https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1688389

________________________________

Sorry for mobile client top post. 

RH have just jumped version of postfix to 3.5.8. Whilst this is a 
welcome step, they have chosen to set some postfix configuration items 
to non-standard to work around "incompatibilities". There is a 
Bugzilla with the info, I'll see if I can find it again. 

One of them is to set CHUNKING off by default, so unless you are 
already explicitly setting smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords in your config 
the new default will be applied. 

Simon Wilson
M: 0400 121 116

________________________________
From: Viktor Dukhovni <postfix-us...@dukhovni.org>
Sent: Monday, 24 May 2021 7:51 am
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: discarding EHLO keywords: CHUNKING

> On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 02:16:24PM -0700, Greg Sims wrote:
>
>> # postconf | grep chunking
>> smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords = chunking
>>
>> # journalctl -u postfix | grep CHUNKING
>> May 23 03:40:59 mail01.raystedman.org postfix/smtpd[401681]: 
>> discarding EHLO keywords: CHUNKING
>> <<We saw 24 of these log entries in 24 hours.>>
>
> That means that you're spawning a new smtpd(8) process roughly once an
> hour, with connections otherwise handled by an existing process, which
> already logged the disabled ESMTP feature with the first connection it
> handled.
>
>> We are running the latest version of RHEL 8.  I believe a number of us
>> will be seeing this entry in our logs.  What are the negative side
>> effects beyond the log entries?
>
> There are no negative side-effects, but the logs record that you've
> chosen to disable a default ESMTP feature, presumably as a work-around
> for some issue.  Once the issue is no longer pertinent, you can turn the
> workaround off.
>
>> Is "smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords = chunking, silent-discard" the
>> recommended solution?
>
> Well, the recommended solution is to not disable CHUNKING, but if
> you must disable it for some reason, you get to choose whether to
> be reminded of this in your logs, or not.
>
> --
>     Viktor.
>


Reply via email to