hey rob0..
thanks.
my bad. forgot to post that i had solved this.. the inet_interfaces
was set to localhost...
thanks
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 6:56 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 05:44:21PM -0800, bruce wrote:
>> System A has postfix, and can relay successfully email through
>>
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 05:44:21PM -0800, bruce wrote:
> System A has postfix, and can relay successfully email through
> Gmail.
> System A is 192.168.1.56
> System B is 192.168.1.59
>
> System B has Postfix, and has the line
> relayhost [192.196.1.56]:25
1. Seems strange that you would n
Thanks everyone for illuminating the true problem for me!
Josh
Hi.
System A has postfix, and can relay successfully email through Gmail.
System A is 192.168.1.56
System B is 192.168.1.59
System B has Postfix, and has the line
relayhost [192.196.1.56]:25
I'd like to be able to have System B, relay it's mail through the
configured Postfix on System A.
On Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29 am, mouss wrote:
> Voytek Eymont a écrit :
>
> there is no evidence in your config that auth'ed mail gets a different
> ticket than other mail.
>
> the recommended way is to enable "submission" (port 587) and configure
> clients to use this port. This will be more and
Erik Logtenberg:
>
> > If your system has no useful IPv6 connectivity, disable IPv6 in Postfix.
> >
> > http://www.postfix.org/inet_protocols
>
> The issue is that other people with broken IPv6 connectivity have
> trouble delivering mail to me, because my mailservers have many
> different IP
On 4-Mar-2010, at 11:47, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
>
> On 3/4/2010 1:42 PM, Leonard Jacobs wrote:
>>
>> What happened to the Ralf and Patrick Book of Postfix book that seems
>> to be out of print? Is there another edition scheduled or was the
>> market just not large enough to keep the bo
bruce a écrit :
> hi.
>
> in testing mail/postfix, i'm finding that the mail that i get on the
> destination/target email is sent from the "user" who's sent the email.
>
> is there an attribute that i can set within the postfix main.cf file
> to force that name to be "foo"...
>
> I've been looki
Voytek Eymont a écrit :
> I have Postfix with SMTP AUTH with self issued certificate, it all works
> well (as long as I don't touch it..)
>
> I have now "allowed" some users to use SMTP AUTH, but, some of their mail
> then gets evaluated as 'spam' by amavisd/spamassasin scores, amongst
> these, 'd
hi.
in testing mail/postfix, i'm finding that the mail that i get on the
destination/target email is sent from the "user" who's sent the email.
is there an attribute that i can set within the postfix main.cf file
to force that name to be "foo"...
I've been looking but I can't find it... so i mus
Joshua Kordani a écrit :
> On 3/3/2010 4:11 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
>>
>> You can't enforce the From: header. The From: header in your spam
>> probably looked something like
>> From: Word Word
>> which is invalid, so postfix rewrote to
>> From: w...@example.com w...@example.com
>>
>> Postfix rewritin
> People who configure MX records should read the SMTP RFC, in
> particular section 5. "Address Resolution and Mail Handling.
>
> By design, Postfix enforces sane limits on ALL information. In the
> case of SMTP server IP addresses. Such limits protect Postfix
> against abusive sites.
Thank you a
> If your system has no useful IPv6 connectivity, disable IPv6 in Postfix.
>
> http://www.postfix.org/inet_protocols
The issue is that other people with broken IPv6 connectivity have
trouble delivering mail to me, because my mailservers have many
different IP addresses, both IPv4 and IPv6. D
I have Postfix with SMTP AUTH with self issued certificate, it all works
well (as long as I don't touch it..)
I have now "allowed" some users to use SMTP AUTH, but, some of their mail
then gets evaluated as 'spam' by amavisd/spamassasin scores, amongst
these, 'dynamic ip' type scores
am I correc
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 06:54:56PM -0300, Gerardo Herzig wrote:
> Hi all. Im getting a loop in my postfix-multi configuration, and cant
> see what is wrong. I try to follow the README [1] as close as i could.
