On 2/8/19 2:31 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
On 2/8/19 2:10 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Feb 8, 2019, at 2:07 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Much easier to automate changes (as we had nothing like postconf -e for
changing master.cf). If I read the patch right, you are
Robert Moskowitz:
>
>
> On 2/8/19 2:10 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> >> On Feb 8, 2019, at 2:07 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> >>
> >> Much easier to automate changes (as we had nothing like postconf -e for
> >> changing master.cf). If I read the patch right, you are providing a
> >> warning
On 2/8/19 2:10 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Feb 8, 2019, at 2:07 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Much easier to automate changes (as we had nothing like postconf -e for
changing master.cf). If I read the patch right, you are providing a warning of
the double entry. Perhaps a better patch
> On Feb 8, 2019, at 2:15 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
> Well, I am not sure. From Viktor's earlier note, it seems that the last wins
> and the earlier ones are just ignored. Maybe it is that Viktor said,
> "master.c"
A simple typo. I meant master.cf.
--
Viktor.
On 2/8/19 2:08 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
On 2/8/19 1:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni:
pickup unix n - n 60 1
pickup
pickup unix n - n 60
> On Feb 8, 2019, at 2:07 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
> Much easier to automate changes (as we had nothing like postconf -e for
> changing master.cf). If I read the patch right, you are providing a warning
> of the double entry. Perhaps a better patch would warn and drop all but the
>
Robert Moskowitz:
>
>
> On 2/8/19 1:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Viktor Dukhovni:
> >>> pickup unix n - n 60
> >>>1 pickup
> >>> pickup unix n - n 60
> >>>1
On 2/8/19 1:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni:
pickup unix n - n 60 1
pickup
pickup unix n - n 60 1
pickup
-o content_filter=
The
On 2/8/19 1:42 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Feb 8, 2019, at 1:26 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Like I said, I am obviously missing something simple I am not doing.
I pulled out that 2nd pickup entry (and I know where I picked up doing this,
sigh):
Be careful to not introduce loops. That
Viktor Dukhovni:
> > pickup unix n - n 60
> > 1 pickup
> > pickup unix n - n 60
> > 1 pickup
> > -o content_filter=
>
> The "pickup" service is defined
> On Feb 8, 2019, at 1:26 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
> Like I said, I am obviously missing something simple I am not doing.
>
> I pulled out that 2nd pickup entry (and I know where I picked up doing this,
> sigh):
Be careful to not introduce loops. That override to skip content filters
On 2/8/19 12:42 PM, Dominic Raferd wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 17:33, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
#postconf -Mxf
pickup unix n - n 60 1
pickup
pickup unix n - n 60 1
On 2/8/19 12:32 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
Never overlook the impossible: what is logged when you execute
"postfix reload"? Does that configuration directory match the
location of the main.cf and master.cf files that you report here?
I suspect it is something 'obvious', but
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 17:33, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > #postconf -Mxf
> >
> > pickup unix n - n 60
> > 1 pickup
> > pickup unix n - n 60
> > 1 pickup
> >
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 12:24:06PM -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
[ Please avoid sending text with Unicode non-breaking spaces
instead of ordinary spaces. ]
> Here is some more information (asked in a private mail):
>
> # postconf smtpd_milters content_filter smtpd_proxy_filter
>
>
Robert Moskowitz:
> > Never overlook the impossible: what is logged when you execute
> > "postfix reload"? Does that configuration directory match the
> > location of the main.cf and master.cf files that you report here?
>
> I suspect it is something 'obvious', but I don't think it is this:
One
On 2/8/19 12:05 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
Wietse, thanks for responding.
On 2/8/19 11:31 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
Something is wrong, but I have yet to find it.
Any and all help greatly appreciated.
If you could summarize in one line what is wrong.
It
On 2/8/19 12:05 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
Wietse, thanks for responding.
On 2/8/19 11:31 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
Something is wrong, but I have yet to find it.
Any and all help greatly appreciated.
If you could summarize in one line what is wrong.
It
Robert Moskowitz:
> Wietse, thanks for responding.
>
> On 2/8/19 11:31 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Robert Moskowitz:
> >> Something is wrong, but I have yet to find it.
