Gm, thank you for reply
ad 1) Thank you for the explanation.
ad 2) Unfortunately, I have read it. In a whole sentence:
Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: connect from unknown[x.x.x.x]
Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: lost connection after EHLO from
unknown[x.x.x.x]
Oct 11
Hello,
I found a small bug in the online documentation on this page:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html
The option message_size_limit is described as:
The maximal size in bytes of a message[..],
This is wrong and should be:
The maximal size in bits of a message[..].
Regards
Sven
Hi,
We have Postfix running for a while in combination with Zarafa.
In Postfix I configured a disclaimer for every outgoing email. To complete
this, I had to add an entry in the master.cf file like this:
*smtp inet n - - - - smtpd
-o
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:44:59 +0200
mirr...@gmail.com articulated:
2011/10/12 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org
mirr...@gmail.com:
Good morning,
may I ask you for advice with a three beginner questions? I am
new to postfix, and I do not want to catch bad habits early on..
I have two identical CentOS 6 servers using
postfix-2.6.6-2.1.el6_0.x86_64 (provided as a standard distribution
package through the repos).
On these boxes, postfix only serves as local mail server (just to send
mail from the local system).
One of them obeys .forward file for root account
On 10/13/2011 02:37 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Noel Jonesnjo...@megan.vbhcs.org:
You might be able to do something with check_recipient_mx_access.
Mostly, these domains have no MX, but only an A record. But yes, I
havne'T yet checked if they all resolve to but a few IPs
Since all the
Nikolaos Milas:
I have two identical CentOS 6 servers using
postfix-2.6.6-2.1.el6_0.x86_64 (provided as a standard distribution
package through the repos).
To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions
in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace
On 10/12/2011 05:35 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:13:45AM +0300, Tolga wrote:
Below are my postconf -n and master.cf:
root@vps:~# postconf -n
debug_peer_level = 3
debug_peer_list = localhost
Don't.
What should I do? Remove these?
myhostname = vps.ozses.net
No
Am 13.10.2011 13:43, schrieb Tolga:
submission inet n - n - - smtpd
# -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt
# -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
# -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
# -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING
You forgot
On 10/13/2011 02:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.10.2011 13:43, schrieb Tolga:
submission inet n - n - - smtpd
# -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt
# -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
# -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
# -o
On 12/10/2011 07:49, Vladimir Vassiliev wrote:
But first line says:
host imx1.rambler.ru[81.19.66.234] said: 452 4.7.1 Try again later (in reply to
DATA command)
How this connects with
relay=imx1.rambler.ru[81.19.66.235]:25, delay=0.38, delays=0.06/0/0.14/0.18,
dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250
Am 13.10.2011 14:04, schrieb Tolga:
Yes, it's a client connection. So, bottom line is, I need both 25 *and* 587
if this is an MX.
If yes, I'm trying for days for nothing.
is this your first mailserver?
587 is for ATHENTICATED smtp-submission and should be active because more and
more
On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.10.2011 14:04, schrieb Tolga:
Yes, it's a client connection. So, bottom line is, I need both 25 *and* 587 if
this is an MX.
If yes, I'm trying for days for nothing.
is this your first mailserver?
No, it's not my first mailserver, but I
Jerry:
Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: connect from
unknown[x.x.x.x] Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: lost
connection after EHLO from unknown[x.x.x.x]
Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: disconnect from
unknown[x.x.x.x]
The CLIENT (not: POSTFIX) hangs up after
Roland de Lepper:
Hi,
We have Postfix running for a while in combination with Zarafa.
In Postfix I configured a disclaimer for every outgoing email. To complete
this, I had to add an entry in the master.cf file like this:
*smtp inet n - - - - smtpd
Am 13.10.2011 14:18, schrieb Tolga:
On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
is this your first mailserver?
No, it's not my first mailserver, but I have lost my previous configuration
the question if i need both cares me a little bit because logically a
foreign
mailserver has a MX
On 10/13/2011 03:24 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.10.2011 14:18, schrieb Tolga:
On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
is this your first mailserver?
No, it's not my first mailserver, but I have lost my previous configuration
the question if i need both cares me a little bit
sven.kie...@compact.de:
Hello,
I found a small bug in the online documentation on this page:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html
The option message_size_limit is described as:
The maximal size in bytes of a message[..],
The documentation is correct.
As the documentation says
Hi Wietse,
Yes..i've read this.
So i'm trying chaining the content filters according to the Postfix book of
O'reilly. I think this will be the solution to my configuration problem.
Let's explain this in a basic mail-flow chart [portnr]:
mail - [25] smtpd 1 - qmgr - [10025] filter-daemon -
Roland de Lepper:
Even when I'm trying to do the first filter via this way, I get an error in
logs saying: connect to 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10025: Connection refused
You have NO SERVER that receives connections on port 10025.
