Hello,
Why cant shadow transports be used on non-local transports ?
It would be useful if there was some facility to call a script when a
non-loacal transport successfully delivers a message
Stuart Gall
Klien bottle for rent
Enquire within.
On 3 Nov 2006, at 15:50, Stephen Gran wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 03:34:15PM +0200, Brent Clark said:
>>
>> Hey all
>>
>> I just found a hole / bug in my acl for file extension handling.
>>
>> This is my current ACL
>>
>> # File extension filtering.
>> deny set acl_m1 = ${extract{-1}{.}{${
On 3 Nov 2006, at 12:29, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
>
>> I would like to handle shorter retry times to all yahoo domains. I
>> know I
>> could use the pattern
>> yahoo.com
>> yahoo.ca
>> etc.
>>
>> Is this the only way to go or can I somehow specify yahoo.
Hello,
Chris Lightfoot writes:
no! you need to ask the recipient of the mail whether they
wanted to receive it. That is the only way you can tell
whether it was spam or not -- users don't typically care
about idiotic conditions which ISPs try to apply to them
or to other people (and rightly so
W B Hacker wrote:
>
> *Fortunately* I saw the '...Sherman" after the 'Marc' in time to avoid a
> coffee-spray.
>
> Otherwise I thought the world had turned upside down.
I think it might be time for me to dust off my old .sig again...
- Marc "not Perkel" Sherman
--
## List details at http://ww
Chris wrote:
> Hi I am seeing entries in log such as this not telling me why email is
> been rejected, is there a way to make exim show the reason and do I
> have anything to worry about?
>
> thanks.
>
> Chris
>
> 2006-11-03 21:14:15 H=(CP155.eiulk5oe.com) [58.210.252.34]:9652
> I=[85.14.x.x]:25
Marc Sherman wrote:
> Markus Braun wrote:
>>> Your exim logs "rejected RCPT". Why do you think you _get_ so much
>>> spam?
>> yes exim rejected it, but i want know if i can do anything else against
>> spam?
>
> What more do you want to do with it than reject it?
>
> - Marc
>
*Fortunately* I sa
Hi I am seeing entries in log such as this not telling me why email is
been rejected, is there a way to make exim show the reason and do I
have anything to worry about?
thanks.
Chris
2006-11-03 21:14:15 H=(CP155.eiulk5oe.com) [58.210.252.34]:9652
I=[85.14.x.x]:25 F=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> rejected R
Marc Sherman wrote:
> Markus Braun wrote:
>>> Your exim logs "rejected RCPT". Why do you think you _get_ so much
>>> spam?
>> yes exim rejected it, but i want know if i can do anything else against
>> spam?
You probably want to read this:
http://www.slett.net/spam-filtering-for-mx/
smime.p7s
Markus Braun wrote:
>> Your exim logs "rejected RCPT". Why do you think you _get_ so much
>> spam?
> yes exim rejected it, but i want know if i can do anything else against
> spam?
What more do you want to do with it than reject it?
- Marc
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/list
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 02:13:38PM -0600, Mar Matthias Darin wrote:
> Chris Lightfoot writes:
> >On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:03:26AM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
[...]
> >what is the true false positive rate? nb you have to
> >measure this, you can't just infer it from complaints.
>
> That would
>Your exim logs "rejected RCPT". Why do you think you _get_ so much
>spam?
yes exim rejected it, but i want know if i can do anything else against
spam?
>And what has SpamAssassin got to do with the logfile entry mentioned
>above?
spamasssins has nothing to do, sorry for the confusion.
marcus
Hello,
Chris Lightfoot writes:
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:03:26AM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
significantly, and had no complaints about false positives.
what is the true false positive rate? nb you have to
measure this, you can't just infer it from complaints.
That would be determined by a
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
> >
> > What's the total mailbox count behind the MXs?
> >
>
> I don't know. I process whole domains, not individual mailboxes. I think
> I'm processing about 4 million messages a day, most of which is spam.
