On Thu, August 7, 2008 19:38, Cameron Camp wrote:
> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> proto=ESMTP helo=
> mydestination = maillist1.domain.com ...
> where should I be looking?
lists.domain.com vs maillists1.domain.com ?
--
Benny Pedersen
Need more webspace ? http://www.servage.net/?coupon=cust37098
>Guess #1: lists.domain.com is not in
>mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_domains.cf
>Use 'postmap -q lists.domain.com
>mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_domains.cf' to check.
>Please report back with more details.
I added the domain to the mysql db, and now I ran
postmap -q lists.domain.com mysq
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Noel Jones wrote:
No, you do not need to "postmap" cidr: or regexp: or pcre: tables. These are
all just plain text files. Postfix reads in the plain text file and
processes it internally.
Thank you, Noel. That cleared it up for me, too.
Rich
This is an answer from ANS Notification system
Bad response. Specify actionid, PIN, alarmid, entityid, ruleid and send a
letter again. user=postfix users list
entity= alarm=0 action=UNKNOWN rule=0
First 20 lines of your mail follows:
==
Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008
Rich Shepard wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Oh, heheh. No, I meant like do I need to be running postmap on it from
the command line kinda scenario, like with the access file.
Stan,
Yes: postmap. I use a Makefile so each time I change anything in
/etc/postfix the proper bu
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Oh, heheh. No, I meant like do I need to be running postmap on it from
the command line kinda scenario, like with the access file.
Stan,
Yes: postmap. I use a Makefile so each time I change anything in
/etc/postfix the proper builds are run. Here's
Henrik K wrote:
There is no mention of "based on hashing" or "Database files are created
with xxx command" in table type list. So it's used plain text as is.
Thank you for the confirmation Henrik. I'd rather be slapped with a
trout for asking a 'stupid' question than run over by a bus for mak
Rich Shepard wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Is the CIDR file a plain text flat file?
Stan,
Yes. A representative line:
222.111.0.0/12 550 Rejected IP address.
Thank you. I knew what it's supposed to look like on the inside to
start out with. I was just unsur
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:16:59PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> That really didn't answer my question. I guess I need to be more specific:
>
> Is the CIDR file a plain text flat file? Do I need to run any commands
> against it to do the binary conversions or is that something Postfix
> doe
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Is the CIDR file a plain text flat file?
Stan,
Yes. A representative line:
222.111.0.0/12 550 Rejected IP address.
Do I need to run any commands against it to do the binary conversions or
is that something Postfix does automatically on th
Brian,
Thanks. The machine having the problem had a larger selection of
library's in /usr/lib/sasl2. I eliminated the extra libs (figuring that
one of them is the problem) and the log entries went away. Since that
didn't break AUTH_SMTP, I consider the problem solved. Again, thanks
for po
Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 01:36:08PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
What changes would I need to make in order to start using CIDR notation
in my access file? I'm currently using the standard hashed access file.
http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html
Lookup table overview -->
Jorey Bump wrote:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote, at 08/07/2008 04:34 PM:
* Jake Vickers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Are there any
pros/cons to checking this at another time rather than in
smtpd_recipient_restrictions? Thanks.
I'd just leave it in smtpd_recipient_restrictions, it's not worth the
hassle to u
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote, at 08/07/2008 04:34 PM:
* Jake Vickers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Are there any
pros/cons to checking this at another time rather than in
smtpd_recipient_restrictions? Thanks.
I'd just leave it in smtpd_recipient_restrictions, it's not worth the
hassle to use:
smtpd_delay_re
* Jake Vickers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'd like to check the reverse mapping at the earliest possible time and
> deny the connection if necessary.
It's not worth it. What do you gain?
> Not sure if it generates an error message for the sender
Of course (the sending MTA shoukd generate one)
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Jake Vickers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Is there a more efficient place to check for a reverse DNS address
rather than using reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname in
smtpd_recipient_restrictions?
Define "efficient"
I'd like to check the reverse mapping at the
* Jake Vickers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Is there a more efficient place to check for a reverse DNS address
> rather than using reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname in
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions?
Define "efficient"
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Postfix -
Is there a more efficient place to check for a reverse DNS address
rather than using
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
in smtpd_recipient_restrictions?
Thanks.
On Thu, August 7, 2008 12:27, Noel Jones wrote:
> Jon wrote:
>> On Thu, August 7, 2008 02:39, Magnus Bäck wrote:
>>> On Thu, August 7, 2008 10:01 am, Jon said:
>>>
On Wed, August 6, 2008 15:23, Nicolas Letellier wrote:
> I'm looking for a solution to desactivate antispam solution for
Jon wrote:
On Thu, August 7, 2008 02:39, Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Thu, August 7, 2008 10:01 am, Jon said:
On Wed, August 6, 2008 15:23, Nicolas Letellier wrote:
I'm looking for a solution to desactivate antispam solution for a
few
recipients.
[...]
Yes, use the smtpd_restriction_classes...
