- Original Message -
From: "LuKreme"
To: "postfix users"
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 9:31 PM
Subject: Postfix and greylisting
What's the best choice with current 2.7 postfix for enabling greylisting? I
am still using postgrey, but I don't think that really takes advantage of
any of th
Zitat von LuKreme :
What's the best choice with current 2.7 postfix for enabling
greylisting? I am still using postgrey, but I don't think that
really takes advantage of any of the new features in current postfix
that would make greylisting more efficient.
Just curious. What features do y
What's the best choice with current 2.7 postfix for enabling greylisting? I am
still using postgrey, but I don't think that really takes advantage of any of
the new features in current postfix that would make greylisting more efficient.
--
"He is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dulln
Corey Chandler:
> I've had to run postfix set-permissions on my box to resolve a few
> ownership issues. On this platform (Debian Lenny) a few things aren't what
> set-permissions expects to find-- largely man pages that aren't compressed,
> slightly different pathing, map files that aren't necess
I've had to run postfix set-permissions on my box to resolve a few
ownership issues. On this platform (Debian Lenny) a few things aren't what
set-permissions expects to find-- largely man pages that aren't compressed,
slightly different pathing, map files that aren't necessarily installed,
etc.
W
On Jul 18, 2010, at 8:09 AM, Matt Hayes wrote:
>
>
> I can tell you that outlook does not require a certificate for SSL/TLS. I
> have quite a few people at work that use Outlook and connect to our servers
> using SSL; no certificate required.
>
Concur. I've yet to see a client that readil
On Sunday, July 18, 2010 10:47:54 am Wietse Venema wrote:
> Christopher Hilton:
> > Outlook express can be convinced to use 587 but my experience with
> > my users I find that Outlook sometimes changes the port setting
> > from 587 to 465 during configuration.
> >
> > You will need a certificate f
Christopher Hilton:
> Outlook express can be convinced to use 587 but my experience with
> my users I find that Outlook sometimes changes the port setting
> from 587 to 465 during configuration.
>
> You will need a certificate for this but if the number of clients
> is small you don't have to go to
On Jul 10, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> On 2010-07-10 James wrote:
>> I currently use ssh to forward a local port to port 25 on my mail
>> server. I would like to submit mail on port 465
>
> No, you wouldn't.
>
>> but I am on DHCP and I don't want to update main.cf whenever I get
* Stefan Foerster :
> # postmulti -i postfix-sasl -x postconf recipient_delimiter
> smtpd_sender_login_maps
> recipient_delimiter = +
> smtpd_sender_login_maps = proxy:pgsql:${maps_dir}/sasl-maps.pgsql
Damn. While editing, I accidentally deleted the ".restricted" at the
end of this line. Of cours
Given: A dedicated Postfix instance, configured to accept mails from
SASL authenticated users. It seems that unlike access(5) maps, the
lookup for smtpd_sender_login_maps for addresses which contain
$recipient_delimiter is not tried at all without the extension:
# postmulti -i postfix-sasl -x post
11 matches
Mail list logo
