Hello
I think something like this should work
----.domain.com:2,S
That is, change @ into dot, remove ".eml", and add ":2,S" suffix (marking
messages as read).
The message sizes are Dovecot extension, I guess mutt will not use them anyway.
Best wishes
Eugene
Get
On 07/31/2023 09:24 AM, Eugene R via Postfix-users wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Those "ugly characters" are there for a reason: they are specified by the
> Maildir standard (and the Dovecot's extensions to it) to encode various
> metadata such as message ID, size, flags, etc
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w
Michel Verdier via Postfix-users wrote in
<87jzu4c5qi@free.fr>:
|On 2023-08-09, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote:
|
|> 192.0.2.1:submission inet n - n - - smtpd
|> -o syslog_name=vpnsub
|> -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=no
|> -o smtp
Michel Verdier via Postfix-users:
> On 2023-08-09, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > 192.0.2.1:submission inet n - n - - smtpd
> > -o syslog_name=vpnsub
> > -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=no
> > -o
> > smtpd_relay_restrictions=permit_my
On 2023-08-09, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote:
> 192.0.2.1:submission inet n - n - - smtpd
> -o syslog_name=vpnsub
> -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=no
> -o
> smtpd_relay_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject_unauth_destination
> -
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 02:53:02PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > > > vpnsub_cleanup unix n - n - 0 cleanup
> > > > -o {header_checks=regexp:{{/^Received:/ IGNORE}}}
> > >
> > > I am not aware of any suport for s
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 02:53:02PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > vpnsub_cleanup unix n - n - 0 cleanup
> > > -o {header_checks=regexp:{{/^Received:/ IGNORE}}}
> >
> > I am not aware of any suport for such inline regexp tables. What
> > release of
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 06:48:11PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via
> > Postfix-users wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah the wonderful suggestion of this super helpful list (thanks
> > > again!) for my setup (laptop postfix on "forbidden add
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 06:48:11PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > Yeah the wonderful suggestion of this super helpful list (thanks
> > again!) for my setup (laptop postfix on "forbidden address" relays
> > to in-VPN postfix which then
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 06:48:11PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Yeah the wonderful suggestion of this super helpful list (thanks
> again!) for my setup (laptop postfix on "forbidden address" relays
> to in-VPN postfix which then sends out) was
>
> 192.0.2.1:submission ine
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
> Michel Verdier via Postfix-users wrote in
> <87fs4s49y5@free.fr>:
> |On 2023-08-09, Fourhundred Thecat via Postfix-users wrote:
> |
> |> do you think this would be OK, or does the hostname and IP (be it
> |> localhost.local) have to be there ?
> |
>
Michel Verdier via Postfix-users wrote in
<87fs4s49y5@free.fr>:
|On 2023-08-09, Fourhundred Thecat via Postfix-users wrote:
|
|> do you think this would be OK, or does the hostname and IP (be it
|> localhost.local) have to be there ?
|
|Why don't you remove completely this header in your
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 11:35:12AM -0500, shorton wrote:
> >Do you have "reject_unauth_pipelining" in any of your smtpd
> >restrictions, in either main.cf or master.cf?
>
> I do:
> smtpd_data_restrictions =
> reject_unauth_pipelining,
> permit
That's the reason why the clie
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Scott Techlist via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Client has an appliance (Axion RTAC) that sends email based reports.
> I don't have access to the appliance or its docs. It used to send its
> emails to an Exchange server that has been decommissioned. I'm tryin
Client has an appliance (Axion RTAC) that sends email based reports. I don't
have access to the appliance or its docs. It used to send its emails to an
Exchange server that has been decommissioned. I'm trying to get it to send to
my postfix server. I have it whitelisted for postfix checks.
Dnia 9.08.2023 o godz. 09:22:03 Bill Cole via Postfix-users pisze:
> A Received header that seems to record a SMTP
> session on the loopback by Postfix is not common,
Hm... I think it's quite common for webmail applications. They usually
connect to IMAP/SMTP server on loopback interface. (assumin
On 2023-08-09, Fourhundred Thecat via Postfix-users wrote:
> do you think this would be OK, or does the hostname and IP (be it
> localhost.local) have to be there ?
Why don't you remove completely this header in your postfix using for
example header_checks ? Received is frequently removed to hide
On 2023-08-09 at 03:40:20 UTC-0400 (Wed, 9 Aug 2023 09:40:20 +0200)
Fourhundred Thecat via Postfix-users <400the...@gmx.ch>
is rumored to have said:
On 2023-08-09 07:58, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 07:34:48AM +0200, Fourhundred Thecat via
Postfix-users wrote
> On 2023-08-09 07:58, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 07:34:48AM +0200, Fourhundred Thecat via Postfix-users
wrote:
So that the first hop looks like this:
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.xxx.yyy (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E0
19 matches
Mail list logo
