Re: Logging Question: SASL Auth Failures?

[Jim Seymour]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:33:37 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema  wrote:

[snip]
> 
> With rsyslogd.conf you can route based on content.
> 
> :msg, contains, "SASL LOGIN"  /var/log/whatever
> :msg, contains, "SASL LOGIN"  ~
> 
> This is based on information from the web, which is often incorrect.

Ok.  Thanks, Wietse.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at .

Logging Question: SASL Auth Failures?

[Jim Seymour]

Hi All,

Each of the various servers I admin occasionally get inundated with
things like

Jan 13 07:33:06 jimsun postfix/submission/smtpd[25328]: warning:
unknown[59.95.95.239]: SASL LOGIN authentication failed:
UGFzc3dvcmQ6

I want these to go to the auth log, rather than, or in addition to,
the mail log.

Anybody know what is the syslog severity level and facility code
attached to SASL auth errors?

Thanks,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at .

Postfix and (Open)DKIM: Received Email?

[Jim Seymour]

Hi All,

I just installed, configured and have working OpenDKIM.  I can see
outgoing email is being properly signed, but not certain what it's doing
for me on the receiving side of things?

All the searching and reading I've done talks all about how to get it
going, and how to test your outgoing email, but not a word on what it
does for you on received email--e.g.: validating the signatures on same,
alerting you to mis-matches, or whatever?

Can somebody either enlighten me or point me in a direction in which I
might find enlightenment?

Thanks,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at .

Re: Postfix and (Open)DKIM: Received Email?

[Jim Seymour]

On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:48:24 -0400 (EDT)
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:

> Jim Seymour:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > I just installed, configured and have working OpenDKIM.  I can see
> > outgoing email is being properly signed, but not certain what it's
> > doing for me on the receiving side of things?
> > 
> > All the searching and reading I've done talks all about how to get
> > it going, and how to test your outgoing email, but not a word on
> > what it does for you on received email--e.g.: validating the
> > signatures on same, alerting you to mis-matches, or whatever?
> > 
> > Can somebody either enlighten me or point me in a direction in
> > which I might find enlightenment?
> 
> The verifier can add a header to the message. However, DKIM does
> not specify a policy for how to handle failure.  You may want to
> look into DMARC for that.

Very well.  Thanks, Wietse.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php>.

Re: pflogsum don't count postscreen rejects

[Jim Seymour]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 14:50:26 +0200
Sven Hoexter s...@timegate.de wrote:

 On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 07:57:40PM -0400, Jim Seymour wrote:
 
 Hey Jim,
 
  I've got some other things people have sent me I need to look
  to.  I suppose it's about time pflogsumm got some attention.
 
 In case you manage to put something together before November I could
 upload it in time for the next Debian stable release freeze. I guess
 that would be appreciated by some people. :)

Actually, Sven, I'm going to try to get it done this weekend.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: pflogsum don't count postscreen rejects

[Jim Seymour]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 16:12:12 +0200
li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net wrote:

 Aug 25 14:55:15 mail-gw postfix/postscreen[29302]: NOQUEUE: reject:
 RCPT from [119.75.11.68]:53210: 550 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
 client [119.75.11.68] blocked using *; from=,
 to=mik...@outlook.it, proto=ESMTP, helo=jchzfsrgvu
 
 pflogsumm don't count postscreen RBL rejects
 already using pflogsumm-1.1.5.tar.gz Beta
 
 sadly mailgraph and logwatch also hide them :-(
 

Send me a log file snippet big enough to generate meaningful stats
and I'll look at adding it.

I haven't used postscreen, yet, so I haven't the data.  (Nor,
that being the case, have I seen the need.)

I've got some other things people have sent me I need to look to.  I
suppose it's about time pflogsumm got some attention.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Postfix installation guid

[Jim Seymour]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2013 20:40:52 +0530
tejas sarade tejas.a.sar...@gmail.com wrote:

 Then there is no point in collecting usage details now.
 Can you tell me if the the source of the mails.

For God's sake: Please learn how to trim quoted text.  Thank you!

And please read this:
http://blog.zixcorp.com/2012/09/boilerplate-confidentiality-notices-in-email-why-bother/

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Pflogsumm Version 1.1.5 Released

[Jim Seymour]

Pflogsumm version 1.1.5 has been released. This is a Beta release.

From the ChangeLog:

rel-1.1.5   20120205

Fixed RFC 3339 support.  Releases 1.1.3 and 1.1.4 were badly
broken in this respect.  Thanks and a tip o' the hat to Sven
Hoexter (sven-at-timegate-dot-de) for the help.

