Am 04.12.2012 08:54, schrieb Tomas Macek:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 04.12.2012 08:20, schrieb Tomas Macek:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.12.2012 07:58, schrieb Tomas Macek:
2) why would you setup a submission service that doesn't require auth
from
Hi,
Dec 4 09:57:29 kartagis postfix/pickup[21399]: D576E9988: uid=48
from=karta...@drupalizm.com
Dec 4 09:57:29 kartagis postfix/cleanup[21291]: D576E9988:
message-id=20121204075729.d576e9...@mail.bilgisayarciniz.org
Dec 4 09:57:29 kartagis postfix/qmgr[16547]: D576E9988:
Am 04.12.2012 08:54, schrieb Tomas Macek:
Everyone here says me, that MUAs should send their mails through 587.
I can't do that without iptables, because all
the people here have Outlook Expresses setup with port 25 for sending
emails from default configuration
so stop your whole project
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 10:10:05 +0200, Muzaffer Tolga Özses
to...@ozses.net wrote:
...
append_dot_mydomain = no
biff = no
inet_interfaces = all
recipient_delimiter = +
relayhost =
You don't need to be re-declaring the postfix default settings again.
Try if the following helps simplifying your
On 04/12/12 20:54, Tomas Macek wrote:
Everyone here says me, that MUAs should send their mails through 587. I
can't do that without iptables, because all the people here have Outlook
Expresses setup with port 25 for sending emails from default configuration.
That's the general advice, yes, but
Reindl Harald skrev den 04-12-2012 08:12:
Am 04.12.2012 07:58, schrieb Tomas Macek:
2) why would you setup a submission service that doesn't require
auth
from MUAs?
make it simple to abuse
It's because they never had to. It is a historical problem. Now we
have thousands of customers, that
Dan Lists:
Postfix avoids using using getpwnam() because it is fundamentally
broken on lots of systems (reporting user does not exist after
failure to complete the request).
You can force Postfix to use getpwnam() if you know that you
will never use *SQL or LDAP etc. datbases:
On 12/04/2012 12:38 PM, Mark Alan wrote:
(postconf -d;postconf -n)|sort|uniq -d
I was asking about how to remove that queue. Other than that, thanks for
the tips.
Muzaffer
Hi everybody,
I'm running a postfix 2.5.5-1 on a old debian server, managing different
mail domains. I'm migrating now to a different mail provider, one domain
at time (es. example.com).
I removed example.com from virtual_alias_domains and/or
mydestination in main.cf. And restarted postfix.
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:59:01PM +1300, Peter wrote:
On 04/12/12 20:54, Tomas Macek wrote:
Everyone here says me, that MUAs should send their mails through
587. I can't do that without iptables, because all the people
here have Outlook Expresses setup with port 25 for sending emails
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 07:46:10AM -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:59:01PM +1300, Peter wrote:
I would still also set up port 587 on the mail.example.com
IP as submission as well and try to encourage your users (at
least the ones you can) to use port 587 from now on.
d.davo...@mastertraining.it:
Hi everybody,
I'm running a postfix 2.5.5-1 on a old debian server, managing different
mail domains. I'm migrating now to a different mail provider, one domain
at time (es. example.com).
I removed example.com from virtual_alias_domains and/or
mydestination in
Hi Wietse,
my machine is no more the final destination. It was but now no more.
Basically i removed the example.com from the config and changed the DNS
to point to different MX records.
That's what is driving me crazy :)
Now it MX records are:
# dig example.com MX +noall +answer
example.com.
Hi,
It was in 2006 That Mouss help me setup our Postfix box and it
worked flawlessly till November 27th 2012, when We had to upgrade the
box to the latest version of webmin for the ability to watch our raid
device, that the problems started. An unruly apt-get started deleting
files and bingo,
d.davo...@mastertraining.it:
Hi Wietse,
my machine is no more the final destination. It was but now no more.
Basically i removed the example.com from the config and changed the DNS
to point to different MX records.
Is your Postfix system is getting stale information from DNS?
