On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 08:56:59PM +0100, Adrian P. van Bloois wrote:
> > > > postconf -n | grep procmail
> > > This gives no aanswer at all. I'm installing from the source
> >
> > > With postconf |grep procmail I do get the right binary.
> >
> > So someone too clever made "procmail" a
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 09:16:37PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Victor Duchovni :
>
> > Well, Postfix just executes "procmail" via your shell (when mailbox_command
> > contains shell metacharacters). Don't blame the messenger. The error message
> > is
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 03:43:25PM +0530, ram wrote:
> One of our clients sends contract notes to their customers and they
> require to store all logs of deliveries/bounces by some law.
>
> They have requirements like
>
> * The log should contain the full date including year
> * The log line s
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:57:54PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> Can anybody comment on this ugly "fix" for Umlauts in realnames?
>
> # Already with Quotes ("=22") thus do nothing
> /^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= <(.*)>$/ REPLACE From:
> =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= <$2>
> # No quotes
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 09:26:53PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> if (space or special characters in realname)
>return encode(add_quotes(realname))
> else
>return realname
> fi
No, if you encode, you don't add quotes, quotes are for ASCII data that
contains special characters.
For n
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for
> display-name, phrase, word, and atom.
>
> Short answer: as long as =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?= looks like an
> RFC2822 atom, it needs no quoting.
And of course, RFC 204
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 08:52:23AM -0800, motty cruz wrote:
> If I use the command
> # mail -v n...@domain.com I get the folloing
> Mail delivery status report will be mailed to
> But then I get MAILER-DAEMON (mail transport unavailable)
>
> Using FreeBSD 7.2
> Postfix 2.6.5
> And second insta
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 09:17:35AM -0800, motty cruz wrote:
> Filter # mail -v mo...@domain.com
> Subject: test postfix conf
> debug_peer_list = 127.0.0.1
>
> .
> EOT
> Mail Delivery Status Report will be mailed to .
> Filter # mailq
> -Queue ID- --Size-- Arrival Time -Sender/Recipient--
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:26:23AM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> 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 t
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 09:15:59PM +0100, Andrzej Kuku??a wrote:
> Thanks, I just didn't know it's platform specific... I thought of
> master(8) command line arguments that are displayed but ignored -- but
> it's not really THAT important.
The master(8) daemon changing its argument vector is not
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:47:16PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > So the first one is correct and the second one not??
> >
> > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?=
> > To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?=
> >
> > This was within one mail from Outlook/Exchange and at lea
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:16:41AM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>> Same what? Can someone explain the observed issue in some detail?
>> All I am seeing is questions about an ill-advised hypothetical solution.
>>
>> When I put my Cyrillic name into Apple's MUA, the From: header read:
>>
>>
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:55:13PM +0100, Sylvain Ferrand wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to overwrite the "display-name" (i.e. the sender description
> string in the the From: field. - cf. RFC 5322 sec 3.4) set by the MUA. Is
> it possible to rewrite the "display-name" (1) in the "From:" heade
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:58:29PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Sylvain Ferrand :
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to overwrite the "display-name" (i.e. the sender
> > description string in the the From: field. - cf. RFC 5322 sec 3.4)
> > set by the MUA. Is it possible to rewrite the "displa
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 04:12:05PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>> There is no "wrong" To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla.
>
> That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the
> root-case...
> If the bug is still present in TB3 i will bother to file a bug.
I failed to
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 04:16:56PM +, Michele Carandente wrote:
> Hi guys.
> I'm still looking for the right solution...
>
> As I said before, I was thinking to put in a cronjob the command
> "postsuper -h ALL", but in that case I'll put in hold also the emails
> that are in queue because may
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:46:10PM -0500, zhong ming wu wrote:
> With dovecot I can have my mail client send a certificate and make
> dovecote use CN field of the cert as username
> to authenticate. If I enable that feature in dovecot, postfix
> authentication does not work despite the fact that
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 01:42:27PM -0500, zhong ming wu wrote:
> > Postfix does not implement the "external" SASL mechanism for
> > authenticating users via TLS client certs.
>
> So it sends user/password to dovecot socket and get yes/no answer?
