Hi,
I would like to request pcre table support in postscreen for some fields
e.g. client_name, helo_name, etc.
For example if client is not listed on any dnsbl, but the reverse
hostname matches /\.dsl\./, the client is greylisted.
Or if client is listed on a single dnsbl and contains someth
Hello
the workaround listed at http://www.postfix.org/workarounds.html does
include the following:
Disable SMTP command pipelining for all mail. This sledgehammer
solution will reduce performance for all outbound mail, by causing
extra network round-trip times.
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
Am 01.12.2010 10:08, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Hello
>
> the workaround listed at http://www.postfix.org/workarounds.html does
> include the following:
>
> Disable SMTP command pipelining for all mail. This sledgehammer solution
> will reduce performance for all outbound mail, by causing ext
I never actually used LDAP, and someone asked if it's possible
to alias one domain to another, and I wonder if its doable in
LDAP the Right Way.
Let's assume we've example.com domain with all the addresses
stored in LDAP somehow. Now let's assume also that example.net
should be an alias for examp
Gid inherits top level directory GID?
sunsaturn:/website/vuser# rm -rf test2.com
sunsaturn:/website/vuser# echo test|mail s...@test2.com
sunsaturn:/website/vuser# ls -al test2.com/test2/Maildir/new/
total 6K
drwx-- 2 2003 postfix 512 Dec 1 05:45 .
drwx-- 5 2003 postfix 512 Dec 1 05:45
Dan:
>
> Gid inherits top level directory GID?
Turn off the SETGID bit in the PARENT directory.
Wietse
There is no setgid bit set.
I had to chmod 777 the /website/vuser directory just so that new user
creates would work otherwise when it changes uid to some virtual id such
as 2003, it would not be allowed to create anything in the directory to
begin with no matter who owned it.
Its really pr
On 12/01/2010 01:35 PM, Dan wrote:
There is no setgid bit set.
I had to chmod 777 the /website/vuser directory just so that new user
creates would work otherwise when it changes uid to some virtual id
such as 2003, it would not be allowed to create anything in the
directory to begin with no
Thanks for your input, as far as proftpd goes:
The distribution file available at the main distribution site and all
mirrors has been compromised.
The new file contains a rootkit.
Original file:
Name: proftpd-1.3.3c.tar.bz2
Size: 4166609
MD5: 8571bd78874b557e98480ed48e2df1d2
SHA256: ea7f02e21f8
Hi,
I'm writing a milter and I'm having a problem where bounce messages
don't seem to be generated. The milter can change who the recipient of
the e-mail is and if Postfix tries to send to that e-mail address and it
is rejected by the remote server, there never seems to be a bounce
message ge
On 12/1/2010 3:08 AM, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
Hello
the workaround listed at
http://www.postfix.org/workarounds.html does include the
following:
Disable SMTP command pipelining for all mail. This
sledgehammer solution will reduce performance for all outbound
mail, by causing extra network ro
On 12/1/2010 7:52 AM, Jeff Fisher wrote:
Hi,
I'm writing a milter and I'm having a problem where bounce
messages don't seem to be generated. The milter can change who
the recipient of the e-mail is and if Postfix tries to send to
that e-mail address and it is rejected by the remote server,
there
On 12/01/2010 02:30 PM, Dan wrote:
Thanks for your input, as far as proftpd goes:
The distribution file available at the main distribution site and all
mirrors has been compromised.
The new file contains a rootkit.
I downloaded the 1.3.3c source and confirmed.
Passed it on to the ProFTPd aut
Dan:
> Gid inherits top level directory GID?
Wietse:
> Turn off the SETGID bit in the PARENT directory.
Dan:
> There is no setgid bit set.
Apparently, FreeBSD copies the GID of a new directory from its
parent, even when the parent does not have sticky/setwhatever
bits set.
bristle# mkdir /var/s
hi,
we need to set up postfix as an incoming relay which forwards
messages via transport to a protected exchange 2007 server.
to do this without getting backscatter, we need to check the
recipients for validity on exchange server side in AD/LDAP.
this howto from 2003 describes pretty well, what
On Dec 1, 2010, at 1:08 AM, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
> BTW: The problem also apply for mail to microsoft.com, not only for
> frontbridge customer.
