Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 1:54 AM, Bill McGonigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah? I've seen benchmarks with postfix spanking sendmail on > performance, and exim handing it right to postfix. I've seen benchmarks that say just about anything. Even when they're not designed to produce a certain desired outcome, benchmarks are very often biased by factors that aren't always immediately obvious. For one, they tend to reflect the knowledge base of the people configuring the software under test. If Acme Consulting Group compares Postfix and Sendmail and finds Sendmail performs better, what's more likely: That Sendmail beats Postfix, or that Acme's staff simply knows Sendmail better than they know Postfix? High-performance benchmarking can also reveal performance characteristics in the OS or hardware that happen to favor a particular program. And maybe the OS wasn't tuned best for this or that program. When you're talking high-performance, the whole system really does matter. If you're doing the benchmarks are for your own use, then most of these concerns don't matter, because of course it's what you're using and what you know that counts. But taking someone else's benchmarks and generalizing them to other situations can be a very misleading thing to do. This is not to defend Sendmail in this respect. I honestly have no idea. Just... "Lies, damn lies, and statistics." -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Apr 14, 2008, at 20:18, Paul Lussier wrote: > Sendmail is still (and probably will be for as long as Eric Allman is > alive/maintaining it) the work-horse of the internet. If I need speed > and throughput, I'd still choose sendmail. If I need massive > scalability, I'll choose sendmail. If I need to deal with wacky and > bizarre, I'll probably choose sendmail. Yeah? I've seen benchmarks with postfix spanking sendmail on performance, and exim handing it right to postfix. The guys I've talked to who handle _big_ mail heart exim. Where sendmail really shines is when you need to do something none of the others have thought about yet - sendmail lets you control everything with .cf. If writing a quick policy daemon for postfix was out of the question, that is. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
"Steven W. Orr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sunday, Apr 13th 2008 at 08:13 -, quoth Ben Scott: > > Why would you ever want to do that? Sendmail has more flexibility. This has been answered, however, I just wanted to add my .02 drachma: Just because something has more flexibility is not necessarilly a reason for choosing it over something less flexible. The majority of vehicles on the road are cars, yet both pickup trucks and tractor/trailers are more flexible. With great flexibility comes great complexity. 99.999% of the flexibility in sendmail is unnecessary for %99.999 of the sites requiring the suse of an MTA. I don't, nor do most people I know, need the ability to gateway between the Internet, ARPANet, or UUCP. Postfix has, as far as I know, a good majority of the flexibility of sendmail at a fraction of the cost in terms of readability and maintainability. Sendmail is still (and probably will be for as long as Eric Allman is alive/maintaining it) the work-horse of the internet. If I need speed and throughput, I'd still choose sendmail. If I need massive scalability, I'll choose sendmail. If I need to deal with wacky and bizarre, I'll probably choose sendmail. If I need simplicity, readability, ease of maintenance, and basic configuration, I'll go with Postfix. I know them both equally as well (which is to say, neither as well as I ought to, both farm more than want to), and in general, I prefer postfix. There, I think that's about .04 drachma :) -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 11:55 -0400, Tom Buskey wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Sendmail has a long history of security problems. > > > I have to point out that the above statement would be equally > true > if one wrote "Unix" instead of "Sendmail". (This is not a > snide > remark, although it may qualify as "subtle".) > > I can't disagree with you there. I used to work at a paranoid > security firm. Sendmail was written by 1 person & they avoided all > code by that person because of the coding techniques/style lent itself > to buffer overflows. Unix had many more authors and different coding > styles. > > > Separate from the above: From what I know if it, Postfix has > a more > modular design than Sendmail. Such designs usually lend > themselves to > task isolation and least-privilege, which is usually good for > security. It's interesting, but despite Sendmail's more > flexible > > Security was part of the design goal from day one. Sendmail was > created in a different era. In fact, the 1st internet worm in 1988 > was enabled because of the root access backdoor written into Sendmail. > That stuff isn't in Sendmail anymore of course. > > > design, implemention of these concepts came later. When they > did > arrive, though, they were implemented using the same Sendmail > configuration facilities already existent. I'm not sure that > last > part really matters, much, though. The source code to > everything is > readily available. What difference does it make if one has to > write a > new .c file vs a new .cf file? That might matter on a > slavery-software