Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 12:57:30PM +0100, Schilling, Timo wrote:
Hello to everybody,
while we use the option reject_unknown_helo_hostname we noticed, that
single hostnames will be rejected without contacting the dns-servers.
After some debugging of the source code we
Hi postfix profis,
I'm running postfix 2.1.5-9 for several domains. Of course it handles the
workload with ease, but when I tail the mail.log the screen scrolls
constantly as it's just rejecting spam every second. The good thing is that
all these accesses are rejected, and logged. Also good
Hi,
I have a strange problem with some email sessions.
Postfix 2.5.2 is configured like email router.
It receives emails from many sources and sends them to one destination.
Each rules for mail routing are done by transport table.
Everything works properly but sometimes some emails are
On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 11:04 +0100, Richard Foley wrote:
Hi postfix profis,
I'm running postfix 2.1.5-9 for several domains. Of course it handles the
workload with ease, but when I tail the mail.log the screen scrolls
constantly as it's just rejecting spam every second. The good thing is
On 1/21/2009 8:46 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
I try to keep my postconf -n output clean/small by not explicitly
setting anything that is not different from the default (postconf -d),
and I just noticed that my postconf -n output contains the following:
config_directory = /etc/postfix
and
On 1/21/2009, Victor Duchovni (victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com) wrote:
Your question cannot be answered based just on the data you have
provided.
Many thanks for the response Victor... I've been trying to digest it
fully... I thought I had a good, basic understanding of the different
address
On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 15:16 -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
Martin Spinassi wrote:
Hi list!
I've been using postfix since a few weeks. I always used qmail before
for mail servers, and I'm really impressed by postfix but there is
something that I really miss...
I use to use qmHandle
Schilling, Timo:
Postfix shouldn't negate the flag (from 1 to 0) so that the function
res_search doesn't append the known domain-informations.
But it is done in the above mentioned file, but why?
Because it makes no sense to append MY OWN DOMAIN to
the hostname from a REMOTE client.
Guy:
Hi,
I added the following line to main.cf but the server name was still
appended to an incomplete sender address.
content_filter = smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10024
begin speculation
You're appending it on return from the filter.
end speculation
Don't list the local machine as a local
Peter Micunek:
Hi,
I have a strange problem with some email sessions.
Postfix 2.5.2 is configured like email router.
It receives emails from many sources and sends them to one destination.
Each rules for mail routing are done by transport table.
Everything works properly but
On Friday 23 January 2009 11:32:04 ram wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 11:04 +0100, Richard Foley wrote:
Hi postfix profis,
I'm running postfix 2.1.5-9
If it isnt broken , dont fix it :-)
Sage advice :-)
If you are seeing a lot of reject lines ( because of spamhaus ? ). That
is
Wietse Venema wrote:
Schilling, Timo:
Postfix shouldn't negate the flag (from 1 to 0) so that the function
res_search doesn't append the known domain-informations.
But it is done in the above mentioned file, but why?
Because it makes no sense to append MY OWN DOMAIN to
the hostname from a
Hi all,
I want to the authenticated users (who are authenticated using SASL2 and
SQL backend) don't pass to several filters detailed in master.cf file;
on the other hand, I want to still using the same filter for all the
remain world.
My first thought has been to create another smtpd daemon
* Jordi Espasa Clofent jespa...@minibofh.org:
Hi all,
I want to the authenticated users (who are authenticated using SASL2 and
SQL backend) don't pass to several filters detailed in master.cf file;
on the other hand, I want to still using the same filter for all the
remain world.
My
Schilling, Timo:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Schilling, Timo:
Postfix shouldn't negate the flag (from 1 to 0) so that the function
res_search doesn't append the known domain-informations.
But it is done in the above mentioned file, but why?
Because it makes no sense to append MY OWN DOMAIN
Zitat von Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Peter Micunek:
Hi,
I have a strange problem with some email sessions.
Postfix 2.5.2 is configured like email router.
It receives emails from many sources and sends them to one destination.
Each rules for mail routing are done by transport table.
As older postfix installations have a fallback_relay variable and
newer installations have a smtp_fallback_relay, i wanted to use
postconf to check, which version is supported.
Usally, i would expect a program to return with a non-zero exit-code at
such a failure:
r...@localhost# postconf
Hello,
i read the documentation about the usage of [ and ] in relayhost
entries ...
I still not quite sure what happens or not happens when using an IP with
or without such signs...
relayhost = 1.2.3.4
may use MX records from DNS?
What if there is no nameserver configured? Will there be any
Jordi Espasa Clofent wrote:
Hi all,
I want to the authenticated users (who are authenticated using SASL2 and
SQL backend) don't pass to several filters detailed in master.cf file;
on the other hand, I want to still using the same filter for all the
remain world.
My first thought has been
Schilling, Timo wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Schilling, Timo:
Postfix shouldn't negate the flag (from 1 to 0) so that the function
res_search doesn't append the known domain-informations.
But it is done in the above mentioned file, but why?
