ender to know
about the rejects.
I guess I am going to go with below which will silently drop the email and
wont notify the sender.
check_recipient_access inline:{{nore...@example.com = discard}}
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:43 PM Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 03:33:42PM -050
I have no reason to use DISCARD. I also dont want sender to receive
anything back. Is reject silently is an option?
/^From:.?(no|No)(reply|-reply)@.*/ REJECT:silently
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:12 PM Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 03:06:37PM -0500, Linux Addict wr
...@example.com = discard}}
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 2:57 PM Wietse Venema wrote:
> Linux Addict:
> > Folks, I am trying to configure discord when supp...@company.com sends
> to
> > noreply@ / no-reply@.
>
> Did you mean "discard"?
>
> > The smtp recipient/head
Folks, I am trying to configure discord when supp...@company.com sends to
noreply@ / no-reply@.
The smtp recipient/header checks seems to parse line by line so I can
discord to noreply, but how do add a condition. I looked if.. endif, but I
am unsure how to get this done with from and to lines in
After 2.9, it should have been 3, not 2.10 ;)
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:33 AM, Len Conrad wrote:
> At 07:18 AM 6/1/2013, you wrote:
>> Am 31.05.2013 22:56, schrieb Wietse Venema:
>>> After the confusion that Postfix 2.10 is not Postfix 2.1, maybe it
>>> is time to change the re
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Terry Kemp wrote:
> On 11/3/10, Linux Addict wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Wietse Venema
> wrote:
> >
> >> Linux Addict:
> >> > >> > If the package is not well constructed:
> >> > >&g
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Linux Addict:
> > >> > If the package is not well constructed:
> > >> >
> > >> > Read the RELEASE_NOTES file for 2.6 and 2.7, then:
> > >> >
> > >> >
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:37 PM, fake...@fakessh.eu wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Le 19.10.2010 19:42, Victor Duchovni a écrit :
>> > On Tue, Oct 19, 20
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:37 PM, fake...@fakessh.eu wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Le 19.10.2010 19:42, Victor Duchovni a écrit :
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:17:23PM -0400, Linux Addict wrote:
> >
> >> Hello, I am running postfix 2
Hello, I am running postfix 2.5.4 and would like to upgrade it to latest
stable 2.7.0. What is the best way upgrade? Do a clean install and port the
settings to newer version? Any help is appreciated.
~LA
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:25 PM, John Adams wrote:
> On 24.05.2010 20:05, Linux Addict wrote:
>
>> Hello, One of my postfix server is sending thousands of messages to
>> non-existent mail box in another internal server. The internal
>> application sends mai
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Linux Addict wrote:
> Hello, One of my postfix server is sending thousands of messages to
> non-existent mail box in another internal server. The internal application
> sends mail as mailb...@domain.net thru postfix. The TO addresses are
> invalid. I
Hello, One of my postfix server is sending thousands of messages to
non-existent mail box in another internal server. The internal application
sends mail as mailb...@domain.net thru postfix. The TO addresses are
invalid. I need reject messages from those domains not resolved.
to=, relay=none,
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List <
grkni...@scent-team.com> wrote:
> On 4/20/2010 1:23 PM, Linux Addict wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Wietse Venema > <mailto:wie...@porcupine.org>> wrote:
> >
> >
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Gaby L:
> > Hi
> > I scan with my postfix server with NMap from other location.
> > The NMAP creats report smtp port open (It is OK) but apear Postfix smtpd
> and other information about MTA program.
> > I dont want to apear any information
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Dan Schaefer wrote:
> Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> Try without SeLinux, AppArmor, and other "security" add-ons.
>> They are not covered by the Postfix warranty.
>>
>>Wietse
>>
>>
> Postfix has a warranty? :) It's a free product...
>
> --
> Dan Schaefer
> Web
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> I noticed that on my OSX builds, there is no default tls_random_source
> defined, yet /dev/urandom exists on those systems:
>
> OSX 10.4:
>
> build24:~ build$ ls -l /dev/urandom
> crw-rw-rw- 1 root wheel8, 1 Jun 18 13:38 /dev/u
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Linux Addict wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Jaroslaw Grzabel wrote:
>
>> Linux Addict wrote:
>>
>>> I tried digging, I get the MX servers on the ANSWER section. I manage DNS
>>> as well, so I know its
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Jaroslaw Grzabel wrote:
> Linux Addict wrote:
>
>> I tried digging, I get the MX servers on the ANSWER section. I manage DNS
>> as well, so I know its resolving correctly.
>>
> What is in the log files then when you're trying to r
I tried digging, I get the MX servers on the ANSWER section. I manage DNS as
well, so I know its resolving correctly.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Jaroslaw Grzabel wrote:
> Linux Addict wrote:
>
>>
>> Simon, I already tried that. Its not doing MX lookup I guess.
