Re: Question regarding 8BITMIME / BINARYMIME

On 12 Mar 2018, at 22:44, J Doe wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding 8BITMIME. I know Postfix supports 8BITMIME and does not support BINARYMIME, but I am wondering why both 8BITMIME and BINARYMIME are ESMTP extensions. It would appear that 8BITMIME solves the same problem as BINARYMIME

Question regarding 8BITMIME / BINARYMIME

Hi, I have a question regarding 8BITMIME. I know Postfix supports 8BITMIME and does not support BINARYMIME, but I am wondering why both 8BITMIME and BINARYMIME are ESMTP extensions. It would appear that 8BITMIME solves the same problem as BINARYMIME (allow 8-bit encoding of MIME), so why

Re: The compatibility_level mechanism

On 2018-03-12 12:12, Wietse Venema wrote: Whereas compatibility is easy to check for features that are implemented in one place, smtputf8 affects a lot of programs. One would have to enable it under the covers, but not enforce it. Thanks for the explanation.  I'll be more careful the next time

Re: Reducing logging

* LuKreme : > I may have asked this before, but if so I can't find the thread. > > I'd like to either reduce the amount that postfix logs or redirect certain > events to a secondary log file (that I can put on a shorter rotation than the > full mail log). > > Is there anyway

Reducing logging

I may have asked this before, but if so I can't find the thread. I'd like to either reduce the amount that postfix logs or redirect certain events to a secondary log file (that I can put on a shorter rotation than the full mail log). Is there anyway to redirect, for example, post screen events

Re: Can't connect to server / migrating to iptables

On 03/12/2018 08:12 AM, wp.rauchholz wrote: # POP3 iptables -A INPUT -i $EXT_DEV -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --syn --dport 110 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i $EXT_DEV -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --syn --dport 995 -j ACCEPT # IMAP iptables -A INPUT -i $EXT_DEV -m state --state NEW

Re: Postfix - Amavis erroneus SPAM

On 3/12/2018 8:15 AM, Enrico Morelli wrote: > Deal, a software that control an hardware has to send alarm mail when > something happens. Starting from two weeks ago, the alarms stops to be > sent and checking in the mail server logs I see the following message: > > Mar 12 09:03:57 mailserver

Can't connect to server / migrating to iptables

I run my mail server on CENTOS 7. The server is modem/router and as such has two NICs; internal and external. Since migrating to iptables, I cannot access the mail server anymore; nor telnet, neither web client. My webserver works just fine. I can't find an error message in /var/log/maillog or

Re: Postfix - Amavis erroneus SPAM

On 12.03.18 14:15, Enrico Morelli wrote: Deal, a software that control an hardware has to send alarm mail when something happens. Starting from two weeks ago, the alarms stops to be sent and checking in the mail server logs I see the following message: Mar 12 09:03:57 mailserver amavis[14797]:

Re: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from

mauri...@caloro.ch: > Mar 12 14:50:02 mail postfix/postscreen[5446]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from > [IP]:4458: 450 4.3.2 Service currently unavailable; from=<>, > to=, proto=ESMTP, helo= > Mar 12 14:50:02 mail postfix/postscreen[5446]: PASS NEW [IP]:4458 > Mar 12 14:50:02 mail

Re: Postfix - Amavis erroneus SPAM

On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 14:09:23 + "Fazzina, Angelo" wrote: > Hi, I would expect you need to search your logs for all the entries > for this email > > CB9E3837E0F > > To see exactly what happened and go from there ? > Good Luck. > Mar 12 09:03:57 mailserver

NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from

I have only changed the DNSBL now it will come back with "NOQUEUE: reject RCPT" Mar 12 14:49:53 mail postfix/smtpd[5425]: disconnect from localhost[127.0.0.1] Mar 12 14:49:54 mail postfix/smtp[5428]: 759654071A: to=<*@stamper.itconsult.co.uk>, relay=et05.itconsult.net[135]:25, delay=1.1,

RE: Postfix - Amavis erroneus SPAM

Hi, I would expect you need to search your logs for all the entries for this email CB9E3837E0F To see exactly what happened and go from there ? Good Luck. -ANGELO FAZZINA ITS Service Manager: Spam and Virus Prevention Mass Mailing G Suite/Gmail ang...@uconn.edu University of Connecticut, 

Re: Greylisting?

