On 02/21/2013 03:34 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
It could be that the process injecting the mails into the queue is
stalling the queuemanager, thus sending out can only begin AFTER the
injection period.
... how ?
Either pickup(8) or smtpd(8) do the queueing; the qmgr only SENDS mail.
There coul
On 02/20/2013 07:16 PM, Vince Wang wrote:
Hello,
We have a configured postfix email server worked well when we had it
on the public IP.
After we moved it behind our firewall on a intranet with ip
192.168.xxx.xxx, we found it is very slow when we send newsletter.
How is DNS set up in comp
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:46:26PM +0100, Erik Slagter wrote:
> Another variation I tried ("pass" and "postscreen" the other way
> around). This works, but gives the original problem, the smtpd
> options are not honoured (especially banner and starttls="may"),
> even though I set both:
Take a DEE
On 21-02-13 19:30, Noel Jones wrote:
You've shared too much. By now no one has any idea what you're doing.
I'm just following the "REPORT A PROBLEM" procedure I was kindly pointed
at...
When postscreen decides to pass the connection to smtpd, postscreen
is no longer involved, and smtpd ha
On 21-02-13 19:17, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
You keep blaming the documentation and the software, when the problem
is most likely in your understanding of it.
Yes I blame the documentation, but not the software. I've been using
postfix for, well, something like ten years or more, I think it's th
On 2/21/2013 10:46 AM, Erik Slagter wrote:
> Another variation I tried ("pass" and "postscreen" the other way
> around).
You've shared too much. By now no one has any idea what you're doing.
Overview:
Postscreen is a front-end listener for smtpd. It's not a proxy.
Incoming connections are ha
On Feb 21, 2013, at 18:28, Erik Slagter wrote:
> On 21-02-13 16:45, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 21.02.2013 16:35, schrieb Erik Slagter:
>>
>>> mx1.ipv4.slagter.name:smtpinetn-n-2smtpd
> >> [ ... ]
>
>> and how should this be supposed to use postscreen
>> with "smtpd"
On 21-02-13 16:45, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.02.2013 16:35, schrieb Erik Slagter:
mx1.ipv4.slagter.name:smtpinetn-n-2smtpd
>> [ ... ]
and how should this be supposed to use postscreen
with "smtpd" instead of "postscreen" as command?
Interesting how anybody is k
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Wietse Venema wrote:
In ldap-domains.cf, I use %d as the key to look for. Should I be using %s
That was the mistake. As documented in ldap_table(5):
%d When the input key is an address of the form user@domain,
%d is replaced by the (RFC 2253) quoted domain
Am 21.02.2013 17:46, schrieb Erik Slagter:
> Another variation I tried ("pass" and "postscreen" the other way around).
> This works, but gives the original
> problem, the smtpd options are not honoured (especially banner and
> starttls="may"), even though I set both:
postscreen != smtpd so why
Another variation I tried ("pass" and "postscreen" the other way
around). This works, but gives the original problem, the smtpd options
are not honoured (especially banner and starttls="may"), even though I
set both:
-o smtpd_tls_security_level=may
-o postscreen_tls_security_level=may
Output
If I set up postscreen as closely as possible to the postscreen README
document, I get this (diff to previous message) (I'm sorry lots of it
has been folded). The log says "address already in use for 10.1.1.1",
this is interesting because none of the changes involved 10.1.1.1.
--- a 2013-02-
Am 21.02.2013 16:35, schrieb Erik Slagter:
> mx1.ipv4.slagter.name:smtpinetn-n-2smtpd
> -o myhostname=eriks.xs4all.nl
> -o smtpd_banner=mx1.slagter.name-ESMTP-$mail_name-mx1-ppp0-ipv4-25
> -o smtpd_tls_security_level=may
> -o postscreen_tls_security_le
On 21-02-13 16:16, Wietse Venema wrote:
Erik Slagter:
TO REPORT A PROBLEM see http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
TO (UN)SUBSCRIBE see http://www.postfix.org/lists.html
Thank you for using Postfix.