What I configured:
main.cf
content_filter =
On 13/10/2011 2:05 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote:
To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions
in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace results.
Thank you Wietsie.
(In the meantime I upgraded to postfix v2.8.5 but the behavior didn't
change.)
I
Nikolaos Milas:
On 13/10/2011 2:05 ??, Wietse Venema wrote:
To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions
in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace results.
Thank you Wietsie.
(In the meantime I upgraded to postfix v2.8.5 but the behavior
I tried all sorts of examples in documentation, but can't seem to get this
to work ;-(
Even the step-by-step example in Oreilly and the README file of postfix (
http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html) doesn't work at my site.
I spend already 8 hours to get this working.
I want to filter two
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Roland de Lepper wrote:
I tried all sorts of examples in documentation, but can't seem to get this
to work ;-(
Even the step-by-step example in Oreilly and the README file of postfix
(http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html) doesn't work at my site.
I spend already 8
Am 13.10.2011 14:35, schrieb wie...@porcupine.org:
sven.kie...@compact.de:
Hello,
I found a small bug in the online documentation on this page:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html
The option message_size_limit is described as:
The maximal size in bytes of a message[..],
The
sven.kie...@compact.de:
We clearly have set up a maximum message size limit of the latter (2.5
MiB). I don't get mail out of this system bigger than that.
Prove it. Show some concrete evidence. Without that, no-one
can tell you what mistake you are making.
As per the mailing list welcome
Am 13.10.2011 17:00, schrieb sven.kie...@compact.de:
Maybe I don't get it, or you use different representations of what is an byte
or KB instead
of KiB? If I'm seeing something wrong please point me to my failure. :-)
you are missing the fact that e-mail is a text-only protocol and so
On 13/10/2011 4:59 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote:
You need to STRACE the program that reads .forward files! That would
be the local(8) delivery agent.
Thanks Wietsie,
I ran with:
local unix - n n - - local -D -vv
and found:
Oct 13 17:48:47 vpnspot postfix/local[12683]: deliver_dotforward[3]:
Nikolaos Milas:
On 13/10/2011 4:59 ??, Wietse Venema wrote:
You need to STRACE the program that reads .forward files! That would
be the local(8) delivery agent.
Thanks Wietsie,
I ran with:
local unix - n n - - local -D -vv
A few messages ago, I asked this:
To find out what
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 17:11 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
... depending on the attachment the overhead can be very different
Base64 always encodes 3 original bytes into 4 base64-bytes, so the
factor to calculate the effective size for an attachment in an email is
always 4/3*original_size.
Of
Stefan Palme:
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 17:11 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
... depending on the attachment the overhead can be very different
Base64 always encodes 3 original bytes into 4 base64-bytes, so the
factor to calculate the effective size for an attachment in an email is
always
Hi Larry,
Thanks.
I already know this, but how is the configuration? That's were i'm
struggeling with.
If you have time, please give me a short example.
Thanks in advanced.
Kind regards,
Roland
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Larry Stone lston...@stonejongleux.comwrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct
On 2011-10-13 11:00 AM, sven.kie...@compact.de sven.kie...@compact.de
wrote:
Maybe I don't get it, or you use different representations of what is an
byte or KB instead of KiB? If I'm seeing something wrong please point me
to my failure. :-)
Or maybe you failed to read the welcome message when
First, please do not top-post on this list. Include comments in-line
with what you are answering.
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Roland de Lepper wrote:
I already know this, but how is the configuration? That's were i'm
struggeling with.
If you have time, please give me a short example.
I did not
On 13/10/2011 6:40 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote:
A few messages ago, I asked this:
To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions
in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace results.
Hi Wietse,
First, I found the cause: It was selinux (once more...).
Nikolaos Milas:
I added in /etc/postfix/main.cf:
debugger_command =
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin
(strace -p $process_id 21 | logger -p mail.info) sleep 5
The DEBUG_README example has a ';' between PATH=stuff and '('.
debugger_command =
On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:29, Tolga to...@ozses.net wrote:
On 10/13/2011 03:24 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.10.2011 14:18, schrieb Tolga:
On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
is this your first mailserver?
No, it's not my first mailserver, but I have lost my previous
On 13/10/2011 9:36 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote:
The DEBUG_README example has a ';' between PATH=stuff and '('.
debugger_command =
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin;
(truss -p $process_id 21 | logger -p mail.info) sleep 5
Without this ';' you have a syntax error.
Ahh,
Hi all, new to the group. Have recently setup POSTFIX as an SMTP relay front
end to an Exchange 2007 backend. Have encountered the following issue:
I'm using POSTFIX as an SMTP fronted relay to an
Exchangehttp://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=1663396page=1 2007
backend. The default size
what exactly do you think get better if you send the same
message with a changed subject to the same mailing-list two
days later?
