On 1/26/2024 20:55:16, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 07:51:31PM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
joe a via Postfix-users:
Postfix 3.5.9-5.9.2
Perhaps not a postfix question at all. Looking for a way to capture
outbound email
On 1/26/2024 19:51:31, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
joe a via Postfix-users:
Postfix 3.5.9-5.9.2
Perhaps not a postfix question at all. Looking for a way to capture
outbound email, for troubleshooting purposes.
Is "smtp-sink" the way to do this?
That could
Postfix 3.5.9-5.9.2
Perhaps not a postfix question at all. Looking for a way to capture
outbound email, for troubleshooting purposes.
Is "smtp-sink" the way to do this?
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To
On 7/7/2023 5:12 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
joe a via Postfix-users:
On 7/7/2023 3:46 PM, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
One hesitates to post this.
Found some oddness when changing a destination in transport_maps
(transport_maps = lmdb:/etc/postfix/transport).
Seems related
On 7/7/2023 3:46 PM, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
One hesitates to post this.
Found some oddness when changing a destination in transport_maps
(transport_maps = lmdb:/etc/postfix/transport).
Seems related to pattern matching.
The file /etc/postfix/transport contains entries of this form
ns on the form of the search term found that "grep "somename\-"
files", provided an exact match. That is enclosing the search term in
double quotes with the escape character seemed to "fix" it.
Or, is this just "expected behavior"?
Oh, Nurse, is it time for me
On 7/6/2023 5:12 PM, Noel Jones via Postfix-users wrote:
On Jul 6, 2023, at 2:55 PM, joe a via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 7/6/2023 12:56 PM, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
On 7/6/2023 8:53 AM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 08:32:42AM -0400, joe a via
On 7/6/2023 12:56 PM, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
On 7/6/2023 8:53 AM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 08:32:42AM -0400, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
While chasing a postfix (version 3.5.9) to dovecot authentication issue,
checked "compiled in&quo
On 7/6/2023 8:53 AM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 08:32:42AM -0400, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
While chasing a postfix (version 3.5.9) to dovecot authentication issue,
checked "compiled in" methods:
postconf -a
cyrus
doveco
While chasing a postfix (version 3.5.9) to dovecot authentication issue,
checked "compiled in" methods:
postconf -a
cyrus
dovecot
postconf -A
cyrus
Does this mean the choices for configuring authentication are affected?
Dovecot and Postfix were installed from packaged version supplied
On 7/4/2023 9:55 PM, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
I realize this is lacking information normally requested, but before
sending such, was hoping for a bit of a sanity check, without seriously
annoying those more knowledgeable than I.
Have working version of postfix 3.5.9 which acts
I realize this is lacking information normally requested, but before
sending such, was hoping for a bit of a sanity check, without seriously
annoying those more knowledgeable than I.
Have working version of postfix 3.5.9 which acts as a relay for a low
volume in house system, authenticating
On 7/2/2023 7:07 PM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Sun, Jul 02, 2023 at 06:49:53PM -0400, joe a via Postfix-users wrote:
> Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users Sun, 02 Jul 2023 14:21:52 -0700
>
>On Sun, Jul 02, 2023 at 05:11:52PM -0400, joe a via Postfix-use
> Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users Sun, 02 Jul 2023 14:21:52 -0700
>
>On Sun, Jul 02, 2023 at 05:11:52PM -0400, joe a via Postfix-users >wrote:
>
>> When attempting to send an email to postfix on that box, for
delivery >to
>> the local dovecot (via lmtp), the mess
Setup a test system with dovecot and postfix, version 3.5.9, intending
to create an "imap server" for local use.
When attempting to send an email to postfix on that box, for delivery to
the local dovecot (via lmpt), the message instead goes out to my ISP in
the fashion of currently working
und the
time of you attempts
>> That's unfortunate, because what you've provided is inadequate to
>> dioagnose your problem.
