On 07/05/2015 02:58, Wietse Venema wrote:
Chris Stankevitz:
http://www.postfix.org/STANDARD_CONFIGURATION_README.html
To whoever dreamed up the configuration commands with line number
followed by a translation: thank you
I'm sure I must have gotten the idea from the days that computer
On 04/06/2014 11:01, Luigi Cirillo wrote:
Hi there,
I am trying to configure postfix on Debian 7 to manage virtual
domains. I tried to send an email from a test user, using
squirrelmail.
The system send the email as user.virtualdomain@hostname.fqdn.com.
How should I configure to send emails
On 11/03/2014 13:33, jmct wrote:
Mar 11 08:26:05 postfix/cleanup[16783]: error: open
/etc/postfix/mime_header_check: No such file or directory
mime_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/mime_header_check
You've configured Postfix to look for a file that it can't find on your
file system.
On 13/02/2014 09:46, template.mob...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
i'm using postfix in our small company successfully for many years.
But now a problem arised and I was not able to solve it myself or
with help from the docs.
We are using sender_bcc_maps, because we want any mail that is sent
from one of
What would be the simplest method in Postfix of implementing an
equivalent to the exim ACL mentioned in this blog post:
http://blog.hinterlands.org/2013/10/unwanted-email-from-communicado-ltd/
That is, what's the simplest way of rejecting email from a list of
domains contained within a simple
On 25/11/2013 13:51, Wietse Venema wrote:
No need to restart Postfix. Use an indexed file and let smtpd(8)
auto-detect that the file has changed.
Run this from cron:
#!/bin/sh
# Configure smtpd(8) to query $TYPE:real-file
TYPE=cdb # or hash or lmdb
SUFF=cdb # or db or
On 05/11/2013 11:03, Jose Borges Ferreira wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 4:43 AM, LuKreme krem...@kreme.com wrote:
Normally, bouncing undeliverable messages is the proper behavior
for a good netizen.
*NEVER* Bounce. Ever.
Reject, yes. Bounce? Absolutely never. If you bounce a message to
me,
On 05/11/2013 11:10, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 05.11.2013 12:03, schrieb Jose Borges Ferreira:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 4:43 AM, LuKreme krem...@kreme.com wrote:
Normally, bouncing undeliverable messages is the proper
behavior for a good netizen.
*NEVER* Bounce. Ever.
Reject, yes. Bounce?
On 28/10/2013 18:36, Tim Legg wrote:
Attached is the postconf -n
I've also been reading the link that Dr. Venema sent me. Could it be
that the mydestination is incorrect? Could it be:
mydestination = timothy.com, localhost.localdomain, localhost
The above is what you need in order for
On 24/10/2013 23:50, Tim Legg wrote:
Hello,
I'm not tring to do virtual domains. Just trying to get it to work with
just one domain. This time, I used this guide:
https://help.ubuntu.com/12.04/serverguide/postfix.html
I can telnet to my machine just fine on port 25.
I tried to send an e-mail
On 25/10/2013 09:19, Simon B wrote:
This also assumes the OP has set up the DNS correctly. And if he's
having trouble understanding how to fix relay access denied, I would
suspect not, but I'll be happy to be wrong.
I suspect he has, as he showed extracts of his logs showing the mails
If the value for mynetworks is contained in a file rather than hardcoded
into main.cf, as per this example from the documentation...
mynetworks = $config_directory/mynetworks
... is it necessary to reload Postfix when the contents of that file
changes, or will any changes be picked up
On 03/10/2013 12:56, Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
If the value for mynetworks is contained in a file rather than hardcoded
into main.cf, as per this example from the documentation...
mynetworks = $config_directory/mynetworks
... is it necessary to reload Postfix when the contents
On 11/09/2013 12:23, Zel Uneec wrote:
Hello everyone!
I need your help setting up postfix.
This is my problem/question: I have multiple domains on my mail server
running postfix (adn dovecot), with LDAP based user accounts. When
someone from outside (that is: not from my domains) sends mail to
On 07/06/2013 12:10, Nikolas Kallis wrote:
Notice helo equals '37.212.64.248' - an address literal.
Please READ the RFC. That form is INVALID.
I think you are referring to the square brackets - I knew about them. I
didn't pick up the logic in the system message. Sorry.
