What is your use-case for validation here? Did you mean submission? It has
actual authentication and can do client cert name validation with
auth_ssl_username_from_cert.
I've been pulling apart an old monolithic server and putting various
systems into dedicated containers. To this end I hav
> On 17/05/2023 09:56 EEST Moritz Orbach via dovecot
> wrote:
>
>
> Am Di, 16.05.2023 20:10 Uhr schrieb Aki Tuomi via dovecot:
> > > On 16/05/2023 16:24 EEST Moritz Orbach via dovecot
> > > wrote:
> > > #6 0x7fd5ac89b08e in fd_set_nonblock (fd=-1, nonblock=true) at
> > > fd-util.c:10
On 2023/5/17 02:18, Aki Tuomi wrote:
On 16/05/2023 20:43 EEST Randy Li via dovecot wrote:
Hello
Following the sieve_spamtest_status_header from the document, I think I
could extract the score from the spamassassin (which is from spampd lmtp).
But sieve script can't never work properly w
> On 19/05/2023 05:54 EEST Sean Gallagher wrote:
>
>
> > We are indeed listening. And Dovecot actually can check the name on the
> > certificate, if you ask it to do so.
> >
> > https://doc.dovecot.org/settings/core/#core_setting-auth_ssl_username_from_cert
> >
>
> I've been studying the co
We are indeed listening. And Dovecot actually can check the name on the
certificate, if you ask it to do so.
https://doc.dovecot.org/settings/core/#core_setting-auth_ssl_username_from_cert
I've been studying the code, looking for any way the
"auth_ssl_username_from_cert" setting could be use
I use a tinc vpn mesh between the nodes. iptables only allows the nodes
to talk to each on port 655, all else is dropped. Works well. I also
have a setup using zerotier for the same thing - my ansible deployment
playbook will use either one.
DC.
On 2023-05-14 11:29 am, Daniel Miller via dove
Hello there,
When using the doveadm command (search HEADER "X-Discourse-Post-Id" "")
or the IMAP command (SEARCH HEADER X-Discourse-Post-Id ""), emails
containing a X-Discourse-Post-Id header are not listed.
I've also tried with non X- headers, such as List-Unsubscribe and
Auto-Submitted.
> OK, that does make sense so far. Today I have checked, and the correct
> dates seem to be showing up now after the initial date (ever since that
> initial run of the "dovecot expunge" command was run on all mailboxes).
> So in our case I have the expunge set to delete older than 30 days. I
> as