Postfix copies SASL protocol requests between the
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 02:45:32PM +0200, Niemi Hannu wrote:
> I have been fighting with a problem with Postfix. There are some users that
> insist on sending mail to large groups of recipients (yes I know that mailman
> or similar is made for that) and there is a limit of number of recipients,
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 02:07:40PM -0600, Kim Albee wrote:
> Is there a filter or a mod that can be made to Postfix that would have the
> process that handles bounced emails within Postfix send the email to a
> different email address (i.e. email identified in specific header variable)
> rather th
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:18:41AM -0300, Gerardo Herzig wrote:
> Hi all, im reading the docs about setting postifx with multiples
> instances [1]. At the "Setting up the null-client Postfix instance"
> part, there is a sample main.cf "which will be a local-submission null
> client:" file, with th
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 02:20:06PM +0100, Pavel Urban wrote:
> open(OUTFILE,"|$Config{'mailer'}") or die "Can't execute
> $Config{'mailer'}: $!\n";
> print OUTFILE "To: $Config{'mailto'}\n";
> print OUTFILE "From: $Config{'mailfrom'}\n";
> print OUTFILE "Subject: Logwatch for $Config{'hostname'} (
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:05:38PM +0100, Wolfgang Zeikat wrote:
> The relay_domains documentation says:
> Specify a list of host or domain names, "/file/name" patterns ...
>
> Would "/file/name" contain one domain per line?
>
> And would changes require "postfix reload"?
Yes, and yes. If you use
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:09:06PM +0100, Wolfgang Zeikat wrote:
> Thanks for the replies, Wietse and Victor.
>
> Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
>>> Would "/file/name" contain one domain per line?
>>>
>>> And would changes require "postfix relo
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 11:09:08PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> I have an existing old postfix TLS server set up and working
> successfully. It was created several years ago and has been working
> fine ever since.
You don't have to upgrade Postfix.
> I'm wondering what the benefits would be with
> upgra
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 01:15:17PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> > Most unlikely. I am not aware of any legacy versions of Postfix that
> > support only SSLv2. Provided you have Postfix 2.3 or later, the TLS
> > support is sufficiently modern and robust.
>
> I'm not happy saying that it's probably older t
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:33:48AM -0800, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> 192.168.0.110:126 inet n - - - - smtpd
> -o smtpd_tls_security_level=may
> -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
> -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
>
> connect with Thund
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 02:42:37PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> > Postfix settings are documented in postconf(5). Unless you are an SSL
> > expert who understands OpenSSL source code in detail, you really should
> > not change the default settings, and generally don't need to know what
> > they are.
>
>
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 12:30:21PM -0800, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> Ok - inferring from that, I tried:
> 192.168.0.110:128 inet n - - - - smtpd
> -o smtpd_tls_wrappermode=yes
> -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
> -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authentic
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 04:04:29PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> >> It's not
> >> possible to figure out which ciphers are offered to TLS clients on my
> >> server?
> >
> > It is possible, but you will most likely shoot yourself in the foot if
> > you try to use this information to adjust Postfix settings.
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:10:37PM +0100, Erik Logtenberg wrote:
> Anyway, I think now I understand what's going on. The distribution that
> I use (Fedora 12) left those two settings to their default. In this
> specific case the setting of 5 IP's just isn't high enough, since this
> host has 22 IP
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 06:54:56PM -0300, Gerardo Herzig wrote:
> Hi all. Im getting a loop in my postfix-multi configuration, and cant
> see what is wrong. I try to follow the README [1] as close as i could.
You need a transport table on the output Postfix to direct mail for
suitable domains to
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 12:05:05PM +0100, Roel van Meer wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Does anyone know if it is possible to configure postfix in such a way that
> it tries to deliver mail via ssmtp if delivery via smtp fails?
>
> Background: We're operating a backup relayhost for a number of customers.
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 06:43:54PM -0500, Jerry wrote:
> From time to time, when mail is being sent internally from one user to
> another on the same network, I see this warning message in the mail-log:
>
> warning: network_biopair_interop: error reading 5 bytes from the
> network: Connection res
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 07:09:59PM -0500, Jerry wrote:
> First, I just sent two messages in quick succession. This is the
> mail-log output:
>
> Mar 9 18:47:54 scorpio postfix/smtpd[64370]: connect from
> xx.my_domain.com[192.168.1.101]
> Mar 9 18:47:55 scorpio postfix/smtpd[64370]: 40197
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 05:01:41PM -0500, Davy Leon wrote:
> Hi folks
>
> I've been trying postfix version 2.3.3 + amavisd-new + clamav for a while
> and it's working pretty cool.
