Kenneth Marshall put forth on 1/22/2010 8:39 AM:
pdns-recursor 3.1.7.2 is easy to configure/use and has a tuneable
resource footprint.
Got her installed, configured, up and running. Let's see if this improves this
spamhaus situation, and a handful a day of other dns related errors I've been
Noel Jones put forth on 1/22/2010 10:00 AM:
Nothing is logged because the DNS server gives an authoritive does not
exist answer. That's not an error, it is the expected response when a
client is not listed in an RBL.
Hi Noel,
I was not venting at Postfix, or Wietse, or any of the devs for
Mark Goodge put forth on 1/22/2010 11:07 AM:
It's not the fault of
Spamhaus, Google or Postfix if people don't RTFM.
I'll give you that. I'd been using zen for years, and sbl-xbl for years before
that. When I changed my resolvers to Google from my current provider's (for
performance reasons,
Stefan Foerster put forth on 1/23/2010 11:08 AM:
In case of severe server overload, with postscreen(8) complaining
about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
(reasonably) safe as a last desperate measure to put $data_directory,
or at least the file referenced by
Javier Fox put forth on 1/27/2010 7:57 PM:
Greetings,
I've inherited a rather kludgy email system consisting of an overpriced,
underpowered spam filtering appliance which I would very much like to
replace with a simple *nix box running Postfix and some manner of spam
filtering software (ie
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 1/27/2010 9:47 PM:
http://www.postfix.org/STANDARD_CONFIGURATION_README.html#firewall
http://www.postfix.org/CONTENT_INSPECTION_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_PROXY_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_recipient_restrictions
http
Jeff Weinberger put forth on 1/28/2010 4:18 PM:
You've made it clear I'm posting the wrong thing - but I don't know
what the right thing is
Sorry to but in Wietse.
Jeff, paste all of postconf -n output and obfuscate any sensitive information in
it such as hostnames or IP addresses that
Based on purely visual non-scientific observation (top), it seems my smtpd
processes on my MX hang around much longer in (Debian) 2.5.5 than they did in
(Debian) 2.3.8. In 2.3.8 Master seemed to build them and tear them down very
quickly after the transaction was complete. An smtpd process'
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 1/29/2010 12:27 AM:
Based on purely visual non-scientific observation (top), it seems my smtpd
processes on my MX hang around much longer in (Debian) 2.5.5 than they did in
(Debian) 2.3.8. In 2.3.8 Master seemed to build them and tear them down very
quickly after
Hay Wietse,
Someone was wondering on spam-l why Postfix defaults smtpd VRFY to ON instead of
OFF. Their theory being that the default of ON makes it easier for spammers to
harvest addresses.
Most people shut if off (including me). Then spammers go to RCPT TO checking,
so IMO it makes little
Wietse Venema put forth on 1/29/2010 6:15 AM:
Stan Hoeppner:
Based on purely visual non-scientific observation (top), it seems my smtpd
processes on my MX hang around much longer in (Debian) 2.5.5 than they did in
(Debian) 2.3.8. In 2.3.8 Master seemed to build them and tear them down very
Wietse Venema put forth on 1/30/2010 9:03 AM:
Allow me to present a tutorial on Postfix and operating system basics.
Thank you Wietse. I'm always eager to learn. :)
Postfix reuses processes for the same reasons that Apache does;
however, Apache always runs a fixed minimum amount of daemons,
Wietse Venema put forth on 1/30/2010 7:14 PM:
Stan Hoeppner:
AFAIK I don't use Berkeley DB tables, only hash (small,few) and cidr
(very large, a handful).
hash (and btree) == Berkeley DB.
Ahh, good to know. I'd thought only btree used Berkeley DB and that hash tables
used something else
. Before that, afaik, it
was only being called for local alias verification, and it exited immediately in
that case as well.
--
Stan
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 1/30/2010 11:13 PM:
Wietse Venema put forth on 1/30/2010 7:14 PM:
Stan Hoeppner:
AFAIK I don't use Berkeley DB tables, only hash (small,few
dd1313 put forth on 1/31/2010 2:44 AM:
could you point me to that part of the docs that refer to that.Actually I
know not what to do next.