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 09:59:27AM +, Allen Coates wrote: > Late last year I tried the Postscreen "deep protocol tests" as a > primitive form of greylisting; It was a high-maintenance exercise > for minimal benefit and I have since stopped using it. > > Google and the like, use a different

Re: Postfix is slow accepting incoming mails

Nikolai Dahlem: > Am 2018-03-09 13:13, schrieb Wietse Venema: > >> delay=0.51, delays=0.21/0/0.17/0.13 > > > > Just to be sure, these numbers include receiving and delivering mail. > > > > 0.21time from message arrival to last active queue entry > > 0 time from last active

Re: unknown recipient issue

Alfredo De Luca: > Hi all. > We have Postfix 2.10 as company mailserver. > I noticed that when I send an email to a not-existing user mailbox in our > domain I don't receive an email back saying unknown mailbox or similar. > > What do I need to do on main.cf in order to achieve that? There is no

Re: Not receiving mail from some legitimate domains

Hi John, You are correct, this is my mistake. I went back through the logs, and this was NOT nabble. I attempted to register another account for the forum in order to generate the e-mail, and this server which issued the help command had coincidentally connected within a few seconds of nabble's

Re: how does relay_domains=$mydestination work?

> On Mar 12, 2018, at 8:39 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > > out of curiosity: the compatibility readme documents "backwards-compatible > default setting relay_domains=$mydestination" and that the empty value > "default value has changed from "$mydestination" to the

Postfix - Amavis erroneus SPAM

Deal, a software that control an hardware has to send alarm mail when something happens. Starting from two weeks ago, the alarms stops to be sent and checking in the mail server logs I see the following message: Mar 12 09:03:57 mailserver amavis[14797]: (14797-01) Blocked SPAM

Re: Greylisting?

On 2018-03-12 (06:40 MDT), "@lbutlr" wrote: > > It is not worthwhile because two many mailers will use different servers to > send mail, which will hit the greylist all over again. This means a lot of > maintenance for those (and we're talking mailers like google, amazon,

Re: Greylisting?

On 2018-03-11 (20:39 MDT), john wrote: > > I greylisting still considered worthwhile or should I drop it? It is not worthwhile because two many mailers will use different servers to send mail, which will hit the greylist all over again. This means a lot of maintenance for those

how does relay_domains=$mydestination work?

Hello, out of curiosity: the compatibility readme documents "backwards-compatible default setting relay_domains=$mydestination" and that the empty value "default value has changed from "$mydestination" to the empty value. This could" under which curcumstances can this cause an error? if the

Re: Greylisting?

The experiment DID stop a few zombies, but not many. On 12/03/18 02:39, john wrote: I  was just taking a look through my postfix configuration and noticed that I have a "check_policy_service" for postgrey a greylisting service. I greylisting still considered worthwhile or should I drop it? On

Re: The compatibility_level mechanism

Jesper Dybdal: > What I do not understand, postfix-wise, is that I have seen no warnings > about "using backwards-compatible" default value of smtputf8_enable > during the period where I was using compatibility_level=0.? With compatibility_level=0, Postfix always accepts mail with a non-ascii

Re: Greylisting?

Late last year I tried the Postscreen "deep protocol tests" as a primitive form of greylisting; It was a high-maintenance exercise for minimal benefit and I have since stopped using it. Google and the like, use a different mail server for each connect attempt. You need an actively maintained

Re: unknown recipient issue

On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:40:25AM +0100, Alfredo De Luca wrote: > We have Postfix 2.10 as company mailserver. > I noticed that when I send an email to a not-existing user mailbox in our > domain I don't receive an email back saying unknown mailbox or similar. Please follow the instructions layed

Re: How to write a milter with access to carddav

Hello Bastian, Thanks for the advice, I will consider it. I am pretty sure to know how to do this. However, because the CardDav server is on the same host, I think it should not be an issue. I made a few tests, and the performances are even better than some anti-spam milters like

Re: unknown recipient issue

On 09.03.18 11:40, Alfredo De Luca wrote: We have Postfix 2.10 as company mailserver. I noticed that when I send an email to a not-existing user mailbox in our domain I don't receive an email back saying unknown mailbox or similar. the mailserver should reject the unknown recipient address,

Re: Not receiving mail from some legitimate domains

On 12/03/18 07:12, jlftl wrote: > Wietse Venema wrote >> jlftl: >>> Thank you very much for the responses! >>> >>> This is a small, personal setup with low traffic so I will definitely >>> explore using notify_classes to try to get more feedback on the failures. >>> >>> Remote server legitmacy -

Re: Not receiving mail from some legitimate domains

Wietse Venema wrote > jlftl: >> Thank you very much for the responses! >> >> This is a small, personal setup with low traffic so I will definitely >> explore using notify_classes to try to get more feedback on the failures. >> >> Remote server legitmacy - *.dbsintl.net appears to be a third

Re: Removing trace records on submission MSA

On 2018-03-10 16:01:01 (-0500), J Doe wrote: I have a question in regards to removing some trace records when providing submission on Postfix 3.1.x and later. While reading RFC 6409 (“Message Submission for Mail”), I note that the RFC observes that: "Even when submitted messages are