>>
>> AS ALWAYS, 'postconf -nf' and 'postconf -Mf' output plus relevant
>> (non-verbose) log lines are critical to getting useful help here.
postconf -nf > somename (like postconf-main-log.txt)
postconf -Mf > someothername (like postconf-master-log.txt)
I probably won't be much help beyond that.
joe a.
>>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 05:56:31PM -0500, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>
>> >> > noauth unix - - n - - smtp
>> >> > -o smtp_sasl_enable=no
>> >> > -o smtp_sender_dependent_aut
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 05:11:02PM -0500, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>
>> > Therefore your master.cf file needs to have an least one additional
>> > smtp-based transport, with either SASL disabled entirely, and/or
>> > sender-dependent authentication disabled, o
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 02:03:29PM -0500, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>
>> > IIRC Wietse already suggested a work-around, by making the
>> > sender-dependent authentication settings be transport-specific.
>> >
>> > In particular the internal nexthop th
attempt
authentication,
for this oddball email when others sent to the same user do not, with the same
configuration.
Perhaps the answer is "it just does, you have a work around, now go away, you
silly
person",
joe a.
-
j4computers, llc
Stone Ridge, NY 12484
845-687-3734
www.j4computers.com
-
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 07:22:40PM -0500, Joe Acquisto-j4
>
> wrote:
>
>> . . .
>> > I would imagine that Postfix can only authenticate to
>> > servers that have entries in /etc/postfix/sasl_passwd.
>> >
>> > smtp_sasl_password_maps
> Wietse Venema:
>> Joe Acquisto-j4:
>> > For version 3.7.4, is there a means of disabling for smtp per user,
>> > per domain, per IP, when "smtp_sender_dependent_authentication =
>> > yes"?
>>
>> Postfix will search smtp_sasl_
ostly as
expected)
/etc/postfixsasl_passwd takes this form:
j...@aaa.comjoea@AAA:ADADAD
j...@aaad.comj...@aaad.com:ADADAD2
As said, this appears to work and does not interfer with incoming email that
goes to a local host, unauthenticated, in all but one case.
joe a
> Wietse Venema:
>> Joe Acquisto-j4:
>> > For version 3.7.4, is there a means of disabling for smtp per user,
>> > per domain, per IP, when "smtp_sender_dependent_authentication =
>> > yes"?
>>
>> Postfix will search smtp_sasl_
post.
Any assistance in adding trace or strace. explicit or referral to recent (and
reachable) docs would be appreciated. The two referenced programs are all
that are natively available in this distribution.
Thanks in advance.
joe a
1 anvil
scacheunix - - n - 1 scache
spamassassin unix - nn - - pipe
flags=Rq user=spamfilter argv=/usr/local/bin/spamass.sh -e /usr/sbin/sendmail
-oi -f ${sender} -- ${recipient}
tlsmgrunix - - n 1000? 1 tlsmgr
postlog unix-dgram n - n - 1 postlogd
-- mechanisms on localhost --
-- end of saslfinger output --
I hope that is sufficient. Thanks for any and all assistance.
joe a
> On 2022-01-17 at 20:09:55 UTC-0500 (Mon, 17 Jan 2022 20:09:55 -0500)
> Joe Acquisto-j4
> is rumored to have said:
>
>
>> Sorry for the garbled message. Looking for the config files, etc that
>> are normally requested.
>
>
> The non-default main.c
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, that got me over that hump. Test email went through,
>>>
>>> Now to translate this effort into fixing my postfix configuration.
>>>
>>> joe a
>>
>> The old adage "read logs and be enlightened"
gt; Thanks, that got me over that hump. Test email went through,
>>
>> Now to translate this effort into fixing my postfix configuration.
>>
>> joe a
>
> The old adage "read logs and be enlightened" (OK I made that up) seems to
> hold.
>
> Eventuall
t hump. Test email went through,
>
> Now to translate this effort into fixing my postfix configuration.
>
> joe a
The old adage "read logs and be enlightened" (OK I made that up) seems to hold.