I have logged in as root on ubuntu, what is next please
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/ubuntu/add-a-user-on-ubuntu-server/
--
Stan
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 1/31/2010 12:04 AM:
Sorry for top posting. Forgot to add something earlier: Proxymap seems to be
exiting on my system immediately after servicing requests. It does not seem
to
be obeying $max_use or $max_idle which are both set to 100. It did this even
before I
Jacqui Caren-home put forth on 1/31/2010 12:47 PM:
I recommend joining the spam-l list and joining the discussion there.
I recommend against this. The topic is dead there now. One poster there
questioned why Wietse enabled it by default. I merely asked here so I could
post an official answer
Wietse Venema put forth on 1/31/2010 10:38 AM:
Stan Hoeppner:
This is making good progress. Seeing the smtpd's memory footprint
drop so dramatically is fantastic. However, I'm still curious as
to why proxymap doesn't appear to be honoring $max_idle or $max_use.
Maybe my understanding
Wietse Venema put forth on 1/31/2010 7:34 PM:
Stan Hoeppner:
Better: apply the long-term solution, in the form of the patch below.
This undoes the max_idle override (a workaround that I introduced
with Postfix 2.3). I already introduced the better solution with
Postfix 2.4 while solving
Noel Jones put forth on 1/29/2010 8:44 AM:
On 1/29/2010 1:37 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Local shows very speedy delivery. Is this long smtpd process
lifespan normal
for 2.5.5 or did I do something screwy/wrong in my config?
relay=local, delay=2.2, delays=2.2/0/0/0.01, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent
Carlos Williams put forth on 2/1/2010 10:04 AM:
I recommend and prefer Roundcube.
http://roundcube.net/
+1
If you're going to offer webmail, you may as well offer IMAP folders instead of
POP. JMHO.
I'm an ex Squirrelmail user and switched to Roundcube, mainly for the nicer user
interface.
Kay put forth on 2/1/2010 11:49 AM:
In my job (hosting company) I see boxes exploited via roundcube all the
time. Squirrelmail? Not one so far. Part of the reason is that
squirrelmail comes with RHEL, so it's kept up to date automatically,
while customers install their own roundcube and
Charles Marcus put forth on 2/1/2010 4:17 PM:
On 2010-02-01 4:05 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
My Roundcube package is currently up to date, and it is a standard
Debian package:
[02:21:52][r...@greer]/$ aptitude show roundcube
Package: roundcube
New: yes
State: installed
Automatically
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 2/1/2010 4:31 PM:
That's probably some sort of twisted Debian humor .)
I wish it was humor... Debian Stable always lags pretty seriously behind the
cutting edge release versions of a lot of packages. Then again, from what I
understand, so do RHEL, CentOS, SLES,
Wade Smart put forth on 2/1/2010 7:43 PM:
Right now I just sent from my mail client (thunderbird) but I would
like to be able to send back through postfix to keep a record of all
sent mails.
That's what your Sent Items folder is for.
You need to keep in mind that by default Postfix won't log
Michele Carandente put forth on 2/2/2010 3:57 AM:
message_size_limit = 3072
Unrelated to your question, but...
You say this machine is behind a dial up line? Ouch! You may want to seriously
consider changing this to something more sane like 262144. With a 56K modem
averaging a real 45
Radio Tron put forth on 2/3/2010 8:22 AM:
3. How do I handle bounced mail and postmaster.. create a white-list file for
postmaster and put a rule saying PASS all.. will that create a loophole where
scumbags can spoof the FROM: field???
The scumbags always spoof the FROM: field. You can
DUBOURG Kevin put forth on 2/8/2010 4:23 AM:
On debian repository 2.5.5-1.1 ... Snif ...
You're looking in the Lenny/Stable repo. Debian never adds new software revs
into Stable TTBOMK. Lenny was released 14 Feb 09, one year ago. If you want
Postfix 2.6.5 as a Deb package, you'll have to go
Jerry put forth on 2/8/2010 5:13 AM:
Wow, I was not aware the debian had actually progressed that far.