Because it makes no sense to append MY OWN DOMAIN to
Richard Foley wrote:
This file is very minimal:
/^\@/ 550 invalid address
/[...@].*\@/550 weird addresses
Don't escape @ in postfix regular expressions.
Don't escape characters inside [ ] classes.
/^@/550 invalid address
/[...@].*@/
Peter Micunek wrote:
Hi,
I have a strange problem with some email sessions.
Postfix 2.5.2 is configured like email router.
It receives emails from many sources and sends them to one destination.
Each rules for mail routing are done by transport table.
Everything works properly but
Bill Loy wrote:
After adding the lines
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/restricted_senders
smtpd_restriction_classes = local_only
local_only =
check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/local_domains, reject
to the file
Noel Jones wrote:
Bill Loy wrote:
After adding the lines smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/restricted_senders
smtpd_restriction_classes = local_only
local_only = check_recipient_access
hash:/etc/postfix/local_domains, reject
to
Hello,
I know this is not specifically a postfix question, but I know there
are a lot of
very knowledgeable people on this list.
I'm wondering what success others have had blocking Phishing emails?
We can block them using header/body checks, but one is always playing
catch up. It's a game you
Paul Reilly wrote:
Hello,
I know this is not specifically a postfix question, but I know there
are a lot of
very knowledgeable people on this list.
I'm wondering what success others have had blocking Phishing emails?
We can block them using header/body checks, but one is always playing
catch
Is anyone using ClamAV with Postfix with the phishing filters?
Are they effective?
Does anyone know of any other service offering Phishing
signatures that one can employ?
SaneSecurity (they're back) is providing ClamAV signatures for spam,
phishing, etc. Rsync scripts are available to
Postfix snapshot 20090123 provides support for managing multiple
Postfix instances. It was designed, implemented and documented
during this week (implementation taking about 1/6 of that time).
Citing from the RELEASE_NOTES:
This can automatically apply your postfix start etc. command
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.797 tagged_above=2 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK=3.116, FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML=0.001,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, MSOE_MID_WRONG_CASE=0.82,
NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001]
the above header details are of a message which was a spam; what does
On 1/23/2009 11:33 AM, bharathan kailath wrote:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.797 tagged_above=2 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK=3.116,
FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457,
MSOE_MID_WRONG_CASE=0.82, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001]
the above
Hi all,
We are using Postfix and I have a little question.
When I send an e-mail to a bad external address (example:
jdhfjdfjdhfjdhfj...@yahoo.com), my SMTP gateway send me an error message from
mailer-dea...@mydomain.com because the target address doesn't exist.
Question: Do you
ESTEVES, Luis:
When I send an e-mail to a bad external address (example:
jdhfjdfjdhfjdhfj...@yahoo.com), my SMTP gateway send me an error
message from mailer-dea...@mydomain.com because the target address
doesn't exist.
Question: Do you know where I can change mydomain.com (after
the
Hi,
The incoming queue was big and increased continually ( from 2000 to up
to 5 messages)
The active queue was full.
The traffic was not to too heavy ( 5,000- messages per 10 minutes).
Trivial-rewrite is using LDAP lookups (locally) to route messages.
System CPU, disk or network were NOT
Can anyone tell me what the formal name of the email technique of
placing something + a delimiter + your email is? I can't seem to
remember...
hose
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 07:24:08PM +0100, postfix wrote:
The incoming queue was big and increased continually ( from 2000 to up
to 5 messages)
Symptom.
The active queue was full.
Cause.
The traffic was not to too heavy ( 5,000- messages per 10 minutes).
Trivial-rewrite is using LDAP
Thomas Ackermann a écrit :
As older postfix installations have a fallback_relay variable and
newer installations have a smtp_fallback_relay, i wanted to use
postconf to check, which version is supported.
Usally, i would expect a program to return with a non-zero exit-code at
such a failure:
christopher andrews a écrit :
I was reading this subject and I was wondering, if you thought about
what would happen if you compile a list of misspelled domains and denied
them instantly and the user mint to send it to one of those domains. I'm
saying this because what you may think is
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 02:37:55PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/23/2009, hose (h...@bluemaggottowel.com) wrote:
Can anyone tell me what the formal name of the email technique of
placing something + a delimiter + your email is? I can't seem to
remember...
Are you talking about
Kevin Bailey a écrit :
Hi Guys,
Just a question RE setting up the DNS zone record correctly for a mail
server.
I have a couple of setups which work but have just copied one and I'm
getting the following response.
j.gilb...@watercooledsurf.com: Host or domain name not found. Name
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 08:53:21PM +0100, mouss wrote:
wrong.
the MX should not be a cname. see
http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-bogusmx.php
use
IN MC 10 mail2.freewayprojects.com.
This requirement was relaxed in RFC 2821. It is OK (though still
better not to if not
On 1/23/2009, Victor Duchovni (victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com) wrote:
- recipient delimiter, the + or sometimes - (...)
character that separates the base address from the address:
- extension, the rest of the address localpart between
the delimiter and the domain.
