On 08/30/2013 02:49 PM, John Levine wrote:
submission 587/udp
I've been doing this for a long time, and I've never seen anyone try
to do SMTP over anything other than TCP.
You'll see this for a lot of services in the file. The old practice was
for IANA to assign both tcp and udp when
Aug 26 21:21:35 [postfix/tlsproxy] CONNECT from [209.85.219.51]:41193
Aug 26 21:21:36 [postfix/postscreen] NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
[209.85.219.51]:41193: 450 4.3.2 Service currently unavailable;
from=mas...@gmail.com, to=mas...@masked.com, proto=ESMTP,
helo=mail-oa0-f51.google.com
Aug 26
Aug 26 21:21:35 [postfix/tlsproxy] CONNECT from
[209.85.219.51]:41193
Aug 26 21:21:36 [postfix/postscreen] NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
[209.85.219.51]:41193: 450 4.3.2 Service currently unavailable;
from=mas...@gmail.com, to=mas...@masked.com, proto=ESMTP,
helo=mail-oa0-f51.google.com
On 8/30/2013 3:44 AM, Grant wrote:
I grep'ed the mail logs for dnsblog and got a huge number of these:
[postfix/postscreen] warning: psc_dnsbl_request: connect to
private/dnsblog service: No such file or directory
Looks as if you've found the problem.
Make sure your master.cf has an entry
Grant:
Aug 26 21:21:35 [postfix/tlsproxy] CONNECT from [209.85.219.51]:41193
Aug 26 21:21:36 [postfix/postscreen] NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
[209.85.219.51]:41193: 450 4.3.2 Service currently unavailable;
from=mas...@gmail.com, to=mas...@masked.com, proto=ESMTP,
Well,
As attachments get larger, and end users use email rather than ftp for file
transfer for convenience sake, a UDP implementation, perhaps using UDP as a
data streaming channel could become a very useful configuration, and the
transfer speed over high latency links (think satellite etc)
On 30 Aug 2013, at 14:07, Terry Gilsenan terry.gilse...@interoil.com wrote:
As attachments get larger, and end users use email rather than ftp for file
transfer for convenience sake, a UDP implementation, perhaps using UDP as a
data streaming channel could become a very useful configuration,
As attachments get larger, and end users use email rather than ftp for file
transfer for convenience sake, a UDP implementation, perhaps using UDP as a
data streaming channel could become a very useful configuration, and the
transfer speed over high latency links (think satellite etc) could
On Aug 30, 2013, at 7:07 AM, Terry Gilsenan wrote:
As attachments get larger, and end users use email rather than ftp for file
transfer for convenience sake, a UDP implementation, perhaps using UDP as a
data streaming channel could become a very useful configuration, and the
transfer
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Jan P. Kessler
Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2013 12:21 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: newbie check Was [Re: port 25 submission settings sanity check]
As
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Glenn English
Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2013 12:52 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: newbie check Was [Re: port 25 submission settings sanity check]
On Aug 30,
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Glenn English
Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2013 12:52 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: newbie check Was [Re: port 25 submission settings sanity check]
On Aug 30,
Terry Gilsenan:
I have done testing with file transfers using both TCP and UDP,
Would not the same result be achieved by disabling TCP congestion
control? I am not implying that doing so is a good idea.
Wietse
Hi list,
I've noticed that the syntax:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = pcre:/etc/postfix/sender_access
is valid, and by all means as effective as:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = check_sender_access
pcre:/etc/postfix/sender_access
I couldn't find this syntax in the documentation, would you please
Terry Gilsenan:
I have done testing with file transfers using both TCP and UDP,
Wietse
Would not the same result be achieved by disabling TCP congestion
control? I am not implying that doing so is a good idea.
Terry Gilsenan:
That could have disastrous consequences for the rest of the
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 06:52:52PM +0200, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
I've noticed that the syntax:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = pcre:/etc/postfix/sender_access
is valid, and by all means as effective as:
smtpd_sender_restrictions =
check_sender_access pcre:/etc/postfix/sender_access
Apoligies if I'm not using the mailing list incorrectly, first time using
one.
I have a postfix installation that is used to relay mails from local users
and to receive mail from external domains.
my domain: example.com
my domain is setup with active directory lookup.
If a local user sends an
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 06:00:50PM +, Terry Gilsenan wrote:
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Robert Sander
Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2013 3:47 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Re-inventing
I have a problem with a plesk server using postfix in which I am
receiving double bounces, duplicates of the same bounce, from my
mailing program. This means that when I download the bounces in
order to filter them I have double the amount to download and would
highly prefer only 1, I do not need
Jean-S?bastien Nicaise:
If a local user sends an email with an invalid email address (mailf
from:inva...@example.com, for example), the ldap table lookup does not
return anything, hence the mail is blocked.
If a local user sends an email with a valid email (mail
from:us...@example.com, for
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2013 2:56 AM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: Re-inventing TCP (was: newbie check..)