Debian jumped from Postfix 2.3.8 on Etch to 2.5.5 when Lenny was flipped to
Stable. Looong release cycles tend to produce these miracle rev leaps on
occasion. On the flip side, more often,
K bharathan put forth on 2/2/2010 10:49 AM:
thanks for all
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Charles Marcus
cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote:
On 2010-02-01 7:17 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
All of that said, I don't find
Wietse Venema put forth on 2/9/2010 8:54 AM:
Dhiraj Chatpar:
Dear All,
Please note that i am getting another error on ubuntu 9.10 machine with
postfix 2.6.5 as below
r...@smtp:/etc/postfix# postmulti -i postfix-1 -e enable
r...@smtp:/etc/postfix# postmulti -i postfix-1 -p start
Jeff Lacki put forth on 2/9/2010 10:53 AM:
I have a situation with hosting.com, trying to setup
a friends postfix config. Since I knew nothing about
them I asked him to find out what their smtp server
was. They said that we cannot use it and gave us a link
to setup postfix, however they
Thijssen put forth on 2/9/2010 4:19 AM:
- If they like flashy GUI bullshit like HTML-mail and WYSIWYG
formatted emails and spam and commerce, then don't use Squirrelmail.
- If they focuss on actual text content and plaintext emails (the way
it should be), then squirrelmail is your Number One
Frank Bonnet put forth on 2/12/2010 10:05 AM:
Hello all ( Postfix and Dovecot )
Trying to use deliver as mailbox_command with Postfix I get this
error each time an email is arriving
deliver(): Error: file_dotlock_create(/var/mail/)
failed: Permission denied
LuKreme put forth on 2/12/2010 10:08 AM:
On 12-Feb-2010, at 08:48, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Tell me about this top-secure aspect of Squirrelmail again. ;)
The fact that some spammers are able to get into email accounts and send spam
via squirrelmail has nothing to do with the security
Aaron Wolfe put forth on 2/12/2010 11:39 AM:
It might be better to think in terms of messages per hour than number of
users.
Most importantly, who are these users? Are they customers? Members of some
society or club? Will these be their primary email accounts or secondary,
tertiary, etc?
DJ Lucas put forth on 2/15/2010 1:22 AM:
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Security/Software_Firewalls/Enterprise_Firewalls/Cisco_PIX_Firewall/Q_24438893.html
Never post links to information that requires a credit card in order to view it.
I'm sure this breaks one if not many netiquette rules.
DJ Lucas put forth on 2/15/2010 1:33 AM:
On 02/15/2010 01:30 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
DJ Lucas put forth on 2/15/2010 1:22 AM:
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Security/Software_Firewalls/Enterprise_Firewalls/Cisco_PIX_Firewall/Q_24438893.html
Never post links to information
Frank Bonnet put forth on 2/15/2010 3:10 AM:
On 02/12/10 18:25, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Frank Bonnet put forth on 2/12/2010 10:05 AM:
Hello all ( Postfix and Dovecot )
Trying to use deliver as mailbox_command with Postfix I get this
error each time an email is arriving
deliver(
Patrick Chemla put forth on 2/19/2010 1:38 AM:
Hi,
I have a Postfix 2.6 relaying tons of emails to millions email addresses
and domains.
I have listed tens of thousands of email addresses and domains to which
I don't want to relay any more.
The plot thickens...
First you said you were
dar...@chaosreigns.com put forth on 2/19/2010 11:26 PM:
I want to collect all spam delivered to my server to an invalid user /
domain. luser_relay seems to be doing part of the job, but how do I get it
around or through spamassassin which is set up as a pre-queue content
filter? It looks
brian moore put forth on 2/22/2010 12:57 PM:
I like Spamhaus, and it is very effective, though they do charge a
nontrivial fee for commercial usage that would never get approved around here.
You may be pleasantly surprised to find out you do qualify for free use.
Wietse Venema put forth on 2/23/2010 10:39 AM:
Not all the world
is Linux. In fact there are 10 times as many Macs.