Check the IP addresses... :)
mail.messaging.microsoft.com == mail.global.frontbridge.com, plus a number of
others.
Aloha,
Michael.
--
"Please ha
Jeroen Koekkoek:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to request pcre table support in postscreen for some fields
> e.g. client_name, helo_name, etc.
>
> For example if client is not listed on any dnsbl, but the reverse
> hostname matches /\.dsl\./, the client is greylisted.
>
> Or if client is listed on a
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
> us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:41 PM
> To: Postfix users
> Subject: Re: postscreen request: pcre support
>
> Jeroen Koekkoek:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I woul
Hi all,
I would like to set up mail filtering on a postfix server. I have read a
lot of documentation, but I can't make it works.
Here's what I did :
- install maildrop package (should I use maildrop or courier-maildrop ?)
- create /etc/maildroprc
- set maildrop transport in master.cf :
maild
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 17:41 +0100, Ben wrote:
> Postfix choose
> local to deliver the mail, but I can't find why. I would like it uses
> maildrop instead.
You need to set up your hosted domains to be virtual hosted
(http://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html).
Or change the transport for local d
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:41:22 -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema
wrote:
> Jeroen Koekkoek:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to request pcre table support in postscreen for some fields
>> e.g. client_name, helo_name, etc.
>>
>> For example if client is not listed on any dnsbl, but the reverse
>> hostname match
jer...@intuxicated.org:
>
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:41:22 -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema
> wrote:
> > Jeroen Koekkoek:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I would like to request pcre table support in postscreen for some fields
>
> >> e.g. client_name, helo_name, etc.
> >>
> >> For example if client is not listed on
I am trying to send via majordomo but yet
I do see
Dec 1 10:35:28 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/error[22238]: 371E112CFAB3:
to=, relay=none, delay=157827, delays=157783/43/0/0.21, dsn=4.3.0,
status=deferred (unknown mail transport error)
This is the first time I have seen this.
What can done to
On 12/1/2010 12:45 PM, The Doctor wrote:
> I am trying to send via majordomo but yet
> I do see
>
> Dec 1 10:35:28 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/error[22238]: 371E112CFAB3:
> to=, relay=none, delay=157827, delays=157783/43/0/0.21, dsn=4.3.0,
> status=deferred (unknown mail transport error)
>
>
>Not entirely, because I can't combine scores in smtpd.
postfwd policy service can weight and score.
Len
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 12:47:13PM -0500, Matt Hayes wrote:
>
>
> On 12/1/2010 12:45 PM, The Doctor wrote:
> > I am trying to send via majordomo but yet
> > I do see
> >
> > Dec 1 10:35:28 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/error[22238]: 371E112CFAB3:
> > to=, relay=none, delay=157827, delays=157783/4
The Doctor:
> I am trying to send via majordomo but yet
> I do see
>
> Dec 1 10:35:28 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/error[22238]: 371E112CFAB3:
> to=, relay=none, delay=157827, delays=157783/43/0/0.21, dsn=4.3.0,
> status=deferred (unknown mail transport error)
>
> This is the first time I have s
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 12:47:58PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Let's assume we've example.com domain with all the addresses
> stored in LDAP somehow. Now let's assume also that example.net
> should be an alias for example.com.
>
Yes, but it costs one table for each aliased domain (the domai
* Ben :
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to set up mail filtering on a postfix server. I have
> read a lot of documentation, but I can't make it works.
Do you really want to use maildrop for filtering? It's only feasible
if your users can edit the filter file. If it's just for you then it's
probably ok
Le 01/12/2010 17:41, Ben a écrit :
Hi all,
I would like to set up mail filtering on a postfix server. I have read a
lot of documentation, but I can't make it works.
Here's what I did :
- install maildrop package (should I use maildrop or courier-maildrop ?)
- create /etc/maildroprc
- set maild
Hello,
I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
Are there incompatibilities or specific path for upgrade ?
Or any manual re-configuration to be done ?
At the end of this email I posted my postconf -n
Thanks for info.
* note :
I know the famous "if it is not broken, do not fix it !".
Zitat von Jeroen Geilman :
On 12/01/2010 02:30 PM, Dan wrote:
Thanks for your input, as far as proftpd goes:
The distribution file available at the main distribution site and all
mirrors has been compromised.