>
> I sent an email with a .EXE attached just for testing purposes, so I
> received a message from content-filter ..
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 02:10:48PM +0100, Gijs wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I'm trying to get postfix work properly with Cyrus-imap but I've yet to get
> everything completely working. My server hosts several domains and uses
> Cyrus to deliver its email to the correct users. In my setup I've
> con
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 08:23:00AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Mar 10 04:59:46 xxx postfix/smtpd[93352]: <
> > xx.my_domain.com[192.168.1.101]: QUIT
> > Mar 10 04:59:46 xxx postfix/smtpd[93352]: >
> > xx.my_domain.com[192.168.1.101]: 221 2.0.0 Bye
> > Mar 10 04:59:46 xxx
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 03:08:18PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > With TLS sessions, after "QUIT" processing, the server tries to perform
> > a clean SSL_shutdown() of the SSL/TLS session. If the client closes
> > the connection without performing the SSL_shutdown(), you'll see the
> > above warn
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:23:53PM +0100, Jiri Vitek wrote:
> 220 mx1.funlife.cz ESMTP
> EHLO cita
> 250-mx1.funlife.cz
> 250-PIPELINING
> 250-SIZE 1536
> 250-VRFY
> 250-ETRN
> 250-STARTTLS
> 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
> 250-8BITMIME
> 250 DSN
Try the test from the server itself, to rule out fir
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 04:52:19PM -0500, Jerry wrote:
> Wietse and Victor, from what I have deduced from reading your posts is
> that I can safely ignore the warning. Is that correct? I am really
> interested though in why this has suddenly started happening. I have
> not touched Postfix or claws
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:48:47PM +0100, Jiri Vitek wrote:
> > > broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
> > > smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes
> > > smtpd_sasl_path = private/auth
> > > smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot
> > > smtpd_tls_auth_only = no
> >
> > Dovecot SASL is enabled in the SMTP server for both TLS a
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:51:59AM -0600, Wilberth P?rez wrote:
> When I configure smtp server from my mail client (thunderbird)
>
>
> with user name login and secure STARTTLS , if i try to send a message the
> following error message appers:
>
>
> "An error occurred while sending mail: unable to
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 05:17:44PM +0100, Jiri Vitek wrote:
> smtpd_sasl_exceptions_networks = $mynetworks
Read the documentation for this parameter.
--
Viktor.
P.S. Morgan Stanley is looking for a New York City based, Senior Unix
system/email administrator to architect and sustain our
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:37:36AM -0600, Wilberth P??rez wrote:
> when i ejecuted the command "postalias /etc/aliases", only generates the
> files:
>
> aliases.dir and aliases.pag
The correct solution is:
main.cf:
alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
alias_maps = $alias_data
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 02:50:49PM -0500, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
> I manage a high-volume mail installation, using an after-queue content
> filter for spam filtering.
>
> We use an ldap transport map (actually a couple of them) to direct each
> recipient's email to it's appropriate final dest
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:12:04PM -0500, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
> > The transport map can reject a recipient at SMTP RCPT TO time,
> > by resolving the recipient to the error(8) or retry(8) transport.
> >
> > The transport map must therefore be searched BEFORE the filter.
>
> I had not cons
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:31:21PM -0500, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
> > And do use "proxy:ldap:" rather than "ldap:" for virtual_alias_maps,
> > and other tables that are used by smtpd and cleanup. Maintain a
> > simple (indexed file) transport table that routes domains, not users.
>
> Fortunate
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:36:54PM -0600, Wilberth P?rez wrote:
> Any one knows
>
> how make for postfix don't put a copy of user message on file of sends ?
>
> I will wish user messages only appears on Inbox.
Postfix does not manage the Sent folder. That's done by MUAs via IMAP.
Configure your
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 04:34:41PM +0100, Richard van den Berg wrote:
> Mar 14 08:47:04 majoron postfix/smtpd[31776]: SSL_accept:error in SSLv3
> read client certificate A
Various SMTP clients are known to mis-handle requests for client
certificates.
