On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 11:26:48AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> >msg_warn("%s: create file %s: %m", myname, STR(temp_path));
> >
> >Are the "create file" warnings found in the system log?
>
> Yes:
>
> Mar 22 19:24:52 domain postfix/postdrop[3624]: warning:
> mail_queue_enter: crea
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 07:58:55PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > This is extremely difficult to reproduce, but it does happen occasionally
> > -- We will tell postfix to stop, and once that is complete, a "postdrop"
> > process will sometimes remain, and will run until it is manually killed.
>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 03:46:00PM +0200, Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I am trying to understand how duplicate mail elimination works in postfix.
>
> According to previous postings, mails that are duplicated by resolving
> multiple recipient aliases that refer to the same final addr
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:11:31AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Kasper Loopstra:
> > Dear list members,
> >
> > In our setup we have various mailboxes that have to be read (and edited)
> > by groups of people. All these groups are defined in LDAP, as are the
> > members (everything uses PAM, s
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:25:29PM +0200, Matthias Egger wrote:
> But now i have a user which fears, that the blacklists could also
> block legitim clients because of false positives. So he wants us to
> let trough all mails with a RCPT TO: set to his address. He is
> aware, that he will then get
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 02:43:59PM +0200, Datzert, Dirk wrote:
> Aug 20 07:01:46 mailserver postfix/smtpd[19678]: connect from
> unknown[149.206.119.116]
>
> Aug 20 07:01:46 mailserver postfix/smtpd[19678]: 338E063:
> client=unknown[149.206.119.116]
>
> Aug 20 07:01:46 mailserver postfix/cleanup
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 09:39:18AM +0100, Dan S wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Wonder if someone can point me in the right direction.
>
> We hold transport routes for loads of destinations and sometimes encounter
> an issue if one particular domain/route suddenly gets a hugh influx of mail.
>
> Say for in
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 12:25:59AM +0300, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
> You may want to try:
>
> enable_original_recipient = no
> smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords = silent-discard, dsn
None of this has any impact on delivery to local aliases that overlap
with each other or an explicitly specified original
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 02:52:31PM +0300, Vasil Mikhalenya wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I can not find solution for the following problem:
> if I send mail to user1@mydomain, and list1@mydomain
> and /etc/aliases contains list1: user1,user2
> postfix duplicates email for the user1(2 identical email deliv
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:20:40PM +0200, Andrea Ganduglia wrote:
> Without transport_maps it doesn't works. If I set virtual_transport =
> dovecot log returns relay=none
> >>>
> >>> The "virtual_transport" setting only applies to domains that are listed
> >>> in virtual_mailbox_domains.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:34:54PM +0200, Andrea Ganduglia wrote:
> > This is not difficult, as long as you don't override postfix' default
> > behaviour with silly transport_maps that don't work.
>
> Without transport_maps it doesn't works. If I set virtual_transport =
> dovecot log returns rela
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:17:38AM -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> > QSHAPE is one tool we were already using, and the good news is that
> > even during a send process (one of which is going on right now), the
> > active queue is generally very small. Like so:
> >
>
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:17:49PM -0700, Steve Jenkins wrote:
> > http://www.postfix.org/TUNING_README.html#mailing_tips
>
> QSHAPE is one tool we were already using, and the good news is that
> even during a send process (one of which is going on right now), the
> active queue is generally ver
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 02:30:09AM -0300, Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
> I need to limit the quantity of messages sent by my users from
> command line (calling sendmail directly), ie: 100 messages by day per
> user.
What would you do with additional messages sent by a local user?
Do you allow the
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:24:23PM +0200, mouss wrote:
> >>> He's only running one postfix smtpd, the other host in the above log is
> >>> bitdefender.
> >>> The simplest would be to change the hostname of either postfix or
> >>> bitdefender, whichever makes more sense.
> >>>
> is is
> e
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:44:25PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > All this said, I doubt it is worth the effort. The existing "fingerprints"
> > are probably enough.
>
> The odds of the same version installed with different build options
> is quite small.
That's essentially my view.
--
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 03:52:31PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Another idea is to add a -F (fingerprint) command-line option to
> every executable that dumps mail_version and build_info information.
> Some people may not be comfortable with egrep and such.