The new file contains a rootkit.
I downloaded the 1.3.3c source and confirmed.
Pa
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 10:09:30AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Apparently, FreeBSD copies the GID of a new directory from its
> parent, even when the parent does not have sticky/setwhatever
> bits set.
It seems this applies not just to sub-directories, but also to new
files:
http://www.manpa
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 09:19:52PM +0100, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
> I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
May as well use 2.7.2.
> Are there incompatibilities or specific path for upgrade ?
The Postfix 2.7 source code includes:
RELEASE_NOTES
RELEASE_NOTES-2.6
RELEASE_
Bruno Costacurta put forth on 12/1/2010 2:19 PM:
> Hello,
>
> I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
> Are there incompatibilities or specific path for upgrade ?
> Or any manual re-configuration to be done ?
I performed this exact backports upgrade about a week ago. As far as I
reca
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 01.12.2010 21:49, Stan Hoeppner a écrit :
> Bruno Costacurta put forth on 12/1/2010 2:19 PM:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
>> Are there incompatibilities or specific path for upgrade ?
>> Or any manual re-config
This is on Fedora 12.
I have been running Postfix with SQL, CourierMail, and Squirelmail for
over a year. I did this using the setup from:
http://wiki.amahi.org/index.php/Amahi_Mail_System
That was created using the instructions at:
http://www.howtoforge.com/virtual-users-domains-postfix-co
Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 2:28 PM:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 09:19:52PM +0100, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
>
>> I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
>
> May as well use 2.7.2.
The OP sticks to Debian Stable and Backports packages Viktor, as I do.
We've waited almost 2 yea
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 03:11:12PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 2:28 PM:
> > On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 09:19:52PM +0100, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
> >
> >> I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
> >
> > May as well use 2.7.2.
>
> The OP sticks to
I've been doing it with postfix and dbmail for several years. It works
very well. I also have it running amavisd-new/spamassassin, clam
anti-virus as well as the fuzzyocr plugin for spamassassin. Along with
additional rule set and bayes database in MySQL, it works well.
On 12/1/2010 4:0
On 12/01/2010 04:51 PM, Curtis Maurand wrote:
I've been doing it with postfix and dbmail for several years. It
works very well. I also have it running amavisd-new/spamassassin,
clam anti-virus as well as the fuzzyocr plugin for spamassassin.
Along with additional rule set and bayes databas
Martin Kellermann put forth on 12/1/2010 9:19 AM:
> we need to set up postfix as an incoming relay which forwards
> messages via transport to a protected exchange 2007 server.
> to do this without getting backscatter, we need to check the
> recipients for validity on exchange server side in AD/LDA
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:18:11PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> If more than that, for many reasons, I recommend using recipient address
> verification instead of LDAP lookups, assuming you have decent spam
> filtering techniques on your Postfix gateway, which is a requirement in
> today's world
Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 3:41 PM:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 03:11:12PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 2:28 PM:
>>> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 09:19:52PM +0100, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
>>>
I intend to upgrade Postfix version 2.5.5 to 2.7.1.
>
Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 4:25 PM:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:18:11PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> If more than that, for many reasons, I recommend using recipient address
>> verification instead of LDAP lookups, assuming you have decent spam
>> filtering techniques on your Post
Hi List,
I am using postfix as relay to protect our internal mailserver.
When account is deleted at internail mailserver, I want to generate
automatic reply at postfix relay. What is the easiest way to do this?
I tried error mailer at transport maps, but it generates error with
this template rep
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:50:20PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > No, LDAP lookups are simpler and cheaper than SMTP probes. The Postfix
> > LDAP driver works with MSFT AD via simple password binds. Code for SASL
> > binds (e.g. for folks who want to use GSSAPI) should be available in
> > the 2.8
On 12/1/2010 4:53 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
Hi List,
I am using postfix as relay to protect our internal mailserver.
When account is deleted at internail mailserver, I want to generate
automatic reply at postfix relay. What is the easiest way to do this?
I tried error mailer at transport maps,
2010/12/2 Noel Jones :
> On 12/1/2010 4:53 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
>>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> I am using postfix as relay to protect our internal mailserver.