Wietse Venema put forth on 2/16/2010 10:01 AM:
This is a technical mailing list. When you claim that something is
bad, you need to support that claim with actual evidence.
Wietse Venema put forth on 2/23/2010 11:41 AM:
Stan Hoeppner:
Wietse Venema put forth on 2/23/2010 10:39 AM:
Not all the world
is Linux. In fact there are 10 times as many Macs.
Wietse Venema put forth on 2/16/2010 10:01 AM:
This is a technical mailing list. When you claim that something
Sahil Tandon put forth on 2/23/2010 12:53 PM:
Stan can you take this pedantic nitpicking off-list if you must
persist? Thanks.
No need to go off-list. This poor dead horse has been beaten enough, I
think. Sorry to have been in pedant mode.
/~$ /usr/bin/wishful_commands/pedant off
--
Stan
Daniel Morgan put forth on 2/26/2010 12:04 AM:
myhostname = apac3.apac.org.ni
In DNS: apac3.apac.org.ni = 165.98.119.11
BUT
165.98.119.11 != apac3.apac.org.ni
165.98.119.11 == pppleon11.ibw.com.ni.
Post the rejected transaction(s) from your logs please. It's likely they
are rejecting your
David Schraeder put forth on 2/26/2010 2:13 PM:
How are you guys getting those stats on the blocks?
Alternatively, try pflogsumm:
http://jimsun.linxnet.com/postfix_contrib.html
If you use Debian you can install pflogsumm via aptitude.
--
Stan
Carlos Williams put forth on 2/28/2010 1:55 PM:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org wrote:
Or you can have postfix add it to main.cf for you by typing the command:
# postconf -e 'address_verify_sender=$double_bounce_sender'
I added the above parameter
Carlos Williams put forth on 2/28/2010 10:02 PM:
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
Carlos, I think it's time you join spam-l and learn all the tricks to
fighting spam. http://spam-l.com/mailman/listinfo/spam-l
Thanks. I will research this and see
Daniel L. Miller put forth on 3/2/2010 1:18 AM:
OK - I'm an idiot. I'll just admit that up front and get it out of the
way.
Now that that's settled, what is the difference between SSL and TLS
in a MUA - particularly Thunderbird - in a Postfix context?
I would have sworn I used to use
Bill Landry put forth on 3/2/2010 2:01 AM:
On 3/1/2010 11:51 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Daniel L. Miller put forth on 3/2/2010 1:18 AM:
OK - I'm an idiot. I'll just admit that up front and get it out of the
way.
Now that that's settled, what is the difference between SSL and TLS
in a MUA
Gregory BELLIER put forth on 3/2/2010 6:03 AM:
Hi !
I downloaded postfix-2.7.0 and I need to manually build it.
The goal is to place everything in a different folder than usual :
/opt/postfix
snip
http://www.postfix.org/INSTALL.html
4.4 - Overriding built-in parameter default settings
donovan jeffrey j put forth on 3/1/2010 8:06 AM:
Greetings
I had several of these on my primary MX this weekend and one just popped
up. Can someone explain where this Insufficient system storage is ?
What filesystem are you using? Are you running out of inodes?
/$ df -i
--
Stan
Ansgar Wiechers put forth on 3/3/2010 6:37 AM:
On 2010-03-03 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
I'm not sure if there is a solution to this, but maybe one of you
folks will know a workaround.
After thunderbird has sent the email, it then has to save the email to
the sent items folders. This can take a
What's the best way to integrate the Spamhaus DBL for folks not already
using SA et al?
Will the following work, or does it check only the entire hostname, and not
the domain portion in isolation as well?
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_rhsbl_client dbl.spamhaus.org
--
Stan
Ansgar Wiechers put forth on 3/3/2010 9:01 AM:
I was under the impression that his Postfix and Dovecot are running on
the same (remote) host, and he's using Postfix as a smarthost for his
outbound mail. If that's the case, then there certainly is an advantage,
as his client won't have to
Noel Jones put forth on 3/3/2010 7:16 PM:
additionally, it appears that dbl.spamhaus.org lists wildcard
subdomains. So for example if dbl lists spammer.tld and the HELO name
is random.foo.spammer.tld it should still be caught by reject_rhsbl_helo.
