Thanks for the responses to my previous post regarding DKIM signatures,
I have DMARC working as well and testing some new SA rules now.
I want to LDAP SigningTable and KeyTable, where we already have Postfix
transport and other lookup records. But I continue to receive no signing
table match
The opendkim mailing lists seems not available any longer, so thought
I'd try here. I'm trying to get a handle on how to setup DKIM properly
on a gateway server, not even sure if what I'm trying to do is possible.
This gateway serves as an MX with ClamAV+Amavisd+SA filtering as well as
the
Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick:
local_header_rewrite_clients = static:all
I'm looking for a way to rewrite by name from any client. My canonical
maps work great for mynetworks, would like to apply the same type
rewrite to any message...
The above setting should enable canonical
Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick:
I have been using canonical_maps for some time to map local addresses,
but that doesn't seem to work for incoming mail. The message is coming
from another Postfix server with the sender specified with the hostname
of the machine
See http
Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick:
I have been using canonical_maps for some time to map local addresses,
but that doesn't seem to work for incoming mail. The message is coming
from another Postfix server with the sender specified with the hostname
of the machine
See http
I have been using canonical_maps for some time to map local addresses,
but that doesn't seem to work for incoming mail. The message is coming
from another Postfix server with the sender specified with the hostname
of the machine
Jul 6 08:35:34 mx1 postfix/smtpd[54573]: NOQUEUE: reject:
We have an issue with a stock Postfix 2.11.3 sending to one MTA. The
message is being sent from a PHP application to the localhost Postfix
for delivery. After making header adjustments to satisfy envelope sender
rejections, the MTA is now accepting with an NDR. Their IT sends this
error from
I started getting notices that the root partition was filling up on one
of our mail gateways and find /tmp/maillog and /var/log/maillog both
being written to with the same logging information. I have checked that
these are two different files and not symlinks, the /tmp file is owned
by admin
We use Postfix on our gateways that only transport to destination
servers, they do not have any local users except for standard
system/root/admin accounts. How can I get Postfix to not allow senders
to use the hostname in their email address. Would it work and is it safe
to add such a REJECT
li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
in general: postconf -n missing
Yes, of course, forgot to add, this is for one of our two gateways I
need to set this up on:
root@mx2:~ # postconf -n
address_verify_map = btree:$data_directory/verify
address_verify_negative_cache = no
address_verify_poll_count = 1
I have enabled some policies like Postgrey to cut down on spam on my
Postfix 2.11 server. The server acts as the MX server for many domains,
is it possible to configure Postfix to activate these types of policies
for certain domains?
--
Robert
Can anyone help me understand what happened to a message to one user
when it was sent to three? Below is the log entries I find for this
message, you can see there were three recipients, all with the note of
'but 1 DISCARD' that I've never encountered before when handed off to
Maia for
Having a problem understanding where my issue is with AV for this one
(maybe more) domain. I see the following message for this unknown user
where AV seems to be working, I only cache positives
mx1# grep 8024C2E2BD /var/log/maillog
Feb 24 08:33:45 mx1 postfix/cleanup[7752]: 8024C2E2BD:
On 2/24/2012 3:40 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick:
On 2/24/2012 2:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick:
(maybe more) domain. I see the following message for this unknown user
where AV seems to be working, I only cache positives
...
Feb 24 08:33:55 mx1 postfix/smtp
On 2/24/2012 4:17 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
There is also is some logic to prevent a negative probe result from
replacing a positive result. This is needed because Postfix will
try to refresh a probe result before it expires.
Just read this after my last post. Perhaps this explains, the address
On 2/24/2012 4:29 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
That is the part I didn't understand. What exactly triggers the other
rejections I see with NOQUEUE? I thought each message would be rejected
What other rejections? You have shown nothing.
Yes, for I have failed to post all that I have referenced...
I have a Postfix 2.8.5 server that is a gateway transport for several
domains and it is sending backscatter when the transport map destination
rejects user unknown. I see multiple MAILER_DAEMON messages like this in
the queue at any given time. I was reading this document and see the
On 1/24/2012 10:01 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Robert Fitzpatrick rob...@webtent.org:
I have a Postfix 2.8.5 server that is a gateway transport for several
domains and it is sending backscatter when the transport map destination
rejects user unknown.