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi thanks again , yes now I understand the injection but i cannot relay on
> php scripts to do the talk postfix sendmail seems more robust to handle that
You could use "mini_sendmail"
> , well anyway while searching for direct injection via smtp i found
On Thu, August 7, 2008 02:39, Magnus Bäck wrote:
> On Thu, August 7, 2008 10:01 am, Jon said:
>
>> On Wed, August 6, 2008 15:23, Nicolas Letellier wrote:
>>
>> > I'm looking for a solution to desactivate antispam solution for a
>> few
>> > recipients.
>
> [...]
>
>> Yes, use the smtpd_restriction_c
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 01:36:08PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> What changes would I need to make in order to start using CIDR notation
> in my access file? I'm currently using the standard hashed access file.
http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html
Lookup table overview --> http://www.post
What changes would I need to make in order to start using CIDR notation
in my access file? I'm currently using the standard hashed access file.
Cameron Camp wrote:
Other sender domains are getting delivered on my list server, but not
gmail:
Aug 7 00:12:49 maillist1 postfix/smtpd[19188]: connect from
yw-out-1718.google.com[74.125.46.152]
Aug 7 00:12:49 maillist1 postfix/smtpd[19188]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from yw-out-1718.google.com[74.1
Other sender domains are getting delivered on my list server, but not
gmail:
Aug 7 00:12:49 maillist1 postfix/smtpd[19188]: connect from
yw-out-1718.google.com[74.125.46.152]
Aug 7 00:12:49 maillist1 postfix/smtpd[19188]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from yw-out-1718.google.com[74.125.46.152]: 554 5.7.1
Rob Tanner wrote:
Hi,
I have 2 edge servers in my mail setup. Both are running Postfix
2.2. Both are configured to use a content filter that feeds back into
Postfix which then forwards the mail to the delivery host (Exchange --
yuck). Both servers also make heavy use of LDAP and SASLAUTHD
Ryan Kish wrote:
Hello,
I would like to move from exim4 to postfix, however I one issue I can
not figure out how to solve with postfix.
I have an application that will send out email on behalf of a user.
The message is sent from the application, and includes a "reply to"
including the user's em
Hi thanks again , yes now I understand the injection but i cannot relay on
php scripts to do the talk postfix sendmail seems more robust to handle that
, well anyway while searching for direct injection via smtp i found the
awnser to my problem and since i asked here ill post the response too for
p
Ryan Kish wrote:
Hello,
I would like to move from exim4 to postfix, however I one issue I can
not figure out how to solve with postfix.
I have an application that will send out email on behalf of a user.
The message is sent from the application, and includes a "reply to"
including the user's em
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi could you explain "direct smtp injection",
telnet host 25
speak smtp
> I m reading now about VERP but anyway i found the information in logs
> very usefull with the downgrade that i cannot atm do the relation i was
> expecting
>
> -Mensagem orig
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Noel Jones wrote:
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/badip,
And this one won't ever match anything. check_sender_access uses the
envelope sender email address (ie. [EMAIL PROTECTED]) as the key; it won't
ever be an IP address.
Thanks, Noel. I missed this, too.
Hello,
I would like to move from exim4 to postfix, however I one issue I can
not figure out how to solve with postfix.
I have an application that will send out email on behalf of a user.
The message is sent from the application, and includes a "reply to"
including the user's email address:
from:
Hi could you explain "direct smtp injection" , I m reading now about VERP
but anyway i found the information in logs very usefull with the downgrade
that i cannot atm do the relation i was expecting
-Mensagem original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Em nome de Ralf Hilde
Rich Shepard wrote:
Every now and then a message that should be rejected by one of my UCE
filters makes it though to my inbox. Today, three of them did so. I'd like
to learn how to find why the lists aren't working on occasion.
The most frequently involved list is badip (IP addresses in CIDR
Hi,
I have 2 edge servers in my mail setup. Both are running Postfix 2.2.
Both are configured to use a content filter that feeds back into Postfix
which then forwards the mail to the delivery host (Exchange -- yuck).
Both servers also make heavy use of LDAP and SASLAUTHD (LDAP again) for
a
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi thanks for your quick reply we are building a web system that permits the
> sending of mail to a user defined mailling list for each of the contacts on
> the mailling list we send one mail ex : ([EMAIL PROTECTED] ->
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] , [EMAIL PROTECTE
Hi thanks for your quick reply we are building a web system that permits the
sending of mail to a user defined mailling list for each of the contacts on
the mailling list we send one mail ex : ([EMAIL PROTECTED] ->
[EMAIL PROTECTED] , [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED] , ... ) for
this we use a
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
No space before a "," ...
And use a "." sometimes.
> Hi there Im having sort of a problem down here, i use php and foreach
> cycle to send mail with postfix, i tweaked the php scripts to get some
> output with sendmail program but if i understood weell by
Hi there Im having sort of a problem down here , i use php and foreach cycle
to send mail with postfix , i tweaked the php scripts to get some output
with sendmail program but if i understood weell by the time i get response
fom sendmail (one sendmail execution by foreach iteration ) , in verbose
m
Hello!