I have a voip server that receives faxes in a tif file. I use fax2email
to convert the tif to a pdf and send it as an attachment over postfix.
My isp blocks port 22, so I've setup a gmail account to use as a relay.
That generally works.
But, every once in a while, authentication fails. When I
I don't currently own a blackberry, but am thinking about getting one
(the Obama effect). A friend who works in the Cellphone business has
warned me that if I just setup the BB to go get my email from my postfix
server this will treated as internet data, whereas if I can interface
postfix - BB
postmas...@klam.ca escreveu:
I don't currently own a blackberry, but am thinking about getting one
(the Obama effect). A friend who works in the Cellphone business has
warned me that if I just setup the BB to go get my email from my postfix
server this will treated as internet data, whereas if
postmas...@klam.ca ha scritto:
I don't currently own a blackberry, but am thinking about getting one
(the Obama effect). A friend who works in the Cellphone business has
warned me that if I just setup the BB to go get my email from my postfix
server this will treated as internet data, whereas if
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 04:09:07PM -0500, sean darcy wrote:
I have a voip server that receives faxes in a tif file. I use fax2email
to convert the tif to a pdf and send it as an attachment over postfix.
My isp blocks port 22, so I've setup a gmail account to use as a
Victor Duchovni:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 04:09:07PM -0500, sean darcy wrote:
I have a voip server that receives faxes in a tif file. I use fax2email
to convert the tif to a pdf and send it as an attachment over postfix.
My isp blocks port 22, so I've setup a gmail account to use as a
postmas...@klam.ca wrote:
I don't currently own a blackberry, but am thinking about getting one
(the Obama effect). A friend who works in the Cellphone business has
warned me that if I just setup the BB to go get my email from my postfix
server this will treated as internet data, whereas if I
postmas...@klam.ca wrote:
I don't currently own a blackberry, but am thinking about getting one
(the Obama effect). A friend who works in the Cellphone business has
warned me that if I just setup the BB to go get my email from my postfix
server this will treated as internet data, whereas if I
mouss wrote:
check_parameter()
{
postconf $1 21 | grep -vq unknown parameter
return $?
}
or
check_parameter()
{
postconf $1 2/dev/null | grep -q =
return $?
}
Then, you need an exit-code wrapper for grep too, it seems :)
check_result() {
RESULT=$( grep ${1} ${2} 2/dev/null )
Thomas Ackermann wrote:
So, does anybody know what technically is the difference between the
use with and without the signs?
I mean, what network things may happen or not happen?
Nobody knows the technical differences?
:-(
Thomas wrote:
Thomas Ackermann wrote:
So, does anybody know what technically is the difference between the
use with and without the signs?
I mean, what network things may happen or not happen?
Nobody knows the technical differences?
:-(
... more likely nobody cares, because postfix
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009, Thomas wrote:
Thomas Ackermann wrote:
So, does anybody know what technically is the difference between the use
with and without the signs?
I mean, what network things may happen or not happen?
Nobody knows the technical differences?
Care to take a look at the Postfix
Steve Crawford wrote:
postmas...@klam.ca wrote:
I don't currently own a blackberry, but am thinking about getting one
(the Obama effect). A friend who works in the Cellphone business has
warned me that if I just setup the BB to go get my email from my postfix
server this will treated as
J.P. Trosclair wrote:
This is really off topic, but grep already returns a success and
failure code based on if there were any matches which mouss's code
uses from what I can tell. There's really no reason to look at grep's
stdout, if it has a match the return code is 0, it doesn't it's != 0.
Duane Hill wrote:
Care to take a look at the Postfix documentation?
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#relayhost
As i wrote, i read the documentation i found - it was exactly this small
entry about relayhost!
The answer from Noel Jones contains quite some more and deeper
information
Noel Jones wrote:
... more likely nobody cares, because postfix behavior is documented.
When the relayhost is a hostname enclosed by [ ] brackets, postfix
asks for an A record and does not ask for an MX record.
If relayhost is an IP address enclosed by brackets, postfix uses that
IP with no
Thomas:
Duane Hill wrote:
Care to take a look at the Postfix documentation?
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#relayhost
As i wrote, i read the documentation i found - it was exactly this small
entry about relayhost!
The answer from Noel Jones contains quite some more and
Wietse Venema [mailto:wie...@porcupine.org] wrote:
Norm Mackey:
The situation reached the point where the mail queue could not even
be listed completely with postqueue without postqueue failing, and
What was the failure? I suppose that after $daemon_timeout seconds
(1800s default) the
Norm Mackey:
The failure was logged in /var/log/mail/errors as messages like:
[r...@relay mail]# cat errors |grep open files|head -n 5
Jan 19 00:39:43 relay postfix/qmgr[26415]: fatal: socket: Too many
open files
Your machine resources don't match the Postfix configuration. Either
scale
i get spam mails that pretend to be from yahoo (eg.from yahoo.it, yahoo.nl)
on my postfix relay; how can i prevent such kind of foregeries
help appreciated
thanks
61 matches
Mail list logo
