Re: GhettoForge Postfix3

[jdebert]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 17:13:32 -0500
post...@ptld.com wrote:


> Wait, so its a fork of Postfix?
> And not the same code as what Wietse releases for the same version?

It's whatever the maintainer of that code wants, intends, etc. 

Why not ask the maintainer?

--
jd

Re: GhettoForge Postfix3

[jdebert]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 15:39:24 -0500
post...@ptld.com wrote:

> > According to http://ghettoforge.org/index.php/Postfix3 it's the
> > latest (presumably stable) release. They appear to have Postfix
> > 3.6 at this time.  
> 
> 
> Yes, I see that. But why "Postfix3"? How is that different from
> normal Postfix? 

[snip]

likely at least a minimal attempt to avoid naming conflicts. renaming
forked the code (hopefully) helps avoid blaming Wietse for whatever gets
broken in that fork.

renaming forks should reasonably be a common practice.

--
jd

Re: After network outage postfix found not running

[jdebert]

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 17:16:10 -0700
Bob Proulx  wrote:

> Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Postfix was only the messenger of bad news. It does not
> > spontaneously self-destruct.  
> 
> I have always found Postfix to be extremely reliable and robust.
> Which was why this happening on two different systems was such an
> oddity.
> 
> Bob

From my own observations on debian:

systemd's default config does not wait for the network before starting
postfix and will not retry. If it is actually set up to wait, then
systemd is ignoring that bit.

--

Re: Google and UK.COM domains

[jdebert]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 19:19:47 +0800
Frank Hwa  wrote:

> for the second level domain, some are "com.au", "com.hk" (the com
> one), some are "co.uk", "co.jp" (the co one). I am not sure, isn't
> there a standard for this naming?
> 

A long-standing convention to use ISO 2-letter country
codes as TLD for each nation since at least the beginning of DNS, IIRC.

For consistency sake, 2 letter 2nd level domains were used. ie, co, or,
ac (equivalent of edu), etc.

The US had and still has the .us. TLD. but that uses a different policy
than the rest of the world.

These may be codified, most likely are. I have had no reason to look
into it.

The most common TLDs of org, com, net, edu, mil, etc., are
persistent artifacts of ARPANET. These are codified in early
RFCs.

--
--

Re: receiving mail for other hosts...

[jdebert]

On Fri, 16 Jul 2021 14:30:43 -0400
Thirumurugan Kalapatti  wrote:

> Jul 16 12:23:30 hostM postfix/smtp[698664]: 7A2A020ECDC6:
> to=, relay=none, delay=0.05, delays=0.02/0.03/0/0,
> dsn=5.4.4, status=bounced (Host or domain name not found. Name
> service error for name=hostb type=A: Host not found)
> 


Perhaps use /etc/hosts temporarily for hostname resolution while the
nameserver issue is resolved?

Your nameserver may only be able to resolve "hostb.yourdomain.com" and
not "hostb" itself. See if your dns admin can fix that.

--

(OT)Ham Radio + SMTP (was Re: How to restrict encrypted email)

[jdebert]

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 11:42:44 -0400
Yuval Levy  wrote:

> It is indeed a matter of interpretation, and I would like to see the
> FCC rules text.  Questions:
> (1) how do they define "encrypted"?

The rules and regulations are very clear on what is permitted. They do
not need to define anything else.

> (2) on who is the obligation imposed?

On all licensed amateur radio operators.

> 
> Imposing the onus on the SMTP server operator is like imposing the
> onus on gas stations for fueling vehicles used in criminal
> endeavors.  It does not fly because the gas station can't possibly
> know what the user will use the vehicle for, other than (probably)
> driving.
> 
> By the definition of encryption, an SMTP server operator can't
> possibly know that a message is encrypted unless the end-user is kind
> enough to say so, e.g. in the MIME headers.
> 
> 
> > Don't let them push you down this slippery slope.  If you are
> > really worried about it, call the FCC or a private attorney and get
> > a solid interpretation.
> 
> If I was the SMTP server operator and they came to me, I'd tell them
> to take a walk.

The encryption ban dates almost from the earliest days of ham radio. It
has included unencrypted digital communications formats as well. It has
been extremely restrictive until recently. The use of ASCII was
prohibited until recently, for example. Violation of the regulations
can result in severe fines and forfeiture of license and equipment.

These are regulations, not laws. There is no due process as there
may be in criminal cases. It's a completely different legal universe.
Enforcement of regulations is administrative and not dealt with in the
courts, until criminal enforcement is necessary.

Please review part 97 of the FCC regulations, which pertains to amateur
radio operation. For the FCC's authority, that would be in Title 47 of
the United States Code.

Re: Blocking email from specific IPs

[jdebert]

On Sat, 14 May 2016 10:37:26 -0700
Noah  wrote:

> Hi there,
> 
> I am hoping to have a blacklist file that stops postfix from
> accepting email from specific IP or IP ranges.
> 
[snip]

Do you want to block these because of spam or some other reason?

If for spam, then it is better to use firewall rules to DROP
connections.

BTW, just curious -- Is the CIDR you show a ficticious example? Or is
NASA truly being a pest? (^_^)

jd

Re: No mail from yahoo or ymail

[jdebert]

On Fri, 05 Dec 2014 13:25:49 -0500
Robert Moskowitz r...@htt-consult.com wrote:

 
 Further, I now see clearly that dig responses I was getting from my
 MiFi connection are incomplete.  No additional information with those 
 problems.  Just tested again, and nope, not there.  Won't bother with 
 that again.  Might as well just add the @server from regular
 connection to one of the root servers.
 

Please note that most, if not all mobile wireless services intercept
DNS via a transparent proxy and change the responses returned to you.
This is also something wired service providers are beginning to do
more frequently as well. You will need a completely different means of
access to DNS to get unbiased, unfiltered, trustworthy results.

jd

Re: HTML bounces

[jdebert]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:49:15 -0600
LuKreme krem...@kreme.com wrote:

 On 17 Oct 2014, at 04:51 , Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
  The harder you try, the fewer people will read your bounce message.
 
 Honestly, I do not think it is possible for there to be fewer people
 who read bounces.
 
 Customized LOCAL bounce messages would be nifty. I don't want HTML
 ones but customizing the messages for local users would be nice. Some
 extensibility to the variables available might be nice too, to allow
 more customizations to the bounce message.
 
 Not a feature request, per se, but if it showed up somewhere down the
 line it's a feature I'd use.
 
 

That would be a bit more helpful to end users who have no idea
how things work.

Otherwise...

Local FAQ re bounces? 

A custom error message to direct local users to said FAQ?

A monthly user newsletter reminding local users to peruse the FAQ for
useful information?

A monthly user newsletter periodically containing a FAQ topic or three?

Cluehammer as a last resort? (not a feature request?)

jd?

Re: Postfix has a bizarre dependency and does not start

[jdebert]

On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 17:07:22 -0700
James Moe ji...@sohnen-moe.com wrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1
 
 
 opensuse 13.1
 postfix 2.9.6-7.4.1
 
 I recently upgraded a server from 12.3 to 13.1. Postfix worked
 correctly in v12.3.
 
 Postfix fails to start with this message:
 
 Code:
 - -- Unit postfix.service has failed.
 - -- 
 - -- The result is dependency.
 Jun 03 10:59:24 sma-server3 systemd[1]: t2.mount mount process exited,
 code=exited status=32
 Jun 03 10:59:24 sma-server3 systemd[1]: Failed to mount /t2.
 

Was that message produced by systemd?

What happens if you do as root: 'postfix check' and 'postfix start'?

What does the system log tell you?

jd