Short cycle, this time, but I kind of wanted this one to work w/o
patches ;)

With no bug reports, say, w/in a week or so, I'm going to promote
this one to stable.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Pflogsumm: Specialization in SMTPD connections

[Jim Seymour]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:06:32 +0200
Nikolaos Milas nmi...@noa.gr wrote:

 On 1/2/2012 6:00 μμ, James Seymour wrote:
 
  rel-1.1.4   20120201
 
 Thank you James for offering and supporting this great tool.

You're welcome.

 
[snip]
 
 Is there a way to include stats on SMTPD connections from
 particular origins?

Not built in to Pflogsumm.

 
[snip]
 
 Before closing, a short question: how pflogsumm decides when to
 display stats (on SMTPD Connections) for a whole domain rather than
 for particular hosts?

There's a function in there that makes a crude attempt to isolate the
domain or sub-domain from the hostname.  It's taken from whatever the
logfile gives me, which, in turn, is dependent upon whatever the
reverse lookup returns.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Messages from= and pflogsumm

[Jim Seymour]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:49:19 +0200
Nikolaos Milas nmi...@noa.gr wrote:

 Hello,
 
 In the logs, there are cases where some message seems to be coming
 from=.

That's because they are.

 
[snip]
 
 In such cases PFLOGSUMM, instead of a domain name or full sender 
 address, displays in the stats from=.

That's because the sender is the null sender.  So it was either
display nothing at all, or show from= to make it clear those were
from the null sender.

 
[snip]
 
 Is it intended behavior?
[snip]

Yes.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: SASL authentication and Windows Live Mail

[Jim Seymour]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:30:33 +
James Day james@ontraq.com wrote:

[snip]
 ... trying the same account details from Windows Live
 Mail throws up a:
 
 554 Relay Access denied error message.
[snip]

IIRC, Relay access denied is a symptom of a non-SSL attempted
connection/login when disable_plaintext_auth = yes in dovecot.conf.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: strange log issue

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 13:04:18 +0100 (CET)
Barbara M. barb...@rfx.it wrote:

 
 After upgrading my old box (Postfix 2.2 on CentOS 4.x), to 
 postfix-2.6.9-1.rhel4, I noticied this strange issue in my daily
 pflogsum (and others), log analisys report:
[snip]
 
 Mails are delivered to the mailboxes, but seems something is
 changed in the logging that give this result.
 Any hints?
[snip]

Not without seeing logfile entries.  Please email me a few dozen
lines of an old logfile and a new one.  (Only a few dozen of each,
please!)

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: strange log issue

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 19:41:07 +0100
Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote:

[snip]
 
 delay=0, changed into delay=0.04, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0.02,
 
 Did you update pflogsumm as well?

Yup.  You need Pflogsumm-1.1.1, at least, looks like.  1.1.3 has been
released for nearly two years.

I really should get 1.1.4 out the door...

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: See which port a user connects to?

[Jim Seymour]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:56:40 -0600
/dev/rob0 r...@gmx.co.uk wrote:

[snip]
 
 I'm not sure how that might affect pflogsumm.pl; perhaps if Jim is 
 still reading the list he can comment?
[snip]

I'm still reading, but I'm usually only seeing the stuff that
mentions Pflogsumm or my name.  Tho, right now, I'm reading it all.

Answer: It'll break it.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Changing Users' Mail Spool Destination

[Jim Seymour]

G'day Postfix'ers,

I'm in the process of building-up a new company mail server.  It'll
be an IMAP4 beast, using Maildir, and so I allocated the vast majority
of the freespace to /home, for IMAP folder storage.  Then it occurred
to me: I know my users have poor habits, and tend to leave much of
their email in INBOX forever and ever.  Hmmm... 

Then it occurred to me: I was pretty certain I'd read that I could
have both Postfix and Dovecot use per-user inboxen in their home
directories.

Do I understand correctly that all I need do is, in main.cf:

home_mailbox = mail/inbox

and in (a bit OT for this list, but while I'm at it), in dovecot.conf:

mail_location = maildir:~/Maildir:INBOX=~/mail/inbox

Thanks,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Changing Users' Mail Spool Destination

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 13:15:28 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:

[snip]
 
 To turn on maildir support, append a trailing '/' to the name.

Yes, I caught that.  (But thanks for the note, anyway).  I plan to
let inbox be mbox format, just like it is in a normal mail spool.
Dovecot is perfectly happy with that.

 
 I don't know if Postfix will auto-create ~user/mail directories.