You need a transport table on the output Postfix to direct mail for
suitable domains to
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:10:37PM +0100, Erik Logtenberg wrote:
> Anyway, I think now I understand what's going on. The distribution that
> I use (Fedora 12) left those two settings to their default. In this
> specific case the setting of 5 IP's just isn't high enough, since this
> host has 22 IP
Erik Logtenberg:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> Ah, seems you were right after all: most bugs are indeed solved by
> reading the manual ;)
>
> Anyway, I think now I understand what's going on. The distribution that
> I use (Fedora 12) left those two settings to their default. In this
> specific case the settin
Hi Wietse,
Ah, seems you were right after all: most bugs are indeed solved by
reading the manual ;)
Anyway, I think now I understand what's going on. The distribution that
I use (Fedora 12) left those two settings to their default. In this
specific case the setting of 5 IP's just isn't high enoug
On 3/4/2010 3:54 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
On 3/4/2010 1:26 PM, Clayton Keller wrote:
I have been looking through archives and through the man pages and
thought I'd go ahead and post my question.
My situation is this:
I need to deliver mail coming in addressed to a specific domain to two
separate
Hi all. Im getting a loop in my postfix-multi configuration, and cant
see what is wrong. I try to follow the README [1] as close as i could.
Here is a sample of /var/log/mail after a email is received:
Mar 4 18:43:28 vmailmulti postfix-in/smtpd[28733]: connect from
mail.fmed.uba.ar[157.92.152.1]
On 3/4/2010 1:26 PM, Clayton Keller wrote:
I have been looking through archives and through the man pages and
thought I'd go ahead and post my question.
My situation is this:
I need to deliver mail coming in addressed to a specific domain to two
separate transports. There are no mailboxes local
Erik Logtenberg:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that Postfix doesn't fall back on other IP addresses
> associated with a certain MX-server when it fails to accept mail, but
> only uses the firs IP address it finds. If that fails, Postfix will move
> on to the next MX-server, but won't try any other available
Noel Jones:
> This patch adds a "reject_rhsbl_reverse_client" function that
> uses the unverified client hostname for the RBL lookup.
>
> The idea is that this might increase rhsbl hit rates if the
> hostname is more frequently available. On the other hand,
> spam-only domains seem to usually
This patch adds a "reject_rhsbl_reverse_client" function that
uses the unverified client hostname for the RBL lookup.
The idea is that this might increase rhsbl hit rates if the
hostname is more frequently available. On the other hand,
spam-only domains seem to usually have verifiable hostnam
hey
new to configuring postfix, got a few questions about how to configure postfix.
I'm running Centos/Fedora, with Postfix, from the basic yum install.
The Sendmail process has been stopped.
I can easily send a basic test mail from the cmdline. Ie:
mail f...@gmail.com
subject: blah
te
I have been looking through archives and through the man pages and
thought I'd go ahead and post my question.
My situation is this:
I need to deliver mail coming in addressed to a specific domain to two
separate transports. There are no mailboxes local to the server at all.
However, I did not
On Thursday 04 March 2010 20:10:26 bruce wrote:
> hey
>
> new to configuring postfix, got a few questions
>
If you ask them, we can try to provide some answers?
hey
new to configuring postfix, got a few questions
On 3/4/2010 1:42 PM, Leonard Jacobs wrote:
>
> What happened to the Ralf and Patrick Book of Postfix book that seems
> to be out of print? Is there another edition scheduled or was the
> market just not large enough to keep the book in print?
>
>
>
> Is there another Postfix book recommended by t
What happened to the Ralf and Patrick Book of Postfix book that seems to be
out of print? Is there another edition scheduled or was the market just not
large enough to keep the book in print?
Is there another Postfix book recommended by the group?
Thanks.
On 2010-03-04 1:19 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 3/4/2010 11:26 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> Now the only other question remaining is whether or not it is advisable
>> to use a regex for the sender_bcc_maps to avoid the necessity of
>> maintaining an explicit map for all users...
> Yes. Using a rege
On 3/4/2010 11:26 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Now the only other question remaining is whether or not it is advisable
to use a regex for the sender_bcc_maps to avoid the necessity of
maintaining an explicit map for all users...