If we're to go to all the trouble, lik
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:20:07PM +0100, Jonathan Gazeley wrote:
> I've been running a postfix server on CentOS 5 for a while with no problem.
> I set up a new CentOS 6 box with postfix, and basically transplanted my
> configs across to the new one. The service starts, but doesn't work
> prope
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:59:32PM +0200, Marc Weber wrote:
> > I am using postfix-2.3.3-2.3.el5_6,dovecot-1.2.17-0_115.el5 on centos 5.6.I
>
> Consider upgrading to 2.8. I tried 2.2 in the past and failed. Don't
> know whether 2.3.3 works much better.
While the older releases are no longer maint
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 08:40:57AM +0200, Paddington Chidziva wrote:
> Good day
>
> I am running a mail server with postfix but my clients who uses the SBS 2008
> pop3 connector are having problems when they send a read/delivery request in
> their e-mails. The SBS event viewer says because of inv
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 03:35:41PM -0400, Zhou, Yan wrote:
> I am seeing my Postfix 2.3.3 having following error.
This is 5+ years out of date.
> It may appears to
> be problem connecting to LDAP (which uses TLS extension),
LDAP over TLS is best attempted with a modern software stack.
> but I
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 08:39:25PM +0200, Csanyi Pal wrote:
> Bubba get it's dynamic IP address using dhcp-client from my ISP's
> dehcp-server.
Hosts with volatile IP addresses need to relay all email via SASL
authenticated connections to their ISP's relay.
They should also not be the MX hosts f
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:04:37PM +0300, gaby wrote:
> I don't undestand what is difference between smtpd_client_restrictions and
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions?
Postfix has 6 top-level restriction lists:
smtpd_client_restrictions
smtpd_helo_restrictions
smtpd_sender_re
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:32:29AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > So what are those?
>
> Postfix prints all information that is available on the OpenSSL
> error stack. The absence of such logging suggests that the error
> stack is empty (perhaps the client hung up), or that your grep(1)
> comman
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:29:03AM -0500, l...@airstreamcomm.net wrote:
> Is it possible to host multiple SSL certs for use with TLS? I am having
> trouble finding documentation regarding this configuration, but we have
> some customers who would like to implement their own SSL certs on our
> out
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 02:33:35PM -0700, Steve Fatula wrote:
> So, mail should go from postfix -> lmtp -> dspam -> smtpd on port 10026,
> but using some sockets instead of TCP.
That's fine. The layer-4 transport is not important.
> So, assuming I have this correct, does this then qualify as the
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:19:16PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 2011-07-21 23:14, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:10:31PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>>
>>> Ah - does setting a relayhost= not make that a single destination, then ?
>> Sure,
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:10:31PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> Ah - does setting a relayhost= not make that a single destination, then ?
Sure, if all remote mail goes to the same place. Anything that causes
the domains in question to resolve to the same transport:nexthop.
--
Viktor.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 04:27:00PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> The alternative would require what is called MX piggy-backing, where
> the MTA looks up the MX records for all the recipients of a message,
> and sorts the recipients by the MX IP address (instead of the
> next-hop domain name like P
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:13:06PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> Now my application is connecting to a local Postfix, which then relays
> to the same remote Postfix.
>
> *Now this same remote Postfix is delivering two messages.*
> -
>
>
> He needs to configure domain-dependent transports on t
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:00:35PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>> It is useful, when you want envelopes with recipient in both domains
>> to be handled in a single transaction with the target nexthop, rather
>> than a separate transaction for each domain (default).
>
> I understood that part, but
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 09:39:19PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>> For mail others send, you can't. For mail you send, if it is important
>> (I would suggest not), configure the same transport:nexthop for both
>> domains:
>>
>> example.com smtp:example.com
>> example.net smtp:exa
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 07:05:41PM +, Eric Smith wrote:
> Damn that was what I was afraid of?..
>
> >> So I am probably missing something in either my setup or in the log file
> >> hence why its included.
> >
> >No, the remote SMTP server not connecting to your server is not caused
> >by your
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 03:03:53PM -0400, Zhou, Yan wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I thought this is a Postfix setting. Postfix 2.3.3.