Help! My forwarder says: 451 timeout,(#4.4.2) (in reply to end of
DATA command) (was original Subject Line).
I will explain the situation, if you're in a hurry jump down to the logs.
I recently installed a 'mail cleaning and forwarding solution' based on
Ubuntu 8.04 Server, runni
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Use cidr: instead of hash:
Thank you very much, Ralf. I certainly missed this when I read your book.
Much appreciated,
Rich
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Ralf is pointing out that you are using a HASH table which cannot do CIDR,
only a single IP.
A CIDR table can do CIDR.
A-ha! I will make the change immediately.
Thank you, Brian,
Rich
* Rich Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
>> These are NOT CIDR format.
>
> I don't understand, Ralf. The contents of badip are in CIDR format. What
> have I missed?
Use cidr: instead of hash:
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PRO
Rich Shepard wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
These are NOT CIDR format.
I don't understand, Ralf. The contents of badip are in CIDR format.
What
have I missed?
Ralf is pointing out that you are using a HASH table which cannot do
CIDR, only a single IP.
A CIDR table
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Rich Shepard wrote:
Every now and then a message that should be rejected by one of my UCE
filters makes it though to my inbox. Today, three of them did so. I'd like
to learn how to find why the lists aren't working on occasion.
The most frequently involved list is badip (I
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
These are NOT CIDR format.
I don't understand, Ralf. The contents of badip are in CIDR format. What
have I missed?
Thanks,
Rich
* Rich Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Every now and then a message that should be rejected by one of my UCE
> filters makes it though to my inbox. Today, three of them did so. I'd like
> to learn how to find why the lists aren't working on occasion.
>
> The most frequently involved list is badi
Every now and then a message that should be rejected by one of my UCE
filters makes it though to my inbox. Today, three of them did so. I'd like
to learn how to find why the lists aren't working on occasion.
The most frequently involved list is badip (IP addresses in CIDR format).
In main.cf
Le 21-oct.-07 à 20:55, Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit :
* Pascal Maes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
If using PPP over ethernet, you may have to reduce the MTU on your
network interface.
Wietse
It's not the case, we have a direct connexion to the Internet.
Nevertheless, try it. Worked for me onc
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 1:49 AM, Wietse Venema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Seblu:
>>
>> and after a test my binary return a good resolution
>>
>> ./a.out
>> server: got connection from 192.42.42.1
>> host=toto.titi
>>
>> and the function gethostbyaddr return also a good answer !
>
> Ok, now you sho
Jamie Bohr:
> I already have a program that works externally from Postfix. It is
> getting it to work from within Postfix that is the issue. Even the
> script from http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html#simple_filter
> does not work. I think there is something I need to set something in
> mai
Hi there Im having sort of a problem down here , i use php and foreach cycle
to send mail with postfix , i tweaked the php scripts to get some output
with sendmail program but if i understood weell by the time i get response
fom sendmail (one sendmail execution by foreach iteration ) , in verbose
m
Sandy Drobic wrote:
inet_interfaces = $myhostname
That parameter sets the ips for LISTENING to SMTP connections.
Correct, and according to the docs at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html, when a single IP address is
specified, that single IP address is used as the source IP address.
Hi,
I've got this home-made script, written in C, on a Freebsd 7.0 server
with different versions of postfix: 2.3,2,4 and 2.5
The problem is that, while most of the time it works like a charm,
sometimes it crashes and bounces the message. It's not really a big
deal, cause the sender gets no
On Thu, August 7, 2008 10:01 am, Jon said:
> On Wed, August 6, 2008 15:23, Nicolas Letellier wrote:
>
> > I'm looking for a solution to desactivate antispam solution for a few
> > recipients.
[...]
> Yes, use the smtpd_restriction_classes...
>
> http://www.postfix.org/RESTRICTION_CLASS_README.ht
Graham Leggett wrote:
Hi all,
I have a machine that is both a postfix mailserver, and a NAT router for
a number of machines behind the box.
Because traffic from machines behind the box can cause the mailserver's
IP to be blacklisted, the mailserver machine has two IP addresses, one
for the
On Wed, August 6, 2008 15:23, Nicolas Letellier wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I'm looking for a solution to desactivate antispam solution for a few
> recipients.
>
> By default, spamassassin is activated for all mails, with a rule like:
> smtp inet n - n - - smtpd
> -o c
Nicolas Letellier wrote:
Hello.
I'm looking for a solution to desactivate antispam solution for a few
recipients.
By default, spamassassin is activated for all mails, with a rule like:
smtp inet n - n - - smtpd
-o content_filter=spamassassin
I would like
Len Conrad schrieb:
I wrote a tarpitting policy server.
It is patch for postgrey greylisting policy server.
It needs Postfix-2.3.x or more. (use SLEEP action)
taRgrey - S25R + tarpitting + greylisting
http://k2net.hakuba.jp/targrey/index.en.html
http://k2net.hakuba.jp/pub/targrey-0.30-po
60 matches
Mail list logo