Yes. Using a regexp with *_bcc_maps has been discussed in the
past
On Thursday 04 March 2010 18:23:19 Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-03-04 11:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > True, but it is my understanding, please correct me if I am wrong, that
> > with Postfix, the BCC-option forces a copy of the email (regardless of
> > which user sent it) to be delivered to a
On 2010-03-04 10:48 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> All the bcc functions are properties of the cleanup daemon, not
> smtpd. It's possible to define a separate cleanup service with
> sender_bcc_maps for submission. See the docs for adding an alternate
> cleanup service.
Excellent - found this (before eve
On 2010-03-04 11:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> True, but it is my understanding, please correct me if I am wrong, that with
> Postfix, the BCC-option forces a copy of the email (regardless of which user
> sent it) to be delivered to a single email-address?
> This would, at least the way I see it,
> 192.168.1.0/24 DUNNO
> 192.168.2.3 REJECT blah
> 192.168.2.0/24 DUNNO
> 192.168.0.0/16 FILTER somefilter
>
>
> in short, create client based policies, not result based policies.
The icing of the "cake" of two very helpful responses. Thanks both.
Robert Lopez
Unix Systems Administrator
Cen
Hi,
I noticed that Postfix doesn't fall back on other IP addresses
associated with a certain MX-server when it fails to accept mail, but
only uses the firs IP address it finds. If that fails, Postfix will move
on to the next MX-server, but won't try any other available IP addresses
for each of the
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 3/3/2010 11:57 PM, Stephen Carville wrote:
>>
>> Part of my configuration:
>>
>> smtpd_delay_reject = yes
>> smtpd_helo_required = yes
>> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
>> permit_mynetworks
>> reject_unauth_destination
>> --->
On Thursday 04 March 2010 16:57:02 Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-03-04 10:26 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >> Interesting... yes, this is doable with dovecot if you are using its
> >> LDA, and you can do it via the global sieve script (which can be made
> >> mandatory for all users) - no need to make
On 2010-03-04 10:26 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> Interesting... yes, this is doable with dovecot if you are using its
>> LDA, and you can do it via the global sieve script (which can be made
>> mandatory for all users) - no need to make a script for each user.
> My idea (NOTE: untested) would only r
On 3/4/2010 9:26 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
1. Can '-o sender_bcc_maps=hash:/etc/postfix/sender_bcc' be added to the
submission service in master.cf? If so, I think this could work.
You can find which options are valid by reading the man page
for each daemon.
All the bcc functions are propert
>Len Conrad put forth on 3/4/2010 6:40 AM:
>
>> But we don't have a relayhost for the sender listsen...@domain.tld. We want
>> that trusted sender to bypass the (scanning, weak) relayhost and nexthop to
>> Internet.
>>
>> in the sender_dependent postfix box,
>>
>> relayhost = [mx.domain.tld]
On 3/3/2010 11:57 PM, Stephen Carville wrote:
Part of my configuration:
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks
reject_unauth_destination
---> check_sender_access cidr:/etc/postfix/accept_by_ip
Oops, check_sender_a
On Thursday 04 March 2010 16:10:21 Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-03-04 9:08 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >>> I am not familiar with Dovecot, but the above might be doable with
> >>> Dovecot as well.
> >>
> >> Does that mean I'd need a autosendfolderfill for each user on the
> >> system?
> >
> > No,
On Thursday 04 March 2010 15:27:45 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> On Thursday 04 March 2010 14:55:59 you wrote:
> > 12:24:20 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > > J. Roeleveld put forth on 3/4/2010 2:12 AM:
> > > > On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> > Does that mean I'd need a autose
On 2010-03-04 9:08 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>>> I am not familiar with Dovecot, but the above might be doable with
>>> Dovecot as well.
>> Does that mean I'd need a autosendfolderfill for each user on the
>> system?
> No, you'll only need to create one of these users. The username
> doesn't matte
Len Conrad put forth on 3/4/2010 6:40 AM:
> But we don't have a relayhost for the sender listsen...@domain.tld. We want
> that trusted sender to bypass the (scanning, weak) relayhost and nexthop to
> Internet.