>
> Say, my postfix server manages domain1 and domain2. If I send a message
> to X@domain1 and Y@domain2. Right now I get two separate messages (both
> identical), h
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 06:55:35PM +, Eric Smith wrote:
> The problem is this yahoo and yahoo alone fails to make connections, the
> problem is random,most emails come through just fine, the specific
> failures are not repeatable. But an parker of ours uses yahoo business
> serves for their em
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 06:39:58PM +, Eric Smith wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is a strange issue, incoming mail for yahoo fails roughly every 10th
> time. Also this is (reportedly) only happening to yahoo emails, all other
> email domains come through just fine.
>
> The setup is on ubuntu 10.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 06:45:46PM -0500, Jay G. Scott wrote:
> Management wants email to
> user@ .arlut.utexas.edu
> will be treated as though it had been addressed to
> u...@arlut.utexas.edu
Regardless of the MTA, this requires at the very least a wild-card MX
record, do you have t
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 06:33:35PM +0200, Erik - versatel wrote:
> In my configuration
> as i login localy - with only a username and no domain
> and i send an email to myself
> it is rewriten to: user@host.domain
http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html#myorigin
Also read the
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Lars T??uber wrote:
> using this leads me into this error message:
> mail.err:
> [...] postfix/smtpd[29046]: fatal: open lock file pid/unix.../world/sname:
> cannot create file exclusively: No such file or directory
>
> I couldn't find locking options for
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:03:38PM -0700, Kendall Shaw wrote:
> Okay, but I am not sending mail to @localhost. I send to
> ks...@kendallshaw.com. Fetchmail sends RCPT TO:. There
> is the header To: ks...@kendallshaw.com in the message. Does postfix decide
> on the destination based on the To he
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 01:30:24PM -0700, Brian Andrus wrote:
>
> Hmph..no wonder my foot hurts!
>
> I do use virtual domains and have all that working, I just wanted to allow
> for folks with virtual domain accounts to have their own .procmailrc to
> have individualized spamassassin rulesets.
>
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 01:00:50PM -0700, Kendall Shaw wrote:
> RCPT TO:
>
> In the log, messages about delivery for that message look like:
>
> ... postfix/qmgr[9145]: 41B0F692043: from=,
> size=2763, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
>
> ... postfix/local[7649]: 41B0F692043:
> to=, orig_to=,
>
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:26:46AM -0700, Brian Andrus wrote:
>
> I thought as much, unfortunately, since the local accounts have an '@' sign
> in them, using procmail as local delivery seems to not be happy.
>
> So now the question becomes:
> Is there a way to get postfix to allow '@' signs as p
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 09:01:43AM -0700, Brian Andrus wrote:
> I wanted to use one of the built-in variables for the user= portion of a
> pipe in master.cf, but it seems postfix does not substitute it for that
> part.
Correct, reasonable and not surprising. Only the "argv" list supports
variab
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:29:57PM +0200, Lars T??uber wrote:
> > If that's indeed the situation, review the security implications; you
> > can either use ACLs to permit the dspam user execute permission fix that
> > up (if supported and enabled on your /var filesystem), or you can
> > consider ma
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:11:57PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote:
> If that's indeed the situation, review the security implications; you
> can either use ACLs to permit the dspam user execute permission fix that
> up (if supported and enabled on your /var filesystem), or you can
> consider making
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:02:34PM +0200, Lars T??uber wrote:
> The unix socket can't be used by other users than root or postfix.
> Is there a way to configure ownership and/or permissions for the socket?
No, the parent directory: $queue_directory/private, must be protected
from users other than
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:44:38PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> > Header checks is most profitably used to reject time-traveling messages
> > from the future.
>
> But then you wouldn't want to block these, for obvious reasons. ;-)
Touché. Ersatz time-traveling messages from the future.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 08:59:24AM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> I use a (relatively) simple regex header check to winnow out old or
> impossible dates; alas, it is not possible to compare two headers with
> header_checks.
Rejecting old dates is not very safe, messages can be Resent, in some
c
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 05:55:42PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Though the fact that AOL
> alone, which handles millions of emails per day, is using Postfix should
> provide ample backing to your proposal to use Postfix. These above are
> simply icing on the cake.
Wrong order of magnitude. Larg
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 03:20:16PM +0300, Amira Othman wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I am new to postfix . I am using postfix-2.3.3-2.3.el5_6 on and
> dovecot-1.0.7-7.el5 on CentOS 5.6.I need to add another domain to my mail
> server any one can help me
http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:01:56PM -0400, jeffrey starin wrote:
> Considering that tables are hashed in postfix, it would be helpful if there
> was a utility or a method to un-hash the tables and actually see what's in
> there.
