Eric Williams:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.comwrote:
Eric Williams put forth on 1/5/2010 8:02 AM:
I would like to apply the same access list so that users sending mail
through this server can only reach those same domains.
I've tried lots of
Eric Williams:
On Jan 5, 2010, at 9:57 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Eric Williams:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Stan Hoeppner
s...@hardwarefreak.comwrote:
Eric Williams put forth on 1/5/2010 8:02 AM:
I would like to apply the same access list so that users sending mail
/dev/rob0:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 09:00:25PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Christopher Adams adam...@gmail.com:
Summary: I would like to ban an address/domain from posting to
my system. I am using header_checks to do that.
Why? Wouldn't check_sender_access be more appropriate?
jeff geng:
Wietse:
Please see my reply marked as blue.
:)
jeff geng
2010/1/5 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org
jeff geng:
Wietse:
Happy new year :)
We use niginx's smtp function to redirect mail to postfix server. But in
postfix, XCLIENT command can't support
Wietse Venema:
+ UPDATE_STR(state-sasl_username, attr_value);
+ printable(state-sasl_username, '?');
+ UPDATE_STR(state-sasl_method, xclient);
Why not use the real authentication mechanism?
Otherwise, if XCLIENT pass LOGIN parameter, state
Port Able:
Hi,
What is the proper command that a client can use to send an email
using Postfix?? Searching through some old posts, I believe the
postdrop command is not intended to be used by client software.?
Is that correct??
You use the Postfix sendmail command.
Wietse
Wendigo Thompson:
Hello:
I maintain a database of e-mail messages for my law firm client -- I
wrote an application that inserts e-mail messages into a database and
then used an alias to pipe e-mail to that application, and the clients
e-mail server forwards all mail for certain litigants
at nginx and I think it does a good job.
Wietse
jeff geng
2010/1/6 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org
Wietse Venema:
+ UPDATE_STR(state-sasl_username, attr_value);
+ printable(state-sasl_username, '?');
+ UPDATE_STR(state-sasl_method
Michael:
I want to deploy a system whereby it will do an SQL lookup and depending on
the result will either continue processing the message as per usual or issue
a 'temporary' reject (Ie: Over quota message).
This is on a relaying/gateway machine so it does not have direct access to
the
Michael:
On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:50:49 Wietse Venema wrote:
Michael:
I want to deploy a system whereby it will do an SQL lookup and depending
on the result will either continue processing the message as per usual or
issue a 'temporary' reject (Ie: Over quota message
Wendigo Thompson:
Hi Wietse:
Answering your first question, the message in question does show up in find:
26701170 872 -rwx--1 _postfix wheel 444689 Aug 4
2008 /var/spool/postfix/maildrop/F423E1976D72
This is one of two messages that you mentioned.
When I look at
Patrick Chemla:
Hi,
I am running Postfix 2.5.6 on a Fedora 11 Linux system on a hardware
based Intel I5/750 Quad Core, 8 Gb memory, 160Gb SSD hard disk.
Incoming messages are entering very fast (500 smtp processes declared)
and the active queue is actually of 2 millions messages
Wendigo Thompson:
To answer Victor, message_size_limit is so.
For Wietse:
1) Pickup seems enabled, from master.cf:
pickupfifo n - n 60 1 pickup
-o content_filter=
Does the mail logfile show records of pickup daemon activity?
If there is none, then this
Victor Duchovni:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:25:01PM -0600, Wendigo Thompson wrote:
Woops, I meant to say: message_size_limit is zero.
I went all verbose and looking at pickup logs for the specific queue
ID I mentioned earlier:
Jan 7 13:16:20 se001 postfix/pickup[57270]: warning:
Wietse Venema:
Victor Duchovni:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:25:01PM -0600, Wendigo Thompson wrote:
Woops, I meant to say: message_size_limit is zero.
I went all verbose and looking at pickup logs for the specific queue
ID I mentioned earlier:
Jan 7 13:16:20 se001 postfix
Wendigo Thompson:
*** ENVELOPE RECORDS /var/spool/postfix/maildrop/F423E1976D72 ***
message_size: 444129 556 1
2 444129
message_arrival_time: Fri Aug 1 15:23:30 2008
create_time: Fri Aug 1 15:23:31 2008
named_attribute:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Wendigo Thompson:
*** ENVELOPE RECORDS /var/spool/postfix/maildrop/F423E1976D72 ***
message_size: ? ? ? ? ?444129 ? ? ? ? ? ? 556 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 1
? ? ?2 ? ? ? ? ?444129
message_arrival_time: Fri Aug ?1 15:23:30
Patrick Chemla:
But the CPU of the box is idle more than 80%. It is clear that it is not a
matter of CPU, nor memory, nor disk. Something in the number of
processes/users/simultaneous tasks is blocking.