> >> Any and all help greatly appreciated.
> > If you could summarize in one line what is wrong.
>
> It does not seem that
On 2/8/19 11:36 AM, Dominic Raferd wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 16:18, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
I have dug some more and not found anything to help. I went through
http://www.postfix.org/docs.html where 2 of the amavis howtos are no longer
available. I have replicated the main.cf and
Wietse, thanks for responding.
On 2/8/19 11:31 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Moskowitz:
Something is wrong, but I have yet to find it.
Any and all help greatly appreciated.
If you could summarize in one line what is wrong.
It does not seem that amavis-new is being called by postfix. The
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 16:18, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
> I have dug some more and not found anything to help. I went through
> http://www.postfix.org/docs.html where 2 of the amavis howtos are no longer
> available. I have replicated the main.cf and master.cf as shown in
>
Robert Moskowitz:
> Something is wrong, but I have yet to find it.
> Any and all help greatly appreciated.
If you could summarize in one line what is wrong.
- You configured amavis via 'content_filter' but it is not being used?
In that case, what is the output from:
postconf -n
I have dug some more and not found anything to help. I went through
http://www.postfix.org/docs.html where 2 of the amavis howtos are no
longer available. I have replicated the main.cf and master.cf as shown
in http://www.shisaa.jp/postset/mailserver-1.html and still no apparent
running of
Harald Koch:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 06:40, Emmanuel Fust? wrote:
> >
> > Never use shared storage. It will be your main source of problems.
>
> Recognizing that shared storage is always a headache:
>
> How do you handle the situation where your active node crashes with queued,
> undelivered
Le 08/02/2019 à 15:58, Harald Koch a écrit :
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 06:40, Emmanuel Fusté wrote:
Never use shared storage. It will be your main source of problems.
Recognizing that shared storage is always a headache:
How do you handle the situation where your active node crashes with
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 06:40, Emmanuel Fusté wrote:
>
> Never use shared storage. It will be your main source of problems.
Recognizing that shared storage is always a headache:
How do you handle the situation where your active node crashes with queued,
undelivered messages?
--
Harald Koch
> > On 06.02.19 02:42, Patton, Matthew [Contractor] wrote:
> I learned the hard way that if you don't set $myhostname to a FQDN
> you can quickly end up on a black list despite having valid SPF
> records.
> >
> > any evidence about this?
The host has both forward and reverse
De Petter Mattheas wrote:
> Yeas we have F5 loadbalancer.
> But how do we shift the config? as far as i know there is no central mgmt for
> postfix only config files on node 1 and node 2
I would use cfengine3 to enforce a config (ideally the same config)
on both nodes (which would be up an
You could use Unison to keep the config folders in sync. Open source. runs on
just about everything.
February 8 2019 8:59 AM, "De Petter Mattheas"
wrote:
> Yeas we have F5 loadbalancer.
>
> But how do we shift the config ? as far as i know there is no central mgmt
> for postfix only config
Yeas we have F5 loadbalancer.
But how do we shift the config ? as far as i know there is no central mgmt for
postfix only config files on node 1 and node 2
Met vriendelijke groeten
Kind regards
De Petter Mattheas
De Petter Mattheas wrote:
> But we need an active passive setup and a shared config, when config a gets a
> change be should have exact the same config.
>
> How would you set this up ?
If you have a high available loadbalancer, you should use that to
enable active/passive (if node one fails,
Thanks for the assist.
But we need an active passive setup and a shared config, when config a gets a
change be should have exact the same config.
How would you set this up ?
-Original Message-
From: Emmanuel Fusté
Sent: 08 February 2019 12:41
To: De Petter Mattheas ; Postfix users
Le 08/02/2019 à 11:35, De Petter Mattheas a écrit :
Hello
Which work method do you guys prefer for ha with postfix?
2 postfix nodes with f5 load balancer active passive and shared
storage for the que
How can you share config between active and passive ? can we use my
sql cluster for
Hello
Which work method do you guys prefer for ha with postfix?
2 postfix nodes with f5 load balancer active passive and shared storage for the
que
How can you share config between active and passive ? can we use my sql cluster
for configuration sharing between the two nodes?
Ha proxy or ha
35 matches
Mail list logo
