* Matus UHLAR - fantomas :
On 18.09.22 14:00, Stefan Foerster wrote:
[...]
postfix/submission/smtpd[156]: warning: SASL: Connect to Dovecot auth socket
'inet:dovecot:12345' failed: Address not available
this looks like "dovecot" host is not resolvable.
Yes, that's exactly wh
* Wietse Venema :
postfix/submission/smtpd[156]: fatal: no SASL authentication mechanisms
The server needs to announce the SASL mechanisms in the EHLO response.
If it cannot reply to EHLO, then I don't see what good it does if
we make this a non-fatal error.
Ah, right. I hadn't remembered
Hello world,
in a containerized setup I noticed a bad command startup if the AUTH
socket is not available (i.e. the container is down):
$ postconf smtpd_sasl_path
smtpd_sasl_path = inet:dovecot:12345
#v+
postfix/submission/smtpd[156]: connect from
client.example.com[:xxx:xx:::3]
* Wietse Venema :
Stefan Foerster:
Mar 17 13:24:40 servername postfix/proxymap[166]: panic: dict_open: attempt to open
lmdb:/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache with both "open" lock and "access" lock
...
postscreen_cache_map = proxy:lmdb:$data_directory/postscreen
Hello Wietse,
* Wietse Venema :
Stefan F?rster:
Mar 17 13:24:40 servername postfix/proxymap[166]: panic: dict_open: attempt to open
lmdb:/var/lib/postfix/postscreen_cache with both "open" lock and "access" lock
Please do not open the postscreen cache through the proxymap daemon.
It cannot
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
- Some distributions already ship with append_dot_mydomain = no.
This is an opportunity to eliminate the inconsistency.
This will probably break mail setups that used to rely on unqualified
names in a way that's hard to diagnose, especially if there is
a
* li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net:
http://marc.info/?l=postfix-usersm=141128851606167w=2
what do people imagine happens if they send the GTUB per mail?
it will be rejcted and may lead up in accout suspend for the
innocent RCPT - don#t do that, call it by name - period
You could define a
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Viktor Dukhovni:
Which works just fine with a single certificate, because TLS in
SMTP in generally unauthenticated. If all the various domains
share the same MX hostnames, many implementations that log
speculative authentication results (no actual
Hello world,
every summer, I'm volunteering to give a programming class at a local
university. The goal is to teach CS students about real world code,
i.e. making them aware of things like resource managament (prevent
runaway fork(2) calls) under heavy load or the need for good documentation.
Hello world,
our current situation is as follows:
1. Public MX, very low incoming volume, smtpd_tls_security_level = may
2. Senders aren't known beforehand, i.e. no previous business relationship.
3. Senders' IT usually doesn't support DANE.
4. Incoming mail is considered highly(!) valuable to
* li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net:
Am 21.06.2014 13:11, schrieb Stefan Foerster:
Could someone share experience with or point me to some kind of best
practices regarding opportunistic TLS, or explain the reasoning for
banning weak ciphers/protocols on a public MX? (again, not talking
nk11p00mm-mx006.me.com.smtp: Flags [S], seq 3314275386, win 1400,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 6,sackOK,TS val 170874802 ecr 0],
length 0
E...e@.@..r.d.:...x...
[...]
I then did a capture of a telnet session to the same server on port 25:
reading from file
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 08:58:47PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
This would require too much complex code for what is a simple Postfix
operation. Your example is poor man's round robin. That's the best
Postfix can do without serious code
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:47:22PM +0200, Peer Heinlein wrote:
Use dovecot with a simple passwd-file-setup in /etc/dovecot/userdb and a
simple relay-domains setup in Postfix and you'll be ready after half an
hour.
Generally, with dovecot
* Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com:
One of our customers has an interesting setup where they did the following:
a) Created 50 users
b) Added a secondary address for the 50 users to an external server
with 50 users (So any email sent to user@server also gets copied to
user@server2).
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:44:27AM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
You should be looking at the SMTP draft, not the OPS draft. [...]
Would that be draft-ietf-dane-smtp-01? Because this one, too
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:47:35AM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
- make sure the submission server at mail.example.com has certificates
for mail.example.com as well as example.com, with example.com being
the certificate that's displayed when
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:27:14PM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
And while we are at it, one more question, slightly unrelated:
draft-dukhovni-dane-ops-01 does not mention MSAs. Is it commonly
expected that user agents will not support TLSA RRs
Hello world,
I'm not sure it this is the right place to ask, so if it's not, feel
free to tell me.