User relay_recipient_maps OR use
On 1/16/2012 2:28 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
We recommend that when using any spam filtering method, users be given
access to the filtered mail - don't block the mail as documented here,
but store it in a separate mailbox. Or tag it and provide users
documentation so that they can filter based
On 1/17/2012 2:08 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
why do you use spamcop ?
Why wouldn't I?
--
Robert rob...@webtent.org
Perhaps this is not the place for this, I didn't find a mailing list on
the spamcop site and just looking to see if this is experienced by
others. Got two calls this morning, both not receiving mail from gmail
users and both being blocked by my usage of 'reject_rbl_client
bl.spamcop.net'. Anyone
I followed the FreeBSD handbook Chapter 24.2 to upgrade from 8.1 to 8.2,
I am getting kernel errors for various postfix commands...
May 9 12:21:11 mx3 kernel: pid 1928 (smtp), uid 125: exited on signal 11
May 9 12:21:11 mx3 kernel: pid 1931 (flush), uid 125: exited on signal 11
I have
I have SPF setup and Postfix is rejecting mail from explicitly
unauthorized servers. If a customer wants me to customize the
configuration so that they can receive mail from that server, is that
wrong? Their current SPF TXT record contains a hard fail as ...
v=spf1 a mx ptr -all
--Robert
The firewall at one of our locations is down and we are using a cheaper
solution until it is replaced, which does not handle content filtering
as well with calls to our db at another network like the old router did
very well. So, I am trying to reroute all the mail destined for that
Postfix
On 8/19/2010 11:03 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html#probe_routing
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#address_verify_transport_maps
Yes, I read both of these, I guess I just can't figure out how to
utilize these configuration options for a
On 8/19/2010 11:26 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
On 8/19/2010 10:10 AM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
On 8/19/2010 11:03 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html#probe_routing
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#address_verify_transport_maps
Yes, I read both
On 8/19/2010 12:52 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Use address_verify_transport_maps in place of your transport_maps to
control the routing of the probe.
Ah, I'm just stupid then, I thought that didn't work unless you were
using transport_maps in the first place, sorry. Thanks for clearing that up.
On 8/19/2010 12:52 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Use address_verify_transport_maps in place of your transport_maps to
control the routing of the probe.
Uhmm, I added address_verify_transport_maps, but it still is sending
verifications to the relayhost:
mx2# postconf -n
address_verify_map =
I am getting a lot of these for various domains...
Jun 2 07:21:08 esmtp postfix/smtpd[55535]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
mail.cypresspartners.com[72.242.211.227]: 450 4.1.8
onlinebanking.ela...@onlinealert.bankofamerica.com: Sender address
rejected: Domain not found;
On 6/2/2010 8:56 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Robert Fitzpatrickli...@webtent.net:
I am getting a lot of these for various domains...
Jun 2 07:21:08 esmtp postfix/smtpd[55535]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from mail.cypresspartners.com[72.242.211.227]: 450 4.1.8
On 6/2/2010 10:43 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
I guess Exchange didn't like that and did reject the mail.
Usually the error message contains info about mailserver generating
this message.
Yes, that is what I hate about Exchange, the error messages vagueness.
Thanks.
I have double-bounce messages in the queue, not sure what that is all
about. For instance, to Yahoo addresses. Is this related to the fact
that I am doing AV to those addresses?
--
Robert
I have an SMTP server down and would like to use another box
temporarily. The IP address of the down server is setup with reverse
DNS. I added this IP address as an alias to the interface on the temp
box, can Postfix control the IP used to send and allow me to use that
alias IP address when
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 20:36 +0200, mouss wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick a écrit :
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 12:34 -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
The current best use view of reject_unverified_(recipient|sender) is
to
use for your domains that you control.
Thanks, and yes, I agree
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 12:34 -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
The current best use view of reject_unverified_(recipient|sender) is
to
use for your domains that you control.
Thanks, and yes, I agree this should be done. We currently use LDAP
lookups for transports. Is there a way to tie
I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
the file and did postfix reload. But still piling up in the logs with
address
36 matches
Mail list logo
