I would like to match the 2a04:5200:fff4:0 IPv6 addresses (/64 block)
in an access table (and I'd like to avoid using a cidr lookup table
for specific cases). I have
2a04:5200:fff4:0 REJECT Blacklisted
However, 2a04:5200:fff4::fe was not caught.
The access(5) man page says "The access map lookup
I;m looking at adding DKIM to my Postfix
is there some up to date DKIM setup write up for multi domain Postfix
setup ? most of the ones I've found are for single domain, and, use
different setups, hence I'm trying to figure out what's the best way to
set this up.
V
On 12 Mar 2019, at 7:53, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I would like to match the 2a04:5200:fff4:0 IPv6 addresses (/64 block)
in an access table (and I'd like to avoid using a cidr lookup table
for specific cases). I have
2a04:5200:fff4:0 REJECT Blacklisted
However, 2a04:5200:fff4::fe was not caught.
Greetings, li...@sbt.net.au!
> I;m looking at adding DKIM to my Postfix
> is there some up to date DKIM setup write up for multi domain Postfix
> setup ?
Since postfix itself does not perform DKIM signing or validation, the postfix
setup is no different, no matter, how many domains you are using
On 2019-03-12 08:49:28 -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
> "0" is not an octet pair. Demo:
>
> # cat accessdemo
> 2a04:5200:fff4:0 REJECT 554 trailing zero
> 2a04:5200:fff4: REJECT 554 trailing octet pair zeros
> 2a04:5200:fff4REJECT 554 NO trailing zero
>
> # postmap hash:accessdemo
>
Vincent Lefevre:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 converted... ]
> I would like to match the 2a04:5200:fff4:0 IPv6 addresses (/64 block)
> in an access table (and I'd like to avoid using a cidr lookup table
> for specific cases). I have
>
> 2a04:5200:fff4:0 REJECT Blacklisted
Short answer: 2a04:5200:fff4 (st
A. Schulze:
> Hello,
>
> updated from 3.4.1 to 3.4.3 and at the same time dovecot-2.2 to dovecot-2.3 (
> + pigeonhole)
> I assume the changes behavior is dovecot/pigeonhole now using the advertised
> "CHUNKING" extension.
>
> Now an echo service (dovecot-2.3-pigeonhole) don't send messages anym
On 12 Mar 2019, at 9:16, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2019-03-12 08:49:28 -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
"0" is not an octet pair. Demo:
# cat accessdemo
2a04:5200:fff4:0REJECT 554 trailing zero
2a04:5200:fff4: REJECT 554 trailing octet pair zeros
2a04:5200:fff4
Bill, I think that an IPv6 address ending in will work only in
a cidr access map, because all other maps use string comparison.
When the Postfix SMTP server queries a table it will use a system
library function to convert the client IP address to string, and
that function will
- first strip l
Viktor Dukhovni:
Your no-BDAT work-around is sufficient until the code is updated
along lines below
Hello Viktor,
Thanks for that patch. I confirm it works like expected
Andreas
A. Schulze:
>
> Viktor Dukhovni:
>
> > Your no-BDAT work-around is sufficient until the code is updated
> > along lines below
>
>
> Hello Viktor,
>
> Thanks for that patch. I confirm it works like expected
Did you test it in smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions?
Wietse
On 12 Mar 2019, at 10:29, Wietse Venema wrote:
Bill, I think that an IPv6 address ending in will work only in
a cidr access map, because all other maps use string comparison.
Did you notice the demo I included, using a hash map?
When the Postfix SMTP server queries a table it will use
Bill Cole:
> On 12 Mar 2019, at 10:29, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Bill, I think that an IPv6 address ending in will work only in
> > a cidr access map, because all other maps use string comparison.
>
> Did you notice the demo I included, using a hash map?
The postmap command does not know h
On 2019-03-12 11:39:54 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Bill Cole:
> > On 12 Mar 2019, at 10:29, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > > Bill, I think that an IPv6 address ending in will work only in
> > > a cidr access map, because all other maps use string comparison.
After looking at the postfix sour
On 12 Mar 2019, at 11:39, Wietse Venema wrote:
Bill Cole:
On 12 Mar 2019, at 10:29, Wietse Venema wrote:
Bill, I think that an IPv6 address ending in will work only in
a cidr access map, because all other maps use string comparison.
Did you notice the demo I included, using a hash map?
Vincent Lefevre:
> BTW, I'm wondering why a canonical form is used for the match
> instead of a form without compressed zeros. Wouldn't the latter
> be more useful in practice, while not slower?
Because the compressed form is what Postfix logs, therefore the
compressed form is what Postfix uses fo
Bill Cole:
> Also (as I discovered by testing) smtpd does not canonicalize
> ADDR=IPv6:* strings given to it by XCLIENT, so testing that way requires
> the tester to know how to canonicalize an address.
Aha, that is a good point. Added canonicalization to the todo list.
Wietse
> is there some up to date DKIM setup write up for multi domain Postfix
> setup ?
Amavisd and OpenDKIM each support multiple domains. Since Postfix does
not handle DKIM signatures, you need to look into external tools.
-Ralph
I think this is the one I used. Works great.
https://www.stevejenkins.com/blog/2011/08/installing-opendkim-rpm-via-yum-with-postfix-or-sendmail-for-rhel-centos-fedora/
On 2019-03-12 7:31 am, li...@sbt.net.au wrote:
I;m looking at adding DKIM to my Postfix
is there some up to date DKIM setup
Hi, wouldn't the answer to the OP's question be to just list all the domains
they want signed in the file
/etc/opendkim/SigningTable
Assuming they are using Opendkim.
I wrote some documentation here.
https://linux.uits.uconn.edu/dkim-review-of-all-aspects/
-ANGELO FAZZINA
ang...@uconn.edu
Uni
I found my notes. This is for RHEL:
yum -y install
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/epel-release-latest-7.noarch.rpm
subscription-manager repos --enable "rhel-*-optional-rpms" --enable
"rhel-*-extras-rpms"
yum -y install opendkim
#generate keys for each domain
cd /etc/opendkim/keys
mkdi
Hi to all of you,
since weeks I'm struggling with this problem, not being able to solve
it on my own and I think the last possibility of getting help is to
ask you, the experts right here.
I set up a mailserver with the help of a howto I found on the net.
Mainly everything is okay, mails are recei
Michael Ludwig:
> Hi to all of you,
>
> since weeks I'm struggling with this problem, not being able to solve
> it on my own and I think the last possibility of getting help is to
> ask you, the experts right here.
> I set up a mailserver with the help of a howto I found on the net.
> Mainly every
* Michael Ludwig:
> So any help is greatly appreciated.
I doubt that Postfix is the culprit. I ran into similar issues a while
ago: E-Mail sent by me which included German umlauts did not arrive with
a valid DKIM signature. I thought that disabling the 8BITMIME extension
in Postfix was a possible
24 matches
Mail list logo