>
I think the last time this came up, it was determ
Hello all,
I`ve got next exim:
>exim -bV
Exim version 4.63 #0 (FreeBSD 6.1) built 24-Oct-2006 09:40:41
Copyright (c) University of Cambridge 2006
Probably Berkeley DB version 1.8x (native mode)
Support for: crypteq iconv() IPv6 use_setclassresources PAM Perl OpenSSL Content
_Scanning Old_Demime
L
Dave Lugo wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>> I'm filtering over 2000 domains now. If I screw up I hear about it
>> generally.
>>
>>
>
> What's the total mailbox count behind the MXs?
>
I don't know. I process whole domains, not individual mailboxes. I think
I'm proc
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> I'm filtering over 2000 domains now. If I screw up I hear about it
> generally.
>
What's the total mailbox count behind the MXs?
--
Dave Lugo [EMAIL PROTECTED]LC Unit #260 TINLC
Have you h
Chris Lightfoot wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:03:26AM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>> significantly, and had no complaints about false positives.
>>
>
> what is the true false positive rate? nb you have to
> measure this, you can't just infer it from complaints.
>
I'm filtering o
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:17:47AM -0800, Tim Wilde wrote:
> Chris Perry wrote:
> > Thanks for elaborating. I suspect the MTU is not the issue at this
> > time. I did have problems with the MTU when I started with DLS, and got
> > that sorted, with assistance from the ISP. Today I was able to
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:03:26AM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
> significantly, and had no complaints about false positives.
what is the true false positive rate? nb you have to
measure this, you can't just infer it from complaints.
--
``Television enables you to be entertained in your home
by p
Chris Perry wrote:
> Thanks for elaborating. I suspect the MTU is not the issue at this
> time. I did have problems with the MTU when I started with DLS, and got
> that sorted, with assistance from the ISP. Today I was able to send a
> large email to the affected exim server without issue. T
Hello,
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
>> My question is how do I make it permanent rather than casual? Could I
>> run exim -q15m -Rff yahoo.com?
>
> Hmm, I would have expected an error from exim in that case, so I can't
> tell what exactly happens if you specify -q and -R.
>
> I'd sugg
Dean Brooks wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 03:03:15PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>
>> So - what you are saying is that if I do an ACL where I have a ratelimit
>> and there is another condition that fails then the ratelimit won't be
>> counted and I can extract the ratelimit info to a vari
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
>> exim -Rff yahoo.com
>
> This switch does the trick as I mentioned before but it finishes work
> after some time although there is still some mail to be sent.
Of course. It does only one queue run. I.e. exim looks at each mail once
and tries to deliver every mail that ha
Not sure what my religion has to do with anything. I'm changing the
subject line hoping to get back to technical rather than religion and
politics.
I am using DynaStop and it has made a huge decrease in the amount of
spam that is getting through, it has reduced server load levels
significantly
Hello,
I am sorry for an empty post to this list. I accedentaly hit Ctrl-X
instead of Ctrl-C. Sorry!
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
> exim -Rff yahoo.com
> Should do the trick for you. Run with -v to see whether it works.
This switch does the trick as I mentioned before but it finish
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
> Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
>> I am afraid it may lead to some conflicting scenarios when various
>> exim processes may try to deliver the same message.
>
> No, exim does locking. You will see "Spool file is locked (another
> process is handling this messa
On Nov 3, 2006, at 5:08 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
>
> --On 2 November 2006 22:11:48 -0700 "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 2, 2006, at 4:13 PM, W B Hacker wrote:
>>
>>> Mar Matthias Darin wrote:
>>>
> I haven't forgotten any of that, thanks. Long Binh
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:23:42PM +1100, Chris Perry wrote:
> Thanks for elaborating. I suspect the MTU is not the issue at this
> time. I did have problems with the MTU when I started with DLS, and got
> that sorted, with assistance from the ISP. Today I was able to send a
> large email to
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 03:03:15PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
> So - what you are saying is that if I do an ACL where I have a ratelimit
> and there is another condition that fails then the ratelimit won't be
> counted and I can extract the ratelimit info to a variable that I can
> use in the ne
Dean Brooks wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 10:09:20PM +1100, Chris Perry wrote:
>
>
>>> Data timeout can be caused by MTU issues. Are you running your server on
>>> a residential DSL line?