Terry Gilsenan:
I have done testing with file
Please don't top-post your replies here. Thank you.
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 02:00:09PM -0400, Jean-Sébastien Nicaise wrote:
I'm verifying the sender email (mail from:) of mails sent from
local users, not the recipient email (rcpt to:).
the mapping parameter used in this case it:
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Robert Sander
Sent: Saturday, 31 August 2013 3:47 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Re-inventing TCP (was: newbie check..)
Am 30.08.2013 19:36, schrieb Terry
I'm verifying the sender email (mail from:) of mails sent from local users,
not the recipient email (rcpt to:).
the mapping parameter used in this case it: *smtpd_sender_login_maps
*
My question still stands...*
*
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
On 30 Aug 2013, at 18:36, Terry Gilsenan terry.gilse...@interoil.com wrote:
The killer on high latency links is the tcp-window and the continual wait for
ack. With links above 1000ms this compounded delay reduces the available
bandwidth to a very small percentage of the interface speed
Am 30.08.2013 19:36, schrieb Terry Gilsenan:
The killer on high latency links is the tcp-window and the continual wait for
ack. With links above 1000ms this compounded delay reduces the available
bandwidth to a very small percentage of the interface speed (eg:256kbps on a
2mbps link).
Hello all:
I had a couple of questions.
First, I was curious how most people tend to handle quota. I have some
disk space on my server, but not a lot. I need to create email accounts
for individual
staff, but need to put a hard limit on their quota. Do you just set up a
limit and then not
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Jean-S?bastien Nicaise:
I'm verifying the sender email (mail from:) of mails sent from local
users,
not the recipient email (rcpt to:).
In that case.
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtpd_reject_unlisted_sender = yes
I grep'ed the mail logs for dnsblog and got a huge number of these:
[postfix/postscreen] warning: psc_dnsbl_request: connect to
private/dnsblog service: No such file or directory
Looks as if you've found the problem.
Make sure your master.cf has an entry like:
dnsblog unix - -
Jean-S?bastien Nicaise:
I'm verifying the sender email (mail from:) of mails sent from local users,
not the recipient email (rcpt to:).
In that case.
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtpd_reject_unlisted_sender = yes
This turns on used unknown tests for for MAIL FROM addresses.
Wietse
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:12:40PM -0400, Jean-Sébastien Nicaise
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Wietse Venema
wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Jean-S?bastien Nicaise:
I'm verifying the sender email (mail from:) of mails sent from
local users, not the recipient email (rcpt to:).
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:52:22 -0400
Jean-Sébastien Nicaise jsnica...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 3:48 PM, John Peach post...@johnpeach.com wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:43:01 -0400
Jean-Sébastien Nicaise jsnica...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
I'm hoping for something
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 3:25 PM, /dev/rob0 r...@gmx.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:12:40PM -0400, Jean-Sébastien Nicaise
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Wietse Venema
wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Jean-S?bastien Nicaise:
I'm verifying the sender email (mail from:) of
On 8/30/2013 2:27 PM, Grant wrote:
I grep'ed the mail logs for dnsblog and got a huge number of these:
[postfix/postscreen] warning: psc_dnsbl_request: connect to
private/dnsblog service: No such file or directory
Looks as if you've found the problem.
Make sure your master.cf has an entry
On 8/30/2013 2:17 PM, Littlefield, Tyler wrote:
Hello all:
I had a couple of questions.
First, I was curious how most people tend to handle quota. I have
some disk space on my server, but not a lot. I need to create email
accounts for individual
staff, but need to put a hard limit on their
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 3:48 PM, John Peach post...@johnpeach.com wrote:
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:43:01 -0400
Jean-Sébastien Nicaise jsnica...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
I'm hoping for something simple like: user sends an email. Postfix looks
at
MAIL FROM. Is the email address part of
That could have disastrous consequences for the rest of the traffic on that
link.
From: Wietse Venemamailto:wie...@porcupine.org
Sent: 30/08/2013 10:27 AM
To: Postfix usersmailto:postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re-inventing TCP (was: newbie check..)
Terry
Viktor Dukhovni postfix-users at
dukhovni.org writes:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 06:52:52PM
+0200, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
I've noticed that the syntax:
smtpd_sender_restrictions =
pcre:/etc/postfix/sender_access
is valid, and by all means as
effective as:
FliedRice:
I have a problem with a plesk server using postfix in which I am
receiving double bounces, duplicates of the same bounce, from my
mailing program. This means that when I download the bounces in
order to filter them I have double the amount to download and would
highly prefer only
On 8/30/2013 10:12 AM, Terry Gilsenan wrote:
I am not talking about implementing SMTP on UDP, I am taking about the
possibility of adding a side-channel for bulk data that would use UDP.
I'm really surprised nobody has mentioned this yet. It seems there's a
far simpler solution to the
40 matches
Mail list logo