>
> Is there a method to un-hash postfix tables and see what is insid
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 04:57:02PM +0200, Geert Mak wrote:
> is it possible to reject/redirect on postfix level (to a spam catcher account
> we monitor) -
>
> - all mail sent to undisclosed recipients
Why not focus on spam, rather than weakly correlated factors. It is probably
best to deploy a
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 07:07:25AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > The utility uses various Postfix library functions, and builds properly
> > only within the Postfix source distribution, so if not adopted by Wietse,
> > it would be an unofficial "patch", and I don't think that releasing it
> > as
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 05:56:42PM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:35:56 -0400
> Victor Duchovni articulated:
>
> > Indeed. Returning to the original topic though, I have a postmast(1)
> > patch that adds a new utility that does with master.cf what
> > po
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 02:38:41PM +0200, Tom Kinghorn wrote:
> I have found this in the amavis logs, which could be the culprit
>
> amavis[27010]: (27010-01-12) (!!)TROUBLE in check_mail: forwarding FAILED:
> Error writing to socket: Broken pipe at (eval 97) line 186.
>
Symptom not cause.
--
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 05:22:03PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > smtp_bind_address is a new feature as of 2.7, clearly stated at the top
>
> No, smtp_bind_address is available in all Postfix versions since 2001.
>
> If Postfix complains like this:
>
> postfix/master[5309]: /etc/postfix/mast
Local domains, listed in mydestination, are expected to have equivalent
namespaces. That is every user valid in one, is valid in all.
If you want email addresses to not be tied to the shared namespace of
system accounts, configure the domains in question as
either virtual_mailbox_domains or virtu
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:49:19PM +0200, Georg Sch?nweger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to tell postfix to relay all mails from user A
> (authenticated via SASL as user A) to a certain SMTP server? I would
> like to relay all mails by a user (identified by SASL authentication)
> regardless of
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 10:19:14PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>> Just don't return any result for lookup key.
>>
>
>
> Didn't the OP say that that produced a warning ?
No, what produced a warning, was returning a restring name that expands
to an empty list. Instead, the lookup key should not be
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 06:33:31PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 2011-07-08 18:30, Damien Robinet wrote:
>> Dear Jeroen,
>>
>> On the main.cf I've this two lines:
>>
>> grey0 = check_policy_service unix:private/dunnopl
>
> grey0 = dunno
No, one can use:
grey0 = check_client_access st
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:35:56PM +0200, mouss wrote:
> /^[0-9\.]$/
> is equivalent to
> any string formed with digits and/or dots
No, just any single character that is a digit or ".". You left off the
"*" or "+" to make it a string composed of one (or zero) or more of said.
> with pcre;
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 02:34:37PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2011-07-06 2:12 PM, motty.cruz wrote:
> > Can I use the transport file to deliver one email to two servers? I actually
> > meant to deliver one email twice, to imap1 and its backups imap2?
>
> ASSP (anti-spam proxy) has this ab
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 11:12:42AM -0700, motty.cruz wrote:
> Thank you Dr.Wietse,
>
> Can I use the transport file to deliver one email to two servers? I actually
> meant to deliver one email twice, to imap1 and its backups imap2?
Two deliveries require two envelope recipients. It is not possi
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:59:52PM -0700, David Pierce wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:52:07PM -0700, David Pierce wrote:
> >
> > > I have a postfix instance on an admin-type node set to relay mail to a
> > host
> > > named "relayhost", i.e., relayhost = relayhost. Now, relayhost is
> > act
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 05:55:30PM -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:52:07PM -0700, David Pierce wrote:
>
> > I have a postfix instance on an admin-type node set to relay mail to a host
> > named "relayhost", i.e., relayhost = relayhost.
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:52:07PM -0700, David Pierce wrote:
> I have a postfix instance on an admin-type node set to relay mail to a host
> named "relayhost", i.e., relayhost = relayhost. Now, relayhost is actually
> an A record for the IP of the relayhost. Funny enough, I do believe this
> wo
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 01:52:45PM -0500, John Clark wrote:
> I agree. However my main question is what is the best way of capturing these
> bounces and and running an SQL insert to opt out the address. Is there a way
> to append a command to be run upon a message being removed from the queue
> vi
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 01:42:09PM -0500, John Clark wrote:
> Messages in my deferral queue are set to be removed after 5 days and I have
> been instructed to catch the above stated conditions after 3 days to
> auto-opt-out.