platform, but surely we all know that story > by now. > > It may be worth noting that Postfix was created by Wietse > Venema, > the same person who created tcp_wrappers. > > Qmail was written by DJ Bernstien, also with a security mindset. Additionally to this, djb has a long-standing (since 1997) reward of $500 for anybody who can publish a verifiable security crack against qmail. Since then, nobody has been able to provide this. > > I know Qmail hasn't accepted outside code. I don't think Sendmail > has. Does Postfix? Does Exim? Does any MTA have multiple authors? > I believe that postfix is still maintained by the original author, although he does accept patches for review and inclusion. Exim is maintained by a group at the University of Cambridge (UK), though I don't know how central the project's structure is regarding the main author. I really do have to say that my favorite all-time mailserver has been qmail. The one thing qmail lacks is many of the more complex and regular features that are common with systems like Postfix, Exim, and Sendmail, as well as integration with heavier-weight IMAP back-ends. There is a large amount of qmail-specific software out there, and I found qmail's code to be wonderful to hack on when I needed to add extra features (such as editing qmail-smtpd to do more stuff at the SMTP-end). I haven't found a mailserver that scales better than qmail either for handling gigantic amounts of email flow. That said, finding others with the breadth of knowledge that I have on qmail proves quite difficult. For our IT clients, we just use Postfix because it is something that "everyone can administer" (hooray pragmatism). At "previous job", I hosted all client mail (for 30k+ domains) through two machines using one as the mail-store (w/ courier-imap) and one as the front-end filter/remailer (for email forward accounts). It was wonderful. -- Coleman Kane ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
>the 1st internet worm in 1988 was enabled because of the root access >backdoor written into Sendmail. If I remember correctly, that "back door" was only available when Sendmail was run in debug mode. I seem to remember this because a friend of mine, Henry "no relation" Hall, was going to join us for dinner at the Hacienda Mexican restaurant on Daniel Webster Highway in Nashua with a bunch of other Digital people. Then I heard on the car radio about this "worm" that was attacking systems. I gleaned enough from the radio broadcast (an oddity in itself) to relay this to Henry, who instead of coming to dinner made sure that the gateway email servers in Digital were running Sendmail with debug mode turned offkeeping Digital from being affected. Unfortunately for most Unix systems, distributing and running Sendmail in debug mode was much more the practice of the day in 1984. md -- Jon "maddog" Hall Executive Director Linux International(R) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 80 Amherst St. Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A. WWW: http://www.li.org Board Member: Uniforum Association Board Member Emeritus: USENIX Association (2000-2006) (R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries. (R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis (R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other countries. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sendmail has a long history of security problems. > > I have to point out that the above statement would be equally true > if one wrote "Unix" instead of "Sendmail". (This is not a snide > remark, although it may qualify as "subtle".) I can't disagree with you there. I used to work at a paranoid security firm. Sendmail was written by 1 person & they avoided all code by that person because of the coding techniques/style lent itself to buffer overflows. Unix had many more authors and different coding styles. Separate from the above: From what I know if it, Postfix has a more > modular design than Sendmail. Such designs usually lend themselves to > task isolation and least-privilege, which is usually good for > security. It's interesting, but despite Sendmail's more flexible Security was part of the design goal from day one. Sendmail was created in a different era. In fact, the 1st internet worm in 1988 was enabled because of the root access backdoor written into Sendmail. That stuff isn't in Sendmail anymore of course. design, implemention of these concepts came later. When they did > arrive, though, they were implemented using the same Sendmail > configuration facilities already existent. I'm not sure that last > part really matters, much, though. The source code to everything is > readily available. What difference does it make if one has to write a > new .c file vs a new .cf file? That might matter on a > slavery-software platform, but surely we all know that story by now. > > It may be worth noting that Postfix was created by Wietse Venema, > the same person who created tcp_wrappers. > Qmail was written by DJ Bernstien, also with a security mindset. I know Qmail hasn't accepted outside code. I don't think Sendmail has. Does Postfix? Does Exim? Does any MTA have multiple authors? ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sendmail has a long history of security problems. I have to point out that the above statement would be equally true if one wrote "Unix" instead of "Sendmail". (This is not a snide remark, although it may qualify as "subtle".) Separate from the above: From what I know if it, Postfix has a more modular design than Sendmail. Such designs usually lend themselves to task isolation and least-privilege, which is usually good for security. It's interesting, but despite Sendmail's more flexible design, implemention of these concepts came later. When they did arrive, though, they were implemented using the same Sendmail configuration facilities already existent. I'm not sure that last part really matters, much, though. The source code to everything is readily available. What difference does it make if one has to write a new .c file vs a new .cf file? That might matter on a slavery-software platform, but surely we all know that story by now. It may be worth noting that Postfix was created by Wietse Venema, the same person who created tcp_wrappers. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Steven W. Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sunday, Apr 13th 2008 at 08:13 -, quoth Ben Scott: > > =>On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > => Anyone want to give a presentation on switching from Sendmail to > =>Postfix? I really need to get around to doing that, one of these > =>decades... > > Why would you ever want to do that? Sendmail has more flexibility. > Security: Sendmail has a long history of security problems. In its defense, it's been beaten to death the last decade and had not had as many security problems. Also, I think OpenBSD uses sendmail by default. Postfix & Qmail have been designed from the beginning to be secure. Sendmail has had it added. It's very hard to add after the fact. Multiple layers for security in depth. Run qmail outside the firewall, postfix inside and sendmail/exchange on local boxes. Simplicity: Simpler configuration syntax. Fewer tools needed. Fewer transports supported (UUCP not needed usually). Smaller footprint. Faster operation? Smaller code/fewer features also mean fewer places for exploits to hide. Easier to code review. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sun, 2008-04-13 at 18:23 -0400, Shawn O'Shea wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Coleman Kane > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the > > > default_destination_recipient_limit > in /etc/postfix/main.cf ... to 5. > > I don't know much of anything about Postfix, but I'm guessing > that > will impact all destination MXes. The goal here was to just > limit > connections to *Yahoo* to 5 recipients per envelope. The > above will > penalize all connections, right? How would one specify that > for just > Yahoo? > I don't have a ton of Postfix experience, but using this Postfix FAQ > question ( http://www.postfix.org/faq.html#incoming ) as a template of > sorts (and reading bits from the O'Reilly postfix book and the postfix > man pages. > > You would create a transport map file, say /etc/postfix/transport. Add > entries for the domains you want to limit and assign them to a > transport name, let's say lamdomains > > yahoo.com lamedomains: > > You need to then run: postmap /etc/postfix/transport > > Then in the postfix main.cf, add lines to tell it about the transport > and to tell it that anything in that transport has the recipient > limit. > transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport > lamedomains_destination_recipient_limit = 5 > > So now you've created a transport, put some domains in it, changed the > default behavior of postfix for that transport, you just need to tell > postfix what to do with that transport (aka, deliver it with smtp). > > Add a line to master.cf: > lamedomains unix - - - - - smtp > > Now tell postfix to reload it's config: postfix reload OMG you're my hero. New stuff learned every day. > > Again, I haven't tested this, so you mean need to read man pages and > play with that a little, but that should set a postfix user in the > right direction > > -Shawn Thanks for that little tidbit, that will be very helpful in the future. I'd like to also point out another feature of Postfix that some of you might also not be familiar with. Notice the "hash:" above in the "transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport" line. If you compile Postfix with the -DHAS_MYSQL option, then you can replace this with "mysql:" and the filename after the ":" is the location of a specially-formatted .cf file that tells postfix to connect to a mysql table and where to get the information that it wants. Postfix uses a database-abstraction model for maintaining most of these "mappings" in the system. Pretty much any configuration option that accepts such a parameter can be turned into a MySQL table. This greatly increases your ability to perform dynamic run-time configuration changes at will (without restarting postfix). I believe that PostgreSQL support also exists as well, for those of you who are that way inclined. -- Coleman Kane ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sun, 2008-04-13 at 19:24 -0400, Ben Scott wrote: > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Steven W. Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Anyone want to give a presentation on switching from Sendmail to > >> Postfix? > > > > Why would you ever want to do that? > > Primarily: Cleaner, easier configuration. I find it costs me more > to learn a new feature in Sendmail than it appears it would cost me to > learn the corresponding feature in Postfix. > > I've been using Sendmail since I started with *nix, so the > incremental cost of learning one new feature when I need it has been > lower than the cost of learning all of Postfix. But every time I do > so, I think of all the cost I've been accumulating over the years. A > common situation, really. The field of IT systems administration is > largely about turning "Better the devil you know" into a way of life. > > > Sendmail has more flexibility. > > More than I need. The higher flexibility comes with a corresponding > cost. So I'm paying for something I don't need. Like commuting into > work by driving an 18-wheeler. > > -- Ben I tend to agree here. Sendmail may be the ultimate mail server software ever, but you practically need a formal degree in Sendmail to get it to perform many of the complex operations that many other mailservers can do in a seemingly more straight-forward manner. For instance, Shawn O'Shea just pointed out that you can dynamically define new transports for postfix, and then address this problem by setting up a "lameservers" transport that behaves in the 5-rcpts-per-message manner using configuration options that are much more lexically understandable. Maybe sendmail *is* the best option if your primary job is a 24/7 mail relay operator... but I don't want to have to learn a (sort of) brand new language for telling my mailserver what to do. I have got better things to do with my time. I'd take the "less features, but easily configurable" mailserver over the "mailserver that you could write a .mc that would compile the mailserver itself if you wanted it to", because I'd spend less of my time administering my mailserver, and more time on Paying Job (TM), and hobby projects (FreeBSD, etc...). -- Coleman Kane signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Steven W. Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Anyone want to give a presentation on switching from Sendmail to >> Postfix? > > Why would you ever want to do that? Primarily: Cleaner, easier configuration. I find it costs me more to learn a new feature in Sendmail than it appears it would cost me to learn the corresponding feature in Postfix. I've been using Sendmail since I started with *nix, so the incremental cost of learning one new feature when I need it has been lower than the cost of learning all of Postfix. But every time I do so, I think of all the cost I've been accumulating over the years. A common situation, really. The field of IT systems administration is largely about turning "Better the devil you know" into a way of life. > Sendmail has more flexibility. More than I need. The higher flexibility comes with a corresponding cost. So I'm paying for something I don't need. Like commuting into work by driving an 18-wheeler. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the > > default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf ... to 5. > > I don't know much of anything about Postfix, but I'm guessing that > will impact all destination MXes. The goal here was to just limit > connections to *Yahoo* to 5 recipients per envelope. The above will > penalize all connections, right? How would one specify that for just > Yahoo? > I don't have a ton of Postfix experience, but using this Postfix FAQ question ( http://www.postfix.org/faq.html#incoming ) as a template of sorts (and reading bits from the O'Reilly postfix book and the postfix man pages. You would create a transport map file, say /etc/postfix/transport. Add entries for the domains you want to limit and assign them to a transport name, let's say lamdomains yahoo.com lamedomains: You need to then run: postmap /etc/postfix/transport Then in the postfix main.cf, add lines to tell it about the transport and to tell it that anything in that transport has the recipient limit. transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport lamedomains_destination_recipient_limit = 5 So now you've created a transport, put some domains in it, changed the default behavior of postfix for that transport, you just need to tell postfix what to do with that transport (aka, deliver it with smtp). Add a line to master.cf: lamedomains unix - - - - - smtp Now tell postfix to reload it's config: postfix reload Again, I haven't tested this, so you mean need to read man pages and play with that a little, but that should set a postfix user in the right direction -Shawn ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sunday, Apr 13th 2008 at 08:13 -, quoth Ben Scott: =>On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: =>> A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the =>> default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf ... to 5. => => I don't know much of anything about Postfix, but I'm guessing that =>will impact all destination MXes. The goal here was to just limit =>connections to *Yahoo* to 5 recipients per envelope. The above will =>penalize all connections, right? How would one specify that for just =>Yahoo? => => Anyone want to give a presentation on switching from Sendmail to =>Postfix? I really need to get around to doing that, one of these =>decades... Why would you ever want to do that? Sendmail has more flexibility. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Saturday, Apr 12th 2008 at 22:53 -, quoth Paul Lussier: =>Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: => =>> A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the =>> default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf (or wherever =>> main.cf is located on your particular install) to 5. Adding (or =>> changing) the following line in the file should do: =>> =>> default_destination_recipient_limit = 5 => =>Thanks! And just to clarify, does this limit the total number of =>recipients to 5, or does it just batch 5 recipients at a time when =>sending to the total list of recipients? In other words, if I sent to =>20 people, does it get send in 4 batches of 5, or do 15 people not =>recieve the mail? => =>I'm assuming the former, i.e. 4 batches of 5. It's a good question. Therew is a difference between sending a sinlge message to list of people and and sending a message to a list. In the former case, I could send something really important to everyone I know with lots of people in the to line. In the latter case, I would send a message to the address of a list that is being run by a mailinglist manager. The manager would then explode the message to all the people that are subscribed to the list. This latter case is what is specified by the m option of the sendmail mailer. The former case would be handled (I believe) by the r option of the mailer. And the point about postfix setting default_destination_recipient_limit is not equivalent because the goal is to cause proper mail delivery in groups of 5 only for yahoo and not for all outgoing traffic. -- Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have .0. happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Organ ..0 Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all- 000 individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question? steveo at syslang.net ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the > default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf ... to 5. I don't know much of anything about Postfix, but I'm guessing that will impact all destination MXes. The goal here was to just limit connections to *Yahoo* to 5 recipients per envelope. The above will penalize all connections, right? How would one specify that for just Yahoo? Anyone want to give a presentation on switching from Sendmail to Postfix? I really need to get around to doing that, one of these decades... -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 22:53 -0400, Paul Lussier wrote: > Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the > > default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf (or wherever > > main.cf is located on your particular install) to 5. Adding (or > > changing) the following line in the file should do: > > > > default_destination_recipient_limit = 5 > > Thanks! And just to clarify, does this limit the total number of > recipients to 5, or does it just batch 5 recipients at a time when > sending to the total list of recipients? In other words, if I sent to > 20 people, does it get send in 4 batches of 5, or do 15 people not > recieve the mail? > > I'm assuming the former, i.e. 4 batches of 5. According to the "Recipient limits" section on this page: http://www.postfix.org/rate.html "If an email message has more than $default_destination_recipient_limit recipients at the same destination, the list of recipients will be broken up into smaller lists, and multiple copies of the message will be sent." -- Coleman signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the > default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf (or wherever > main.cf is located on your particular install) to 5. Adding (or > changing) the following line in the file should do: > > default_destination_recipient_limit = 5 Thanks! And just to clarify, does this limit the total number of recipients to 5, or does it just batch 5 recipients at a time when sending to the total list of recipients? In other words, if I sent to 20 people, does it get send in 4 batches of 5, or do 15 people not recieve the mail? I'm assuming the former, i.e. 4 batches of 5. -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 10:40 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote: > Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > "Steven W. Orr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> Add this to the end of your sendmail.mc > > > > Anyone know what the postfix fix is? > > Yeah. Install sendmail. ;) > > > Seeya, > > Paul > > -derek > A more helpful suggestion is that you may want to set the default_destination_recipient_limit in /etc/postfix/main.cf (or wherever main.cf is located on your particular install) to 5. Adding (or changing) the following line in the file should do: default_destination_recipient_limit = 5 -- Coleman Kane signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Steven W. Orr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Add this to the end of your sendmail.mc > > Anyone know what the postfix fix is? Yeah. Install sendmail. ;) > Seeya, > Paul -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
"Steven W. Orr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Add this to the end of your sendmail.mc Anyone know what the postfix fix is? -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
RE: Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.
> and as the French say "Eez beeg fat accomplishmente". Extra points for Steven... It took me until I ran it thru google's language tools to get the joke. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