Indeed, the symptom of blocking is in the third field of
the Postfix delays logging.
Patrick Chemla:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
Le 08/01/2010 00:43, Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 12:30:34AM +0200, Patrick Chemla wrote:
Jan 7 22:02:57 postfix postfix/qmgr[26441]: 5B91F873F6: removed
Jan 7 22:02:57 postfix
/dev/rob0:
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 08:37:16AM -0500, Shaun T. Erickson wrote:
Yes, this is what is shown in the SASL Howto and how I have had
my server's submission port configured in the past.
However, in the 2.6.2 postfix distribution I'm trying to configure
now, the default
Philippe Cerfon:
Hi.
Just for my understanding
http://www.postfix.org/MAILDROP_README.html#direct uses -d
${us...@${nexthop}.
Why is nexthop used instead of domain? And when would these two be different?
Like Rome, Postfix was not built in one day.
Unfortunately these is no way to
Wietse Venema:
Patrick Chemla:
Le 08/01/2010 00:43, Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 12:30:34AM +0200, Patrick Chemla wrote:
Jan 7 22:02:57 postfix postfix/qmgr[26441]: 5B91F873F6: removed
Jan 7 22:02:57 postfix postfix/smtp[27180]: 375DDD5923:
to=lexoti
Davy Leon:
Hi folks
I have a Centos 5.3 Box running postfix 2.6.3 .
I use an smarthost in a per user authentication basis. I meant every local
user has a passwrod to use against the smarthost.
My question is, in this conditions is it possible to take advantage of
smtp_connection_cache so
/dev/rob0:
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 10:23:38AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
/dev/rob0:
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 08:37:16AM -0500, Shaun T. Erickson wrote:
Yes, this is what is shown in the SASL Howto and how I have had
my server's submission port configured in the past.
However
Christopher Hackman:
Hello,
I'm pretty new to Postfix, and I'm experimenting with using it for our new
inbound MTA. Is it possible to customize the following error message?
MAIL FROM: u...@remotedomain.com
250 2.1.0 Ok
RCPT TO: invalidacco...@virtualdomain.com
550 5.1.1
Davy Leon:
Thanks Wietse. Very usefull your answer. I was making a huge mistake. Thanks
If you have multiple SASL accounts with the same provider, then
you may want to set smtp_connection_cache_on_demand = no.
At some point someone may add code that labels the connection cache
with the SASL
Philippe Cerfon:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Like Rome, Postfix was not built in one day.
Unfortunately these is no way to AUTOMATICALLY find all the pieces
of documentation that need to be updated when a new feature (such
as ${domain
Jack Knowlton:
Hi all.
Our internal postfix server relays all outbound mail thru an external host.
How can I set it to use a different relay server when the email comes from
a specified domain? Eg. j...@domain1.com - xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx (default),
m...@domain2.com - yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy
Postfix 2.3
Patrick Chemla:
Hi all,
I got these statistics:
Jan 9 19:15:21 postfix postfix/scache[18038]: statistics: start
interval Jan 9 19:09:03
Jan 9 19:15:21 postfix postfix/scache[18038]: statistics: domain lookup
hits=110 miss=89 success=55%
Jan 9 19:15:21 postfix
Wietse Venema:
Patrick Chemla:
Hi all,
I got these statistics:
Jan 9 19:15:21 postfix postfix/scache[18038]: statistics: start
interval Jan 9 19:09:03
Jan 9 19:15:21 postfix postfix/scache[18038]: statistics: domain lookup
hits=110 miss=89 success=55%
Jan 9 19:15:21
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
Hi.
Is there somewhere some documentation how each of the exit codes from
sysexit.h is interpreted by Postfix when used with pipe(8) (returned
e.g. by maildrop)?
I naively assume that the sysexits.h names speak for themselves.
I just now the EX_TEMPFAIL means
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
On Sat, 2010-01-09 at 19:58 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
EX_TEMPFAIL defers mail, as does EX_OSERR (system resource not
available). All others are hard coded as non-retryable.