Never the less,
On 07/06/2013 13:45, Michael P. Demelbauer wrote:
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 10:05:41PM +1000, Nikolas Kallis wrote:
As '37.212.64.248' for 'helo' is neither a FQDN nor an address
literal, then is it pointless using 'reject_invalid_helo_hostname'
with 'reject_non_fqdn_helo_host name'?
I have never
On 07/06/2013 14:06, Nikolas Kallis wrote:
Hello,
I just got an unsolicited e-mail from the domain 'bbbmail.com', which is
hosted at '46.235.78.1'.
'46.235.78.1' does not resolve to a host name, therefore 'bbbmail.com'
is not a FQDN.
'bbbmail.com' is a fully qualified domain name. That is
On 07/06/2013 14:16, Nikolas Kallis wrote:
On 07/06/13 23:11, Mark Goodge wrote:
On 07/06/2013 14:06, Nikolas Kallis wrote:
Hello,
I just got an unsolicited e-mail from the domain 'bbbmail.com', which is
hosted at '46.235.78.1'.
'46.235.78.1' does not resolve to a host name, therefore
Some background...
I have a slightly odd problem, in that my main outbound mail server is
seemingly being blocked by one of the UK's major budget web/mail hosts.
My postfix logs show things like this:
status=deferred (lost connection with athena.hosts.co.uk[85.233.160.20]
while receiving
On 29/01/2013 10:43, M. Fioretti wrote:
which looks like postfix on the SERVER was not aware that now 2.39.122.159
IS in mynetworks. Why?
mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, 212.48.186.219, 2.39.122.59
2.39.122.159 --- does not match --^
Mark
--
http://mark.goodge.co.uk
On 08/01/2013 16:38, Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wrote:
Em 08/01/2013, às 14:21, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org
escreveu:
Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
Why keep trying when we have a clear signal of a temporary
error?
As Victor noted Postfix does not keep trying the SAME delivery.
Yes you're
On 11/12/2012 10:26, Tom Kinghorn wrote:
Good day list.
Without the use of policyd or postfwd, is it possible to
limit connections to your mail server from a specific country only?
I was thinking something like:
mynetworks = $config_directory/mynetworks
countryips =
On 20/10/2012 18:27, Mike's unattended mail wrote:
On 2012-10-20, Jeroen Geilman jer...@adaptr.nl wrote:
DNSBLs are recommended by just about everyone who is serious about
email,
There are a couple ways to use DNSBLs. There are those who are
serious but either incompetent or on a
On 21/10/2012 15:21, Mike's unattended mail wrote:
On 2012-10-21, Mark Goodge m...@good-stuff.co.uk wrote:
And, even if it isn't spam, it is a near-100% indicator of
incompetance on the part of the sending system's administrator.
How do you think a competent sys admin sets the EHLO under
On 01/10/2012 15:54, achal wrote:
I want to add a line in body of every email sent from my postfix centos 5
smtp server.
We want to add welcome to our company we offer free SMTP services to those
who do not spam.
This is done to prevent spammers from using our mail services.I want this
line to
On 18/07/2012 11:58, John Doe wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
John Doe:
Hello,
A few days ago i received a email that has a send and a received
(from/to) field set to someth...@gmail.com, and in the header the
X-Original-To is set to
On 18/07/2012 12:10, John Doe wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Mark Goodge m...@good-stuff.co.uk wrote:
On 18/07/2012 11:58, John Doe wrote:
How can i stop postfix from delivering mail to the recipient mentioned
in the x-original-to field?
You can't. That's who the sender
On 20/06/2012 16:13, François Yuul wrote:
Hello,
I use Postfix as a relay SMTP to send bulk mail (newsletter).
And I would like to regulate them according to the domain name of the
recipient.
For example, if I have to send 100 emails to domainA and 100 mails to
domainB
I would like Postfix
On 05/04/2012 15:29, Eric Kimminau wrote:
If you really must know, it is a Healthcare based company and we are
developing a registration method. If the registered address used is any
but these three domains a secondary process is initiated which will
generate a registration packet being created
On 16/02/2012 14:35, Scappatura Rocco wrote:
I would like that sender domain names for which is not configured any
MX record are not relayed from my MTA.
Why?
MX records are not required for receiving mail. Nor are they required
for sending mail. So there is no reason to reject mail which
On 16/02/2012 15:26, Scappatura Rocco wrote:
Scappatura Rocco:
I would like that sender domain names for which is not
configured any MX record are not relayed from my MTA. I have
tried to use the
That would be a mistake. There is no RFC REQUIREMENT that a domain
has an MX record.
