Re: disable ipv6 when sending to gmail ?

Sorry, my bad. I dropped the ball on publish settings, the writing was not visible for general public to see. Apologies. Anyway, I realized that since I replied to an existing conversation on Nabble.com, it is impossible for a person not seeing the entire thread to get my idea. The thread can be s

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

Hi Wietse, Op Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 02:22:36PM -0400 schreef Wietse Venema: > If one must force the outbound SMTP IP address depending on the > inbound SMTP IP address, specify "-o content_filter=foo:" in > master.cf. I've thought about that, but it will fail if the message can't be delivered imme

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

Roel Bouwman: > Hi Wietse, > > Op Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 02:22:36PM -0400 schreef Wietse Venema: > > If one must force the outbound SMTP IP address depending on the > > inbound SMTP IP address, specify "-o content_filter=foo:" in > > master.cf. > > I've thought about that, but it will fail if the m

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

On Oct 17, 2013 4:59 PM, "Roel Bouwman" wrote: > > Hello, > > I've been trying to simplify our multi-instance Postfix setup, > however, I'm wondering whether it's actually possible. So I > was wondering if anyone could tell me whether my idea is futile > or could actually work. > > Let me explain.

Re: postfix reports no rDNS on a host with many PTR records

Em 17/10/13 15:09, Blake Hudson escreveu: Based on your suggestion, I did find the following bug report for glibc from 2008 (that looks like Wietse had an indirect hand in): http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5790 It appears that the issue was resolved in glibc due to Leonardo's

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

El 17/10/13 11:21, Dominik George escribió: > Dominik George schrieb: > >>> Viktor Dukhovni schrieb: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16:27AM -0400, Carlos R Laguna wrote: > LDAP is not SQL, and inverse relations (groups of user, rather > > than > users of group) are very difficult to

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

Grr. the text editor ate up one line from my example. It's fixed below. Wietse Viktor Dukhovni: > > You made some mistake in a master.cf service name field, or some > > "security" feature (selinux, apparmor, or the like) is getting in > > the way. > > However, all these pathnames are que

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

Viktor Dukhovni: > > You made some mistake in a master.cf service name field, or some > > "security" feature (selinux, apparmor, or the like) is getting in > > the way. > > However, all these pathnames are queue-directory relative, and so > a second queue-manager with a custom queue directory need

Re: postfix reports no rDNS on a host with many PTR records

/dev/rob0 wrote the following on 10/17/2013 12:17 PM: On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:01:39PM -0500, Blake Hudson wrote: Peter wrote the following on 10/16/2013 5:32 PM: On 10/16/2013 04:03 AM, Blake Hudson wrote: Thanks for the reminder about where to locate the test programs Wietse. I confirmed

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 01:30:50PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > Roel Bouwman: > > I have tried duplicating the "cleanup" and "qmgr" and "rewrite" > > services in master.cf with a duplicate one, and using the > > -o queue_directory and -o ..._service_name and -o default_transport > > parameters to

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

Roel Bouwman: > I have tried duplicating the "cleanup" and "qmgr" and "rewrite" > services in master.cf with a duplicate one, and using the > -o queue_directory and -o ..._service_name and -o default_transport > parameters to seperate traffic flows. > > However, this doesn't seem to work as I woul

Re: postfix reports no rDNS on a host with many PTR records

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:01:39PM -0500, Blake Hudson wrote: > Peter wrote the following on 10/16/2013 5:32 PM: > >On 10/16/2013 04:03 AM, Blake Hudson wrote: > >>Thanks for the reminder about where to locate the test programs > >>Wietse. I confirmed this appears to be an issue with RHEL5 (all >

Re: postfix reports no rDNS on a host with many PTR records

Peter wrote the following on 10/16/2013 5:32 PM: On 10/16/2013 04:03 AM, Blake Hudson wrote: Thanks for the reminder about where to locate the test programs Wietse. I confirmed this appears to be an issue with RHEL5 (all patches applied today). The issue is resolved in RHEL6. I am running a loc

Re: Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 05:58:16PM +0200, Roel Bouwman wrote: > I have tried duplicating the "cleanup" and "qmgr" and "rewrite" > services in master.cf with a duplicate one, and using the > -o queue_directory and -o ..._service_name and -o default_transport > parameters to seperate traffic flows.

Outbound routing decision based on inbound smtpd process

Hello, I've been trying to simplify our multi-instance Postfix setup, however, I'm wondering whether it's actually possible. So I was wondering if anyone could tell me whether my idea is futile or could actually work. Let me explain. We run SMTP services for multiple organisations on a cluster o

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Dominik George schrieb: >>> Viktor Dukhovni schrieb: >>> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16:27AM -0400, Carlos R Laguna wrote: >>> > LDAP is not SQL, and inverse relations (groups of user, rather >than >>> > users of group) are very difficult to expre

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 >> Viktor Dukhovni schrieb: >> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16:27AM -0400, Carlos R Laguna wrote: >> > LDAP is not SQL, and inverse relations (groups of user, rather than >> > users of group) are very difficult to express. On second thought, Viktor

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Carlos R Laguna schrieb: >Dominik George you mind to explain yourseld a little more further. If your LDAP users are regular system users, i.e., have the posixAccount class, and your mail servers uses them for local authentication, then obviously,

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

El 17/10/13 10:25, Dominik George escribió: > Viktor Dukhovni schrieb: > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16:27AM -0400, Carlos R Laguna wrote: > > LDAP is not SQL, and inverse relations (groups of user, rather than > > users of group) are very difficult to express. > > Whereas, if the LDAP users are

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Viktor Dukhovni schrieb: >On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16:27AM -0400, Carlos R Laguna wrote: >LDAP is not SQL, and inverse relations (groups of user, rather than >users of group) are very difficult to express. Whereas, if the LDAP users are system us

Re: Restriction classes and ldap groups

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16:27AM -0400, Carlos R Laguna wrote: > Hello everyone, for a while now i have ben using ldap groups to create > restriccion classes for manage the access of my users like this > > correose_search_base = ou=Groups,dc=jovenclub,dc=cu > correose_query_filter = (&(|(cn=Cor

Restriction classes and ldap groups

Hello everyone, for a while now i have ben using ldap groups to create restriccion classes for manage the access of my users like this correose_search_base = ou=Groups,dc=jovenclub,dc=cu correose_query_filter = (&(|(cn=CorreoSE))(memberUid=%u)) correose_result_attribute = cn So i get the cn of th

Re: disable ipv6 when sending to gmail ?

Hi, that all sounds cool, but ... > Anyways, my users are happy. Their mail gets delivered. See my blog > post > > about my fix. could you please fix that to point to something more helpful than an em

Re: disable ipv6 when sending to gmail ?

Google chose to change the wording in their 550 error. 550-5.7.1 [2001:-my-IPv6-address-here- 16] Our system has detected 550-5.7.1 that this message does not meet IPv6 sending guidelines regarding PTR 550-5.7.1 records and authentication. Please review 550-5.7.1 https://support.google.com/mai