You have not posted your "postconf -n" outpu
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:29:46PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> I suppose the "failed DNS whitelist lookup" problem could be mostly avoided
> if the DEFER_IF_REJECT flag was raised on lookup failure. That would allow
> known good mail to pass, and rejected mail would get a safety net. IIRC
> la
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 05:15:59PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Victor Duchovni:
> > With explicit DNSWL lookups, indeed "defer_if_reject" is acceptable, since
> > the DWL is operated locally or by a competent provider and persistent temp
> > failure of lookups is
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:41:02PM +0100, Erik Logtenberg wrote:
> However the DEFER_IF_REJECT flag makes _all_ mail that would normally be
> rejected (quite much) be deferred, which imho is quite a sacrifice to
> make. (if I understand correctly)
No, this would apply only to failed DNSWL lookups
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:57:11PM +0100, Erik Logtenberg wrote:
> However in the case where the whitelist is (completely) unavailable for
> some period of time, I still think that my suggestion applies, don't you
> agree?
No. It is assumed that you use a sufficiently reliable DNSWL. Ideally
a lo
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 04:34:32PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
>> But this entails that a user remember the unityserver domain. We'd like
>> the process to be cleaner by allowing forwards to their public address.
>> Then our smtp will be responsible for rerouting it to the unity server.
>> Hope this
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:00:14AM -0300, Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Tripathy
> wrote:
> >
> > BTW, the machines in the CDE will all have anti-virus and automatic updates
> > enabled.
> >
> > So, back to postfix, can it do such a thing? Act as a "pro
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:41:24PM +0200, ??
?? wrote:
>> Postfix does not send "mail read" notifications.
>
> You mean that these notifications are not part of the Postfix System?
They can't be. Postfix is a doctor not escalator (oops an MTA not a mail
client
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 04:14:31PM -, Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> > It works in practice. A few Postfix TLS proxies have been terminating TLS
> > connections, making access control decisions and forwarding unencrypted
> > SMTP to a non-Postfix server for many years now.
> >
> > These systems o
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 01:31:11PM -0300, Ronie Gilberto Henrich wrote:
>The problem about your solution below is that it will go into a loop.
Only if you go out of your way to make it loop. The address
expansion in virtual(5) is recursive, but it stops as soon as address
expands to itself.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:41:32PM +0200, Alex wrote:
> Basically I have a mysql table with thousands recipients , on the left hand
> I have recipient and on the right hand I have the action (REJECT) and some
> additional text
>
> u...@domain.tld REJECT Additional text
>
> In case of am mu
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:18:50AM -0700, Emmett Culley wrote:
> The ones that don't get delivered to the remote mail server have log
> entries like this:
>
> Mar 18 03:15:02 aoakley postfix/smtp[1714]: 6835847611D:
> to=, relay=mail1.domain1.com[xxx.xxx.xx.x]:25,
> delay=0.68, delays=0.06/0.01
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 01:54:08PM -0300, Ronie Gilberto Henrich wrote:
> Isn't it a simpler way to accomplish that?
No.
> Something like a support for variables (%u) on the left side?
>
> Example:
> everyone_query_filter = (&(accountStatus=active)(%u=everyone))
This is not "simpler" it is sim
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 03:58:42PM +0100, Attila Nagy wrote:
> I have a somewhat busy mail relay running postfix 2.7, which has problems
> with a slow destination.
> I can't limit the number (or rate) of incoming e-mails for that domain, and
> I can't increase the throughput of the destination,
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:10:18PM -0300, Ronie Gilberto Henrich wrote:
> If the LDAP object needs to expans to all user addresses, make it an
> LDAP-URI valued group. If the group is large (thousands of recipients), do
> the expansion on a dedicated list server, not your primary Postfix queue.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 06:08:12AM -0600, Glenn English wrote:
> It looks to me like the problem has something to do with DNS, not
> SMTP, right?
Yes.
> And why would Yahoo be doing a CNAME lookup?
Their MTA does that for all destinations, among other lookups.
> (I checked
> from a remote site
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:32:13PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > And why would Yahoo be doing a CNAME lookup?
> >
> > Their MTA does that for all destinations, among other lookups.
> >
> > Your DNS server is a bit odd:
> >
> > $ dig +trace -t any slsware.com
> >
> > ;; connection timed
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Attila Nagy wrote:
> On 03/19/10 16:13, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> Forward mail for this domain to a separate queue (Postfix instance)
>> that handles mail for this---and perhaps some other similar---domains.
>> The slow domain wil
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 01:26:03PM -0700, brian moore wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:27:29 -0400 (EDT)
> Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Just to clarify, this DNS server is likely to create the same
> > problem with other sites that run a version of the qmail MTA.