I have no
On 16/02/2012 16:07, Scappatura Rocco wrote:
What do your logs say when your server tries to deliver the DSN?
status=deferred (connect to domain.tld[xxx.yyy.uuu.vvv]:25: Connection timed
out)
Which proves that the problem is not lack of DNS, since your server is
finding an IP address to
On 13/02/2012 14:23, Chris wrote:
Hi Postfix Users,
How to filter messages from this list?
I miss something like List-Id: Postfix Mailing List
postfix-users.postfix.org
Any of these provide sufficient for filtering:
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Sender: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
On 13/02/2012 14:56, Wietse Venema wrote:
Alex Bligh:
Wietse,
--On 13 February 2012 07:31:58 -0500 Wietse Venemawie...@porcupine.org
wrote:
I've read the documentation on header_checks and it only *appears* to
operate on headers received from another server. What I want is
Please point out
On 15/12/2011 16:24, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
Hi!
You can do this with recpients_bcc_maps
Well, as far as i know this just adds a bcc address to the message and
as a result the mail would still pass through amavis and through the
smarthost before leaving the system, thus it would get
On 15/12/2011 16:58, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
schrieb Mark Goodge:
On 15/12/2011 16:24, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
Hi!
You can do this with recpients_bcc_maps
Well, as far as i know this just adds a bcc address to the message and
as a result the mail would still pass through amavis
On 02/12/2011 14:15, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 08:24:29AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
There is no scenario in which a site that accepts your mail (i.e.
has not classified you as a spammer, correctly or not) will offer
better service if all your mail delayed by a few hours,
On 02/12/2011 14:35, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 02:23:53PM +, Mark Goodge wrote:
That makes no sense at all, surely nothing more productive will happen
when the spiggot is turned on 4 hours later with even more mail queued.
The point is that following instructions
I am suffering from AOL numpties who click this is spam on
notification emails they get (by their request!) from a forum and
mailing list hosted on my server. In order to trap these, I've set up a
feedback loop with AOL so that I'm notified when anybody does that.
However, AOL's feedback
On 22/11/2011 13:20, Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
What I'd like to do, therefore, is set a header via Postfix. But I am
having difficulty working out how to do that, or even if it's possible.
First, you must send one recipient per message, otherwise you still
won't know who
On 22/11/2011 14:03, Wolfgang Zeikat wrote:
In an older episode, on 2011-11-22 11:51, Mark Goodge wrote:
However, AOL's feedback system removes the recipient email address, so
I can't identify the complainer from the report.
It does not remove your server's header lines though, including
On 17/11/2011 14:39, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment ..
tell your students to use the email address provided by the school on the
school domain. Also, as a policy, I blacklist all yahoo, gmail, hotmail
junk and life is much better at the
On 14/10/2011 08:13, Peter wrote:
...and when someone comes into the #postfix IRC channel (like they did
earlier today) seeking help because they read that last sentence in the
docs and thought, I have a dedicated server, I should set that to
'enforce'. and I looked at that section of the docs
On 16/09/2011 08:18, Frank Bonnet wrote:
Hello
We are moving our old LISTSERV server after 15 years of very good
services :-)
Lsoft prices have grown up amazingly so I plan to use open source
software to replace it ...
I would like to have feedbacks from lists managers that use Postfix
we
On 12/09/2011 14:37, Jon Harris wrote:
Hi List
I don't know if this is possible
But we have developed a website for a customer with a CRM backend,
without around 72,000 subscribers.
We want to update and manage the subscriber list on the webserver and
generate the weekly mailshot, all
How can I bind Postfix to only send outgoing mail via one IP address
(ie, always use the same ethernet interface)?
I have a server which has two IP addresses, one on eth0 and one on
eth0.1. I have discovered that some of my outgoing mail is being
rejected by over-zealous spam filters because
On 23/08/2011 14:29, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Mark Goodgepostfix-users@postfix.org:
How can I bind Postfix to only send outgoing mail via one IP address
(ie, always use the same ethernet interface)?
smtp_bind_address
Yes, I discovered that about 5 seconds after I hit send on the
On 09/08/2011 19:18, Gary Chambers wrote:
All,
I apologize in advance for this Postmaster 101 question.