>>>
>> Yes, its a residential DSL line.
>>
>> 2006-11-02 21:27:47 1GfYrR-0002My-UX SMTP data time
Chris Lightfoot wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 10:09:20PM +1100, Chris Perry wrote:
>
>> Marc,
>>
>> Yes, its a residential DSL line.
>>
>> The full line is
>> 2006-11-02 21:27:47 1GfYrR-0002My-UX SMTP data timeout (message
>> abandoned) on connection from dmz-vsgate1.sng.ibb.ubs.com [147.60.
Thanks Philip.
Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Chris Perry wrote:
>
>
>> Is there a command line option to dump out all option settings,
>> including the defaults not set in the config file.
>>
>
> -bP
>
>
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-us
On Friday 03 November 2006 16:22, Marc Haber took the opportunity to say:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 22:00:09 +0100, "Marco Kammerer"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I have a exim 4.63 with SA Exim and Clamav up and running and forward all
> >spamemails to a spezial "spambox".
>
> My I ask why you use
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 04:21:46PM +0200, Tair Belini wrote:
> XYZ1 verifies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> since the delivering IP is defined as the SMTP server of domain THIRD1, it
> accepts message.
> Then, it tries to deliver (forward) message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Now, the delivering IP is not the
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 22:00:09 +0100, "Marco Kammerer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a exim 4.63 with SA Exim and Clamav up and running and forward all
>spamemails to a spezial "spambox".
My I ask why you use SA-Exim instead of exim's built-in ACL
spamassassin interface?
http://wiki.debian.org/
Hello Markus,
Markus Braun, 03.11.2006 (d.m.y):
> i have at the moment spamassassin with exim4 running.
>
> But in my logfiles I have so many spam information like this:
>
> 2006-11-01 03:55:27 H=adsl-152-80-187.asm.bellsouth.net (COMPUTER)
> [72.152.80.187] F=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> rejected RCPT
Tair Belini wrote:
> Hello,
>
> With two hosts XYZ1 and ABC2 both running exim,
You'll get more help on this list if you don't obfuscate.
- Marc
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this lis
Hello,
With two hosts XYZ1 and ABC2 both running exim, and exim.conf files containing
require verify = sender/callout
Alias [EMAIL PROTECTED] is forwarded to mailbox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
USER1 is *undefined(invalid)* on domain THIRD1
Hello
i have at the moment spamassassin with exim4 running.
But in my logfiles I have so many spam information like this:
2006-11-01 03:55:27 H=adsl-152-80-187.asm.bellsouth.net (COMPUTER)
[72.152.80.187] F=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> rejected RCPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
DNSBL listed at sbl-xbl.spamhaus.o
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Brent Clark wrote:
> From: Brent Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: exim-users@exim.org
> Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 15:34:15 +0200
> Subject: [exim] caution to those blocking files by extension
>
> I just found a hole / bug in my acl for file extension handling.
>
> This is my curr
On 02/11/06, Zbigniew Szalbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> If someone how has been down the road of building exim with DK support and
> especially with generating DKs and is willing to share a simply how-to, I
> would really appreciate a link.
>
Not got any nice links and at the momen
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 03:34:15PM +0200, Brent Clark said:
>
> Hey all
>
> I just found a hole / bug in my acl for file extension handling.
>
> This is my current ACL
>
> # File extension filtering.
> deny set acl_m1 = ${extract{-1}{.}{${lc:$mime_filename}}}
> message = Disallowed file exte
Hey all
I just found a hole / bug in my acl for file extension handling.