>>
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Simon Waters wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 July 2009 16:53:52 Linux Addict wrote:
> >
> > I tried using transport maps, "example.com :[smtp1.example.com]"
> > and " example.com smtp:[smtp1.example.com], but of them didn'
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * Ralf Hildebrandt :
>
> > > In simple, When I send a mail to @example.com, postfix must send the
> mail
> > > to the MX records of smtp.example.com.
>
> > example.com smtp.example.com
>
> OK, not too
I have a postfix MTA server running. I was asked to setup relay mail to a
specific domain thru MX record.
Domain - Example.com
An A record smtp.example.com
MX Records smtp.example.com - smtp1.example.com and smtp2.example.com.
In simple, When I send a mail to @example.com, postfix must send the m
Greetings, I have Two instacnes of postfix running, but all the logs getting
to /var/log/maillog. Could someone please point me on how to create separate
log file for the 2nd instance?
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Victor Duchovni <
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 09:33:24AM -0400, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> > I am reading TLS page on postfix and here
> > http://www.state-of-mind.de/assets/postfix_tls.pdf.
> >
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Victor Duchovni <
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 02:33:46PM -0400, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> > I ran openssl test command that you provided and doesn't look like my
> cert
> > config is good.
&g
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Victor Duchovni <
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 01:49:24PM -0400, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> > smtp_tls_note_starttls_offer = yes
> > smtp_use_tls = yes
> > smtpd_tls_CAfile = /usr/share/ssl/
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Victor Duchovni <
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:38:55AM -0400, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> > Hello Gurus, Currently my postfix server runs with self-signed cert, but
> now
> > I was asked to implemen
Hello Gurus, Currently my postfix server runs with self-signed cert, but now
I was asked to implement verisign cert for some of the outgoing mails. My
question is when the verisign is cert installed, will all the outgoing mails
such as toyahoo.com, gmail.com will be encrypted? Do the clients neeed
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Linux Addict wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Blake Hudson wrote:
>
>>
>> Original Message
>> Subject: Re: Header Time
>> From: Linux Addict
>>
>>
>>> I dont think th
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Blake Hudson wrote:
>
> Original Message
> Subject: Re: Header Time
> From: Linux Addict
>
>
>> I dont think this is something to do with outlook as I tested with yahoo
>> and gmail as well. I see the same p
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 4:17 PM, ghe wrote:
> I can't say much because I know next to nothing about Outlook and friends,
> but MS keeps time in local time (I hear), and *nix goes on GMT, and there's
> a 4 hour time correction for your local time, and you're seeing a 4 hour
> time change in your h
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2009, at 2:06 PM, Linux Addict wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:41 PM, ghe <
> g...@slsware.com>wrote:
>
>> On 6/25/09 9:50 AM, Linux Addict wrote:
>>
>> A device uses postfix re
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:41 PM, ghe wrote:
> On 6/25/09 9:50 AM, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> A device uses postfix relay to send mails out. When I receive them in
>> outlook, they are 4 hrs behind. When I looked at the header, postfix seems
>> to doing -400 (EDT).
>>
Hi, I am sure someone can clarify it for me.
A device uses postfix relay to send mails out. When I receive them in
outlook, they are 4 hrs behind. When I looked at the header, postfix seems
to doing -400 (EDT).
by postfixmta.domain.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 62B1257AB5
for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:16
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Victor Duchovni <
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:59:22AM -0400, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> > Dear Group, I am modifying my recipient restrictions to displayed below.
> I
> > referred many document
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Victor Duchovni <
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:17:29PM -0400, Matt Hayes wrote:
>
> > Linux Addict wrote:
> > > Dear Group, I am modifying my recipient restrictions to displayed
> below.
>
Dear Group, I am modifying my recipient restrictions to displayed below. I
referred many documents to compile the options. I want you experts to once
verify it for me.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_non_fqdn_sender,
reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
reject_unknown_sender_domain,
reject_unknown_re
Thank you everyone!! Lot of information.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Res wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> reject_rbl_client blackholes.easynet.nl,reject_rbl_client
>> cbl.abuseat.org,reject_rbl_client proxies.blackholes.wirehub.net,
>&
Please see below my smtpd_recipient_restrictions. On my rbl client list I
have multiple entries, but not sure how many of them actually maintained. Is
there one single place where I can find such a list. Any help is greatly
appreciated.
smtpd_helo_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject_non_
Wietse Venema wrote:
Linux Addict:
What I would like to do is, if a destination host does not have
an MX record, then I would like to drop the message, don't want
to bounce it.
The Internet email RFCs do not require MX records. They specify
that the MTA must deliver by A records
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Monday, January 26, 2009 at 23:39 CET,
Linux Addict wrote:
I am seeing multiple messages on Postfix Maillog. The mx server cant
reach the host in question and its timing out. We monitor the mailq
size and because of 100 of messages like this, we are bombarded
I am seeing multiple messages on Postfix Maillog. The mx server cant
reach the host in question and its timing out. We monitor the mailq size
and because of 100 of messages like this, we are bombarded with pages.