Checking the HELO name against the DBL is an
Noel Jones put forth on 3/3/2010 7:16 PM:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_rhsbl_client dbl.spamhaus.org
(note for the archives: that's not a complete
smtpd_recipient_restrictions statement.)
BTW, what is incomplete WRT the above restriction example I gave?
reject_rhsbl_client
/dev/rob0 put forth on 3/3/2010 10:31 PM:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:29:50PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Noel Jones put forth on 3/3/2010 7:16 PM:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_rhsbl_client dbl.spamhaus.org
(note for the archives: that's not a complete
smtpd_recipient_restrictions
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 3/4/2010 1:55 AM:
The Spamhaus DBL is a realtime database of domains (typically web site
domains) found in spam messages. Mail server software capable of
scanning email message body contents for URIs can use the DBL to
identify, classify or reject spam containing
J. Roeleveld put forth on 3/4/2010 2:12 AM:
On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for all the tips.
Postfix and Dovecot are indeed on the same box and I do agree with you that
it would require one heck of a hack to get this to work.
See below,
Len Conrad put forth on 3/4/2010 4:16 AM:
If listsen...@domain.tld, send to Internet
Else, send to MX gateway
This may be what you're looking for.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps (default: empty)
A sender-dependent
Len Conrad put forth on 3/4/2010 6:40 AM:
But we don't have a relayhost for the sender listsen...@domain.tld. We want
that trusted sender to bypass the (scanning, weak) relayhost and nexthop to
Internet.
in the sender_dependent postfix box,
relayhost = [mx.domain.tld]
Noel Jones put forth on 3/4/2010 2:51 PM:
This patch adds a reject_rhsbl_reverse_client function that uses the
unverified client hostname for the RBL lookup.
Cool. Thanks Noel.
The idea is that this might increase rhsbl hit rates if the hostname is
more frequently available. On the other
John WInther put forth on 3/6/2010 12:57 PM:
Thanks for info, I am aware of the manual and I have previus tryed to
change the myhostname to soapnut.dk, I still got the reverse dns error.
I gave me an idear to reverse resolve the ip address registred in mx,
and the reply from that test was the
Greg A. Woods put forth on 3/6/2010 2:58 PM:
At Sat, 06 Mar 2010 14:42:13 -0600, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com
wrote:
Subject: Re: reverse dns fails with multiple domains
RFC does not dictate that your forward and reverse dns names match.
Common sense and common decency do though
mouss put forth on 3/6/2010 3:01 PM:
so OP not only has a generic name, but it doesn't resolve back to the
IP. If he can get his ISP to fix his reverse (preferably using a custom
reverse), then maybe things will get better.
I assume this is difficult if not impossible, given it appears
John WInther put forth on 3/6/2010 4:18 PM:
My primary concern is that some mailservers deny sending mail to my domains
if the reverse dns lookup fails. If I set myhostname to one of my public
domains, the reply string from HELO is ok, but the reverse dns lookup
fails,
If not possible to
mouss put forth on 3/6/2010 6:03 PM:
Stan Hoeppner a écrit :
[snip]
A web server with a single IP address hosting 378 vitural domains. Should
it have 379 PTRs? One for the host itself and one for each virtual domain?
Of course not.
A mail server with a single IP address hosting 378 mail
Zhang Huangbin put forth on 3/12/2010 6:36 AM:
On Mar 12, 2010, at 2:59 PM, Goutam Baul wrote:
Hello Everybody,
I am facing a scenario where the client needs a mailing solution while the
user information will be kept in a Microsoft Active Directory server. I was
trying to search for
Wilberth Pérez put forth on 3/12/2010 9:57 AM:
Hi everybody
any one knows, how i could edit dovecot to assign user quotas ?