Am 14.10.2011 00:08, schrieb Joel Roberts:
Hi all, new to the group. Have recently setup POSTFIX as an SMTP relay front
end to an Exchange 2007 backend. Have
On 13 Oct 2011, at 23:08, Joel Roberts joel.robe...@pinkardcc.com wrote:
Hi all, new to the group. Have recently setup POSTFIX as an SMTP relay front
end to an Exchange 2007 backend. Have encountered the following issue:
I'm using POSTFIX as an SMTP fronted relay to an Exchange 2007
Hello
Recently I've been doing modifications to my internal server smtp mail,
so to authenticate e-mails that are sent
The authentication mechanism I used is explained in the postfix site,
very simple:
http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html # server_dovecot
All outgoing emails are
On 11 Oct 2011, at 15:54, Simon Brereton simon.brere...@buongiorno.com
wrote:
this is obseleted (I'm running 2.7.1) and to use
smtpd_tls_security_level = may instead - however, vim tells me that
the former is a valid configurable (it's highlighted) whilst the
latter is not. That's part of
Harald,
I sent the first message just after registering with the group and didn't
receive a copy of it. I thought it hadn't gone through, but thank you for your
helpful response.
Thank you,
Joel Roberts
Network Administrator
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
Mark,
The bounce back error comes from the Exchange server. It lists the POSTFIX
server as the server that is rejecting the attachment based on size. The
Exchange connector to the POSTFIX server is set to accept attachments up to 20
MB and on the back end I can send attachments up to 20 MB
On 13 Oct 2011, at 23:37, Michel Bulgado mic...@casa.co.cu wrote:
Hello
Recently I've been doing modifications to my internal server smtp mail, so to
authenticate e-mails that are sent
The authentication mechanism I used is explained in the postfix site, very
simple:
Joel Roberts:
I can test with telnet and post the results asap. Nothing shows
in the POSTFIX log if I?m tailing it while testing it. The Exchange
logs just say that it?s been rejected by the POSTFIX server.
If you believe that Postfix is in error then you must provide POSTFIX
logs and POSTFIX
On 10/13/2011 5:41 PM, Mark Homoky wrote:
On 11 Oct 2011, at 15:54, Simon Brereton simon.brere...@buongiorno.com
wrote:
this is obseleted (I'm running 2.7.1) and to use
smtpd_tls_security_level = may instead - however, vim tells me that
the former is a valid configurable (it's
On 10/13/2011 5:37 PM, Michel Bulgado wrote:
Oct 13 18:11:58 legolas postfix/smtp[26982]: 210081CEAAE:
to=p...@home.com, relay=192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1]:25, delay=2.7,
delays=1.6/0/0/1.1, dsn=5.7.1, status=bounced (host
192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1] said: 554 5.7.1 c39...@gmail.com: Sender
address
On 13 October 2011 19:16, Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org wrote:
On 10/13/2011 5:41 PM, Mark Homoky wrote:
On 11 Oct 2011, at 15:54, Simon Brereton simon.brere...@buongiorno.com
wrote:
this is obseleted (I'm running 2.7.1) and to use
smtpd_tls_security_level = may instead - however, vim
On 10/13/2011 6:39 PM, Simon Brereton wrote:
smtp_tls_CAfile = ?
smtp_tls_cert_file = ?
smtp_tls_key_file = ?
Typcially these would be set to the same cert keys as used by smtpd.
Not needed, you neither ask for nor verify client certs.
Should I be? And if so, how do I do that? Bearing
from postconf(5) for smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt:
Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to SMTP
clients, and require that clients use TLS encryption. According to
RFC 2487 this MUST NOT be applied in case of a publicly-referenced
SMTP server. Instead, this option should
On 10/13/2011 9:24 PM, Peter wrote:
from postconf(5) for smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt:
Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to SMTP
clients, and require that clients use TLS encryption. According to
RFC 2487 this MUST NOT be applied in case of a publicly-referenced
On 14/10/11 15:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On the public internet you can't force remote SMTP servers to use
encryption when connecting to your server, because very few, if any,
public SMTP servers implement outbound encryption in this way. Most
send in plain text, and always have. For
Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com escribió:
On 10/13/2011 5:37 PM, Michel Bulgado wrote:
Oct 13 18:11:58 legolas postfix/smtp[26982]: 210081CEAAE:
to=p...@home.com, relay=192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1]:25, delay=2.7,
delays=1.6/0/0/1.1, dsn=5.7.1, status=bounced (host
192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1]
Mark Homoky mark.hom...@lingidiom.com escribió:
On 13 Oct 2011, at 23:37, Michel Bulgado mic...@casa.co.cu wrote:
Hello
Recently I've been doing modifications to my internal server smtp
mail, so to authenticate e-mails that are sent
The authentication mechanism I used is explained in the
56 matches
Mail list logo