I configured DANE TLSA RRs for incertum.net, port 25 a few days ago,
but until now, the only test I could perform was bootstrapping a
recent Postfix snapshot and the latest OpenSSL and send myself
* Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org:
I ran posttls-finger from my laptop, and got:
[...]
So you're all set.
Thanks for taking the time to do this, I appreciate it.
I noticed that posttls-finger is not part of any upstream source I
could find, leading me to github - is that
* Kevin Blackwell akblack...@gmail.com:
I have 2 mx records. The primary is Exchanges edge server that has it's own
internal spam filtering. The secondary is poxtfix server relaying mail to
the edge server as a backup mx record. Are you saying the postfix server
should be behind the Exchange
Hello Noel,
* Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org:
On 2/10/2013 4:37 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
does anyone have experience with very large (about 2k entries) hash
tables?
Hash tables scale very well to hundreds of thousands of entries; 2k
entries on an Atom processor with 1G ram won't
Hello world,
does anyone have experience with very large (about 2k entries) hash
tables?
I'll have to implement a check_recipient_access rule within
smtpd_recipient_restrictions - it will be only temporary, three days
at most, but I'm still worried about the possible performance impact.
OS
* Chris Horry zer...@wibble.co.uk:
On 9/18/2012 16:36, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
[postscreen after-220 tests]
Those tests are useful, nonetheless :)
Definitely, my only problem is that I've seen greylisting cause
legitimate (admittedly due to poorly configured mail servers) mail to
get lost.
* Sam Jones sam_jone...@btinternet.com:
I guess what I'm querying in a way is some of the sales blurb from
people like PowerMTA GreenArrow and the remarks they make about open
source solutions like Postfix etc. This one in particular: Open source
Mail Transfer Agents (MTAs) often max out
Hello world,
we are currently in the process of writing some internal documentation
for our Postfix mail servers (currently 2.8.9, soon to be 2.9.1). We
would like to include a few hints on debugging, and aside from logs
and other stuff (like DEBUG_README), we'd mention postcat and
postqueue
While testing something completely different, I noticed that a newly
installed test machine didn't send any mail:
Jan 20 11:45:27 vhrstest postfix/pickup[9992]: fatal: could not find any active
network interfaces
Jan 20 11:45:27 vhrstest postfix/master[12458]: warning: process
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
While testing something completely different, I noticed that a newly
installed test machine didn't send any mail:
Jan 20 11:45:27 vhrstest postfix/pickup[9992]: fatal: could not find any
active network interfaces
Jan 20 11:45:27 vhrstest
* Eric Smith e...@fruitcom.com:
Here are the logs when mailing the postfix list server;
Jun 23 13:30:20 pepper postfix/qmgr[1447]: 500C1290144:
from=majordomo-ow...@cloud9.net, size=10278, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Jun 23 13:30:20 pepper postfix/local[4655]: 500C1290144:
to=e...@fruitcom.com,
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
We have een reports on this mailing list that some routers or
firewalls mis-handle TCP features such as window scaling and ECN.
Of course it is possible that the problem is not with your
nearest router, but elsewhere in the network.
Any workaround?
* Mark Alan va...@e-healthexpert.org:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 22:22:52 +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter
p...@state-of-mind.de wrote:
If there are significant differences that are not Debian related
Stefan certainly has had reasons to add them.
That's certainly a way to view things and I respect
* Robert Schetterer rob...@schetterer.org:
whatever, i use this debs they are up and running,
in ubuntu lucid
You should not use these packages on Ubuntu - they lack some of the
necessary triggers like e.g. ufw.
Cheers
Stefan
* Mark Alan va...@e-healthexpert.org:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 17:49:38 +0100, Stefan Foerster
Apparently you did so just to cope with the novice user that does
not know how to use MySQL with Postfix chrooted services.
Believe me, nothing is more annyoing than seeing other people
suffering from
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Victor Duchovni:
I've been running with smtpd_tls_eecdh_grade = strong with Postfix
2.7 for a while now. No problems to report. Approximately 24,000 EECDH
sessions a week. Of these approximately 75% use AECDH-AES256-SHA, and ~25%
use
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 12:14:17PM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
Given: A dedicated Postfix instance, configured to accept mails from
SASL authenticated users. It seems that unlike access(5) maps, the
lookup for smtpd_sender_login_maps
Given: A dedicated Postfix instance, configured to accept mails from
SASL authenticated users. It seems that unlike access(5) maps, the
lookup for smtpd_sender_login_maps for addresses which contain
$recipient_delimiter is not tried at all without the extension:
# postmulti -i postfix-sasl -x
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
# postmulti -i postfix-sasl -x postconf recipient_delimiter
smtpd_sender_login_maps
recipient_delimiter = +
smtpd_sender_login_maps = proxy:pgsql:${maps_dir}/sasl-maps.pgsql
Damn. While editing, I accidentally deleted the .restricted
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Avinash Pawar // Viva:
I want to give priority to each outbound email and as per priority email
will be sent.