You are asking on the wrong list. Please use:
http://www.dovecot.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dovecot
mailto:dove...@dovecot.org
--
Stan
Wietse Venema put forth on 3/15/2010 10:22 AM:
Since this does not work, is there an available option to move
myhostname out of main.cf and into another file name or type?
To set a fixed Postfix name, set the right hostname in main.cf, or
set the right hostname in the kernel. If you need
Erik Logtenberg put forth on 3/15/2010 11:16 AM:
Hi,
Is there a possibility to use a DNS-based RBL whitelist in Postfix? In
The Netherlands we have an NL-Whitelist, which contains the IP's of all
major ISP's. By using this whitelist one can make sure that accidental
automatic blacklisting
postfix users put forth on 3/19/2010 8:34 PM:
Hi,
I am migrating the Exchange 2000 to Exchange 2010, but before we switch over
to new server, I want make a copy of email to new server for testing.
Existing Config:
Postfix - Amavisd - Exchange 2000
Here what I want :
Postfix ---
Voytek Eymont put forth on 3/20/2010 5:52 PM:
one of the blacklist I use it is ix.dnsbl.manitu.net
to my knowledge, it has been OK since I've set it up, with no known
complaints
what is the user's opinions on it's usefulness ?
This is one of the downsides to fully automated low threshold
Randy put forth on 3/24/2010 3:55 PM:
dig -x 208.43.143.111
;; ANSWER SECTION:
111.143.43.208.in-addr.arpa. 3600 INPTR
208.43.143.111-static.reverse.softlayer.com.
Your problem isn't the Exchange server per se. Your problem is that you're
forwarding spam to it, and its anti-spam
Glenn English put forth on 4/1/2010 5:42 PM:
I was asking about Postfix running as a daemon on the firewall computer that
handles routing and inspecting traffic between the WAN, the DMZ, and the LAN.
This Postfix would intercept and inspect incoming SMTP connections (and drop
some) before
Hello Nicolas,
Try this:
Remove 'check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/client_access' from
smtpd_recipient_restrictions. Add the following line in main.cf
somewhere before/above smtpd_recipient_restrictions:
smtpd_client_restrictions = hash:/etc/postfix/client_access
And make sure you
Richard Foley wrote:
This mail is just FYI and by way of saying:
postfix and friends do a great job - many thanks!
Hi Richard,
I second your sentiments and would like to shout out a big thank you to
Wietse for creating Postfix!
I was at about the same point you are now for
appreciated.
Thanks.
Stan Hoeppner
TheHardwareFreak
Henrik K wrote:
Sorry if I don't offer sympathies, but Postfix is notoriously well
documented and maintained. A quick look into the man page will show you how
it's spelled.
You missed my point entirely, it seems...
I agree that Postfix should warn in that case.
I don't understand why it
Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 01:36:08PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
What changes would I need to make in order to start using CIDR notation
in my access file? I'm currently using the standard hashed access file.
http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html
Lookup table overview
Thanks for the pruning tips Ralf. I figured some of those were dead,
just hadn't bothered to do any verification recently.
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Stan Hoeppner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I highly recommend you sub to spam-l and post your question there also.
http://www.claws-and-paws.com/spam-l
In this scenario you're better off trying to help others clean up their
networks than to try to block or filter based on the content. As you
stated, they are the Gorillas of mail and you can't really block them.
So, work with them. Believe it or not, these records are published
because
Rob McEwen wrote:
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
That's Rob's list, haha! It's cool to hear folks are using it. He's
been plugging it on spam-l for a while.
Stan, I really do like you... and I don't want to make an enemy out of
you... but there are massive mis-characterizations in that statement
Robert Lopez put forth on 4/6/2010 1:56 PM:
Then then this is working:
$ postmap -q 222.254.228.0 cidr:/etc/postfix/cidr-ip
DISCARD
$ postmap -q 222.254.228.1 cidr:/etc/postfix/cidr-ip
DISCARD
So, now I understand.
