[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

for this, it might not be feasible to go with something very big. But this is all pointing me in the right direction, thanks to everyone contributing to the discussion! Jens On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:51 AM Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users wrote: > > * Jens Hoffrichter via Postfix-users :

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

- fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: > > On 02.11.23 12:04, Jens Hoffrichter via Postfix-users wrote: > >Actually, I was just discussing these things - this is just regarding > >the new requirements from Google and Yahoo starting Feb 1st. > > >What happens, if a

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

Actually, I was just discussing these things - this is just regarding the new requirements from Google and Yahoo starting Feb 1st. What happens, if a mail is sent from AmazonSES, with a signature key from amazonses.com, but with a header from set to something different, like hoffrichter.no Would

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

Steffen, Because Google / Gmail / Google Workspace will put out DKIM requirements for every email from bulk senders from Feb 1st - not ARC requirements. From what I understand, DMARC alignment only happens on SPF and DKIM alignment, not on ARC alignment - and because of that, DKIM is relevant for

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

be very helpful :) Jens On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 8:11 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:06:46AM +0100, Jens Hoffrichter via Postfix-users > wrote: > > > We are looking into implementing DKIM signing for one of our services, > > and

[pfx] Recommendation for dkim signing

Hi! We are looking into implementing DKIM signing for one of our services, and there are multiple ways to implement that. So far I have found that you can do it with opendkim and amavis - any recommendation for one or the other, or maybe something completely different I haven't found yet?

Re: Trusted vs Verified TLS

Thanks! That was exactly the documentation I was looking for! Jens On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 11:05 AM Sven Schwedas wrote: > > On 11.10.22 10:37, Jens Hoffrichter wrote: > > What are the technical differences between those two methods of connecting? > > http

Trusted vs Verified TLS

Hi, We are running a fairly large postfix installation, with a lot of TLS policy entries and our own curated trust store. For some TLS connections, I see in the log Trusted TLS connection established and for some, I see Verified TLS connection established Both to the same type of remote

Consultation on configuration check

Hi all, I hope this is okay to post here - if not I apologize in advance. For a client of ours we are looking for a consultant to do an external configuration check of their postfix instances. This is of course paid work, and as our client is in the EU, you should ideally be located in the EU

Modifying subject for emails from external senders

Hi, I cannot find a previous discussion about this topic here on the mailing list. We are running postfix instances for a big corporation, which delivers to MS Exchange / Exchange online backends. We now have gotten the requirement to mark all e-mails coming from external senders to mark in the

Re: Where is the transport_maps resolved?

Hi Viktor! On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:23 PM Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > Transport lookups in smtpd(8) are just for recipient classification and > validation, so that it can distinguish between local, virtual alias, > virtual mailbox, relay recipients and the rest. No actual routing > happens in

Where is the transport_maps resolved?

Hi! I'm trying to implement a relatively esoteric use case right now, where all the mails I sent to postfix on a specific smtp daemon configured in the master.cf to a different nexthop than the regular mail going through the services. But this should only occur for a list of domains (my internal