>>
>> When account is deleted at internail mailserver, I want to generate
>> automatic reply at postfix relay. What is the easiest way to do this
On 12/1/2010 5:24 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
2010/12/2 Noel Jones:
On 12/1/2010 4:53 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
Hi List,
I am using postfix as relay to protect our internal mailserver.
When account is deleted at internail mailserver, I want to generate
automatic reply at postfix relay. What is
I just upgraded to postfix-2.8-20101130 from postfix-2.8-20101108
I am seeing the following being logged
Dec 2 00:16:26 rosalia postfix/postscreen[8147]: fatal: bad numerical
configuration: postscreen_client_connection_count_limit =
Dec 2 00:16:27 rosalia postfix/master[5648]: warning: process
On 12/1/2010 5:34 PM, John Fawcett wrote:
I just upgraded to postfix-2.8-20101130 from postfix-2.8-20101108
I am seeing the following being logged
Dec 2 00:16:26 rosalia postfix/postscreen[8147]: fatal: bad numerical
configuration: postscreen_client_connection_count_limit =
Dec 2 00:16:27 ros
Eero Volotinen:
> Hi List,
>
> I am using postfix as relay to protect our internal mailserver.
>
> When account is deleted at internail mailserver, I want to generate
> automatic reply at postfix relay. What is the easiest way to do this?
DO NOT send autoreplies for non-existent recipients. You
On 02/12/10 00:55, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/1/2010 5:34 PM, John Fawcett wrote:
>> I just upgraded to postfix-2.8-20101130 from postfix-2.8-20101108
>>
>> I am seeing the following being logged
>>
>> Dec 2 00:16:26 rosalia postfix/postscreen[8147]: fatal: bad numerical
>> configuration: postscree
Noel Jones:
> On 12/1/2010 7:52 AM, Jeff Fisher wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm writing a milter and I'm having a problem where bounce
> > messages don't seem to be generated. The milter can change who
> > the recipient of the e-mail is and if Postfix tries to send to
> > that e-mail address and it is r
On 02/12/10 01:14, John Fawcett wrote:
> I just upgraded to postfix-2.8-20101130 from postfix-2.8-20101108
>>> I am seeing the following being logged
>>>
>>> Dec 2 00:16:26 rosalia postfix/postscreen[8147]: fatal: bad numerical
>>> configuration: postscreen_client_connection_count_limit =
>>> Dec
John Fawcett:
> Seems that postscreen_client_connection_count_limit does not want to be
> initialized from the default value of smtpd_client_connection_count_limit.
Confirmed. I have two machines with postscreen. One has
smtpd_client_connection_count_limit in main.cf, and the other has
postscreen_
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 01:38:10AM +0100, John Fawcett wrote:
> this patch seems to fix it, though maybe someone who knows more about
> how postscreen initializes parameters from default values of other
> parameters (via $parm_name) should check that it is what is needed.
The patch is correct apa
On 12/1/2010 6:45 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
John Fawcett:
Seems that postscreen_client_connection_count_limit does not want to be
initialized from the default value of smtpd_client_connection_count_limit.
Confirmed. I have two machines with postscreen. One has
smtpd_client_connection_count_limi
On 01/12/2010, at 23:18, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Martin Kellermann put forth on 12/1/2010 9:19 AM:
>
>> so, is it still (seven years later) "The right thing™ to do" ?
>> will it work proper with exchange 2007/2010 ?
>> since the usage of "script-generated map-files" will never show
>> a real-time
Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 5:06 PM:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:50:20PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Are LDAP queries still simpler and cheaper once all recipient addresses
>> are cached in $data_directory/verify_cache?
>
> Yes, because the vast majority of "RCPT TO" commands are d
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 11:43:30PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 5:06 PM:
> > On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:50:20PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> >> Are LDAP queries still simpler and cheaper once all recipient addresses
> >> are cached in $data_directory/ver
Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 11:51 PM:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 11:43:30PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 5:06 PM:
>>> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:50:20PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>
Are LDAP queries still simpler and cheaper once all reci
On 01/12/2010, at 23:40, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/1/2010 3:41 PM:
>> It would be unwise of LaMont or Debian, having selected a particular
>> Postfix 2.x release (say 2.7) to not track the patch updates from time to
>> time. I understand that Debian stable or backports
64 matches
Mail list logo