What is the best practice to handle these messages? Any help or link to
documentat
Apologies if its offlist. If Anyone using zenoss to monitor postfix,
please reply only to me with whatever details you may have. Thank you
very much in advance.
~LA
Wietse Venema wrote:
Linux Addict:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
Linux Addict wrote:
Hello, I have clients sending mails to an non-existent email
address/domain, emailerm...@exchange.example.net. I want to discard any
mail sent to this address. I looked at
Sahil Tandon wrote:
Linux Addict wrote:
Hello, I have clients sending mails to an non-existent email
address/domain, emailerm...@exchange.example.net. I want to discard any
mail sent to this address. I looked at smtpd_recipient_restrictions, but
cant figure out how to get this done
Hello, I have clients sending mails to an non-existent email
address/domain, emailerm...@exchange.example.net. I want to discard any
mail sent to this address. I looked at smtpd_recipient_restrictions, but
cant figure out how to get this done. Please help me!!
~LA
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:44 PM, mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Charles Marcus
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>> On 11/11/2008 4:49 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
>>>
>>>>
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Charles Marcus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On 11/11/2008 4:49 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> >> Common administrative practices include submission on 587 for
> >> trusted clients only and should not be permitted on the internet.
> >> This port should be firewalled out
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 5:19 PM, Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict wrote:
>
>> Hi, Please excuse me if it is not relevant on this forum.
>>
>> I am planning to use domain keys and dkim for our domain just to send
>> mails outside.
>>
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Carmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Sahil Tandon wrote:
> >> Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Steven King wrote:
> &
Hi, Please excuse me if it is not relevant on this forum.
I am planning to use domain keys and dkim for our domain just to send mails
outside.
Is DKIMproxy good enough to cover both older Yahoo Domainkeys and new DKIM?
thanks you.
~LA
Linux Addict wrote:
Steven King wrote:
Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on
RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage.
I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress
test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a bit sluggish but
through it with very little impact to other
services running on the system.
Linux Addict wrote:
We have a java mailer application which was hung and queued more than
100k mails. People are working to fix it. I am worried that all 100k
mails may hit postfix server and cause some damage.
Anyway I
We have a java mailer application which was hung and queued more than
100k mails. People are working to fix it. I am worried that all 100k
mails may hit postfix server and cause some damage.
Anyway I can prepare for it?
~LA
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 5:49 PM, mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict a écrit :
> > Unfortuantly that hosts also sends some legitimate mails. I just want to
> > block those two mail ids for now.
>
> unfortunately for you, if the host is owned, it will fi
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict wrote:
>
>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>
>>Linux Addict wrote:
>>
>>
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict wrote:
>
>>
>> Nevermind.. I did strings on one of the messages on "deferred" and got the
>> information.
>>
>>
> use
> postcat -q QUEUEID | more
> t
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:29 AM, mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Linux Addict a écrit :
>>
>> > [snip]
>> > local_recipient_maps = proxy:unix:passwd.by
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 3:29 AM, mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict a écrit :
>
> > [snip]
> > local_recipient_maps = proxy:unix:passwd.byname $virtual_alias_maps
> > $alias_maps
>
> remove $virtual_alias_maps from local_recipient_maps.
>
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 9:53 PM, Charles Marcus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On 10/20/2008 Linux Addict wrote:
>
>> mynetworks = /etc/postfix/network_table
>>
>
> Contents of this file could be instructive...
>
All I have on the file is RFC 1918 Address Space.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 20 Oct 2008, at 18:39, Linux Addict wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 20 Oct 2008, at 18:24, Linux Addict wrote:
>>
>&
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20 Oct 2008, at 18:24, Linux Addict wrote:
>
> Hi, Looks like our MX servers are hit hard by a specific email address
> which is sending frequent mails trying to use our relay effectively many
> mai
Hi, Looks like our MX servers are hit hard by a specific email address which
is sending frequent mails trying to use our relay effectively many mail
servers seems to be blacklisting.
Oct 20 18:20:05 mx01 postfix/qmgr[6512]: DBB784BE68E: from=<
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, size=3309, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Frank Bonnet wrote:
hello
Our site is regulary rejected by HOTMAIL/LIVE during several
days then it stop to be rejected then rejected again and so on ...
This happens ONLY with HOTMAIL
Anyone has the same trouble ?
the rejection message is like the following
host mx1.hotmail.com[65.54.244.8
Linux Addict wrote:
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> Hi, I have virtual zone on a postfix mail rela
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi, I have virtual zone on a postfix mail relay.
> >
> > Virtual Zone Virtual Alias
> > zon
Hi, I have virtual zone on a postfix mail relay.
Virtual Zone Virtual Alias
zone1.example.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
zone1.example.com is managed by us which is postfix
example.net is Exchange server managed by a
68 matches
Mail list logo