>
> That sounds like a feature to
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 06:57:42AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Another possible test:
>
> #ifconfig lo0 mtu 1500
>
> That should decide any argument about write buffer sizes.
Has the OP considered turning off the clamav milter, and retesting?
--
Viktor.
P.S. Morgan Stanley is
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:08:31PM +0100, Richard van den Berg wrote:
> On 22-3-10 22:06 , Richard van den Berg wrote:
>> Apparently postfix does not call SSL_library_init() /
>> OpenSSL_add_ssl_algorithms(), see
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=573748 and
>> http://marc.info
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 07:05:32PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > My sincerest of thanks for providing both a solution and information about
> > OpenBSD semantics of which I was not aware.
>
> It's no different with Linux, Solaris, and so on.
>
> The loopback MTU is usually large to improve per
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:10:44AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > * issuer "TERENA Personal CA"
> > * O=TERENA
> > * C=NL
> >
> > I guess what I am looking for is a new restriction called something like
> > "check_ccert_attr", that would use user defined attributes to take
> > decisions. That wo
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:16:03PM +, Daniel Gomes wrote:
> postfix/master[1043]: warning: process /usr/lib/postfix/smtpd pid 1790
> killed by signal 6
> postfix/master[1043]: warning: /usr/lib/postfix/smtpd: bad command
> startup -- throttling
Is smtpd running in a chroot jail?
Is OpenLDAP
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 08:47:27AM -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
> Our Q2 patch cycle is coming up and I was going to upgrade 2.6.5 -> 2.6.6 on
> the servers but then though maybe 2.6.5 -> 2.7.0 might be in order. I have
> everything ready to go either way (download and created RPM's for both 2.6.6
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 09:09:24AM -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
> > Everything you need to know is the RELEASE_NOTES.
>
> Read them already... I just wanted to do a double check first.
Good. You should be all set then. By all means go with 2.7.
--
Viktor.
P.S. Morgan Stanley is looking
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 04:18:49PM +, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
[ Received: from stytwo.spampig.org.uk (stytwo.spampig.org.uk [212.69.52.158]) ]
> On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 12:05 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> > Everything you need to know is the RELEASE_NOTES.
>
> Y
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:50:30PM -0400, Kaleb Hosie wrote:
> I am running CentOS 5.4 and the latest version of Postfix it has on the
> repository is version 2.3.3. After looking at the Postfix site I found out
> that that version is no longer updated.
>
> Is it worth downloading the source co
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 02:23:30PM -0400, Carlos Mennens wrote:
> In my Postfix main.cf, I have the following TLS parameters:
>
> smtpd_use_tls = yes #announce STARTTLS support to SMTP clients, but do
This is the Postfix 2.2 syntax. With 2.3 and later, use:
smtpd_tls_security_level = may
N
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 03:17:05PM -0400, Carlos Mennens wrote:
> > > smtpd_tls_security_level = may
> >
> > Use this instead of "smtpd_use_tls".
>
> Noted.
>
> >> smtpd_tls_auth_only = yes # ?
> >
> > Disable SASL authentication for un-encrypted connections.
>
> I am guessing I only have the a
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:43:18AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> James Lever:
> > I_ve been banging my head away at this for a while today and all
> > I have is a headache.
> >
> > Is there a (preferably generic) way to redirect *all* delivery to
> > local accounts to $lo...@$mydomain instead of
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 04:51:33PM +0200, Isak Badenhorst wrote:
> I have asked before with no sucess and want ask again because I have spent
> quite a few days now searching for the answer with no luck. Maybe I am just
> not reading well enough but I cannot find my answer.
>
> I have just moved
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 07:51:53AM +1000, James Lever wrote:
>
> On 25/03/2010, at 3:45 AM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> >>
> >> http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html#myorigin
> >>
> >> See the *second* paragraph.
> >
> >
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:09:44AM +0100, Gregory BELLIER wrote:
> if I copy an existing cipher in OpenSSL and rename it, it will act as if it
> is a new cipher.
On the wire SSL ciphers have numeric ids, not names. If you "rename"
a cipher, it just changes how it is displayed in logs. Renaming c
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:19:03PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> I have a system with some user accounts and is the final destination
> for a few domains. Some of these users forward email off the system to
> another system, such as yahoo or gmail. The problem I'm having is when
> a user is forwarding thei
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:31:40AM +0100, Gregory BELLIER wrote:
>> At this point, you really need to step back, take a deep breath, and
>> use OpenSSL as-is.