Thanks.
Making this
configurable is a couple hours of work (design a user interface
Stefan Foerster:
So, my question is: Are there any plans to further enhance Postfix's
functionality as far as SMTP proxy filtering is concerned, and make
that kind of load balancing available to pre-queue setups using
smtpd_proxy_filter?
For TRUE load balancing you need a stateful system that
Stefan Foerster:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
For STATISTICAL load balancing you can get by with multiple IP
addresses per proxy filter host name. However this requires new
The main difference I see here is that delivery to a content_filter
will try more than one server, giving
Dr. Lars Hanke:
Apparently postfix missed the switching of nameservers and did not learn
of the new DNS until restart. Is this a bug or a feature?
Like most programs, Postfix never reads /etc/resolv.conf.
Instead, that file is read by the NSSWITCH system library functions,
and the DNS system
Patrick Chemla:
Wietse,
Please try the following, as asked half a week ago:
postconf -e smtp_connection_cache_on_demand=no
postfix reload
and report if this makes a difference.
Wietse
I have tested this since yesterday night.
I got some problems with Linux
Stefan Foerster:
One of the greatest improvements in the 2.7 tree is the ability to
defer transmission of received messages to a SMTP proxy until the
message receiption completes (smtpd_proxy_options = speed_adjust).
Can you be more specific about the benefits?
Wietse
Patrick Chemla:
Wietse:
OK, so you can turn back on that connection caching. Note that
qmail creates and destroys two processes per SMTP session, so
reusing a session is also a win from a CPU resource point of view.
Patrick:
If I do so, will postfix open more than one connexion to each
Stefan Foerster:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
One of the greatest improvements in the 2.7 tree is the ability to
defer transmission of received messages to a SMTP proxy until the
message receiption completes (smtpd_proxy_options = speed_adjust).
Can you
l...@ds.gauner.org:
Hi,
I'm trying to use header_checks in conjunction with a pcre map to
distribute certain mail traffic to certain outgoing transports. I've got a
setup like this:
--- main.cf snip ---
header_checks = pcre:/etc/postfix/header.pcre
--- snap ---
--- header.pcre snip ---
Eugueny Kontsevoy:
I had some issues with free disk space so I had to start the server, expand
the partition and restart it again.
I did the following:
postsuper -r ALL
It reported that it re-queued a bunch of messages and I can see that they're
sitting in maildrop queue.
postqueue -p
Dominik Schulz:
Am Montag 11 Januar 2010 15:08:05 schrieb Wietse Venema:
l...@ds.gauner.org:
Hi,
I'm trying to use header_checks in conjunction with a pcre map to
distribute certain mail traffic to certain outgoing transports. I've got
a setup like this:
--- main.cf snip
Frank Cusack:
On January 13, 2010 8:16:36 AM -0600 Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com
wrote:
Frank Cusack put forth on 1/12/2010 9:46 PM:
I think it all ended well though? Except my problem still exists. :\
We know things break when that hosts sends mail to you. What happens
Frank Cusack:
Perhaps surprisingly, Postfix does not send or receive network
packets. Instead, packets are handled by the TCP/IP implementation
in the operating system kernel.
If anything decides prematurely that the connection is dead, it
is your operating system kernel not Postfix.
Noel Jones:
Is postscreen supposed to always run with stress=yes?
Seems to me stress-adaptive behavior would be useful in
postscreen.
The stress=yes setting indicates that a master.cf service is using
up all its process slots. It is applicable only for servers that
accept connections from
Dhiraj Chatpar:
Dear All,
What string or what configuration to use in postfix in order to not receive
any bounces at all. I mean incase there is a bounce it should not be
returned back to the sender who initiated the mail.
I am sure there is a way to achieve this in postfix
See:
RFC
Dhiraj Chatpar:
Dear All,
What string or what configuration to use in postfix in order to not receive
any bounces at all. I mean incase there is a bounce it should not be
returned back to the sender who initiated the mail.
I am sure there is a way to achieve this in postfix
Wietse:
See:
Tom Hendrikx:
Hi,
After setting up postfix up on a ipv4/ipv6 dualstack machine I'm seeing
the following issue: connections on 127.0.0.1 (where my content_filter
re-injects mail) are logged as:
010-01-13T22:51:07+01:00 meredith-vmail postfix/smtpd[4772]: warning:
127.0.0.1: address not
Tom Hendrikx:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Tom Hendrikx:
Hi,
After setting up postfix up on a ipv4/ipv6 dualstack machine I'm seeing
the following issue: connections on 127.0.0.1 (where my content_filter
re-injects mail) are logged as:
010-01-13T22:51:07+01:00 meredith-vmail postfix/smtpd
Is that possible for mail headers field to continue multiple /^From: .*/
speaking in terms of maildrop and PCRE?
