--On Thursday, January 19, 2017 21:07 +0900 Christian Balzer
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:30:24 -0500 John C Klensin wrote:
>
> [snip]
>>
>> There are also some complex questions as to whether a server
>> is ever permitted to refuse to accept mail with a
>>
On 19/01/17 14:05, mar...@mejor.pl wrote:
> I found coredump from exim
What version of Exim, and what OS?
--
Thanks,
Jeremy
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list -
W dniu 19.01.2017 o 15:25, Jeremy Harris pisze:
> On 19/01/17 14:05, mar...@mejor.pl wrote:
>> I found coredump from exim
>
> What version of Exim, and what OS?
Version is in subject, OS is Gentoo,
# exim -bV
Exim version 4.88 #1 built 10-Jan-2017 15:05:59
Copyright (c) University of
Hi!
I found coredump from exim, this is what gdb says:
> warning: Could not load shared library symbols for linux-vdso.so.1.
> Do you need "set solib-search-path" or "set sysroot"?
> [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
> Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1".
>
Hello,
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:30:24 -0500 John C Klensin wrote:
[snip]
>
> There are also some complex questions as to whether a server is
> ever permitted to refuse to accept mail with a backward-pointing
> address of "<>". Unless tied to either the identifying
> information in EHLO/HELO or
--On Thursday, January 19, 2017 08:59 +0100 Heiko Schlittermann
wrote:
> Jeremy Harris (Do 19 Jan 2017 01:03:37 CET):
>> On 18/01/17 21:50, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
>> > Side note: we should have:
>> >
>> > --> MAIL FROM:<>
>> >
--On Thursday, January 19, 2017 09:59 + Jeremy Harris
wrote:
>>> I do not see anything
>>> that is more risky there than RCPT TO. (Given current ACL
>>> capabilities.) And in combination with the enforcement of a
>>> preceeding MAIL FROM it even makes some sense to me.
>
Phil Pennock (Do 19 Jan 2017 10:20:19 CET):
…
> Hrm? I wasn't reading the other thread.
>
> Exim used to support both EXPN and VRFY but the default ACL is to deny,
> so you need to explicitly enable via ACL. Although ... it's not showing
> up in EHLO response, when I
On 19/01/17 09:59, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> VRFY is not listed as a service extension in
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/mail-parameters/mail-parameters.xhtml
To confuse the issue more, an example in 5321 (D.4) _does_ list
VRFY in an EHLO response.
Exim doesn't (as far back as 4.50) - but does
On 2017-01-18, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
>
> --===1145591294==
> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
> protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="s89yJNDe6fM6BJKb"
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
>
> --s89yJNDe6fM6BJKb
> Content-Type:
On 19/01/17 09:20, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2017-01-19 at 08:59 +0100, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
>> position to to introduce it. But, OTOH if Postfix and Exim would support
>> it… (just dreaming) there would be a good coverage.
>>
>> Does anybody remember, why VRFY isn't supported?
Mostly a case
Hello,
on behalf of a customer (small hosting company) I'm searching for a
simple (web) UI to configure mailaccounts. This UI should be something
like a self service portal for the hosting cutomers.
Ideally it is just a UI without any assumptions about the mail server
software in use. (e.g.
On 2017-01-19 at 08:59 +0100, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
> position to to introduce it. But, OTOH if Postfix and Exim would support
> it… (just dreaming) there would be a good coverage.
>
> Does anybody remember, why VRFY isn't supported? I do not see anything
> that is more risky there than RCPT
13 matches
Mail list logo