On 07/12/2018 07:36 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 07:20:26PM +0530, Ram wrote:
My postfix servers remain pretty busy throughout the day getting around
100 - 200 mails / second
I have seen that for every 100 k mails around 20 mails disappear from
the queue.
From
My postfix servers remain pretty busy throughout the day getting around
100 - 200 mails / second
I have seen that for every 100 k mails around 20 mails disappear from
the queue.
From maillogs , I can see smtpd accepting the connection , creating a
queue-id and then cleanup picking it up.
But
On 04/20/2018 07:39 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
On 04/20/2018 07:14 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
I have a very busy postfix server that acts as a relay. It gets mails
from an application and then forwards the mails to the delivery servers
on local LAN
The application can send mails
On 04/20/2018 07:14 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
I have a very busy postfix server that acts as a relay. It gets mails
from an application and then forwards the mails to the delivery servers
on local LAN
The application can send mails at rate of? upto 600 mails per second
Postfix has been
I have a very busy postfix server that acts as a relay. It gets mails
from an application and then forwards the mails to the delivery servers
on local LAN
The application can send mails at rate of upto 600 mails per second
Postfix has been configured to accept mails all that quickly, but the
I am using a custom policy daemon to reject some messages which do not
match the policies of the company. This is usually to do with some
content checks in subject or body.
The problem is even if the message is given a REJECT, The email client
(Thunderbird ) does not throw up any error
For
I have a postfix gateway that relays mails for various senders and for
some mails it generates NDR's when the mail is not deliverable
Can I configure postfix to bounce the message and retain the original
subject with the current message
Something like
Undelivered Mail:
On Wednesday 04 May 2016 12:43 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 11:39:48AM +0530, Ram wrote:
I have a postfix relay server that sends all mails to a relayhost.
Problem is that some domains , whose MX is all same, are not accepting
mails from that relayhost for now.
Until
a different network.
I dont have a list of all such domains , only the MX host is known
Can there be any such configuration in postfix
Thanks
Ram
I am seeing a surge in the number of password attempts both at my
postfix smtp servers as well as imap servers
These attacks seem to be targetted since the attempts are made at
correct userids
At one instance I have seen mails being sent impersonating a valid
sender asking for money to be
How can I add a bcc recipient using a policy daemon
I have written a custom policy daemon , and the logic requires that for
some conditions the mail needs to be bcc'ed to a program
Can this be done ?
Thanks
Ram
On 09/11/2015 08:01 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
How can I add a bcc recipient using a policy daemon
I have written a custom policy daemon , and the logic requires that for
some conditions the mail needs to be bcc'ed to a program
Can this be done ?
Postfix 3.0 and later:
BCC
On 06/25/2015 06:31 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 02:07:37PM +0530, Ram wrote:
I see that milter.org has been shut down.
A commercial decision by the new owners of Sendmail. This does
not remove support for the milter API from Postfix.
Now I am wondering if milters
are the other options in postfix,
Thanks
Ram
of the smtp client machine on postfix, not the load balancer IP
Thanks
Ram
On 12/19/2014 03:16 PM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 19.12.2014 um 08:53 schrieb Ram:
Can I use postfix smtpauth with a hash or cdb file
sasldb2 file is unfriendly , because that requires command line to add /
modify.
I want to have this fully automated using a UI
no - cyrus SASL is just
in realtime
Thanks
Ram
Is there a simple way I can configure postfix to convert all Envelope
From and To addresses to lowercase, before delivery
I believe postfix internally converts all ids to-lowercase while doing
hash map lookups
I need this because that will save all unnecessary tolower() function
calls in all
Thanks
Ram
On 07/09/2013 04:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
Today I use in master.cf
smtp unix - - n - - smtp
-o smtp_bind_address=X.X.X.X
-o fallback_relay=newhost
But I have a requirement that the fallback mails should be sent via a
different
On 07/09/2013 05:33 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
On 07/09/2013 04:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
Today I use in master.cf
smtp unix - - n - - smtp
-o smtp_bind_address=X.X.X.X
-o fallback_relay=newhost
But I have a requirement
Is it possible to use 2 different methods of authentication on smtpd
based on userids
Some users authentication against ldap , some authenticate against say a
database
() and the mail will
get quarantined ? I am not getting any samples of this
Thanks
Ram
I have a requirement of 2 different users using the same sender email
address
I found a very old patch for doing this in postfix.
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.devel/4
Is this patch still the only way of doing multiple owners
Thanks
Ram
seems to have some memory leak and it brings down the machine.
I guess realtime logging should be a very common requirement. What is
the best way for this
Thanks
Ram
Neither the sender receives a
bounce or the sender gets the message!!!