Just set the maximal_queue_lifetime to 3 days. If you're opting users ou
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 06:12:09PM +0100, Oliver Schonrock wrote:
> When using my php library I was able to isolate the delay to the
> END_OF_DATA command ie
>
> .LF>
>
> Postfix's response to that command takes 0.1s if using the "Sendmail"
> client or the php library. but takes only 0.01s when
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:38:04AM -0400, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
> Trying to find the document on the flow of email through postfix as I write
> this.
http://www.postfix.org/OVERVIEW.html
>>> The logs are as follows and this continues for a long time.
>>>
>>> Jun 29 10:36:43 dfbbl05 postfix/
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 07:45:48PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > And how do I allow only a restricted set of envelope from values (with
> > sendmail
> > -f)?
>
> I think this is not possible.
Correct, sendmail(1) is not privileged, and it sets the envelope sender
used by postdrop(1) either
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 08:12:28PM -0700, Rich Wales wrote:
> In http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_client_restrictions, I
> read that "for safety", permit_dnswl_client and permit_rhswl_client are
> silently ignored when they would override reject_unauth_destination.
That is ignored in
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 01:00:37PM +0300, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
> What does
>
>${user:no-such-user}
>
> exactly do?
If ${user} is the empty string, the value "no-such-user" is used
instead. Presumably that is not a valid IMAP user in your environment,
so the mail will bounce.
--
Vik
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:14:31PM +0800, Jon Miller wrote:
> When I see mail trying to come in I get an error such as:
>
> Jun 24 23:01:08 mmtlnx postfix/smtpd[27237]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> mail.domain3.com.au[203.161.81.22]: 554
> : Client host rejected: Access denied;
> from= to= proto=
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:56:22AM +0300, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
> dovecot unix - n n - - pipe
>flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/dovecot-lda -f
> ${sender} -d ${user}
>
> Obviously this happens because in this case there is no ${user} data.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 06:50:32PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:54:22 +, aly.khi...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Usually a reload is sufficient.
>
> to be more clear:
>
> if changes are done in main.cf then postfix reload
> if changes in master.cf then stop postfix, and start p
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 08:35:00PM +0900, Sun Chong wrote:
> >
> > I know that the permissions are set if you do this:
> >
> > 1) untar source from mirrors at www.postfix.org
> > 2) make (or "make makefiles" with documented options for LDAP, SQL, etc)
> > 3) make install
>
> That's the procedur
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 04:48:50PM +, Li, Jilong (MU-Student) wrote:
> After changing the file "main.cf", do I need to run "postfix reload"
> ? Or should I run "/etc/rc.d/init.d/postfix restart" ?
A reload achieves a non-distruptive restart of all services other
than master(8). Also the maste
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:27:02PM -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> Soon I will be putting up a web page with slides and notes for my
> postscreen talk at Southeast (USA) LinuxFest. In the meantime, you
> can see what I have posted about my postscreen config here:
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 01:30:21AM +0200, Xavier Ambrosioni wrote:
> 22:16:25.978773 IP smtp10.smtpout.orange.fr.41183 >
> passrlminisrv.cinema-voiron.fr.smtp: Flags [S], seq 105066692, win 5840,
> options [mss 1380,sackOK,TS val 2993558281 ecr 0,nop,wscale 8], length 0
> 22:16:28.978262 IP smtp
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 09:44:00PM +0200, m...@smtp.fakessh.eu wrote:
> Le vendredi 17 juin 2011 21:39, Victor Duchovni a ?crit?:
> > In that case you've over-engineered your configuration as was my guess.
> > Now you need to construct something more restrained.
> So I
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 09:32:15PM +0200, m...@smtp.fakessh.eu wrote:
> Le vendredi 17 juin 2011 20:44, Wietse Venema a ?crit?:
>
> > That is not "postconf -n" output. There are too many lines of output.
