Thank Noel, I appreciate the info.
On 7/23/2010 12:59 PM, Walter Pinto wrote:
Couldn't you restrict the large bounces by setting bounce_size_limit = x ?
This limits the amount of data returned with the bounce; it
doesn't eliminate the bounce.
smtpd_data_restrictions = reject_multi_recipient_bounce is a good idea too
This r
Couldn't you restrict the large bounces by setting bounce_size_limit = x ?
smtpd_data_restrictions = reject_multi_recipient_bounce is a good idea too
Vasya Pupkin wrote:
> I'm my own only customer. And I understand risks of disabling bounce
> feature. I understand that someone will not get a notification if his
> email will not be delivered to me, but I can live with it.
It is still solving the wrong problem, and possibly (probably?) someday
yo
On 2010-07-22 10:45 AM, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
> I am dealing with the same thing. I have to forward to non-local
> mail servers and I try to mimic some of those settings but we still
> get a few that pass local mail to external mail which is then
> rejected.
To state the obvious - have you tried
Vasya Pupkin:
> > In particular, if a bounce is caused by a downstream MTA rejecting
> > an email because it's too large, then that's an unavoidable bounce.
> > But it's also unlikely to be backscatter
>
> In my case it was one of the most reasons why my server acted as a
> backscatterer.
You hav
> In particular, if a bounce is caused by a downstream MTA rejecting
> an email because it's too large, then that's an unavoidable bounce.
> But it's also unlikely to be backscatter
In my case it was one of the most reasons why my server acted as a
backscatterer.
I'm my own only customer. And I understand risks of disabling bounce
feature. I understand that someone will not get a notification if his
email will not be delivered to me, but I can live with it.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 7:29 PM, Eray Aslan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 06:52:22PM +0400, Vasy
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
n
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 06:52:22PM +0400, Vasya Pupkin wrote:
> You of course understand that this is not possible, right?
Yes, I am sure he does. That was sarcasm. Anyway,
If the amount of backscatter is small, do not change behaviour. But
accept the fact that (prepare for) you might get blac
Sometimes the downstream MX has a 'special cookbook' of super secret
anti-spam body checks, and you will always have this problem.
Vasya Pupkin wrote (on Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 06:37:26PM +0400):
> It is already as restrictive as possible and acceptable for me. I do
> not want to loose any non-spam
In my experience, ALL the NDRs I've ever seen are useless - if mail is
bad, it should be REJECTed, otherwise the system is breaking down
somewhere.
Is there a way to just drop bounces on the floor?
Vasya Pupkin wrote (on Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 06:52:22PM +0400):
> You of course understand that this
You of course understand that this is not possible, right?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Vasya Pupkin:
>> I'm doing best I can to fight spam.
>
> Then you will have to predict what mail will be rejected down-stream.
> Let me know when you solve that problem :-)
>
>
I just got an idea to use smtp_header_checks to discard mail from
postmas...@mydomain.tld which is used for bounce emails. I hope it
will work.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
> Vasya Pupkin wrote:
>>
>> Hello.
>>
>> First, I have spent two days reading articles and searchi
Vasya Pupkin wrote:
Hello.
First, I have spent two days reading articles and searching web for
solution but failed there. I am using postfix as an mx for my domains,
it accpets mail for different addresses withing my domains which is
then forwarded to other external domains, i.e. google.com and
It is already as restrictive as possible and acceptable for me. I do
not want to loose any non-spam mail as well, so I am not going insane
adding network block based rbl domains, but I am using most reliable
rbl domains, including zen.spamhaus.org, bl.spamcop.net,
cbl.abuseat.org, b.barracudacentra
I'm doing best I can to fight spam. What I described happens with spam
that pierced through all filters. There is no 100% way to detect spam
and you know that. So, some percentage will still go through and will
be forwarded, and possibly rejected, causing bounce to be generated.
On Thu, Jul 22, 20
Vasya Pupkin wrote:
> Hello.
>
> First, I have spent two days reading articles and searching web for
> solution but failed there. I am using postfix as an mx for my domains,
> it accpets mail for different addresses withing my domains which is
> then forwarded to other external domains, i.e. googl
Vasya Pupkin:
> Hello.
>
> First, I have spent two days reading articles and searching web for
> solution but failed there. I am using postfix as an mx for my domains,
> it accpets mail for different addresses withing my domains which is
> then forwarded to other external domains, i.e. google.com
Hello.
First, I have spent two days reading articles and searching web for
solution but failed there. I am using postfix as an mx for my domains,
it accpets mail for different addresses withing my domains which is
then forwarded to other external domains, i.e. google.com and other
mail services. M
20 matches
Mail list logo