Can some one please assist me on how to go about and resolve this issue
Thanks Regards
Ram
On 12/15/2012 08:48 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
Hi
I have a slightly OT question
If I have to use a single IP for a sender domain to the internet, but
yet the mails may get sent from different servers
What is the best way for doing it
The requirement is because the volumes are too large
wants to send the mails using a
dedicated IP
Thanks
Ram
is not really helping because ultimately the
mail will go through after the anvil time.
Since the legitimate users are extremely low email users , I can safely
block anyone permanently who sends more than 1 mail in 10s with zero FP's
How can I do this ?
Thanks
Ram
of ram,
do you think it is enough ?
Usually postfix would not be the bottleneck for any mail server. You
need to size for dovecot in your case.
And sizing would be impossible unless you know how many mails / hr or
concurrent imap / pop connections you are going to get.
Please size your dovecot
I want to redirect all mails that expire after maximal_queue_lifetime
to a program that will parse these mails then send an appropriate error
Can I do this with postfix ?
Thanks
Ram
On 10/29/2012 05:28 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
I want to redirect all mails that expire after maximal_queue_lifetime
to a program that will parse these mails then send an appropriate error
Can I do this with postfix ?
That is not documented, therefore that is not implemented.
Postfix uses
On 10/29/2012 06:54 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
On 10/29/2012 05:28 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
I want to redirect all mails that expire after maximal_queue_lifetime
to a program that will parse these mails then send an appropriate error
Can I do this with postfix
On 10/04/2012 04:30 PM, DN Singh wrote:
Hello group,
I want to implement a catch-all address on my system. This is a very
simple setup where the users are system users. Hence, the unrouted
mail should go to user bounce.
After searching documentation I implemented virtual_alias_maps. But,
journaling/ offered by exchange
This was probably discussed here long back ..
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/postfix-users/message/286167
Is there any workaround available now ?
Thanks
Ram
server. So the first MX
server is just a gateway ?
In that case you dont require a virtual_transport
You just require a simple transport_maps entry
On the first server
put in /etc/postfix/transport
example.com smtp:[secondmx.example.com]
That should help
Thanks
Ram
PS:
If I got your
-in.l.google.com[173.194.79.27] timed out while sending
RCPT TO
I think I will have to reduce the backoff time in postfix , so that
postfix does not learn that gmail is not accepting mails
Thanks
Ram
You can enable soft bounce. So NDR mails will be pending in the queue
But I am not sure really want to do this.
Why should you not notify senders of delivery failures ? What is the
real problem you want to solve ?
On 06/01/2012 12:36 PM, Wael MANAI wrote:
Any idea?
Le jeudi 31 mai 2012
helpful if someone got it working on postfix 2.9
Thanks
Ram
the recipient address before sending using lmtp_generic_maps
For eg
@cyrus.example.com @example.com
That should work AFAIK , please test it before you implement though :-)
Thanks
Ram
PS: You seem to have historic reasons for sending to cyrus , infact it
should be other way around. Get rid
On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 15:49 -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 03:59:22PM -0500, Peter Blair wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Reindl Harald
h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
how do other people act with such braindead sh**t?
Look into greylisting it. You'll find that
already
Thanks
Ram
Can I configure my postfix server to send all bounces to a single
mailbox , instead of the sender of the mail
On 10/13/2011 02:37 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Noel Jonesnjo...@megan.vbhcs.org:
You might be able to do something with check_recipient_mx_access.
Mostly, these domains have no MX, but only an A record. But yes, I
havne'T yet checked if they all resolve to but a few IPs
Since all the
I have a cluster of mailservers , so when a mail arrives it is sent to
the actual recipient by using virtual alias maps
How can I configure postfix to send NDR's like quota bounces with the
original recipient address and not the expanded alias
Thanks
Ram
On 10/01/2011 06:43 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
According to access Manpage
http://www.postfix.org/access.5.html
The BCC option for a access lookup is not supported. When will
support for BCC be added ?
According to the HISTORY file:
20070405
Feature: BCC access/policy
According to access Manpage
http://www.postfix.org/access.5.html
The BCC option for a access lookup is not supported. When will
support for BCC be added ?
Thanks
Ram
, 8GB RAM, and a ~100GB SSD.
Rewrite the app to submit via SMTP.
The actual outbound is indeed a relay farm of outgoing mail servers
behind LVS.
The application server is just a generation box. And that is where the
bottleneck is.
An application change is anyway required,
But what I would
, and also this is a serialized process.
So sending mails serially slows down the general delivery
Thanks
Ram
On 08/19/2011 07:59 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
One customer of ours wants to send research reports to all his partners
instantly after the data is available.
Why not put the report on a website and send the partners email
with a hyperlink?