Eventually I emerged from my fog and found the bounce messages were via the
provi
to translate this effort into fixing my postfix configuration.
joe a
> On 2022-01-13 at 20:26:53 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 20:26:53 -0500)
> Joe Acquisto-j4
> is rumored to have said:
>
> [...]
>> Would it be valid to presume that an SMTP server that can be connected
>> to,
>> securely, via Outlook, Thunderbird
> On 2022-01-13 at 13:09:45 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 13:09:45 -0500)
> Joe Acquisto-j4
> is rumored to have said:
>
>> While reading the Postfix SASL doc,
> (http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html#client_sasl),
>> I puzzled over a few things.
>>
>>
While reading the Postfix SASL doc,
(http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html#client_sasl),
I puzzled over a few things.
- "The smtp_tls_security_level setting ensures that the connection to the
remote smtp server will be encrypted, and smtp_sasl_tls_security_options
removes the prohibition
ht entice much more "unfriendly traffic" than you might imagine.
joe a
t;
>
> Nothing is broken, https just isn't supported.
Sorry for the noise, apparently I changed something in my browser to require
https.
Odd that.
joe a.
oday I find only a directory listing at www.postfix.org or www.postfix.com
joe a.
Initially it appeared to me that milters had to be specified main.cf.
> Delving somewhat deeper it now appears that to me milters can
> alternately be specified in master.cf? Is that correct?
>
> joe a
Re-reading http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html#principles
I think provides
> On 22 Feb 2021, at 18:40, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>
On 22 Feb 2021, at 17:27, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Post fix version 3.4.7. with Spamassassin. While adding virus
>>>> scanning (clamav) noticed during testing
>>>> that any mai
> On 24/02/21 11:47 am, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>> Added Virus scanning to a SOHO stetup. clamav-milter is directing (?)
> "infected" mail to postfix HOLD queue.
>
> Perhaps rather than having clamav-milter put the message on hold, it
> might be possible to
oal and probably has "boiler
plate" solutions, lurking every where.
But my search skills are at odds with the SEO overlords these days. (ie, I
can't find nothing, useful, no how, lately)
Thanks for your tolerance.
joe a.
> On 22 Feb 2021, at 17:27, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>
>> Post fix version 3.4.7. with Spamassassin. While adding virus
>> scanning (clamav) noticed during testing
>> that any mail send from the postfix host does not get processed by
>> spamassassin.
>>
or clamd.
Wondering how I can fix that. That is, cause local mail to be scanned.
Quick look at master.cf and main.cf, nothing jumped out to bite me.
joe a.
> I'm revisiting blocking certain attachments. A multi part question:
> Implementation, logging, testing.
>
> Seems the accepted way to do attachment blocking is something like this:
>
> in /etc/postfix/main.cf added, without quotes: "mime_header_checks =
>
I'm revisiting blocking certain attachments. A multi part question:
Implementation, logging, testing.
Seems the accepted way to do attachment blocking is something like this:
in /etc/postfix/main.cf added, without quotes: "mime_header_checks =
regexp:/etc/postfix/block_attachments"
in
> michael Schumacher wrote:
>> Joe,
>>
Due to some recent malware (in attachments, obvious stuff) wanted to add AV
> scanning. I gather "Amavis-new" is the hot ticket these days,
>>> I deal with Sophos products and would like to use their linux p
Not to waste anyone's time, but I posted this on SA list and a Sophos site,
but, came up with zip. Not even a "do-dah". Beyond "experiences"
any leads to general "how to: guides that work in practice?
>> SOHO system, on virtual machines. Fairly recent versions. Running openSUSE
>> Leap 15.1.
>>>
> kris_h:
>> Hey Wietse,
>>
>> thank you for this clearification.
>>
>> What do you think about using the reject-recipient /\$\{/-rule?
>
> As a temporary rule, it may have made sense when the Exim bug was new.
>
> As a permanent 'deny' rule, it won't block new exploits.
>
> Wietse
Hi fair folks. After years of using OS X servers I'm back on FreeBSD and
well... owls have sure aged since then.