Don't feel bad Robert. I went through pretty much the same thing you
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 4/10/2010 2:21 AM:
I'm using zen.spamhaus.org in postscreen and,
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net
reject_rbl_client bogons.cymru.com
reject_rhsbl_sender dbl.spamhaus.org
reject_rhsbl_reverse_client dbl.spamhaus.org
Reinaldo de Carvalho put forth on 4/10/2010 5:56 PM:
In other words:
/([0-9]{1,3}(\.|-)){3}.*\.[a-z]+/ reject generic hostname
/(^a?dsl|a?dsl(\.|-)|(\.|-)a?dsl|(\.|-)d(yn|ip|ial)(\.|-)|(\.|-)cable(\.|-)|(\.|-)user(\.|-)|^dynamic|(\.|-)dynamic|dynamic(\.|-)|(\.|-)ppp(oe)?(\.|-|)|^ppp)/
Noel Jones put forth on 4/10/2010 8:16 PM:
On 4/10/2010 5:49 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
check_client_access regexp:/etc/postfix/fqrdns.regexp
...
You'll probably get more hits using
check_reverse_client_hostname_access. That prevents
Alex put forth on 4/10/2010 7:28 PM:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org
reject_rhsbl_client dbl.spamhaus.org
reject_rhsbl_sender dbl.spamhaus.org
reject_rhsbl_helo dbl.spamhaus.org
I'm familiar with zen, but I
Thou shalt not quote RFC whilst composing in HTML or RTF!
I think that's chiseled on a stone tablet somewhere. If not it should have
been.
--
Stan
Mike Abbott put forth on 4/12/2010 8:56 AM:
+ if (in_stream == NULL) {
+/* must fail the entire transaction */
+chat_reset(state,
Steve put forth on 4/12/2010 10:56 AM:
AFAIK Outlook often saves the messages in a local Sent folder if you use
Outlook as a pure IMAP client. On the IMAP server nothing gets saved.
But you are right. All the other clients that I know save the message on the
server or at least are able to
Gary Smith put forth on 4/13/2010 7:07 PM:
Currently we are using mysql plugin for this and are switching over to static
files (or files generated on a schedule from the database). Anyway, looking
at the docs, it says that the entry need only been found in the file to be
accepted,
Eduardo Júnior put forth on 4/15/2010 8:04 AM:
Due the high load of e-mails over my link, I want that
my messages outgoing through more IPs with only postfix box.
If you only have one physical link, how will sending mail from multiple IPs
within the same subnet solve your link congestion
CT put forth on 4/15/2010 4:43 PM:
I have several boxes that check my relay every 40 seconds to
check that the server is up.
After multiple attempts to get the number of checks reduced I would
like the know the preferred way to block specific IP addresses in Postfix.
I have no issue with
Eduardo Júnior put forth on 4/15/2010 4:52 PM:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
Eduardo Júnior put forth on 4/15/2010 8:04 AM:
Due the high load of e-mails over my link, I want that
my messages outgoing through more IPs with only postfix box
Alex put forth on 4/18/2010 4:45 PM:
Is it possible to use maps_rbl_domains instead of reject_rbl_client
here? It appears this machine has a version of postfix that doesn't
understand reject_rbl_client.
maps_rbl_domains (default: empty)
Obsolete feature: use the reject_rbl_client feature
Noel Jones put forth on 4/18/2010 10:55 PM:
Yes, reject_unknown_client_hostname is still too strict for us. And
we're very strict!
I ran with this for a short while. Had problems with it rejecting Hotmail
connections. And these weren't Hotmail user mails beings delivered, but
responses to
Alex put forth on 4/19/2010 12:11 AM:
It looks like I have a big project ahead of me to upgrade. What kind
of process is involved with going from such an old version to the
current, independent of all the other software?
Not much. Just create/modify the new main.cf and any other config files
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 4/19/2010 8:29 AM:
* John Peach post...@johnpeach.com:
Your nslookup shows you using 207.172.3.20 as a nameserver:
20.3.172.207.in-addr.arpa name = auth1.dns.rcn.net
Your ISP's nameserver. You need to run your own, so that you query
spamhaus directly.
201 - 300 of 1223 matches
Mail list logo