That's easily addressed with a simply shell or Perl script I can
create.  Heck, I could even set up a cron job to make sure they all
exist, in case I got absent-minded when creating a new user.

Thanks,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Changing Users' Mail Spool Destination

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:30:12 +
Duane Hill duih...@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]
 
 You  could  also  use  Dovecot  LDA  or  LMTP. Dovecot will create
 the directory  structure  automatically  upon  the  first login or
 message delivery.

Wouldn't I lose Postfix' header and body processing if I did that?
There's also the +d address support, .forward, etc.

I think I can also handle the automatic creation of the ~/mail
directory, and perhaps empty inbox mbox file, in the Linux user
creation stuff.  (Never looked into that yet.)

Anyway: My question was more one of: If I wanted to do it the way I
described: Were the configs I noted really all I need do?

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Postfix lost connection after DATA from unknown... and ipfilter -AF OUT log message

[Jim Seymour]

Hi All,

This may be a weird one, and may be completely OT.  If the latter:
Feel free to tell me to bugger off :)

System is FreeBSD 8.2, running ipfilter and
postfix-current-2.9.2019,4.

Occasionally I see something like this from ipfilter in
/var/log/messages:

bge1 @0:24 b my_outside_ip,25 - 89.73.201.168,36545 PR tcp len
20 40 -AR OUT

Looking in /var/log/maillog...

Dec 11 17:47:08 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: connect from
  unknown[89.73.201.168]
Dec 11 17:47:10 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: NOQUEUE: reject:
  RCPT from unknown[89.73.201.168]: 450 4.7.1 Client host
rejected: cannot find your reverse hostname, [89.73.201.168];
  from=a...@carloerbareactifs.com to=nngu...@mydom.ain
  proto=ESMTP helo=89-73-201-168.dynamic.chello.pl
Dec 11 17:47:11 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: lost connection
  after DATA from unknown[89.73.201.168]
Dec 11 17:47:11 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: disconnect from
  unknown[89.73.201.168]

This particular one occurred seven times in a row, in quick
succession.

I've searched on this *fairly* seriously and come up with nothing.
Anybody got any idea what this is?

Thanks,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Postfix lost connection after DATA from unknown... and ipfilter -AF OUT log message

[Jim Seymour]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
[snip]
 
 why do you use reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname if you do
 not like the results of it?

Why do you answer the question when you obviously have not read it?
(Or at least apparently not understood it.)

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Postfix lost connection after DATA from unknown... and ipfilter -AF OUT log message

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:35:23 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:

[snip]
 
 Why are you blocking outbound TCP RST?

I am not, to the best of my knowledge.

There is a TCP control traffic rate limit in the border router, there
as a DoS prevention tactic, but that's it.

This doesn't happen all the time.  It doesn't even happen often.  Out
of nearly 6000 connections, today, there are 145 various A.. OUT and
A.. OUT OOW messages.  Each of them occurs two-or-more times,
involving the same contacting IP.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Postfix lost connection after DATA from unknown... and ipfilter -AF OUT log message

[Jim Seymour]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 01:11:00 +0100
Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:

 
 
 Am 12.12.2011 01:04, schrieb Jim Seymour:
  On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
  Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
  [snip]
 
  why do you use reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname if you do
  not like the results of it?
  
  Why do you answer the question when you obviously have not read
  it? (Or at least apparently not understood it.)
 
 wtf - i have read your log-snippet and explained you what
 cannot find your reverse hostname means

I know what cannot find your reverse hostname means.

 
 what bge1 @0:24 b my_outside_ip,25 - 89.73.201.168,36545 PR tcp
 len means i have not commented since i am not a bsd-user, if this
 is your only question so why do you post maillog-snippets?

To show the relationship between the information in the two logfiles.

If it was *purely* a FBSD or ipfilter question (which I allowed as
how it might actually be), I'd have asked in a FBSD or ipfilter forum.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Postfix lost connection after DATA from unknown... and ipfilter -AF OUT log message

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:15:35 -0500
Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote:

 Each of them occurs two-or-more
 times, involving the same contacting IP.

Clarification: That was to say that, when it occurs multiple times
in a row, it's the same IP trying over-and-over again in each set of
retries. A total of 17 unique IPs have been involved in such
occurrences today.

In fact: No client has tried less than twice in a row, most have
averaged around six tries.  Some up to a dozen or more.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Postfix lost connection after DATA from unknown... and ipfilter -AF OUT log message

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 20:03:59 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:

 Wietse Venema:
   bge1 @0:24 b my_outside_ip,25 - 89.73.201.168,36545 PR
   tcp len 20 40 -AR OUT
  
  Why are you blocking outbound TCP RST?
 