So I'm trying to do a virtual domain+virtual users setup with Dovecot where
I'd have several virtual domains and several users. Each user is supposed to
be authenticated via the simple
Pardon the OT post, but looking for comments on smartmontools and
GSmartControl, disk monitoring software. Off list only replies are fine with
me.
Sorry to post OT, but anyone having issues with mimecast?
I normally send via my providers mail server (Specturm aka TimeWarner). Email
to certain address never arrived, no bounce.
Setup to send to their domain and/or IP via their published MX and
immediately got "451 - IP temporarily
>>>> Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> 10/20/16 1:56 PM >>>
>Joe Acquisto-j4:
>> Currently have postifx configured to relay mail via a "relay_host"
>> (main.cf). There is a need to send mail to a certain domain via
>> a different
Currently have postifx configured to relay mail via a "relay_host" (main.cf).
There is a need to send mail to a certain domain via a different host. Google
has suggested a few ways, transport hash, header filter.
Since this special destination has a primary and a secondary IP, how might
Perhaps it's time to change the subject line?
>>> On 8/23/2016 at 1:16 AM, in message
<388d98f9-e63e-4d0a-865a-f32814510...@billmail.scconsult.com>, "Bill Cole"
<postfixlists-070...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2016, at 16:14, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>
>> Any chance of assistance here w
>>> On 8/22/2016 at 7:31 PM, in message
<6d14c5d6-a707-499e-854b-5287d47b8...@kreme.com>, "@lbutlr"
<krem...@kreme.com>
wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2016, at 14:14, Joe Acquisto-j4 <j...@j4computers.com>
wrote:
>> There is a need to add disclaimers to outgoin
Any chance of assistance here with alterMIME?There is a need to add
disclaimers to outgoing mail.
I have it configured (one supposes) to be complaint free on restart of postfix
and can see from /var/log/mail that is does act on the specific email addresses
(senders) that I intended. At
>Please provide concrete evidence as requested.
>
> Wietse
Entirely my misinterpreting what I observed. Working as intended/expected.
Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks for your gentle response.
postfix restart"
Was that naive?
HTH.
>>>> Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> 08/18/16 10:10 AM >>>
>Joe Acquisto-j4:
>> Using postfix 2.5.6.
>>
>> In main.cf, changed "relayhost" from and IP address to a valid domain.
>
> - the "sen
Using postfix 2.5.6.
In main.cf, changed "relayhost" from and IP address to a valid domain.
- the "sender" changed from the original sender domain to the host name and
domain of the postfix server.
- the mail was shown as "queued" instead of "delivered"
What can I do to retain the senders
/main.cf ?
>>> "Joe Acquisto-j4" <j...@j4computers.com> 05/12/16 11:33 AM >>>
Postfix version 2.5.6 being used as a relay for chatty internal processes.
Suddenly, one of them is complaining of this error, in the midst of a 250 ish
recipient email. With attac
Postfix version 2.5.6 being used as a relay for chatty internal processes.
Suddenly, one of them is complaining of this error, in the midst of a 250 ish
recipient email. With attachment of some size.
". . .postfix/smtpd[15953]: NOQUEUE: reject: MAIL from unknown[192.168.aa.bb]:
452 4.3.1
=
]
Thanks, That is exactly what happened. My editor settings remove
trailing spaces or tabs. The post-install from
3.1-20150330 worked fine without any issues.
Thanks again,
Joe
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Mar 31 00:06:07 master postfix/postfix-script[11541]: fatal: Postfix
integrity check failed!
The queue directories already exist. The message is shown when
post-install fails.
Any thoughts, please?
I am also attaching my local working version of post-install.
Thanks
Joe
--- post-install.original
/postfix-3.1-20150330.tar.gz
I had to comment out these 3 lines to get it to work.
With this change to lines 209-211, the script works fine.
+# IFS=
+#
+# BACKUP_IFS=$IFS
It looks like the sub-shell processing for writing back to main.cf is
working now.