Am I correct in understanding that every mail server that is 1) attempting
to deliver e-mail to an invalid address on my server and 2) is from=, and
3) the message did not originate on my
On 04/08/2011 15:22, Alejandro Facultad wrote:
Dear, I have a Postfix mail server in my company and a person from here
is asking to send massive mails to a list of 15.000 recipients in order
to announce periodically our company's news.
I think with've got the risk that our mail server may be
On 11/07/2011 11:40, Damien Robinet wrote:
Hi Harald,
We have many agencies that can use our mail server.
Each agency has one or more domain name. They can add their domain in
our system to receive their emails professionals.
We have already limited the users who have the right to the domain
On 11/07/2011 15:02, Бак Микаел wrote:
Easy!
Fix the software that your trusted users use to add their domain. Make
THAT software check that the domain's MX record points to the right
place BEFORE you actually add it to the database.
That's not actually helpful, because if you want to avoid
On 11/07/2011 15:21, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.07.2011 16:12, schrieb Mark Goodge:
On 11/07/2011 15:02, Бак Микаел wrote:
Easy!
Fix the software that your trusted users use to add their domain. Make
THAT software check that the domain's MX record points to the right
place BEFORE you
On 20/06/2011 09:20, Tom Kinghorn wrote:
Good morning all.
what would be the best way to block (or substitute) profanity in the
Subject body of mails.
Are you trying to prevent your users from sending profanity, or are you
trying to prevent profanity reaching them if sent to them by
On 25/03/2011 12:06, Peter Sørensen wrote:
I've already used the proxymap solution. We ran into serious problems with the
clustered mysql backend.
I have 5 servers with smtd set to max 300.
I will get back to the proxymap solution. I have adjusted some settings in the
mysql backend.
But
On 19/01/2011 15:04, /dev/rob0 wrote:
Off topic, but on this subject, I am planning to implement this with
a web page, and maybe a contact form. Does anyone have a preferred
simple and yet spam-resistant means of doing this? Ideally I'd like
something that's more blind-friendly than Captcha.
On 12/11/2010 13:52, Carlos Mennens wrote:
I was just curious is it common in enterprise environments for Linux
administrators to combine their primary email server (Postfix) with
their companies web server (Apache)? I'm just more curious than
anything and I know this is a relative question with
On 11/11/2010 14:56, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 11/11/2010 03:14 PM, Pedro Axelrud wrote:
Hello guys,
We have a startup with an email marketing web app, we are very rigid
with our clients to not allow spammers.
One of our client's wants to send a message to two million contacts
HOW will they
On 22/09/2010 13:40, Brian Pribis wrote:
Here is the virtual:
c...@letterpress.cc brian
brian is a real live unix account on this system, and mail does indeed
get to this account.
If I email from ANY MUA to c...@letterpress.cc FROM
br...@boxcarpress.com and hit reply-all I get:
TO =
OK, I'm sure this is in the documentation somewhere, but my brain isn't
working this morning and I need to get a fix for this fairly quickly, so
I'm asking here instead :-)
Anyway, I currently have a situation where mail is currently received by
machine A, which then forwards it to machine B.
On 23/07/2010 13:37, Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
What I need to do is configure A so that mail destined for B is stored
indefinitely (well, for a few days, at least) without generating NDRs or
attempted delivery notifications, so that when B comes back online all
the stored mail can
On 22/07/2010 11:54, Denis BUCHER wrote:
Dear all,
After hours of reading websites and this mailing list, and after many
unsuccessful tries, I would be happy if someone could help me.
I want to allow some incoming networks to be allowed to connect to our
servers and all the rest to be blocked.
On 22/07/2010 16:29, Eray Aslan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 06:52:22PM +04
If the amount of backscatter is small, do not change behaviour. But
accept the fact that (prepare for) you might get blacklisted in the
future.
If that is not acceptable, stop forwarding mail to domains that you do
On 18/06/2010 10:17, Antoine Nguyen wrote:
Le 18/06/2010 11:15, Michael Weissenbacher a écrit :
Conclusion: the spam is passed! I could stop sending notifications but I
think my employer would not like it...
Short answer:
You should NEVER notify anyone about detected spam! This will
On 21/05/2010 14:03, Sasa wrote:
Hi, I have a problem with some mails that are discarded when in body
message there is a web link with http prefix, i.e. with:
http://www.example.com/example
On my mail server I have:
postfix 2.5.6
amavisd-new
spamassassin
clamav
This is spamassassin
On 21/05/2010 14:44, Sasa wrote:
but is strange that when mail is blocked I haven't in log file Blocked
SPAM,
It says discarded, UBE, which means the same thing.
therefore how can I modify my spamassassin configuration for
resolve my problem ?