The partners want them mailed .. just a (stupid
On 08/19/2011 07:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.08.2011 16:05, schrieb Ram:
I dont want to make smtpd connections in the app because that slows down the
app significantly
and also this is a serialized process.
So sending mails serially slows down the general delivery
it is a bad design
of the typosquatted (
tahoo.com etc ) all go to the same ip addresses, usually to some park
server , which does not accept mails at all.
Can I configure postfix such a way that if mail is sent to these ip
addresses , then bounce immediately.
Or if the DNS is ns1.sedoparking.com etc
Thanks
Ram
Hi,
How can I configure postfix to silently discard mails from ips listed in
a DNS blacklist
default_rbl_reply=DISCARD
does not work ( Obviously I made this up .. that was not documented
anywhere :-) )
Thanks
Ram
Sorry for being OT here ;-)
I am writing a milter that will insert custom attachments into mails
sent depending on the recipient and insert some text too
Is there are sample milter that I can build upon
Thanks
Ram
://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html#incoming_queue .. I have
increased in_flow_delay to 10s
But that does not help.
I wonder what happens when I restart postfix that the queue clearing is
so fast for the first 5 minutes or so
Thanks
Ram
On 03/17/2011 10:11 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:04:31AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
I have a postfix (2.7) server where as soon as I restart the mails are
moved rapidly from incoming queue to active
But soon ( after 5 minutes ) the queue manager is left
(F2.77; T1.28; A2.04; B3.07_01; Q3.07)
Subject: This is a long subject of mail from ram to test if
smtp_header_checks is working fine for 1
Message-Id: t4hc4wc1s2v8.1294402...@netcore.co.in
To: r...@netcore.co.in
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 17:40:01 +0530
From: r...@netcore.co.in
This is a Test Mail
On 01/07/2011 06:25 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ram:
I am using postfix smtp_header_checks to log subjects of mails
I have enabled WARN inside smtp_header_checks
But If I send a mail with a long subject then the subject gets chopped
at some length (approx 50 chars )
Postfix truncates EVERYTHING
are trying to trace a lost mail , look in your maillog. (grep for
sender or recipient if you like )
If the mail was received mail may be sent, bounced , discarded or may
be still in the queue.
Anyway the entry will give you a clue.
Thanks
Ram
On Sat, 2010-09-04 at 14:28 +0530, Ashwin Muni wrote:
Thanks Ram
But all my 1000 users are in AD and only few of them need to have
mailboxes on exchange, how shall i bifurcate 250 users in exchange and
rest 750 users in postfix.
Again the idea of fetching valid users is great from AD
On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 14:22 +0300, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
Manao ahoana, Hello, Bonjour,
I would like to setup a specific relay host to some client IP address.
How to?
I already saw sender_dependent_relayhost_maps but it's per
sender, not per client IP.
I think you can use
at the smtpd level
before the mail enters inside.
Thanks
Ram
Any help appreciated.
--
Ashwin Muni
http://www.linuxmaza.com
Linux Tutorials and Howtos
I have set up sender dependent transport_maps different clients to use
different outgoing ips
From the document at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_default_transport_maps
The transport_maps overrides sender_dependent_default_transport_maps
What I need to do is
configure my postfix to defer mails if authentication fails , rather
then bouncing them. For any other rejection , obviously, the mail has
to be bounced back.
Thanks
Ram
.
Is there any benefit for using protocol=6, how can I measure the impact
of using a lower protocol.
Thanks
Ram
bypass most or all restrictions, so this is unlikely to make
much difference. Unless you're doing something silly like
1000 body_check rules or using a content_filter or milter.
- put the queue on a ram-disk (8GB Ram, might leave 6GB for the queue,
would this be sufficient?)
Putting
Hi ,
On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 09:39 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Ram r...@netcore.co.in:
We have a requirement to send some research analysis mails as quickly as
possible.
Everyday after the data is available my app generates the mails in eml
format in a directory.
What
Ram
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 04:50 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Patrick Ben Koetter put forth on 7/22/2010 2:11 AM:
* Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com:
Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
Ram:
One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
the mails
free
all the time.
The ramdisk seems to work great. But sporadically some smtp clients are
getting an error
Insufficient system storage
When will this happen ? Does postfix find not enough space on the
ramdisk ? How can I find when this occurs ?
Thanks
Ram
by which you can achieve that. You may
start with these
http://www.postfix.org/LOCAL_RECIPIENT_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html
Thanks
Ram
Now this is the problem of all invites, especially those invites that
scrape my addressbook and invite everyone.
Should not all invites carry some header or any other identification ,
that list management software can automatically detect and /dev/null the
mails
Thanks
Ram
may not be that
perfect :-) )
I thought of using recipient_bcc_maps but having huge
recipient_bcc_maps files on all my servers does not seem a good idea.
Anyway most of these map entries will *never* get used in normal times.