Thanks again,
Joe
signature.asc
Description
On 1/21/2015 at 10:37 PM, Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org
wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 09:08:19PM -0500, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
This appeared to work fine and does, for most messages. However,
our org often sends an email to thousands of users with in our
system
Please excuse the top post. the web client . . .
Thanks for expanding on this.
I've hacked a means of getting around this for the time being, until we
can change the addressing of the lists. A simple fix, technically
but a cautious tradition exists.
Thanks for all the comments.
joe
Daniel Miller dmil...@amfes.com 01/22/15 9:03 AM
On 1/22/2015 3:13 AM, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
Thanks. I appreciate the reminder. The methodology is long standing
and should be altered. The users have only the tools offered to them.
However, not trying to be argumentative at all -
While I
Hope some find this amusing and not annoying. Perhaps someone know how to
approach this issue toward a resolution.
We have an in house commercial email system. Due to a re-organization, a
number of our users are now required to use an o365 account, yet must still
receive internal messages.
I confess to not having researched this, mainly as I have no clue how to search
the subject effectively. So, with great trepidation, I timidly squeak out this
question:
Using postfix, is it possible to force a re-addressing of an email based on
the sender of the message? To expand a bit, we
to allow messages to be sent via SMTP from the old system
to the new, in a controlled and highly restricted manner.
Having had some time to breath the free air again, I'm not so sure I
should be allowed out without my leash.
joe a.
Joe Acquisto-j4:
I confess to not having researched
Comments on the ZD net article that claims shellshock exploit via crafty SMTP
headers? Just asking, that's all . . .
I attached a link to it below, please excuse if that is improper behavior.
http://www.zdnet.com/shellshock-attacks-mail-servers-735094/
New to list, been using postfix for a little while.
I would like to point a postfix install to two outbound relay's (all outbound
mail to go thru them) so that, should one be unavailable, it will attempt to
send via the other. Not round robin but fail over.
This is probably simple, but have
Some mail from local (mynetworks) machines are getting mail rejected with
warning: Illegal address syntax from blah in MAIL command: a b c
This is despite resolve_numeric_domain = yes in main.cf, which I read was
supposed to fix bad from address from scripts, etc.
Wrong?
joe a.
ignore any
syntax problem in the from address of email, from local/trusted sources, as
this is likely to surface again as time goes on.
Thanks for any assistance you can provide.
li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net 08/21/14 1:45 PM
Am 21.08.2014 um 19:32 schrieb Joe Acquisto-j4:
Some mail from
: A Web server
Script
That's all there is on that line. Thanks for the assistance.
joe a.
DTNX Postmaster postmas...@dtnx.net 08/21/14 1:52 PM
On 21 Aug 2014, at 19:32, Joe Acquisto-j4 j...@j4computers.com wrote:
Some mail from local (mynetworks) machines are getting mail rejected with
warning
, as painless as possible.
Since we inflicted this burden on the apps community we were attempting to be as
fraternal as possible. Seems to require a certain masochism on our part. g
As you say, tho, there are limits.
joe a.
Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org 08/21/14 2:36 PM
Joe Acquisto-j4
fail2ban to monitor your logs in real time and autoban via
iptables any ip that had failed logins? You could whitelist your own ip
range so they never get bannned regardless.
--
Joe Laffey
The Stable
Visual Effects
http://TheStable.tv/?e34523M/
On Sun, 8 Jun 2014, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 08.06.2014 17:18, schrieb Joe Laffey:
On Sun, 8 Jun 2014, Kai Krakow wrote:
Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org schrieb:
But I want to (automatically) block the suspicious networks and not first
block all then whitelist the known-good
sshd ports I have been
using for well over 15 years. But this is a topic for another mailing
list.