>
> in the sender_dependent postfix box,
>
> relayhost = [mx.domain.tld]
>
> sen
On 2010-03-04 Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-03-03 4:49 PM, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
>> Read again. The "sent items" folder is in the user's mailbox, which
>> Thunderbird most certainly does *not* access via SMTP, but via IMAP.
>
> My point was, if you want this to be done *without* TB having to sa
On Thursday 04 March 2010 14:55:59 you wrote:
> 12:24:20 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > J. Roeleveld put forth on 3/4/2010 2:12 AM:
> > > On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
>
>
>
> > > With that, I thought there is an option in postfix to bcc a single
> > > address on all emails
On Thursday 04 March 2010 14:55:59 you wrote:
> 12:24:20 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > J. Roeleveld put forth on 3/4/2010 2:12 AM:
> > > On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
>
>
>
> > > With that, I thought there is an option in postfix to bcc a single
> > > address on all emai
On 3/3/2010 4:11 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
You can't enforce the From: header. The From: header in your spam
probably looked something like
From: Word Word
which is invalid, so postfix rewrote to
From: w...@example.com w...@example.com
Postfix rewriting controls are described here:
http://www.postf
On 2010-03-03 4:49 PM, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> Read again. The "sent items" folder is in the user's mailbox, which
> Thunderbird most certainly does *not* access via SMTP, but via IMAP.
My point was, if you want this to be done *without* TB having to save it
to the Sent folder itself, it would es
On Thursday 04 March 2010 12:24:20 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> J. Roeleveld put forth on 3/4/2010 2:12 AM:
> > On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> >
> > With that, I thought there is an option in postfix to bcc a single
> > address on all emails?
> > You could then put a fil
>> If listsen...@domain.tld, send to Internet
>>
>> Else, send to MX gateway
>
>This may be what you're looking for.
I read that before I sent my msg
>http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
>
>sender_dependent_relayhost_maps (default: empty)
>
>A sender-dependen
On 2010-03-04 Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> On 2010-03-03 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> I suppose it might be possible to hack together a solution in the MTA
>> or IMAP server, manually dropping copies of sent messages in the
>> user's IMAP Sent Items folder. That would be one heck of a kludge
>> though.
>
On 2010-03-03 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Ansgar Wiechers put forth on 3/3/2010 9:01 AM:
>> I was under the impression that his Postfix and Dovecot are running
>> on the same (remote) host, and he's using Postfix as a smarthost for
>> his outbound mail. If that's the case, then there certainly is an
>>
* Stan Hoeppner :
> Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 3/4/2010 1:55 AM:
>
> > "The Spamhaus DBL is a realtime database of domains (typically web site
> > domains) found in spam messages. Mail server software capable of
> > scanning email message body contents for URIs can use the DBL to
> > identify,
Len Conrad put forth on 3/4/2010 4:16 AM:
> If listsen...@domain.tld, send to Internet
>
> Else, send to MX gateway
This may be what you're looking for.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps (default: empty)
A sender-depende
J. Roeleveld put forth on 3/4/2010 2:12 AM:
> On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> Thanks for all the tips.
>>
>> Postfix and Dovecot are indeed on the same box and I do agree with you that
>> it would require one heck of a hack to get this to work.
>
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 3/4/2010 1:55 AM:
> "The Spamhaus DBL is a realtime database of domains (typically web site
> domains) found in spam messages. Mail server software capable of
> scanning email message body contents for URIs can use the DBL to
> identify, classify or reject spam contai
We have two postfix machines, one is a (weak) MX in/out gateway with
amavisd+sa+clam that falls way behind during a huge (trusted) outbound
send-only distribution list.
The other, powerful postfix machine is not-yet-fully configged next-up to
replace the current weak MX, but we can't do tha
On Thursday 04 March 2010 08:57:30 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Thanks for all the tips.
>
> Postfix and Dovecot are indeed on the same box and I do agree with you that
> it would require one heck of a hack to get this to work.
See below, it might be a "simple" configuration stil
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for all the tips.
Postfix and Dovecot are indeed on the same box and I do agree with you that it
would require one heck of a hack to get this to work.
Since this is software, it is possible, just maybe not with the current
implementation of the 2 bits of software. It would
63 matches
Mail list logo
