Hi,
I'm returning with this issue* but I consider it starting to have bad
side effects.
Yesterday on the dmarc-ietf list on a subject of bounce emails, Franck
Martin stated that
.It is notoriously known that postfix cannot DKIM sign the messages
it generates(MDN).
and he send the link to Postfix
Dirk St?cker:
For some subdomains when switching from catchall to individual settings I
simply set a CNAME to another name with correct MX settings
name.domain.tld -- mail.domain.tld (containing A, and MX)
It worked for many servers, but some started to deliver mail to
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 09:43:59AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Normally, Postfix makes delivery decisions based on the recipient
address. If you want to deliver the same recipient in multiple
places, then you need to create a backup copy of the message:
- Either send the backup copy
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 05:59:47PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
If you don't want to use an SMTP Y proxy, you can use recipient_bcc_maps
with regexp tables, I believe examples are in the list archives.
BCC mapping via regexp or PCRE:
u...@example.net
Nicolas Boullis:
Thanks Wietse for those suggestions, I did not consider using a
smtpd_proxy_filter.
However, I had a look at smtpprox as you suggested but, as far as I can
see, it cannont behave as a Y proxy.
This takes a few lines of code.
I could consider writing a Y proxy myself, but
Am 28.11.2014 um 14:41 schrieb Nicolas Boullis:
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 09:43:59AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Normally, Postfix makes delivery decisions based on the recipient
address. If you want to deliver the same recipient in multiple
places, then you need to create a backup copy
Grim Reaper:
Hi there
I am looking for a email branding solution that can integrate with Postfix.
I have been searching, but it has been unsuccessful.
If I understand correctly, this is about a system that produces
(HTML) mail with a specific look and feel.
The good news is that such
Jose Borges Ferreira:
What's wrong ? The documentation or the
internal_mail_filter_classes/non_smtpd_milters implementation that
allows applying a signing Milter to bounces ?
You appear to believe that there is a difference between Postfix
documentation and Postfix implementation.
Can you in
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Can you in a few words explain what the difference is, without
asking the reader to dig into other mailing list messages?
Hi,
I just reference the other lists for full context and quoted the relevant parts.
I'm just
Jose Borges Ferreira:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Can you in a few words explain what the difference is, without
asking the reader to dig into other mailing list messages?
Hi,
I just reference the other lists for full context and quoted the
Hi,
I have a trivial question, which could become a wish list feature.
There are three MTAs. First is a web server postfix instance that relates all
mail to the second MTAS, a relay server, which can send mail directly to the
world. This relay server and a third MTA are two postfix multi
Am 28.11.2014 um 17:19 schrieb Wietse Venema:
Jose Borges Ferreira:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Can you in a few words explain what the difference is, without
asking the reader to dig into other mailing list messages?
I just reference the
Christen Rößner:
Unfortunately the form does set a From:-header to an AOL address.
(ask the customer to) fix that
MX host is foo bar, use transport SMTP:[some.mta]:12345
There was as similar discussion on this list some days ago:
http://marc.info/?t=14166878141
configure domain
The default setting of unknown_address_reject_code is 450
(http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unknown_address_reject_code).
If the sender domain or recipient domain are not found (subject to the
caveat that this is NOT a temporary DNS error when postfix does the
lookup) isn't it reasonable to
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:34:54AM -0500, Raman Gupta wrote:
The default setting of unknown_address_reject_code is 450
(http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unknown_address_reject_code).
Once your system is correctly configured, by all means change it
to 550. The default is a safety measure
On 11/28/2014 11:41 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:34:54AM -0500, Raman Gupta wrote:
The default setting of unknown_address_reject_code is 450
(http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unknown_address_reject_code).