That depends on whether it is a problem. As I
On 10/05/2010 16:02, BABEDH-DHRA wrote:
I certainly appreciate the input but as I have said I have tried to get
this working over the last 365 days +
I do not quite understand how it is not working.
In that case, what you really need to do is explain what you've done so
far, and where you
On 26/04/2010 13:39, Zachary Burns wrote:
I have a company controller that loves to micro-manage people and
unfortunately loves to do it with software instead of dealing with the
people problem...but anyway I'm getting off on a rant
You are aware that this list is archived publicly, I hope
On 26/03/2010 20:54, listadecorreo wrote:
Hello
in the last month I revived a lot of spam from user_non_ex...@mydomain
to user_ex...@mydomain. can I block all received externals mails
from my domain to my domain...
It's very easy to block mails from fake_u...@domain to real_u...@domain.
On 18/03/2010 13:53, Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
So, back to postfix, can it do such a thing? Act as a proxy and not a
store and forward relay
In SMTP terms, a proxy is effectively the same thing as a
store-and-forward relay. But yes, Postfix will do this very well. For
inbound mail, you can
On 12/03/2010 08:54, Jeff Huang wrote:
Hi,
I found that the Return-Path is null when postfix send bounce mail.It
like this:
Return-Path:
And it show that from= from mailllog.
It means that the bounce mail has no from,and some mailServer reject
these email.
That's how it's supposed to work.
On 16/02/2010 15:53, Eero Volotinen wrote:
Well, It is bad because server (client) can cache ip address for long
time and then one of your smtp server fails. It can take long time
before server gets ip address of working smtp server..
The client is faulty in that case. If it fails to
On 09/02/2010 10:19, Thijssen wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 16:52, K bharathankbhara...@gmail.com wrote:
of course this is a non postfix topic; but i'd like to know from the
experienced which webmail is best for a postfix pop server
It mostly depends on the type of users you have;
- If they
On 09/02/2010 11:53, Thijssen wrote:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 12:28, Mark Goodgem...@good-stuff.co.uk
wrote:
But for day-to-day use as a long-term replacement for a desktop
client, or for any user who gets a much larger than normal volume
of mail,
What do you mean by that?
Hundreds, or even
On 09/02/2010 16:00, Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa wrote:
Possibly, although there are different reasons for detesting OE and Outlook.
OE and Outlook are crap desktop clients; most experienced high-volume mail
users prefer better clients such as Thunderbird. If your users also detest
On 22/01/2010 16:58, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
My venting should be aimed at Spamhaus. What they've done here is the opposite
of transparency. In the case of Google DNS, Spamhaus has pulled something a bit
underhanded in my estimation. They don't want people using Google DNS to query
Spamhaus
richard lucassen wrote:
Hello list,
I want to send once a week a simple mail to a list of 3000 recipients. I
can set smtpd_recipient_limit and smtpd_recipient_overshoot_limit to
higher limits, but is there a better way to handle this?
Yes. Install a proper mailing list management system, such
richard lucassen wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:57:41 +
Mark Goodge m...@good-stuff.co.uk wrote:
I want to send once a week a simple mail to a list of 3000
recipients. I can set smtpd_recipient_limit and
smtpd_recipient_overshoot_limit to higher limits, but is there a
better way to handle
richard lucassen wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 14:28:11 -0600
Kenneth Marshall k...@rice.edu wrote:
[mlm]
I will second that using a real MLM is usually a much, much better
option that will allow you to prevent collateral damage to your mail
reputation when there is a delivery problem. For
Noel Jones wrote:
On 12/15/2009 7:30 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 12/14/2009, Simon Waters (sim...@zynet.net) wrote:
On Monday 14 December 2009 14:24:34 Jaroslaw Grzabel wrote:
What postfix does ? Reject all messages until
I will not be notified and remove the database and let postfix to
Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
The cache has two main functions:
1. To reduce traffic between the gateway and destination server, and
reduce load on both.
2. To allow the gateway server to correctly handle mail
acceptance/rejection when the destination server is unreachable
Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
The cache has two main functions:
1. To reduce traffic between the gateway and destination server, and
reduce load on both.
