Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/24/2010 11:33 PM:
> /etc/postfix/transport:
> server2.com: relay:[10.0.2.73]
>
> /etc/postfix/master.cf:
> relay unix - - n - 200 smtp
> -o smtp_helo_timeout=3s
> -o smtp_connect_timeout=3s
> -o disable_dn
Sahil,
Thankyou for this, it did indeed do the trick, I've documented it on the
WWW in case anyone else has a similar need:
http://sysadministrivia.blogspot.com/2010/06/stopping-spammers-using-old
-mx-records.html
I couldn't find the answer using Google, so hopefully someone else will
be able to
Hi
We have 2 postfix servers.
1. One is our mail gateway which is also the primary MX for our domains,
inbound and outbound emails all passes this (let's call this server1)
server.
2. The other server is a standalone postfix with tons of disk. (let's
call this server2).
Server 2 doesn't rel
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:47:12PM +0200, mouss wrote:
> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:20:23AM +0200, mouss wrote:
> >
> >> This mail is coming from postini. if you use postini, there's nothing
> >> you can do with the envelope (and even if you do content filtering, you
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:51:55 Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> > > Maybe he will. The OP could install the policyd policy server (v1) and
> > > impose sender restrictions von sasl authenticated senders.
> >
> > I will look into this thanks.
> >
> > Is there a reason that v1 is better then v2 for this a
Keld Simonsen:
> For postfix proper, does postfix invoke the postfix sendmail command somewhere
> in the process as an MTA to deliver a mail, - for aliases expansion?
The Postfix sendmail command RECEIVES mail INTO Postfix.
The Postfix sendmail command is not used to DELIVER mail.
Wietse
Victor Duchovni a écrit :
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:20:23AM +0200, mouss wrote:
>
>> This mail is coming from postini. if you use postini, there's nothing
>> you can do with the envelope (and even if you do content filtering, you
>> shouldn't reject mail. it's too late).
>
> Postini implement
> > So you leave your online documentation using the syntax of a
> > release that is 6 years old? That seems fairly odd. Why not use
> > versioned documentation?
People can legitimately use Postfix over a span of many years.
Currently, the oldest supported release is Postfix version 2.4,
which
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 15:30, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> Another drawback to having versioned documentation online is that El
> Goog is as likely to find the wrong version of a document. If a
> seeker ends up at http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html , all's
> well, but not necessarily so if they fin
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:39:05AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:28 PM -0400 Victor Duchovni
> wrote:
>
>> http://www.postfix.org/ldap_table.5.html
>>
>> BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY
>>For backwards compatibility with Postfix version 2.0 and
>
> So
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 07:48:53PM +0200, Luciana Moreira wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thx again for the replies, I am starting to see the light at the end of the
> tunnel :-)
>
> I have tried to disable the lmtp connection caching by setting the
> following variable on main.cf:
> lmtp_cache_connection=n
Hello,
Thx again for the replies, I am starting to see the light at the end of
the tunnel :-)
I have tried to disable the lmtp connection caching by setting the
following variable on main.cf:
lmtp_cache_connection=no
but the same errors are happening.
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24
--On Thursday, June 24, 2010 1:16 PM -0400 Victor Duchovni
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:12:23PM -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> Note the above deprecated postmap -q syntax.
It is not deprecated, this never worked.
Thanks! :)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Engi
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 09:47:04PM +0300, Oguz Yilmaz wrote:
> I just wanted to ask If Is there a way to disable "loops back to
> myself" errors in a case which is not actually a real loop back.
Yes, by sending to a port other than port 25.
--
Viktor.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:12:23PM -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> > Note the above deprecated postmap -q syntax.
>
> It is not deprecated, this never worked.
Index: proto/LDAP_README.html
*** proto/LDAP_README.html 6 Feb 2010 07:34:26 - 1.1.1.1
--- proto/LDAP_README.html 24
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:06:58AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>fancy.cf:
>...
>search_base = dc=example, dc=com
>query_filter = mail=%s
>result_attribute = memberaddr
>special_result_attribute = memberdn
>termin
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 06:55:47PM +0200, Luciana Moreira wrote:
> Hello Wietse,
>
> Thx a lot for your quick reply.