And I always thought I could be blunt at moments ;-)
PROBLEM (apparently this is a "pr
Erik Slagter:
> On 21-02-13 15:50, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Erik Slagter:
> >> I tried another variant:
> >>
> >> 192.168.0.1:smtp inet ... postscreen
> >> -o options...
> >>
> >> 192.168.0.1:pass inet ... smtpd
> >> -o options...
> >
> > If you don't show the exact options and the exact l
On 21-02-13 15:50, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Erik Slagter:
>> I tried another variant:
>>
>> 192.168.0.1:smtp inet ... postscreen
>> -o options...
>>
>> 192.168.0.1:pass inet ... smtpd
>> -o options...
>
> If you don't show the exact options and the exact logging
> then no-one can say what mi
Erik Slagter:
> I tried another variant:
>
> 192.168.0.1:smtp inet ... postscreen
> -o options...
>
> 192.168.0.1:pass inet ... smtpd
> -o options...
If you don't show the exact options and the exact logging
then no-one can say what mistake YOU are making.
Wietse
On 21-02-13 15:29, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
>> See above, SMTP welcome string. Which I added as an option to both the
>> smtpd and the postscreen line... None of them were honoured.
>
> Postscreen has its own set of options. Read the documentation;
> http://www.postfix.org/postscreen.8.html
man pos
* Vince Wang :
> Hello,
>
> We have a configured postfix email server worked well when we had it on the
> public IP. After we moved it behind our firewall on a intranet with ip
> 192.168.xxx.xxx, we found it is very slow when we send newsletter.
Logs?
> As I just start learning about postfix
On Feb 21, 2013, at 14:32, Erik Slagter wrote:
> On 21-02-13 13:04, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
>
>> http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html
>> Have you followed those instructions?
>
> Yes I did (of course).
>
> The README does NOT give any information on the use of multiple
> interfaces. It
On 21/02/2013 15:56, Erik Slagter wrote:
On 21-02-13 14:41, Birta Levente wrote:
Postfix does start, but it doesn't honour the options, on both
instances. It's very simple to check, because I have postcheck report
another welcome string on every interface. Now it shows the "default"
welcome stri
On 21/02/2013 15:32, Erik Slagter wrote:
On 21-02-13 13:04, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
Please help me with the following. I have here a postfix system that
listens on multiple (external) interfaces, e.g. one of them receives
e-mail from the internet, one of them receives more or less secure mail
fr
On 21-02-13 13:04, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
>> Please help me with the following. I have here a postfix system that
>> listens on multiple (external) interfaces, e.g. one of them receives
>> e-mail from the internet, one of them receives more or less secure mail
>> from associated institutions.
>>
>
On 2/20/2013 11:29 PM, Dennis Carr wrote:
> I'm basically looking for such an option - for all intents, if a domain
> is not, for some reason, in the RBLs, one could manually add the domain
> into such a list. In particular, I'm looking to do this to
> hostwinds.net and bluemountain14.com, as they
On Feb 21, 2013, at 10:31, Erik Slagter wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Please help me with the following. I have here a postfix system that
> listens on multiple (external) interfaces, e.g. one of them receives
> e-mail from the internet, one of them receives more or less secure mail
> from associated
Erik Slagter:
> I want to start using postscreen. Of course I am not going to "test" in
> a production environment, so I made a comparable postfix installation
> and with that installation I ran into a problem:
>
> The options (-o) that I specify on the various per-interface smtpd
> instances are
On Feb 21, 2013, at 10:16, Goutam Baul wrote:
> We are running postfix-2.3.3-2 on RHEL 5.4 (32bit). The reason for running
> such an old version is the non-availability of the currently used security
> suite on newer version of OS and this issues are likely to be addressed
> within a couple of
Hello all,
Please help me with the following. I have here a postfix system that
listens on multiple (external) interfaces, e.g. one of them receives
e-mail from the internet, one of them receives more or less secure mail
from associated institutions.
E-mail received on the "internet" interface re
Dear List,
We are running postfix-2.3.3-2 on RHEL 5.4 (32bit). The reason for running
such an old version is the non-availability of the currently used security
suite on newer version of OS and this issues are likely to be addressed
within a couple of weeks.
Our system is handling mails of
29 matches
Mail list logo
