Re: growing size of mail.log file - postfix logs

* Poliman - Serwis : > Hi everyone. In mail.log file I have many lines like below: > Mar 2 06:53:30 vps342401 postfix/smtps/smtpd[14642]: SSL_accept error from > house.census.shodan.io[89.248.172.16]: -1 > Mar 2 06:53:30 vps342401 postfix/smtps/smtpd[14642]: warning: TLS

growing size of mail.log file - postfix logs

Hi everyone. In mail.log file I have many lines like below: Mar 2 06:53:30 vps342401 postfix/smtps/smtpd[14642]: SSL_accept error from house.census.shodan.io[89.248.172.16]: -1 Mar 2 06:53:30 vps342401 postfix/smtps/smtpd[14642]: warning: TLS library problem: error:1408A10B:SSL

Re: ot: troubleshhoting MX issue (?)

On Wed, March 1, 2017 10:45 pm, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:50:55PM +1100, Voytek wrote: Andrew, > Why are you setting +nocd? ahmm, I saw it in Viktor's post, and, copied it..oops > It looks like you're still seeing a SERVFAIL for the MX record, at > least in what you

Re: DNSBL, Spamhaus and postscreen filters

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 05:49:35PM -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote in haste, and now at leisure, corrects: > I'm more familiar with BIND, and this will do it: > > # mv /etc/named.conf /etc/named.conf.distrib # touch /etc/named.conf > # echo "nameserver 127.0.0.1" > /etc/resolv.conf > # named A

Re: DNSBL, Spamhaus and postscreen filters

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 10:00:28PM +, Robert Sharp wrote: > I was prompted from reading a recent post to check whether my > postscreen set up was picking up Spamhaus responses. Quick grep > through my logs confirmed that it was not. Seems I am in a bit > of Bind (sorry for the pun). If I use

DNSBL, Spamhaus and postscreen filters

I was prompted from reading a recent post to check whether my postscreen set up was picking up Spamhaus responses. Quick grep through my logs confirmed that it was not. Seems I am in a bit of Bind (sorry for the pun). If I use Google's DNS I dont get a response from zen.spamhaus.org. If I use

Re: dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

On Mar 1, 2017 4:30 PM, "Viktor Dukhovni" wrote: > On Mar 1, 2017, at 4:14 PM, Ian Evans wrote: > > Okay...lack of caffeine and hospital distraction is probably not the best time to be doing this, > > Created /etc/virtual with: > > example.com

Re: dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

> On Mar 1, 2017, at 4:14 PM, Ian Evans wrote: > > Okay...lack of caffeine and hospital distraction is probably not the best > time to be doing this, > > Created /etc/virtual with: > > example.com this-text-is-ignored Lose the above line. The domain is not a

Inserting a signature

Hello, I'm wanting to insert an email signature in all outgoing email messages. Is altermime still the best way of doing this or is there another path? Thanks. Dave.

Re: dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Ian Evans wrote: > > > > virtual_mailbox_base = /home/vmail > > virtual_mailbox_domains = example.com > > virtual_mailbox_limit = 0 > >

Re: dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

> On Mar 1, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Ian Evans wrote: > > virtual_mailbox_base = /home/vmail > virtual_mailbox_domains = example.com > virtual_mailbox_limit = 0 > virtual_mailbox_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/vmaps > virtual_transport = lmtp:unix:private/dovecot-lmtp The

LDAP-based autoresponder?

:-) Not a postfix issue in fact... Forgive me, please! I've found something like this: http://www.onyxbits.de/gnarwl/ So old so abandoned, there is surely no forum/list/support/help on it. Is there - by accident - anyone who used it and have integrated it with postfix? Thanks in advance! Best

Re: dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 8:42 AM, Ian Evans wrote: > > > > Mar 1 08:19:59 carson postfix/lmtp[16949]: 0DCD22016BE: to=< > sa...@example.com>,

Re: dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

> On Mar 1, 2017, at 8:42 AM, Ian Evans wrote: > > Mar 1 08:19:59 carson postfix/lmtp[16949]: 0DCD22016BE: > to=, relay=carson.example.com[private/dovecot-lmtp], > delay=0.07, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0.04, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced (host >

Re: Question about milters

Thank you so much Patrick. I sincerely appreciate your help with this. On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > * Linda Pagillo : > > Thank you for this Patrick. My problem is, I want to disable the milter > for > > outgoing authenticated

Re: Question about milters

* Linda Pagillo : > Thank you for this Patrick. My problem is, I want to disable the milter for > outgoing authenticated email on those ports, not enable the milter for > them. Also.. I want the milter to still run on non-authenticated email. For > example... u...@domain.com is

Re: Question about milters

Thank you for this Patrick. My problem is, I want to disable the milter for outgoing authenticated email on those ports, not enable the milter for them. Also.. I want the milter to still run on non-authenticated email. For example... u...@domain.com is a valid user on the server. They want to send

Re: Question about milters

* Linda Pagillo : > I have only one smtpd_milter and no non_smtpd_milters. The one milter I'm > using is called SNFMilter. It's an anti-spam milter that I use from Arm > Research. I have a configuration file called SNFMilter.xml and in the > main.cf I have the following line:

Re: Question about milters

I have only one smtpd_milter and no non_smtpd_milters. The one milter I'm using is called SNFMilter. It's an anti-spam milter that I use from Arm Research. I have a configuration file called SNFMilter.xml and in the main.cf I have the following line: smtpd_milters = unix:/path/to/socket Forgive

SRS software for postfix?

:-) I'm searching for a Sender Rewriting Scheme tool well integrated with postfix. postsrsd seems nice and generally works nice however it causes some problems if canonicals for all four addresses are used - it operates on the same `sender_canonical_classes' and `recipient_canonical_classes'

Re: Question about milters

* Linda Pagillo : > Good day everyone. I have a quick question about a milter that I'm using. > I'm running Postfix 3.x. The milter is called SNFMilter and it uses a Unix > socket instead of inet. My question is a general question about milters. Is > there a way to bypass a

Question about milters

Good day everyone. I have a quick question about a milter that I'm using. I'm running Postfix 3.x. The milter is called SNFMilter and it uses a Unix socket instead of inet. My question is a general question about milters. Is there a way to bypass a milter for authenticated senders who are sending

dovecot lda bouncing postfix aliases

Recently configured postfix to use the dovecot lda as I wanted to use sieve. Got that working a few days ago but noticed that I wasn't getting any emails to aliases. Checked the logs and saw messages like: Mar 1 08:19:59 carson postfix/lmtp[16949]: 0DCD22016BE: to=< sa...@example.com>,

Re: ot: troubleshhoting MX issue (?)

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:50:55PM +1100, Voytek wrote: > BUT, I'm not getting BOTH MX and NS, like in your dig, though, get them > individually with 't' option Name servers may include or not, according to various local policy settings, the Authority section appropriate to an answer. When you

Re: ot: troubleshhoting MX issue (?)

On Wed, March 1, 2017 11:13 am, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > That resolver is having problems that I don't see: > > > $ dig +nocd -t mx surfacetreatment.be > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 23879 > ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 2 >