>
> I thought that the client side concurrency was defined by:
>
> 1) lmtp_destination_concurrency_limit
Per nexthop, provided the transport is called "lmtp", and not something
els
--On Thursday, June 24, 2010 12:56 PM -0400 Victor Duchovni
wrote:
Nothing of the sort, the documentation shows *current* syntax and briefly
documents any legacy syntax. Your tone is in the above is unnecessarily
hostile. Please don't go there...
Nothing in my response was intended as hosti
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 09:39:05AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:28 PM -0400 Victor Duchovni
> wrote:
>
>> http://www.postfix.org/ldap_table.5.html
>>
>> BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY
>>For backwards compatibility with Postfix version 2.0 and
>
> So
Hello Wietse,
Thx a lot for your quick reply.
I thought that the client side concurrency was defined by:
1) lmtp_destination_concurrency_limit
2) the number of lmtp processes
I have set them both to 1 now and still get the same error message. So I
am starting to believe that there must be yet
--On Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:28 PM -0400 Victor Duchovni
wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/ldap_table.5.html
BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY
For backwards compatibility with Postfix version 2.0 and
So you leave your online documentation using the syntax of a release that
is 6 years old
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:08, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> In situations where mail is forwarded outside the environment that
> supports the local recipient delimiter (e.g. Postfix->Exchange):
>
> I set:
>
> propagate_unmatched_extesion = canonical
>
> overriding the default:
>
> propa
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:43:57AM -0400, Phil Howard wrote:
> I don't see any easy fix to this.
>
> A user has email forwarded from their address at domainA to their
> address at domainB and also to their address at domainC, each running
> on different mail servers (but maybe the same MTA softwa
I don't see any easy fix to this.
A user has email forwarded from their address at domainA to their
address at domainB and also to their address at domainC, each running
on different mail servers (but maybe the same MTA software). The
catch is that domainA uses one recipient delimiter character (
Luciana Moreira Signed by - PrivaSphere AG:
> Hello guys,
>
> I am trying to tunne our postfix installation. In our setup we receive
> mails, pass them after an anti-virus milter to a internal mail
> processing system that uses lmtp using a content filter, and then
> forward the mail to the fin
Hello guys,
I am trying to tunne our postfix installation. In our setup we receive
mails, pass them after an anti-virus milter to a internal mail
processing system that uses lmtp using a content filter, and then
forward the mail to the final destination.
Since I have full control over the in
* Michael :
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:48:04 Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> > * Stan Hoeppner :
> > > Michael put forth on 6/24/2010 3:07 AM:
> > > > I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if
> > > > something is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised
> > >
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:48:04 Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> * Stan Hoeppner :
> > Michael put forth on 6/24/2010 3:07 AM:
> > > I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if
> > > something is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised
> > > account to send emails
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:03:18 +0200, fakessh wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:09:35 +0200, fakessh wrote:
>> hello ladies and gents
>>
>>
>> I do not know if I am in error or in the real
>> i a file check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/acces_client
>>
>> cat /etc/postfix/acces_client
>> mx3.mai
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:09:35 +0200, fakessh wrote:
> hello ladies and gents
>
>
> I do not know if I am in error or in the real
> i a file check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/acces_client
>
> cat /etc/postfix/acces_client
> mx3.mail2000.com.tw REJECT
> mx2.mail2000.com.tw
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:41:59 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Michael put forth on 6/24/2010 3:07 AM:
> > I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if
> > something is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised
> > account to send emails.
> >
> > What tool(s) can be used
* Stan Hoeppner :
> Michael put forth on 6/24/2010 3:07 AM:
> > I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if
> > something
> > is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised account to send
> > emails.
> >
> > What tool(s) can be used to achieve this?
>
> G
Michael put forth on 6/24/2010 3:07 AM:
> I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if
> something
> is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised account to send
> emails.
>
> What tool(s) can be used to achieve this?
Given the nature of your requirement,
hello ladies and gents
I do not know if I am in error or in the real
i a file check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/acces_client
cat /etc/postfix/acces_client
mx3.mail2000.com.tw REJECT
mx2.mail2000.com.tw REJECT
mx2.mail.tw.yahoo.com REJECT
I forbid the property to
I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if something
is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised account to send
emails.
What tool(s) can be used to achieve this?
Thanks,
Michael
35 matches
Mail list logo