According to RFC 5322:
from= From: mailbox-list CRLF
mailbox-list= (mailbox *(, mailbox)) / obs-mbox-list
Thus, one From: header may contain multiple
ram:
I need to configure a postfix server that relays mails from a windows
based App.
The App is an age old custom application written and has no options to
configure except an outgoing IP :-(
But I need to manage the bounces and so I was thinking of changing the
env from to a VERP
Wietse Venema:
ram:
I need to configure a postfix server that relays mails from a windows
based App.
The App is an age old custom application written and has no options to
configure except an outgoing IP :-(
But I need to manage the bounces and so I was thinking of changing
Wendigo Thompson:
Victor:
I wanted to use Postfix as a delivery mechanism so that I would be
able to queue and hold mail during database outages and other
maintenance -- a job that it does very well. Is there really no
advice available on how to increase the speed of Postfix's local mail
Wendigo Thompson:
Wietse:
I know who you are -- big fan of yours ever since tcpwrappers :-)
Hah!
(As for my claim, of course other people also wrote parts of
Postfix, in particular Victor has been a major contributor).
The only reason I wrote in is that this queueing of mail issue
to specify four to get two, which
is what I want here, so that each /tmp/db_capture file
is tagged with the process ID).
Wietse
Thanks again,
Wendy
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Wendigo Thompson:
Wietse:
? I know who you are -- big
Wendigo Thompson:
Okay, I have some updates. Reducing the concurrency down (and
ultimately to 1) increased performance: it seems the delays I was
seeing were related to concurrency inside SQL. However, I am still
seeing half second delays in local delivery while my insertion
application is
Taylor, Marc:
Good morning,
I am new to this list and I am not even sure if this is the place to
start, but here goes.
I have an Ubuntu 8.0.4 LTS server with postfix 2.5.1-2ubuntu1.2,
mailman2.1.9-9ubuntu1 and procmail3.22-16ubuntu3. I have followed the
instructions in the Ubuntu
Joe Postfix:
Hi, we're trying to setup our Postfix relays to BCC emails to/from specific
users (members of an LDAP group - A/D actually) to a mailbox that logs their
correspondence. I wasnt able to find any mention of this in the online
documentation anywhere - does anyone know of a way to
Frank Cusack:
until a name lookup has been done. But if that name lookup takes a
very long time, along with the connect postfix should log how long
ago the actual connect was.
The SMTP server can find out long the name/address lookup took.
It does not juggle TCP packets.
The sysadmin should
Charles Boling:
I've been a postfix user for nearly 10 years, but in many ways I'm still
quite the newbie. That's the problem with Postfix being such a solid
MTA: I don't mess with it much. :-)
For a good chunk of that time, I have wrestled on and off with this
problem off and on, playing
postfix-2.7-20100117 changes the meaning of content filters of the
form transport: (note: no next-hop destination) so that this
form can be used to implement sender reputation schemes. Typically,
mail is split into classes, and all mail in class X is sent out
from an SMTP client IP address that
Stefan Foerster:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
This is implemented by specifying FILTER actions with empty next-hop
destinations in access maps or header/body_checks, and by configuring
in master.cf one Postfix SMTP client for each SMTP source IP address,
where each client has its
Daniel L. Miller:
Other than scanning the logfiles, is there a way a service can receive
notification of a successful delivery to a remote site? In other words,
a trusted client submits mail for a remote site, Postfix connects and
receives acknowledgement from the remote site, and then
Wietse Venema:
Stefan Foerster:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
This is implemented by specifying FILTER actions with empty next-hop
destinations in access maps or header/body_checks, and by configuring
in master.cf one Postfix SMTP client for each SMTP source IP address
Victor Duchovni:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 07:01:45PM +0200, Henrik K wrote:
I think I prefer a separate daemon that tails postfix log and greps all
to=xxx, relay=xxx info and passes it to the policy daemon. That way the
policy daemon doesn't need to have a big DNS mess to resolve all the
Daniel L. Miller:
Henrik K wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:44:48PM -0800, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
Daily scanning of logfiles does not accomplish this. Nor would even an
hourly scan - and constant logfile scanning strikes me as inelegant. If
there is any method currently
The following solution solves 99% of the problem:
- IF mail is from a local (or authenticated) client
- AND the sender has already passed reject_unlisted_sender
- THEN store the (sender, recipient) pair in a whitelist.