Postfix may be
On 12/4/2012 8:59 AM, wispli...@airnet.ca wrote:
Hi,
It was in 2006 That Mouss help me setup our Postfix box and it
worked flawlessly till November 27th 2012, when We had to upgrade
the box to the latest version of webmin for the ability to watch our
raid device, that the problems started.
The anonymized dig output I wrote before was the real one, except the
domain name.
It was run directly from the debian mail server I'm having the problem.
I don't want to waste anybody's time, just asking for some hint on what
and where to check.
Like if there is a way to debug the dns query
d.davo...@mastertraining.it:
The anonymized dig output I wrote before was the real one, except the
domain name.
It was run directly from the debian mail server I'm having the problem.
I don't want to waste anybody's time, just asking for some hint on what
and where to check.
Like if there
This is from /var/log/syslog:
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/smtpd[26204]: 4E21EA735A:
client=unknown[192.168.2.203]
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/cleanup[26207]: 4E21EA735A:
message-id=20121204151341.3478.f-zambe...@mastertraining.it
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/qmgr[24532]: 4E21EA735A:
* d.davo...@mastertraining.it d.davo...@mastertraining.it:
This is from /var/log/syslog:
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/smtpd[26204]: 4E21EA735A:
client=unknown[192.168.2.203]
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/cleanup[26207]: 4E21EA735A:
* d.davo...@mastertraining.it d.davo...@mastertraining.it:
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/smtp[26167]: 4E21EA735A:
to=e.bos...@mastervoice.it, relay=none, delay=0.1,
delays=0.1/0/0/0, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail for mastervoice.it loops
back to myself)
What is the result of
% host -t mx
Ralf Hildebrandt:
* d.davo...@mastertraining.it d.davo...@mastertraining.it:
Dec 4 15:13:41 mail2 postfix/smtp[26167]: 4E21EA735A:
to=e.bos...@mastervoice.it, relay=none, delay=0.1,
delays=0.1/0/0/0, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail for mastervoice.it loops
back to myself)
What is
Here the requested output:
mail2:~# host -t mx mastervoice.it
mastervoice.it MX 10 ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM
mastervoice.it MX 20 ALT1.ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM
mastervoice.it MX 20 ALT2.ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM
mastervoice.it MX 30 ASPMX2.GOOGLEMAIL.COM
Yes, we have read both before we posted and have researched heavily on
the internet. Hence the way the email sent, we have followed more than
one setup troubleshoot.
We were hoping a fresh pair of eyes would pick up the mistake we have
made.
You have a Good Day now,
Carl A Jeptha
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
wimpunk:
If you want to check on malicious links, postfix could verify if the
link it points to is a file with the correct features.
The .forward file is a program that can execute arbitrary shell
commands and that can
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 5:49 PM, /dev/rob0 r...@gmx.co.uk wrote:
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 09:51:05AM +0100, wimpunk wrote:
The reason I searched for this is because I just wanted to make my
own management easier. I had a .forward+a file which filtered the
mail to a specific folder in my
wimpunk:
Thanks for the feedback but still I don't get the point why it would
make any difference between using a link or a file as .forward. That
link could only be written by the sysadmin or me. The only thing you
have to trust is having users with a little common sense. But you
On 12/4/2012 2:05 PM, wispli...@airnet.ca wrote:
Yes, we have read both before we posted and have researched heavily
on the internet. Hence the way the email sent, we have followed more
than one setup troubleshoot.
We were hoping a fresh pair of eyes would pick up the mistake we
have made.
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 08:48:47PM +0100, Daniele Davolio wrote:
Here the requested output:
mail2:~# host -t mx mastervoice.it
mastervoice.itMX 10 ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM
mastervoice.itMX 20 ALT1.ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.COM
mastervoice.itMX 20
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Muzaffer Tolga Özses to...@ozses.net wrote:
Dec 4 09:57:29 kartagis postfix/smtp[21296]: D576E9988: to=
[node:author:mail]@mail.bilgisayarciniz.org, orig_to=[node:author:mail],
relay=none, delay=0.01, delays=0.01/0/0.01/0, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail
for
30 matches
Mail list logo