Thanks
Ram
On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 14:15 +0200, Administrator Beckspaced.com wrote:
On 7/9/2010 16:13, Administrator Beckspaced.com wrote:
On 7/9/2010 14:40, Ram wrote:
On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 13:35 +0200, Administrator Beckspaced.com wrote:
On 7/9/2010 13:27, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am
sender authentication
Because that will reduce the deliverability of their spams
Thanks
Ram
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 23:39 -0700, junkyardma...@verizon.net wrote:
Very aware spammers can create their own domains and and SPF records. They
can do essentially the same thing with any anti spam measures. And I have
see a number of them do just that, an SPF record of entire IPv4 address
On my central postfix server I do typically 100k mail transactions per
hour. Postfix 2.7 on a Dual Quadcore Xeon 4 GB Ram RHEL5 box.
Sometimes this happens that mails move very slowly from incoming queue
to the active queue.
I think I got the basic hygiene right:
This server has absolutely
processes on the machine
I tried blocking the from id and the spam-bot changes the id in the very
next hour
Is there a way I can auto ratelimi mails on from-id
Thanks
Ram
mmail postfix/smtpd[23565]: nss_ldap: reconnecting to
LDAP server (sleeping 8 seconds)...
Jun 4 14:53:12 mmail postfix/smtpd[23565]: nss_ldap: reconnected to
LDAP server ldap://XX after 3 attempts
How do I configure postfix , not to connect to ldap at all.
Thanks
Ram
Ram
, see how it supports DKIM checks
Thanks
Ram
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 10:15 -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
On 5/10/2010 8:33 AM, ram wrote:
Can I use somthing like lmtp_generic_maps for delivery to dovecot
Your question is incomplete.
What are you trying to accomplish? How does postfix deliver
to dovecot?
I have a master.cf entry
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 12:29 +0300, Appliantologist wrote:
Hi guys,
I still need to accept mail for the email addresses we host on our
machine from the net, so blocking port 25 or mynetworks as local host
would seem to prevent that. we still have users on the domain that
get mail to the
...@googlemail.com.
I guess you need recipient_bcc_maps
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#recipient_bcc_maps
Thanks
Ram
want to
sign
Put your domains in there
Thanks
Ram
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 21:15 +0200, Ignacio García wrote:
Hi there. Some days ago 1 of our postfix servers was abused by bot
networks using one of our customer's stolen credentials, inadvertently
done by a virus/keylogger probably. In few hours more than 2 spam
messages were in our
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 17:45 -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
The script just does:
* Copy in new relay_recipients file
* postmap relay_recipients
* postfix reload
Is there a better way to do this? Should I stop postfix completely during
this time? Will putting the queue on hold
On Sun, 2010-04-11 at 19:51 -0400, john wrote:
i am attempting to build Postfix from the source rpms, I think I have
worked out how to set the various parameters to get the options I want.
except I don't see how to make this a x86_64 install.
What am i missing?
JLA
On a redhat like
.
Thanks
Ram
.
You could use different rates for different senders too based on the
envelope-from address
Thanks
Ram
, or only a few
I suspect the recipient server is doing an SPF check. So you wont be
able to forward unless you change the envelope.
Thanks
Ram
_ONLY_ the
FROM is warni...@domain.com?
Thanks in advance.
Do not try to modify any setting in postfix. Set your mass
( massive ?? ) mail application Envelope sender-id to a different
sender-id. All mail servers would send the bounce messages to the
Envelope sender id
Thanks
Ram
servers.
I want to make sure that every customer uses only his domain(s) and
sends the mail. Important to implement proper usage reporting as well as
stop abuse of network
Thanks
Ram
PS: SPF is used by gmail,hotmail, aol and 40% of the fortune 500
companies in the world among a huge lot
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 09:03 +0530, an...@isac.gov.in wrote:
Dear List,
We are using the smtpd-policyd feature from long time to allow some
specific users to receive higher size mails. It is working fine.
But, it does not work when the recipient_count is more than one as we
are
it
Thanks
Ram
) {
if(suspect client login) {
reject_authenticated_sender_login_mismatch
} else {
allow sender_login_mismatch
}
}
Thanks
Ram
a better a solution let me know too.
Thanks
Ram
On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 15:40 +0100, Vegard Svanberg wrote:
Hi,
we are trying to mitigate the impact of having infected users, brute
force hacked webmail accounts etc. sending (larging amounts of) outbound
spam.
The best idea we've come up with so far is to perform outbound spam
I need to reject messages above n recipients with a Permanent Failure.
If I configure smtpd_recipient_limit=50
I cant outright reject the messages unless I set
smtpd_hard_error_limit=1
Thanks
Ram
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 14:30 -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote:
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
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo