True ,no objection to that Mr Badru.But when it comes to some services
like Mail,DNS may be web too it's not all about money I think it's
management to some extent (my opinion) .
My point wasn't about money though it rates high, it was more of who
should access what.Talked of education, do the authorities in
Shangai have a point when they say "one should have
education/lincense" to takecare of a service like mail.I mean
people shouldn't think that having a mailserver is like having a
cell phone. I think this is the backwardness we still have.And
it's good EACOSS is there for Ugandans to start with and it's really
doing good for our nation.(commercial breake)
:-)
Otherwise why shouldn't anyone with money have a mailserver if at
all he can employ someone with the experience in the field.
I wouldn't like to be ranked as Nigeria when it comes to scam just
because of high education.Sometimes too much of anything is bad.
Look at Wire's scenario,who was wrong?Everything should have a limit
and control, like it or not that's why we all exist.And I think Wire
and all of us on the list have some work to do but with limits.
Thanks for that point Mr Badru.
" Keep him in the dark and he will keep his money in the dark"
:-) niceone
R.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
PGP Fingerprint: 6695 794A B84E D922 88FB 73CC 6CBD 8036 B3CD 7304
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.
--Isaac Newton
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Badru Ntege wrote:
Ronny
we are trying to move forward
not backwards. Educate the user and you will make more money. Keep
him in the dark and he will keep his money in the dark.
Congs friend. This happens the world over "it's our server so why not
give us access "so say most customers.Don't worry there is a law in
China that says nobody apart from a licensed party like you or an ISP
should run a mailserver.This will save us time and give you/us more biz :-) when it get's in Ug
Cheers
R
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
PGP Fingerprint: 6695 794A B84E D922 88FB 73CC 6CBD 8036 B3CD 7304
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.
--Isaac Newton
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ronny
After 5 hours of hassling with the issue, I decided to do a postfix
re-install and this sorted out issues. I therefore still strongly believe
that the client could have tampered with the Antispam settings since after
the clean install and reintegrating the original A/Spam, I got the same
error as before. This morning I had the A/spam reinstalled and all is back
on form.
Thanks
Wire J
Hi , since you made no changes to postfix,(assumming you don't have
autoupdates) you may need to use the elimination method.If am right you
have, an antivirus,antispam and the OS (all these do handsfree updates)
right?
Otherwise you may need to update the Postfix incase you have a lower
version since we don't know which version you are currently running.
Else other members may have some interesting pointers apart from mine
(Eliminate to get the culprit).Worst scenario backup those conf files
and reinstall the MTA takes less than 20 minutes ;-)
R.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
PGP Fingerprint: 6695 794A B84E D922 88FB 73CC 6CBD 8036 B3CD 7304
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.
--Isaac Newton
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Guido Sohne wrote:
On May 9, 2006, at 5:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May 9 20:10:24 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: > 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]: .
May 9 20:10:24 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: > 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]: QUIT
May 9 20:10:26 mail filter-module[4254]: AAP304460CD00109E:
spam_status=no
([EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED])
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: < 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]: 451
4.0.0
Local error (network error: Bad file descriptor)
At the line above, I think it says that your filter program is telling
postfix that it encountered a 451 error ...
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: connect to subsystem
private/defer
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr nrequest = 0
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr flags = 0
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr queue_id = 30C7784613
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr original_recipient =
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr recipient =
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr offset = 338
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr status = 4.0.0
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr action = ""
May 9 20:10:26 mail postfix/smtp[6162]: send attr reason = host
127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 451 4.0.0 Local error (network error: Bad
file
descriptor) (in reply to end of DATA command)
Postfix appears to be passing that error condition back up, but it
doesn't look like it originated from within Postfix, hence the <
character in the first occurrence of the error.
-- G.
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them
(including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for
them in any way.
---------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any
way.
---------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
|
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