There is no priority support in Postfix. Postfix uses a shared
queue by design.
Instead of making Postfix more complex, you could use
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
What happens after gate has tried to validate more than
$smtpd_soft_error_limit invalid recipients? Will it be slowed down?
Is it possible to exclude gate from that artificial slowdown on
hub using smtpd_client_event_limit_exceptions
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
It would still be nice to know whether smtpd_client_event_limit_exceptions
will prevent the additional delays.
NVM. This code in smtpd_chat.c, within smtpd_chat_reply, is
executed without making any reference
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Tarpit delays by the hub will slow down the dictionary attack.
Is that a problem?
It can delay legitimate mail with yet unverified recipients, but
that's pretty much what one would suspect
Two questions regarding proxymap:
1. Is a single proxymap(8) process able to handle multiple lookup
tables? I.e., taking the example from the manpage, modifying it to
mysql = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/
virtual_alias_maps =${mysql}virtual_alias_maps.cf
virtual_alias_domains =
Two questions regarding proxymap:
1. Is a single proxymap(8) process able to handle multiple lookup
tables? I.e., taking the example from the manpage, modifying it to
mysql = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/
virtual_alias_maps =${mysql}virtual_alias_maps.cf
virtual_alias_domains =
* Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com:
Stefan Foerster put forth on 6/20/2010 5:16 AM:
and furthermore assuming a limit of 40 proxymap(8) processes defined
in master.cf, will this result in 40 or 80 connections to the
database?
I have no idea on this one. The whole point of proxymap
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
Two questions regarding proxymap:
1. Is a single proxymap(8) process able to handle multiple lookup
tables? I.e., taking the example from the manpage, modifying it to
mysql = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/
virtual_alias_maps
This is - again - not a problem report but a mere theoretical
question. Given two Postfix servers, one (called gate) accepting
connections from the internet, with example.com in $relay_domains and
address verification enabled forwarding mails for verified recipients
to the second server (called
* Florin Andrei flo...@andrei.myip.org:
Looking at the Postfix queue graphs in Munin, one thing I noticed is
that when the scheduled emails go out (it's not a continuous
trickle, it's in batches, that's just how the software works), a
fraction, maybe 25%, go into the active queue right away,
The documentation for authorized_submit_users states:
,[ postconf(5) ]
| Otherwise, the real UID of the process is looked up in the system
| password file, and access is granted only if the corresponding login
| name is on the access list.
`
Does that literally refer to the password
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 06:28:15AM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
$ postmulti -i postfix-out -x mailq
This is correct.
-Queue ID- --Size-- Arrival Time -Sender/Recipient---
1BCBD1DF86 2622 Mon Jun 7 03:02:34
I'm most likely doing it wrong:
$ postmulti -i postfix-out -x mailq
-Queue ID- --Size-- Arrival Time -Sender/Recipient---
1BCBD1DF86 2622 Mon Jun 7 03:02:34
boskop-svn-bounces+trac=trac.incertum@lists.incertum.net
(connect to trac.incertum.net[85.214.20.182]:25:
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
I'm most likely doing it wrong:
$ postmulti -i postfix-out -x mailq
-Queue ID- --Size-- Arrival Time -Sender/Recipient---
1BCBD1DF86 2622 Mon Jun 7 03:02:34
boskop-svn-bounces+trac=trac.incertum@lists.incertum.net
* Phil Howard ttip...@gmail.com:
I'm looking for an SMTP testing tool I can use to do tests of configuration
changes to Postfix. To do the proper tests I need to carry out the actual
SMTP protocol from this program (as opposed to just putting mail in the
queue), with TLS, STARTTLS, and
This morning, I got a warning in my logs that I have never seen
before:
postfix-hub/cleanup[27115]: warning: defer: removed spurious 1E0DE10003 log
It was followed by what seemed the normal delivery of a single mail:
postfix-hub/smtpd[27112]: 1E0DE10003:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
It was followed by what seemed the normal delivery of a single mail:
postfix-hub/smtpd[27112]: 1E0DE10003:
client=edge.kvm.incertum.net[192.168.122.13]
Right, this is a new message that has claimed the name 1E0DE10003,
Postfix
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Normally the queue manager deletes a defer logfile when it brings
a message into the active queue, and the bounce daemon deletes the
defer logfile after sending a mail too old bounce message.