>>
> As I said, it's to learn. If I do nothing then it's pointless.
No need to change the OpenSSL APIs to discover how Postfix handles
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 01:13:36PM +, me wrote:
> I'm reading the docs but somehow can not get the hang of a config,
> for a local domain(canonical/mydestination) that recipients list would be
> looked up in ldap
http://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/DATAB
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:52:55PM +0100, Dick Visser wrote:
> > Having noticed the many pitfalls of parsing X.509 certs, and written
> > careful code to parse them (and avoided Postfix being linked to
> > vulnerabilities later found in most certificate parsers), I am reluctant
> > to ask Postfix
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:31:50AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Friday, March 26, 2010 6:28 PM +0100 Matias Surdi
> wrote:
>
>
>> Additionaly, on the postfix log I can see:
>>
>> Mar 26 15:44:17 calipso postfix/smtpd[27237]: warning:
>> dict_ldap_lookup: Search error 34: Invalid DN s
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 06:28:50PM +0100, Matias Surdi wrote:
> The problem is that I'm receiving mails to non existent accounts, or ,
> with an accented (non ascii) character and instead of rejecting the
> mail postfix is replying the client with a 451 error, here is the
> session transcript, wit
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 04:54:00PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Don't pass non-ASCII user names to your LDAP table.
>
> Hmm. If the Postfix LDAP driver handles only non-ASCII query keys
> then we should have a smarter response from the mail system.
Agreed. By the time I read your message, I h
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:52:28PM -0400, Jon Giles wrote:
> So I set this up in the main.cf file.
>
> relay_domains = maildomain1 maildomain2 maildomain3
> relayhost = to the DNS name of the email archiving service
> fallback_relay = to the second DNS name of the email archiving service
DO NOT
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 08:16:28AM +1300, Mike Hutchinson wrote:
> > What version of Postfix is this?
>
> Postfix mail_version = 2.5.1
The rate control features introduced in 2.5.0 were improved in later
patches, you must upgrade to the latest 2.5 release if you want to
enforce inter-message del
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 09:31:29AM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> Better choices include
> - set virtual_mailbox_limit to some large value you don't ever expect to
> exceed, maybe 10x ~ 100x the message_size_limit.
> - set "virtual_mailbox_limit = $message_size_limit" so that changes to
> message_si
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:28:22PM -0400, Jon Giles wrote:
> Thanks again for the suggestions. Having removed fallback_relay has
> stopped the loops, but I am still challenged in setting up the failover to
> the second relayhost.
>
> Unless there is something I am missing, using a local DNS ser
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 03:50:17PM +0200, Emmanuel Fust?? wrote:
> Could I achieve my goal with modifying the relay line in the master.cf
> like:
>
> relay unix - - - - - smtp
> -o smtp_fallback_relay=
> -o relayhost= [a.b.c.d]
No.
> Or should
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 11:49:50AM -0600, Glenn English wrote:
> Is it possible to use postfix as a reverse proxy for my SMTP server?
Yes, but why?
> I think what I'm asking is does postfix do its UBE and protocol checks
> *before* it sends to a smarthost.
Yes, but when Postfix is a proxy, ther
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 12:50:04PM -0600, Glenn English wrote:
>
> On Apr 1, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> >> Is it possible to use postfix as a reverse proxy for my SMTP server?
> >
> > Yes, but why?
>
> Because I was told over on the
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 10:58:09PM +0200, Daniel Cizinsky wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 03:40:04PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> >> Daniel Cizinsky at lists
> >
> >
> > This is expected behavior. Mail released from hold with "postsuper -H"
> > always gets at least one chance to be delivered rega
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 03:52:46PM -0600, Glenn English wrote:
>
> On Apr 1, 2010, at 1:48 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> > What is the "it" that has to be done for "security reasons".
>
> Reverse proxy-ing servers on the firewall. The idea, as I
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 08:15:29PM -0600, Glenn English wrote:
> > So why must this be a Postfix-as-proxy, instead of a complete
> > Postfix-with-queue instance?
>
> Like I said, I'm not at all sure it does. But I'm told that there
> should be an SMTP reverse proxy running on the firewall to prot
701 - 800 of 2677 matches
Mail list logo
