wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
Andrzej A. Filip:
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
[...]
In any case, using UNIX system account names with @ is a mistake,
and I will not put in a great deal of effort to make that easy.
IMHO it does make sense at big system shared
Am 01.08.2015 um 16:07 schrieb Martin S:
Hi,
If I want to add SPF in this scenario:
I have a mailserver (mail.foo.com) which handles mail for foo.com.
It also handles mail for the domains bar.com and acme.com.
bar.com and acme.com doesn't have any mail servers (mx records points to
Good morning Martin,
I have exactly the same scenario. Instead of using include, I just use
the ipv4 addresses
of the mailserver:
v=spf1 ip4:97.107.132.79 ip4:50.116.29.164 -all
Here, the two IP addresses are for my two mx hosts.
This is the SPF record for all my domains, including the
Hi,
If I want to add SPF in this scenario:
I have a mailserver (mail.foo.com) which handles mail for foo.com.
It also handles mail for the domains bar.com and acme.com.
bar.com and acme.com doesn't have any mail servers (mx records points to
mail.foo.com).
Would the correct SPF record then be:
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org [150723 09:17]:
Not possible. The virtual_uid_maps parameter is a feature of the
virtual(8) not the pipe(8) transport. And it stores a numeric uid,
not a login name.
Why do virtual_uid_maps and virtual_gid_maps require a numeric uid/gid?
Allowing
Quoting Martin S mar...@skjoldebrand.eu:
Hi,
If I want to add SPF in this scenario:
Thanks for the input, it's basically how I thought it would be except the
part of not adding it to a normal domain.
/Martin S
Andrzej A. Filip:
I can easily agree that @ in names of Unix OS accounts will stay as
not _recommended_ for LONG. I disagree it *must* stay this way.
I expect that in the not so long term only root and other infrastructure
has a UNIX server account. Users exist in a different layer.
Martin S skrev den 2015-08-01 16:07:
I might just be confused (again).
what ever you do try this link
https://dmarcian.com/spf-survey/
do NOT include domain with active A MX
instaed create _spf.example.net and use it for include, so the _spf is
not pointing to A MX, this will
Would the correct SPF record then be:
v=spf1 include:foo.com ~all
For each domain?
my mailserver handles 4 domains. i explicitly set the permitted sender ips on
the spf entry for my main domain like
v=spf1 ip4:(ip v4 addr) ip6:(ip v6 addr)
and for the three other domains i redirect to my
Marvin Renich:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org [150801 15:52]:
Marvin Renich:
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org [150723 09:17]:
Not possible. The virtual_uid_maps parameter is a feature of the
virtual(8) not the pipe(8) transport. And it stores a numeric uid,
On Aug 1, 2015, at 8:41 AM, John Gateley post...@jfoo.org wrote:
v=spf1 ip4:97.107.132.79 ip4:50.116.29.164 -all
v=spf1 mx a ip4:75.148.37.66/32 a:mail.covisp.net -all
Hmm, I have both the IP and the name in the txt record for the domains that are
hosted via my mail server.
--
You start
Marvin Renich:
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org [150723 09:17]:
Not possible. The virtual_uid_maps parameter is a feature of the
virtual(8) not the pipe(8) transport. And it stores a numeric uid,
not a login name.
Why do virtual_uid_maps and virtual_gid_maps require a
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org [150801 15:52]:
Marvin Renich:
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org [150723 09:17]:
Not possible. The virtual_uid_maps parameter is a feature of the
virtual(8) not the pipe(8) transport. And it stores a numeric uid,
not a login name.
13 matches
Mail list logo
