com articulated:
Looks like one of our clients are trying to email us but their emails
are getting rejected. I'm sorry I will not display customers ip
Apr 28 11:11:12 host postfix/smtpd[48962]: warning: hostname
mail.tld.com
motty.cruz:
450 4.1.8 cli...@tld.com: Sender address rejected: Domain not found
reject_unknown_sender_domain
Reject the request when Postfix is not final destination for the
sender address, and the MAIL FROM address has no DNS A or MX
record, or when it has a malformed
On 4/28/2011 2:56 PM, motty.cruz wrote:
Thanks Raindl,
Problem was fixed; but I don't want to open my spam filter server to
spammers. Do you think that is a DNS configuration issue on our client's
DNS? When I issue the following command on the spam filter server
# nslookup client.ip.address
Victor Duchovni:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:50:57PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Victor Duchovni:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:55:53PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Of course, I could simply mandate that people run only the latest
systems and that they always set all the flags that
Thanks for help!
The reason I posted this question is because I been having this issue for
the past two weeks.
This is what I get in my logs
warning: hostname mail.northwestpetroleum.com does not resolve to address
72.54.186.219
# nslookup northwestpetroleum.com
Server: my.dns.ip
Am 28.04.2011 22:09, schrieb motty.cruz:
warning: hostname mail.northwestpetroleum.com does not resolve to address
72.54.186.219
this is bad but not the problem
# nslookup northwestpetroleum.com
Server: my.dns.ip
Address:my.dns.ip#53
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:
Hi,
Recently I noticed that I have mails with mail headers like this:
Received: perfectly normal things
can be seen here
because it's already our system
Received: from [109.91.80.133] (HELO VKYNBXL)
by moln-51ca578dee (8.14.3/8.14.3) with SMTP id 39875026 for
dma...@xx.xx;
Yes, thanks for your time.
Have upgraded all relevant machines to postfix 2.8.2
Apparently cached smtp connections on the sending server (to the
popper) are brought down early if there is nothing to send.
Also apparently there is a minimum of 5 connections, had
* Duane Hill wrote :
Thursday, April 28, 2011, 1:19:11 AM, you wrote:
Troy Piggins wrote:
Wondering how you're solving this for emails sent with Date: headers
way in the past or future. What do you think is a reasonably
acceptable in terms of dates. 3 days each side of the correct
Might not be the right place to post this, so just let me know to
move on if so...
I've been using the wonderful postgrey on my server and it seems to
do a wonderful job of cutting down spam. I am now curious about the
targrey patch and whether it would be worthwhile addition, or do you
find
On 04/28/2011 07:45 PM, Troy Piggins wrote:
Might not be the right place to post this, so just let me know to
move on if so...
I've been using the wonderful postgrey on my server and it seems to
do a wonderful job of cutting down spam. I am now curious about the
targrey patch and whether
* Michael Orlitzky wrote :
On 04/28/2011 07:45 PM, Troy Piggins wrote:
Might not be the right place to post this, so just let me know to
move on if so...
I've been using the wonderful postgrey on my server and it seems to
do a wonderful job of cutting down spam. I am now curious about
In the docs here: http://www.postfix.org/RESTRICTION_CLASS_README.html#external
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/restricted_senders
...other stuff...
Is this a typo or can you use check_sender_access
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 23:34:16 -0400, Jurvis LaSalle wrote:
In the docs here:
http://www.postfix.org/RESTRICTION_CLASS_README.html#external
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/restricted_senders
I've followed the recent advice as I'm also getting a lot of
these_long_subjects_emails_with_crap_in_them:
--
* Noel Jones wrote :
On 4/27/2011 6:17 AM, Troy Piggins wrote:
Hi there. I'm noticing lately most of the spam that gets through my
On Fri, April 29, 2011 4:15 pm, Voytek Eymont wrote:
#grep {40}/ header_checks
/^Subject: +[^[:space:]]{40}/ REJECT no spaces in subject
but I'm having a couple issues:
and I'm still getting some, is this that they have a 'CR' or several at
the start ?
* Voytek Eymont wrote :
I've followed the recent advice as I'm also getting a lot of
these_long_subjects_emails_with_crap_in_them:
--
* Noel Jones wrote :
On 4/27/2011 6:17 AM, Troy Piggins wrote:
Hi there. I'm noticing lately most of the spam that gets through my
43 matches
Mail list logo