This can be done with trivial modification of an existing greylisting
Stan Hoeppner:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
Mark Nernberg (gmail account) put forth on 1/18/2010 4:50 PM:
On Jan 18, 2010, at 17:48, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
Mark Nernberg (gmail account) put forth on 1/18/2010 4:17 PM:
I have achieved this
Arora, Sumit:
Hi,
I'm stuck into a problem.
I'm using content filter, which parses email from my postfix server.
My postfix server sometimes sends a command which is less than 4 alphabets.
I don't know what to do for that command, as I don't know which command is
that...
Can anybody
Harakiri:
Hi,
after upgrading a machine from etch to lenny i get the following warning
postfix/smtpd[23231]: warning: pcre map /etc/postfix/postfix_rbl_check, line
0: ignoring unrecognized request
main.cf:
check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/postfix_rbl_check
file:
Martijn de Munnik:
Hi list,
I have a problem with delivering mail to a host and get this error:
host mx2.amsterdam.nl[145.222.14.10] said: 421 enepmx02.amsterdam.nl
Error: timeout exceeded (in reply to end of DATA command)
This error only seems to occur with 'large' mails. Currently I
Jaroslaw Grzabel:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Use an access(5) map on the client:
check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/nice_reject
with:
unknown 550 5.1.2 Your reverse DNS entries are off
Thank you for that Ralf. Do you know if may I operate on any variables ?
I need to
Jaroslaw Grzabel:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Syntax of access tables is documented: man 5 access.
Wietse
Yes I know. But as I mention in the post sent a moment ago, the problem
is that I'm afraid I will reject unknown hosts with valid PTR. I don't
want to do this.
See man 5
Jaroslaw Grzabel:
But as I mention in the post sent a moment ago, the problem
is that I'm afraid I will reject unknown hosts with valid PTR. I don't
want to do this.
Wietse Venema wrote:
See man 5 postconf for the difference between:
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
Jaroslaw Grzabel:
I'm afraid I will reject unknown hosts with valid PTR. I don't
want to do this.
Wietse Venema:
If you are concerned that you reject mail from hosts with valid PTR,
then I recommend that you choose between:
1) reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname. As documented
Martijn de Munnik:
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:20:01 -0500 (EST), wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse
Venema) wrote:
Martijn de Munnik:
Hi list,
I have a problem with delivering mail to a host and get this error:
host mx2.amsterdam.nl[145.222.14.10] said: 421 enepmx02.amsterdam.nl
Error
Wolfgang Zeikat:
We are experimenting with spamass-milter to check mails and reject them
if a configured spamassassin score is reached. That part works, but the
milter is (of course) applied to all mails after our
smtpd_recipient_restrictions lookups return OK for the recipient, i.e.
also
Here's the TCP initial handshake:
17:30:44.951789 IP 213.207.90.2.48147 145.222.14.10.25: S
50514820:50514820(0) win 49640 mss 1460,nop,wscale 0,nop,nop,sackOK
17:30:44.954496 IP 145.222.14.10.25 213.207.90.2.48147: S
4148480248:4148480248(0) ack 50514821 win 5840 mss 1380,nop,wscale 2
Daniel L. Miller:
Wietse Venema wrote:
The following solution solves 99% of the problem:
- IF mail is from a local (or authenticated) client
That's the magic part right there. How do I accomplish this?
The client IP address passed along in the policy protocol.
- AND the sender
Wolfgang Zeikat:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Is it possible to exclude mails from
smtpd_milters = unix:/var/run/spamass.sock?
There is no such option.
OK. Thank you for the bad news ;)
It is not a good idea to simply turn off Milters in the middle of
an SMTP session, because that would
Martijn de Munnik:
On Jan 20, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:22:56PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
The broken router then throws away the bytes with higher sequence
numbers than 14233.
Workaround: turn off window scaling support on the sender's
Wietse Venema:
You can do
ndd /dev/tcp \?
to find out what parameters are supported. On my Solaris9 and
Solaris10 test boxes it is called tcp_wscale_always.