This is my current ACL
# File extension filtering.
deny set acl_m1 = ${extract{-1}{.}{${lc:$mime_filename}}}
message = Disallowed file extension
log_message = REJECTED ATTACHMENT ($acl_m1) (rcpt to: $recipients)
co
Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
> --On 3 November 2006 00:00:58 + Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 02/11/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter Bowyer wrote:
*snip*
>> It's a DNSBL which lists dynamic IP ranges which have mostly been
>> submitted by the owning ISPs, sp
--On 3 November 2006 00:24:32 + Chris Lightfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Therefore there must be, in the opinion of the people
> responsible, some feature of dynamic IPs which makes it
> impossible that mail originating from them is desirable to
> receive.
No, we just believe that th
--On 3 November 2006 00:00:58 + Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 02/11/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Peter Bowyer wrote:
>> >
>> > That's why DynaBlock, dynablock.njabl.org etc exist, and why people
>> > use them as part of their mail blocking strategy.
>> >
--On 2 November 2006 23:04:10 + Chris Lightfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 11:01:23PM +, Peter Bowyer wrote:
>> On 02/11/06, Chris Lightfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
>> > I find this ``everyone competent enough to run a mail
>> > server can afford
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 11:30 +0100, Steffen Heil wrote:
> Hi
>
> > I can't get exim to only allow authorised clients to send
> > mail without putting in the acl
> >
> > > require message = "Authentication required"
> > > authenticated = *
> >
> > at which point i get the required
--On 2 November 2006 22:11:48 -0700 "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 2, 2006, at 4:13 PM, W B Hacker wrote:
>
>> Mar Matthias Darin wrote:
>>
I haven't forgotten any of that, thanks. Long Binh AUG 67- AUG 68.
But this list is not really the place for
Hello Mar,
Mar Matthias Darin, 03.11.2006 (d.m.y):
> As to the issue of my signature... My grandfather, my father, my
> mother-in-law as well as many cousins, newphews and the like and a large
> portition of my friends served in Vietnam. The point is that we DON'T
> forget these brave people
--On 3 November 2006 06:59:24 +0800 W B Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Marc wisely lives in California, where inventing your own religion and
> setting yourself up as a God on a website attracts no special notice.
Actually, his religion has no God. In fact, it's an atheist religion.
--
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 10:55:22AM +, Chris Lear wrote:
> * Chris Lightfoot wrote (03/11/06 09:53):
[...]
> > I suppose
> > I could appeal to the end-to-end principle but apparently
> > nobody believes in that any more.
> >
>
> You're proba
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> I am afraid it may lead to some conflicting scenarios when various
> exim processes may try to deliver the same message.
No, exim does locking. You will see "Spool file is locked (another
process is handling this message)" messages in your logs and/or exim -v
output.
lg
Hello - sorry - just one more quesiton:
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
> exim -Rff yahoo.com
> Should do the trick for you. Run with -v to see whether it works.
Is it safe to run exim with this option and then have normal queue runs as
well? I am afraid it may lead to some conflictin
* Chris Lightfoot wrote (03/11/06 09:53):
[...]
>
> You also said,
>
> [ this class of email origination points ]
>> consists of people who have other ways to send their legitimate email.
>> At the very least, they have their ISP's mail relay, which is free (or
>> if it isn't, change provider).
On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 11:30 +0100, Steffen Heil wrote:
> Hi
>
> > I can't get exim to only allow authorised clients to send
> > mail without putting in the acl
> >
> > > require message = "Authentication required"
> > > authenticated = *
> >
> > at which point i get the required a
Hi
> I can't get exim to only allow authorised clients to send
> mail without putting in the acl
>
> > require message = "Authentication required"
> > authenticated = *
>
> at which point i get the required authorised for clients but
> the incoming mail gets rejected instead.
Pl
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> I would like to handle shorter retry times to all yahoo domains. I know I
> could use the pattern
> yahoo.com
> yahoo.ca
> etc.
>
> Is this the only way to go or can I somehow specify yahoo.* to match all
> yahoo domains and specify shorter max-mail
Dear Daniel, Philip and others,
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
> exim -Rff yahoo.com
> Should do the trick for you. Run with -v to see whether it works.
Wonderful!!! In no time almost 100 emails sent! My deepest
appreciation and thanks to you all!
--
Zbigniew Szalbot
--
## List d
On 03/11/2006 10:11, Mar Matthias Darin wrote:
> I will NOT address this issue any further in this list.
