Re: AW: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-28 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 03:09:40PM +0200, Joachim Lindenberg wrote: > I don´t get why defining a different transport per domain should be > easier than defining a tls policy per domain, and my configuration is > mostly automated anyway. Not *per-domain*, per TLS security level. All domains that

AW: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-28 Thread Joachim Lindenberg
-us...@postfix.org <> Im Auftrag von Viktor Dukhovni Gesendet: Friday, 27 May 2022 15:13 An: postfix-users@postfix.org Betreff: Re: transport map with TLS policies? On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 09:21:23AM +0200, Joachim Lindenberg wrote: > I added a transport map (or “route” as mailcow-dockeri

Re: AW: AW: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Byung-Hee HWANG
Dear Joachim, "Joachim Lindenberg" writes: > Couldn´t run the python script due to postfix in docker, but can run > postfix-finger domain - but this tells me what I already knew and > wrote in my first mail. The certificate is not trusted and thus verify > as default does not work, and it

Re: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Byung-Hee HWANG
Viktor Dukhovni writes: > (... thanks ...) > Yes. But in your case (with an overly strict default policy, requiring > may exceptions) it would be more appropriate to define a dedicated > transport for opportunistic unauthenticated TLS: > > # Or "dane" instead of "may" if you have a working

Re: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 09:21:23AM +0200, Joachim Lindenberg wrote: > I added a transport map (or “route” as mailcow-dockerized calls it) > that points to the alive MX What was the exact form of the transport entry? Presumably, something like: example.com smtp:[mx1.example.com] > plus

AW: AW: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Joachim Lindenberg
at all. Does it? Best Regards, Joachim -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org <> Im Auftrag von Byung-Hee HWANG Gesendet: Friday, 27 May 2022 14:11 An: postfix-users@postfix.org Betreff: Re: AW: transport map with TLS policies? Hellow Joachim, "Joachim

Re: AW: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Byung-Hee HWANG
Hellow Joachim, "Joachim Lindenberg" writes: > Hello Byung-Hee, > I do have all of the following in my TLS policy: > domainmay > mx.domain may > [mx.domain]:25may > and it doesn´t work for me. Well you could check that your server is 'good' or 'not

AW: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Joachim Lindenberg
HWANG Gesendet: Friday, 27 May 2022 11:01 An: postfix-users@postfix.org Betreff: Re: transport map with TLS policies? Hellow Joachim, "Joachim Lindenberg" writes: > I wanted to send a mail to a domain yesterday, that was using dead MX > records and one the one MX that was

Re: transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Byung-Hee HWANG
Hellow Joachim, "Joachim Lindenberg" writes: > I wanted to send a mail to a domain yesterday, that was using dead MX records > and one > the one MX that was alive, was presenting an untrusted certificate (my server > uses verify > by default). I added a transport map (or “route” as

transport map with TLS policies?

2022-05-27 Thread Joachim Lindenberg
I wanted to send a mail to a domain yesterday, that was using dead MX records and one the one MX that was alive, was presenting an untrusted certificate (my server uses verify by default). I added a transport map (or “route” as mailcow-dockerized calls it) that points to the alive MX plus a TLS