According to Solaris10 documentation:
When this parameter is enabled, which is the default setting
[since
It's nice for a change to work with someone who provides actual
information, instead of that dork from last week who was just
venting his opinions and not giving people a chance to help.
In this case it looks like a Solaris TCP bug when sending data over
a connection that suffers from heavy
RaSca:
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#logging
Look for obvious signs of trouble
Hi,
I haven't found any message of this kind concerning the message group.
I suppose you overlooked this warning then.
Jan 21 15:06:06 mail-2 postfix/qmgr[31542]: warning: connect to
transport
RaSca:
Il giorno Gio 21 Gen 2010 16:33:23 CET, wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse
Venema) ha scritto:
RaSca:
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#logging
Look for obvious signs of trouble
Hi,
I haven't found any message of this kind concerning the message group.
I suppose you
Victor Duchovni:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 02:57:17PM +0100, Mickael CANEVET wrote:
Hi,
I'd like postfix to treat EX_CANTCREAT (73) as temporary failure.
I use this command to deliver my mails:
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/formail -D 8192 ~/.msgid.cache
-s
Martijn de Munnik:
Jan 21 17:02:30 marcus postfix/qmgr[16421]: 523FD1C11A:
from=mart...@youngguns.nl, size=650750, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jan 21 17:02:30 marcus postfix/smtp[16449]: 523FD1C11A: host
mx-cluster1.one.com[91.198.169.10] said: 450 4.7.1 r...@musicscool.nl:
Recipient address
Doug Robbins:
Messages containing leading whitespace in the recipient address are
rejected.
Only if the recipient does not exist.
Example:
Jan 22 08:32:41 vps10 postfix/smtpd[5937]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
smtpout.eastlink.ca[24.222.0.30]: 550 5.1.1 soli...@example.com:
Recipient
Stan Hoeppner:
1. Spamhaus has banned Google Public DNS resolver queries. I
didn't know this until today. If Postfix is using Google Public
DNS resolvers, rbl queries to zen.spamhaus.org fail but Postfix
(Debian Lenny 2.5.5-1.1) logs NOTHING about it. Not the query
attempt, not the
Victor Duchovni:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 02:13:17PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Is there something I can do to avoid these rejections (other than the
obvious -- get dba...@example2.com to fix his address book)?
Hm, you could try and alias soli...@example.com to
Victor Duchovni:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 09:16:07AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
The lookup keys and RHS values for virtual(5) are in rfc822 format.
A PCRE table can take care of this:
Virtual alias lookups are done in the unquoted form, while
canonical map lookups are in quoted
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 01:27:06PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
If I recall correctly, the wrapper program needs to be installed
set-uid, and it needs to be configured at compile time with the
right uid/gid information.
Ruben Safir:
I made it SIUD and the wrapper config-test seems to believe
Ruben Safir:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
On 01/22/2010 05:22 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 01:27:06PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
If I recall correctly, the wrapper program needs to be installed
set-uid, and it needs to be configured at compile
Jelle de Jong:
Hello everybody,
I got a hole set 20 of Debian systems connected to mobile broadband
internet. They are behind a NAT of with dynamic ip's.
I want these systems to be able to sent emails to my server for all
kind of reasons like monitoring, security updates etcetera.
I
Jozsef Kadlecsik:
Hello,
We plan to add the possibility for our users to choose that messages
categorized as spam are put on the hold queue instead of the default
reject. Thus it'll be possible to release the false positives, which
can make life easier for them.
Currently I can see
Jozsef Kadlecsik:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Wietse Venema wrote:
Jozsef Kadlecsik:
How could one achieve that the held messages are separated from the normal
traffic (i.e. hold queue on another partition), but if the messages cannot
be held, then those gets rejected instead of queued
Martijn de Munnik:
On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while it
is awaiting the next command from the sender.
The key
Stefan Foerster:
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 $postscreen_cache_map, on a ramdisk
Shawn Fee:
Is there a fix for the 451 4.3.0 Error: queue file write error yet? I
heard to increase the smtp_proxy_timeout = 600s in the main.cf file, but
then I heard that can run down your server.
You have a configuration error, and you need to look in the Postfix
mail logfile for details.
Shawn Fee:
Sorry I meant Plesk 9.3.0. And the problem was suppose to be fixed in this
realease.
What is the Postfix logfile warning message?
Wietse
1101 - 1200 of 13099 matches
Mail list logo