2. To allow the gateway server to correctly handle mail
acceptance/rejection when
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/21/2009, Chris Imrie (chris.im...@abeta.co.uk) wrote:
It checks to verify the sender once, then caches the result in a
database, so mail servers aren't hassled more than once per email
address verification.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think this could still get you
Raimund Eimann wrote:
Hi,
I'm running Cyrus imapd and postfix on a box. I would like postfix to
deliver incoming mail not to /var/spool/mail/username, but rather to
/var/spool/imap/username/Inbox, where the latter is apparently not a
flat file, but rather a typical imap directory structure
Dan Slay wrote:
Thanks, that's what I have read. Which is why this make things more awkward.
I cannot see that holding a recipient list is a solution. If, for
instance, you relay for thousands of domains all going to different
MTA's that hold each individual domains recipient list, its not
wiskbr...@hotmail.com wrote:
I am seeing a few spams coming through with a from address (seen on my
postfix logs) that does not match the From address shown on my users
Outlook. In fact my users are seeing a From address as their own,
something that my postfix server currently does not allow
Clunk Werclick wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 13:27 +0200, no_s...@cardiff.fr wrote:
Where am I wrong, and what is necessary to setup bounce handling knowing
that :
1- Bounces return addresses are constructed dynamically, and there is no
real user account corresponding to
no_s...@cardiff.fr wrote:
My question is how to I manage bounces back in my postfix servers,
knowing that the bounce addresses do not exists as valid users ??? If
you don't have the answer, I don't think community needs your
personal comments on what's good and what's bad...
Create a virtual
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Steve steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk:
Is this right?
Yes
You cannot whitelist a sender or client in an access list to bypass
header or body checks. Header and body checks take place whether you
explicitly OK a client or sender, in access lists, or not.
I'm gob
Steve wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 08:17 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Goodge:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Steve steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk:
Is this right?
Yes
You cannot whitelist a sender or client in an access list to bypass
header or body checks. Header and body checks take
EASY steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk wrote:
It's a bug. Read the original question carefully. If I'm pasting the
original headers into the BODY of a fresh mail, and the header filters
are *blocking* it - is that intended behaviour? Answer (hopefully) 'No'.
If the header-only filters are
EASY steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 16:40 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Steve steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk:
/^Received: from.*(cmodem|dhcp|adsl|broadband|dynamic)/ REJECT dynamic host in
headers
OK
In
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Steve
steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk wrote:
Can you fix your client to post ONLIST please, and not direct to user.
From the headers of your email:
Reply-to: steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk
So either the list software is broken, or yours is (I suspect the
KLaM Postmaster wrote:
Is this mailing list closed (or fairly closed), I only ask because if it
is then there does not seem to any good reason to munge addresses,
domain names etc.
If it open (that is publicly readable) then there is.
It's publicly archived in a number of places, and posts
ddaas wrote:
Hello everybody !
We have a lot of clients that have yahoo e-mails.
Yahoo accept e-mail from our server but by default sort them as spams.
What could it be? Does anyone know what does yahoo like or dislike?
If the messages are reaching the recipients' mailbox, but being sorted
ram wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 18:36 +0100, Gábor Lénárt wrote:
Hei,
I have a got a stupid problem. We have some customers saying they can't and
don't want to reconfigure their mail servers even if Planet-X hits Earth and
that would help to avoid it :) And their MTAs always responds with:
Gábor Lénárt wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:38:28PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
[...]
Also sounds as if you don't have a valid recipient list for these
customers. Not OK. Your queue is likely filled with lots of
undeliverable mail to unknown recipients, and undeliverable bounces to
bogus
Michael De Groote wrote:
i have a very simple postfix setup running at school.
now the principal wants to send mails to all the parents that
registered their emailaddress and signed on for a newsletter every
week. This causes him to get a 452: 4.5.3 Too many recipients.
I tried setting
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Gerard schrieb:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:09:16 +0100
Robert Schetterer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
double checked this on different mailservers
on different nets , at current i cant deliver out mail to yahoo.de/com
anyone else notices same problems?
Lacking a
Martin Strand wrote:
Our customers are extremely non-technical (some believe the Internet
is that blue 'e' on the computer) so I have little hope in
explaining why postmaster is a reserved mailbox. :) This particular
customer registered his domain somewhere else and now decided to
switch to
Carlos Williams wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Adam Tauno Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If your delivering to a Cyrus IMAPd server then SIEVE has very nice
facilities to handle vacation messages for you. Several rather nice
UI/clients are available as well so users can setup
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