> List moderator, my apologies for this message being off topic.
[Wearing moderator hat]
Without wanting to sound pompous about it, can we all let this deviation
from topic (and the various
I can't get exim to only allow authorised clients to send mail without
putting in the acl
> require message = "Authentication required"
> authenticated = *
at which point i get the required authorised for clients but the incoming
mail gets rejected instead.
Cheers
ken
--
## Lis
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 09:15:42PM +1100, Chris Perry wrote:
[...]
> I'm thinking now the problem is some specific relationship between the
> UBS server and mine.
>
> I do not know how long the transmission lasts for before failing.
> Anyway of logging that?
an obvious next step would be t
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> yahoo flatly refuses connections (but most likely does it at a
> firewall and not MTA level because I do not see any specific 550
> errors, just something like:
>
> 2006-11-03 10:19:51 1Gfjf4-000HNf-1c == [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=dnslookup
> T=remote_smtp defer (-53): retry ti
Hello,
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Chris Lightfoot wrote:
> have you followed the advice in
>http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-01.html
Yes.
> -- especially the bit about reading the full error text of
> any failure SMTP responses you've had in previous queue
> runs? Have you talked to t
Hello,
Peter Bowyer writes:
In fact I have no real opinion about the content of the .sig in
question; I was commenting on the excuse that it was system-generated,
which implies that the poster has no control over it - either he
should defend it or take steps to remove it (like use a gmail acco
have you followed the advice in
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-01.html
-- especially the bit about reading the full error text of
any failure SMTP responses you've had in previous queue
runs? Have you talked to the Yahoo email people? (IME
they're generally helpful-sounding but
Dear all,
In exim manual I read that:
"Warning: If you use a regular expression in a routing rule pattern, it
must match a complete address, not just a domain, because that is how
regular expressions work in address lists."
I would like to handle shorter retry times to all yahoo domains. I kno
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 07:07:43AM +, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> On 03/11/06, Chris Lightfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > Therefore there must be, in the opinion of the people
> > responsible, some feature of dynamic IPs which makes it
> > impossible that mail originating from them is d
Hello Marc,
Marc Perkel, 03.11.2006 (d.m.y):
> Would be nice, if Phil is listening - new feature - to have some kind of
> a "no-count" option so a count can be tested without counting it.
IMO you don't need an additional exim feature for that. Why don't you
simply log the values you want to kno
Hello,
Since yesterday I have been practically unable to deliver emails to
yahoo.* accoutns. I have about 2000 emails now in queue, most of them
destined to yahoo.
The problem is the sheer number of emails I need to deliver. When there
are only few emails in queue, yahoo greylists them and mos
Marco Kammerer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to add to my config, that i am able to get this to ifs to work.
> I just want to test for exe and bat if the domain is in in the file
> domain_no_exe
>
> The log read either
> unknown condition "1" inside "and{...}" condition
> or
> each subcondition inside
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Chris Perry wrote:
> Is there a command line option to dump out all option settings,
> including the defaults not set in the config file.
-bP
--
Philip HazelUniversity of Cambridge Computing Service
Get the Exim 4 book:http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
--
##
Peter Bowyer wrote:
> It's a DNSBL which lists dynamic IP ranges which have mostly been
> submitted by the owning ISPs,
Hmm, I don't think so. http://dynablock.njabl.org/dynablock.html says
"IPs that really are dynamic will not be removed.". With this in mind,
dynablock.njabl.org is just another
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
> I am on lots of forums and see all sorts of ridiculous .sig notices.
> Ignore them if you don't like them.
It would have been easier to ignore it if it would have been properly
separated.
Just my .02l gas,
daniel
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/ma
Zbigniew Szalbot wrote:
> Dear Renaud and others,
...
>
> From reading the online documentation it seems that the next step should
> be setting dns entries for domainkeys but here is where I have doubts
> how to do that. If anyone is willing to share/provide a link, I'd
> appreciate.
>
> Thank
76 matches
Mail list logo
