Does ASSP keep connections to the backend server open without sending RSET?
--
Daniel
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No l
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> Kevin wrote:
>
Though this log "Sender address rejected: unverified address" is
suspicious. (read: possible cause)
This is part of a thread I have on the Postfix list on this issue.
Wietse-
The RCPT TO command was rejected with "503 5.5.1
Kevin wrote:
>>> Though this log "Sender address rejected: unverified address" is
>>> suspicious. (read: possible cause)
>>>
>>>
>> I thought that myself - but I'm talking with Wietse (Postfix's author) -
>> and he didn't indicate a problem on HIS end! Doesn't mean there wasn't
>> one
> I think it's caused by the recipient being invalid, at least thats
what
> the logs indicate. I could be wrong.
I do too. I had the same error (a 503 error, but different textual
response. Mine was "Bad sequence of commands. [SMTP Error Code 503]")
For me, the server that sits behind ASSP was m
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> Kevin wrote:
>> Daniel L. Miller wrote:
>>
>>> I've been enjoying a almost spam-free life for the past week, but then I
>>> just got a wake-up call from the Postfix group. I'm being told I'm
>>> losing mail - below is a copy of a log from a remote server trying to
>
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> Kevin wrote:
>> <--snippity-->
>>
>>> I'm not seeing what might have caused this problem - in fact, I don't
>>> see any evidence of a problem on my side.
>>>
> Is there a logging option I can enable to see the SMTP dialog between
> ASSP and the remote sender? "D
Kevin wrote:
> <--snippity-->
>
>> I'm not seeing what might have caused this problem - in fact, I don't
>> see any evidence of a problem on my side.
>>
Is there a logging option I can enable to see the SMTP dialog between
ASSP and the remote sender? "Debug Mode"?
--
Daniel
-
Kevin wrote:
> Daniel L. Miller wrote:
>
>> I've been enjoying a almost spam-free life for the past week, but then I
>> just got a wake-up call from the Postfix group. I'm being told I'm
>> losing mail - below is a copy of a log from a remote server trying to
>> talk to me.
>>
>>
> <--s
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> I've been enjoying a almost spam-free life for the past week, but then I
> just got a wake-up call from the Postfix group. I'm being told I'm
> losing mail - below is a copy of a log from a remote server trying to
> talk to me.
>
<--snippity-->
>
>
> My log shows -
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> Kevin wrote:
>> Daniel L. Miller wrote:
>>
>>> I see in the "Logging" section the "Send NOOP info", along with the note
>>> that Postfix croaks on it. Can you give me some more info as to what
>>> the NOOP is for, and how Postfix has a problem with it?
>>>
>> Th
I've been enjoying a almost spam-free life for the past week, but then I
just got a wake-up call from the Postfix group. I'm being told I'm
losing mail - below is a copy of a log from a remote server trying to
talk to me.
May 30 08:25:11 spike postfix/pickup[42261]: E372B1F3E97: uid=1001 from=
Kevin wrote:
> Daniel L. Miller wrote:
>
>> I see in the "Logging" section the "Send NOOP info", along with the note
>> that Postfix croaks on it. Can you give me some more info as to what
>> the NOOP is for, and how Postfix has a problem with it?
>>
>
> This is a very old feature that w
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> I see in the "Logging" section the "Send NOOP info", along with the note
> that Postfix croaks on it. Can you give me some more info as to what
> the NOOP is for, and how Postfix has a problem with it?
This is a very old feature that was intended to allow sendmail to l
Is it possible to have multiple addresses set in sendAllSpam?
I think it might be beneficial to have both a central spam dump that an
admin can go through to see spam trends and trends in false positives,
and also delivery to users via [EMAIL PROTECTED] and let
subaddressing/filtering take care
Charles Marcus wrote:
> Graziano wrote:
>
>> I disabled RBL , PB and Forged HELO
>>
>> now is crashing after this
>>
>
> Di dyou see the earlier reference to an older version of Perl causing a
> crash?
>
> What version of Perl? Modules installed? Versions?
>
>
the problem is not perl .
Am I right in thinking that Accept Emails (reports) from these external
addresses (EmailSenderOK) means I can give access to send in ham reports?
I have tried adding an ip address, email address, and a domain name but it
doesn't appear to be working! I'm running 1.3.1.
Help would be apprec
Graziano wrote:
> I disabled RBL , PB and Forged HELO
>
> now is crashing after this
Di dyou see the earlier reference to an older version of Perl causing a
crash?
What version of Perl? Modules installed? Versions?
--
Best regards,
Charles
--
> why not just doing it:
> put an address in the whitelist and see if it comes through.
> That would mean you run "whitelisted only".
I whitelisted gmail.com and I sent two mails, one direct to the Server without
ASSP, one via ASSP.
logfile---
May-30-07 16:25:56 Conn
larsneo wrote:
> it seems to me that the message is blocked as intended (Message Scoring:
> 65 >= 50) and the bombre-check comes too late for correct scoring.
with 1.3.2(final) the log reads ok but it *seems* to me that there are no
bomb-checks once the message scoring hits the max value after r
I disabled RBL , PB and Forged HELO
now is crashing after this
30 May 07 12:41:39
sq: IO::Socket::INET=GLOB(0x97d0dc8) l=56
30 May 07 12:41:39 <3>
Note PBExtremeOK with DoPenalty set to 0
> I activated debug mode
>
> each time assp crashes (after few seconds) debug file has these lines at
>
I activated debug mode
each time assp crashes (after few seconds) debug file has these lines at
the end
30 May 07 12:24:33
30 May 07 12:24:33
30 May 07 12:24:33
sq: IO::Socket::INET=GLOB(0xae61724) l=32
30 May 07 12:24:33 <3>
30 May 07 12:26:32 <34>
May-30-07 08:26:32 194.90.9.27 <[EMAIL PR
Hi,
Pascal Dreissen schrieb:
> Kevin schreef:
>> Pascal Dreissen wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> If the SMTP idle timout is set to 300, how can somebody explain this
>>>
>>> (smtpIdleTimeout:=300)
>>>
>>> SMTP Connections
>>>
>>> There are 96 SMTP sessions active.
>>>
>>>
>> What OS?
>
why not just doing it:
put an address in the whitelist and see if it comes through.
That would mean you run "whitelisted only".
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB
> put an address in the whitelist and see if it comes through.
> That would mean you run "whitelisted only".
I'm getting mail, I have Spam from [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] but the
mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] and other "testmail" is
dropped (google says: HELO Timeou
I see in the "Logging" section the "Send NOOP info", along with the note
that Postfix croaks on it. Can you give me some more info as to what
the NOOP is for, and how Postfix has a problem with it?
--
Daniel
-
This SF.net
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>Good Morning, back at work again :)
put an address in the whitelist and see if it comes through.
That would mean you run "whitelisted only".
fritz
-
26 matches
Mail list logo