 According to ipmon(8),

The web is rotting my brain.  I never thought to actually check, you
know, the manual page.

Good. Grief.

-AR means the ACK and RST flags are set.
 My question is why is your firewall blocking outbound ACK|RST?

I'm using basically canned rulesets in my ipfilter setup.  That is
the default deny at the end of bge1's output filters.

I must've messed-up, somewhere.  I'll take a look in the morning.

Thanks, Wietse, Sahil, for the education.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Rewriting FROM, TO and CC

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 08:04:44 +0100
Ignacio sanfermi...@gmail.com wrote:

[snip]
 
 The application connects to a smtp server and sent an e-mail as:
 SENDER: user1@domain
 TO: user2@domain;user3@domain
 
 From this smtp server we would like to relay e-mail to Corporate
 Exchange
 server.This server needs authentication to relay e-mail. Since user1
 password changes every week, we would like to set a generic user
 whose password will not change. Therefore, sender must be changed to
 genericuser@domain.
[snip]

Why don't you just set up an alias on the Postfix server that expands
to the recipients you want, and have the application send to the
alias?

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Low Budget Backups

[Jim Seymour]

On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 19:00:55 -0800 (PST)
email builder emailbuilde...@yahoo.com wrote:

 
[snip]
 
 OK, rsync it is.  
 
 Can you restore a system crash with a simple
 rsync backed set of duplicate files?
[snip]

Never tried it :p  I suspect not.

TBH: Other than a Unix SYS3 installation, running on a Motorola Delta
box, that was trashed because it was in the middle of an fsck when
the power came back up, and the power twitched again (which will do it
every time on a non-journaled filesystem), I've never had an actual
all-out crash, per se.  I've had some pretty badly-mangled
filesystems, but nothing I couldn't eventually recover with the aid
of a few file-by-file copies from tape backup.

Then again: My policiy is that if it's important: It's on a RAID
array.

I could probably make my rsync-driven backup script available to you,
if you'd like.  It's production-quality code and I *believe* it's
ready for release.  It's been in-use on my server, here at home,
since February of this year.  The only reason I haven't released it,
yet, is because, well, I kind of never got around to it :p.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Rewriting FROM, TO and CC

[Jim Seymour]

On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 17:37:31 +0100
Ignacio sanfermi...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello Jim,
 
 Thank you very much, but there are more than 1000 possible options,
 and they change almost every week. It depends on projects and
 people involved in them.

One of us is confused.  How would creating an alias and running
newaliases be any harder then mangling the headers (if the latter
would work, which it will not)?

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Problem with smtp client bind address

[Jim Seymour]

On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 16:46:00 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:

 James Seymour:
  On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 16:27:07 -0500 (EST)
  Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
  [snip]
   I suggest that you use different smtp_bind_address settings in
   master.cf for the (default) smtp transport and for the (inbound)
   relay transport.
  
  This server is, amongst other things, a mail gateway.  It accepts
  incoming on both interfaces, and sends on both.
 
 It sends outbound mail on both interfaces?
 
 It sends inbound mail on both interfaces?

Bah! No.  Incoming goes out the inside interface and outgoing out the
outside interface :p.  Sorry, I was in serious burnout mode after
having been hacking on the new box since about 07:30.

 
 I would expect that inbound and outbound use different interfaces,
 therefore you can use different delivery agents.

And right you'd be.

 
 For the default smtp transport, use -o
 smtp_bind_address=external-address
 
 Use a transport map to force inbound mail to use the relay
 transport, and that one will automagically use the right source IP
 address because there is only one to choose from.

Done!  Worked like a charm, Wietse.  Thanks *very* much for your help.

I'd already had all the transport entries.  (Holdover from when our
mail routing was significantly more complicated.)  I simply had to
replace the smtp:s with relay:s, in addition to the master.cf
change, and it was done.

Great :)

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Multiple Domains, Mail Gateway, Two Mail Servers

[Jim Seymour]

Wow, over 48 hours and no solution(s) suggested?  Everybody on
vacation? :)

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Pflogsumm Version 1.1.3 Released

[Jim Seymour]

 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:00:10 -0300
 From: Julio Cesar Covolato ju...@psi.com.br
 To: Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com, owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
 Subject: Re: Pflogsumm Version 1.1.3 Released
 
 Hi Jim!
 
 Any improviment to suport the reinjection from amavisd?

Nope.  If I had, it would've been mentioned in the ChangeLog.
As stated in Pflogsumm's FAQ #14: I was not able to make anything
work that didn't otherwise harm the output.