Once your system is correctly configured, by all means
Christen R??ner:
When the relay server determines the MX for a recipient address, is there any
table that works like this:
MX host is foo bar, use transport SMTP:[some.mta]:12345
To override MX host selection based on recipient:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#transport_maps
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 08:11:54AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dirk St?cker:
For some subdomains when switching from catchall to individual settings I
simply set a CNAME to another name with correct MX settings
name.domain.tld -- mail.domain.tld (containing A, and MX)
It
Am 28.11.2014 um 18:32 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 08:11:54AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dirk St?cker:
For some subdomains when switching from catchall to individual settings I
simply set a CNAME to another name with correct MX settings
name.domain.tld --
Am 28.11.2014 um 18:05 schrieb Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Christen R??ner:
When the relay server determines the MX for a recipient address, is there
any table that works like this:
MX host is foo bar, use transport SMTP:[some.mta]:12345
To override MX host selection based
Am 28.11.2014 um 19:26 schrieb Christen Rößner
c...@roessner-network-solutions.com:
Recipient address lookup for i...@neue-arbeitslos-vb.de would result in a MX
result of mx.deltaweb.de. And now I look for a way to say: do not send to
mx.deltaweb.de:25, but consult a lookup table for
On 11/28/2014 12:26 PM, Christen Rößner wrote:
Am 28.11.2014 um 18:05 schrieb Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Christen R??ner:
When the relay server determines the MX for a recipient address, is there
any table that works like this:
MX host is foo bar, use transport
Am 28.11.2014 um 19:31 schrieb Christen Rößner:
Am 28.11.2014 um 19:26 schrieb Christen Rößner
c...@roessner-network-solutions.com:
Recipient address lookup for i...@neue-arbeitslos-vb.de would result in a MX
result of mx.deltaweb.de. And now I look for a way to say: do not send to
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:30 PM, li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
I'm just pointing that the Milter documentation*, quote:
Postfix currently does not apply content filters to mail that is
forwarded or aliased internally, or to mail that is generated
internally such as bounces or
Am 28.11.2014 um 19:39 schrieb li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net:
Am 28.11.2014 um 19:31 schrieb Christen Rößner:
Am 28.11.2014 um 19:26 schrieb Christen Rößner
c...@roessner-network-solutions.com:
Recipient address lookup for i...@neue-arbeitslos-vb.de would result in a
MX
Christen R??ner:
I look for:
Table:
LhsRhs
mx.some.mtasmtp:[mx.whatever.tld]:1234
I have implemented smtp_dns_reply_filter (currently, testing), which
matches a resource record against a (regular expression) pattern.
At the moment supports IGNORE, but it
don't get me wrong but Postfix currently does not apply content filters to
mail that is forwarded or aliased internally, or to mail that is generated
internally such as bounces or Postmaster notifications. This may be a
problem when you want to apply a signing Milter to such mail claims
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:26 schrieb Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Christen R??ner:
I look for:
Table:
LhsRhs
mx.some.mtasmtp:[mx.whatever.tld]:1234
I have implemented smtp_dns_reply_filter (currently, testing), which
matches a resource record
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:40 schrieb Wietse Venema:
don't get me wrong but Postfix currently does not apply content filters to
mail that is forwarded or aliased internally, or to mail that is generated
internally such as bounces or Postmaster notifications. This may be a
problem when you want to
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Christian Rößner:
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:26 schrieb Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Christen R??ner:
I look for:
Table:
LhsRhs
mx.some.mtasmtp:[mx.whatever.tld]:1234
I have implemented smtp_dns_reply_filter (currently,
Table:
LhsRhs
mx.some.mtasmtp:[mx.whatever.tld]:1234
If mx.some.mta was found via the recipient, domain, consider
using a pattern based on the recipient.
If mx.some.mta was found via the sender, consider using a
sender-based acces rule with
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:50 schrieb li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net:
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Christian Rößner:
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:26 schrieb Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Christen R??ner:
I look for:
Table:
LhsRhs
mx.some.mta
Von: Christen Rößner c...@roessner-network-solutions.com
Datum: 28. November 2014 22:16:05 MEZ
An: li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net
Betreff: Re: Transport based on next hop
Am 28.11.2014 um 21:33 schrieb Christian Rößner
c...@roessner-network-solutions.com:
Am 28.11.2014 um 20:50
Christian Rößner:
This server already has two ip addresses and routing can not be done
on answer decisions. That exactly is the problem here.
And the main MTA on port 25 enforces a policy.
As you told in a previus message you run multiple instances on one host.
I assume you have a clean
34 matches
Mail list logo