> I assure you this is my exit.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 02:54:51
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 09:00:51PM +0200, Daniel wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> i get some postifx errors. Someone will send me some news (newsletter
> or so) and the mails didnt arrive. I see the following "error" in my
> log:
>
> Jun 17 20:47:37 web01 postfix/smtpd[5197]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT fro
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 02:44:52PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > r13151 ~]# postconf -n | egrep postscreen
>
> That is not "postconf -n" output. There are too many lines of output.
Or the OP tweaked or cloned default values of too many parameters. If
the OP posts a more modest set of non-defau
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 04:39:25PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > 2 What is Closing a DNS loophole with obsolete per-site TLS policies in
> > postfix TLS Documentation,Amavisd-new with TLS postfix generate is problem?
>
> Which DNS loophole?
http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html#client_tl
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:27:16AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> smtp-no-verp unix - - n - - smtp
> -o smtp_generic_maps=pcre:/etc/postfix/no-verp.pcre
If the set of localpart addresses that use VERP is small (perhaps just
one or two, typically "bounc
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 07:00:25PM +0530, Jayanta Ghosh wrote:
> Jun 16 12:54:19 mail postfix/smtpd[933]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> unknown[115.241.25.154]: 554 5.7.1 : Recipient
> address rejected: Access denied; from= to= 2...@gmail.com> proto=ESMTP helo=
The client connected from 115.241.25
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 07:44:53PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > We do not use it before/after filter. The setup is that BCC mapping
> > is only needed for sending outgoing mail (we send a copy to the
> > "Sent" folder) so we enable BCC mapping by default (in main.cf)
> > and disable it on defau
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:44:36AM +0300, karave...@mail.bg wrote:
> For our setup here we needed to selectively disable BCC mappings without
> disabling the other mappings. So attached is a patch that adds this
> capability to receive_override_options . It does not change any other
> behavior.
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:19:33AM +0200, Frank Bonnet wrote:
> INTERNET
>|
>|
>MX SERVER
>|
>|
>INTERNAL MAILHUB
>|
>|
> USERS'S MUAs
>
>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:38:44AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Command:
> # tcpdump -s 0 -w /file/name host server-ip-address and port 25
>
> After some time, "kill -INT" the tcpdump process.
>
> Look in the logfile for a session that breaks, and find that session
> in the tcpdump recordin
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:21:27PM +0200, Dyonisius Visser wrote:
> So I guess I am looking for a sort of 'conditional' transport: only mail
> for vis...@terena.org that does not have a X-Spam-Flag header should be
> going to smtp:remote.filter.box.
>
> Any idea how to achieve this?
The re-injec
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 08:05:24PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> I was thinking a setting integrated with smtp_pix_workarounds would be more
> automatic, with little maintenance once configured.
Given that the banner detection is incomplete (some pixen are not
obviously such) one still needs manual
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 02:18:43PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > # telnet mailamir.com 25
> > Trying 114.31.73.44...
> > Connected to mailamir.com.
> > Escape character is '^]'.
> > 220 **
>
> Hmm...
>
> % telnet mailamir.com 25
> Trying 114.31.73.44...
> Connected to m
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 07:48:54PM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Noel Jones :
>
> > I think I posted something almost exactly like this a while ago
> > (year+?). Anyway, I can confirm that I've had this same problem and
> > came up with the same workaround, still in place.
>
> Yeah. Maybe
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:37:55AM -0600, Ian Stradling wrote:
> Thank you for your assistance. It basically confirms what I thought,
> which is only one notification is possible, and any more otherwise would
> just create congestion.
Typically, the destination of delayed messages and the origin
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:21:33AM -0600, Ian Stradling wrote:
> I am new to the world of Postfix and have been requested by my employer
> to set up a series of Email Delay Notifications for our server.
>
> Currently the main.cf file is set to:
> delay_warning_time = 4h
>
> I understand this to
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:21:56AM +0200, Csillag Tamas wrote:
> I need to duplicate mails if they are sent from users with sending
> profile set to a specific role (which they can set).
>
> For example user1@domain can select departmentA@domain as a sender
> address. In this case I want to send
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:13:34PM +1100, Winston Smith wrote:
> Are these the Programming Middle Ages???
Trolling will not make you friends here.
Configuring Postfix to live in a non-default location is done at
compile-time not install-time. At install-time one gets to either install
Postfix lo
1 - 100 of 2677 matches
Mail list logo