John Fawcett has created a Pflogsumm pre-processor/-filter that
he claims works.  It's mentioned in that same FAQ.  I've sent him
an individual heads-up, so he can synchronize his code with the
latest Pflogsumm release if he wishes.  (His code I think won't
process RFC 3339 timestamps.)

Btw: I took a quick look, this morning, to see if it would
be feasible to integrate John's work directly into Pflogsumm.
Doesn't look like it--not without a major restructuring of Pflogsumm,
which is an effort I'm not willing to undertake at this time.

 
 Thanks

You're welcome.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Pflogsumm Version 1.1.3 Released

[Jim Seymour]

Pflogsumm version 1.1.3 has *finally* been released. This is a Beta
release.


From the ChangeLog:


rel-1.1.3   20100320

   Added long-awaited switches to optionally reduce detail reporting:
   --bounce_detail=N, --deferral_detail=N, --reject_detail=N,
   --smtp_detail=N, smtpd_warning_detail=N, and --detail=N.  Setting
   any of them to 0 suppresses that detail entirely.  --detail=N sets
   the default for all of them, as well as for -u=N and -h=N.

   With the above enhancements, the following switches are depreciated,
   and will eventually be removed: --no_bounce_detail,
   --no_deferral_detail, --no_reject_detail and --no_smtpd_warnings.
   They are replaced by setting the desired --*_detail=0.  They still
   work, but using them generates a warning.

   Added support for parsing logs with RFC 3339 timestamps.  Thanks
   and a tip o' the hat to sftf-at-yandrex-dot-ru for the heads-up
   and the code contribution.  (N.B.: My code does not require a
   command-line switch.  The format is detected automatically.)

   Fixed some --ignore-case inconsistincies.  Thanks and a tip o'
   the hat to Richard Blanchet (richard-dot-blanchet-at-free-dot-fr)
   for the heads-up and the diff.

   Fixed parsing bug that resulted in attempts to treat
   kind-of-IPv4-looking strings as IPv4 addresses.  (I really need to
   improve reject/defer/etc. reason parsing to fix this properly.)
   Thanks to Joseph Vit (jvit-at-certicon-dot-cz) for the bug
   report.

Translators: I recommend you do NOT work on this release.  Wait until
1.2.0 appears.  This version is expected to become 1.2.0, unless
bug-fixes are required.  The only change I currently have planned is
perhaps adding --user_detail and --host_detail, for consistency with
the other new --blurfl_detail=N switches.

Regards,
Jim

--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Pflogsumm Status

[Jim Seymour]

Hi All,

As many of you may be aware, about a year ago I emailed the list
asking if anybody would be interested in taking over maintenance
of Pflogsumm.  Several people volunteered.  In the mean-time,
after un-loading a bit (basically taking a hiatus from anything
that resembled computer work in my spare time) and reflecting on
it, I decided to keep the project.  At the time I was considering
giving it, and my other projects up, I was going through a pretty
rough patch, life-wise, job-wise, etc..  I've gotten things
straightened-out and back on an even keel.  (Well, as even a keel
as things can get, these days :).)

I'm working on a new release even now.  More information to
follow in a day or two.

Regards,
Jim

--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php.

Re: Header/body checks question, problem.

[Jim Seymour]

wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
 
 KLaM Postmaster:
  Among the stuff being rejected is the output of pflogsumm, I run a daily
  a report and email it to postmaster. I was not getting the reports so I
 
 See http://www.postfix.org/http://www.postfix.org/BUILTIN_FILTER_README.html
 section Preventing daily mail status reports from being blocked.

Yeah, or pflogsumm's own FAQ, which has had an entry for this for
about forever.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.linxnet.com/contact/scform.php.

New Pflogsumm Maintainer Needed

[Jim Seymour]

Hi All,

I'm simplifiying my life.  Amonst other things, that means I'm dropping
my business class DSL circuit and all of my involvement in projects,
documentation, anti-spam efforts, etc.

If somebody *qualified* wants to officially take over maintenance of
Pflogsumm, please speak up.

Qualified means at least as knowledgable as I about Perl (not
too-difficult a hurdle) and not the type to bloat a utility beyond all
reason by bowing to every piddling little feature request everybody
asks for in a bid to retain the popularity of your project.

If somebody has a recommentation for another individual, that, too, is
welcome.

I hope those of you that have used it have found pflogsumm useful, and
I'll take this opportunity to again thank the various contributors,
over the years.

Regards,
Jim
-- 
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering.  If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at http://jimsun.linxnet.com/contact/scform.php.