--
Joe Laffey
The Stable
Visual Effects
http://TheStable.tv/?e34526M/
smtpd_tls_security_level = may
smtpd_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtpd_scache
tls_random_source = dev:/dev/urandom
Thanks,
Joe
--
Joe Shamblinw...@cs.duke.edu
Senior IT Analyst Department of Computer Science
(919) 660-6582
On May 27, 2014, at 2:38 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Joe Shamblin:
I am experiencing an issue where hosts that do not have reverse
DNS see an extended delay (45-60 seconds for ssl or non-ssl
connections) before they get the initial 220 greeting. Hosts that
do have properly
+1 for mailgraph and queuegraph!
Joe
On 07/17/2013 05:23 AM, José Luís Faria wrote:
I'm using
http://mailgraph.schweikert.ch/
Em 17-07-2013 13:14, Roman Gelfand escreveu:
Is there open source web based postfix server monitoring software?
I am looking to see if there is something
postfix packages for RHEL are available from several
sources - we've been using postfix 2.8.8 on RHEL 6 here.
Joe
with various other email
related components in one convenient interface.
Joe
for name=nosuchdomain.com type=A: Host not found)
- Joe
Sent from my iPad
On 24 May, 2013, at 1:27, wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
Joe Wong:
Afaik this is the default behaviour. Postfix retries until
queue_lifetime is exceeded.
Are you experiencing something else? Can you show the logs, when the
mail with queueid 92B8BCC3DE got
Install the missing dev packages - mysql-devel, pcre-devel etc which
will provide the missing headers.
On 07/10/2012 10:36 AM, Feel Zhou wrote:
Thanks for Brian's answer*
*
1 I add the missed,such as
[root@mail postfix-2.9.3]# make -f Makefile.init makefiles
CCARGS=-DHAS_MYSQL
charges
by the server, so postmulti seems to be the best option.
Joe
table?
Thanks for your input -
Joe
Sent from my iPad
On 26 Mar, 2012, at 4:29, Patrick Ben Koetter p...@state-of-mind.de wrote:
* KingT mr.kingcas...@gmail.com:
I have just read SMTP Authentication and known have much type of it. Such as
mail Submission, Extended SMTP, SASL.
And I want to setup an SMTP AUTH on my mail
I read the details of the multiple instance support but it's not clear
to me how I can use it to achieve my goal. Do anyone have similar
setup and share your configuration here?
Many Thanks,
- Joe
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Joe Wong joewon...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Reindl.
On Tue
into the multiple instance support, I am not sure how
this will work with my setup. Appreciated your opinion here.
Best regards,
- Joe
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Andrew Beverley a...@andybev.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 16:46 +0800, Joe Wong wrote:
I read the details of the multiple instance
Hello Noel,
The IP I mentioned was not the remote IP, but the IP address in the
oubound MTA machine.
- Joe
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org wrote:
On 2/8/2012 7:21 PM, Joe Wong wrote:
Hello Andy,
Sorry I should state the details initially. I am hosting
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org wrote:
On 2/8/2012 9:24 PM, Joe Wong wrote:
Hello Noel,
The IP I mentioned was not the remote IP, but the IP address in the
oubound MTA machine.
- Joe
[please don't top post]
Indeed. Use
Hello,
Say my MTA has multiple IP addresses on it. Is there a way to
configure Postfix (outbound) to use IP 1 when matching condition A and
IP2 if matching condition B and IP3 and none of the conditions are
matched?
Thanks,
- joe
Thanks for the reference. How could this be used with some condition?
I am looking for binding sender domain A with IP 1 and domain B go
through IP 2, go to IP3 otherwise.
- Joe
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Reindl Harald:
Am 07.02.2012 09:53
:19, schrieb Joe Wong:
Thanks for the reference. How could this be used with some condition?
I am looking for binding sender domain A with IP 1 and domain B go
through IP 2, go to IP3 otherwise.
- Joe
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Reindl Harald:
Am
Hello,
is it possible to configure postfix not to send email with recipient
domains to certain MX host?
- Joe
Hi,
I tried, it works but not the way I would like to implement. Say sender
sent a email to 3 recipients, one of them hit the rule. What I want is
sender will not get any bounce but the offending recipient will simply
dropped, while the other 2 will still get the email. Is this possible?
- Joe
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