If the defer file still exists without the message file, some
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Currently, sites that send valid UTF-8 in MAIL/RCPT commands can
make meaningful LDAP queries in Postfix. Lots of MTAs are 8-bit
clean internally, so this can actually work today.
Do we want to remove this ability from Postfix, or should we add
a
* Carlos Mennens carlosw...@gmail.com:
I noticed that I am no longer able to send email via Postfix with
STARTTLS enabled on my server. I have not changed anything on my
Postfix server over the weekend. I only changed my Firewall appliance
but everything appears to be in order. I don't
This morning, I upgraded from 2.8-20100213 to 2.8-20100306 and enabled
IPv6 I have always used the lmtp(8) client to feed messages to
amavisd-new (well, those that picked up by pickup(8), anyways):
pickupfifo n - - 60 1 pickup
-o
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
See DEBUG_README for instructions to attach a non-interactive debugger.
The only change in the SMTP client is the smtp_address_preference and
lmtp_address_preference parameters, which were tested only for SMTP.
Unfortunately, even after
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Ralf Hildebrandt:
[ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ]
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
See DEBUG_README for instructions to attach a non-interactive debugger.
The only change in the SMTP client is the smtp_address_preference and
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Patrick Ben Koetter:
When a message reenters from an instance that uses XFORWARD, for example
amavis, will Postfix count the IP used twice and, for example,
add that to smtpd_client_recipient_rate_limit?
Rate limits apply to the real client IP
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Erik Logtenberg:
Wietse, is there a reason why you would not want a permit_rbl_client
feature in postfix? If not, then I would like to hereby suggest this
feature request.
If you would approve the feature request but don't have the time and/or
other
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
I created postscreen because it is becoming too expensive to spend
one server process per zombie connection. Instead, one postscreen
process manages up to thousands of inbound connections simultaneously,
and drops the majority of them before they can
Now, feature request is actually not the right word - it's more an
idea, and probably somebody just needs to tell me it's a bad one.
With the postscreen_dnsbl_sites setting, each site administrator can
configure a list of DNS blacklists that new SMTP connections will be
checked against (excluding
* Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org:
Perhaps surprisingly, postfix smtpd_*_restrictions only apply to mail
submitted via smtp.
Someone should actually start collecting all those frequently used
sayings - and perhaps translate them.
I remember having asked a not-so-clever question here once,
* Jon L Miller jlmil...@mmtnetworks.com.au:
Is it standard practice to have the filter: permit_my _networks at the top
of a listing? Also having the filter permit at the bottom what is the reason
and the difference between the two filters.
If, by filters you are referring to
* DUBOURG Kevin ke...@dubourg.info:
No, the stable candidate is 2.6.
On debian repository 2.5.5-1.1 ... Snif ...
I've been maintaining backports for Debian/stable since the stress
dep. server personality patch was first published. Right now, my
personal repository at
Hallo Wietse,
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Robert Schetterer:
Hi Wietse, is their any
fixed release date for version 2.7 ?
There is a release candidate for testing.
The TLS caches won't get automatic cleanups in the initial 2.7
release(s)?
Stefan
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Robert Schetterer:
Hi Wietse, is their any
fixed release date for version 2.7 ?
There is a release candidate for testing.
The TLS caches won't get automatic cleanups in the initial 2.7
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
The TLS caches won't get automatic cleanups in the initial 2.7
release(s)?
TLS caches have always had automatic cache cleanup.
In fact, the verify and postscreen daemons use a library module
that contains a generalized version
If in a mail cluster, with multiple machines having access to a shared
storage device (SAN, iSCSI) which is presented to the host as a normal
block device (e.g. /dev/sda, hosting a normal ext3 filesystem), one of
the mail nodes fails, what are the necessary Postfix steps to take
over the queue on
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:13:33PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
If in a mail cluster, with multiple machines having access to a shared
storage device (SAN, iSCSI) which is presented to the host as a normal
block device (e.g. /dev/sda
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:39:34PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
If the node doesn't have to process any new incoming mail, will qmgr
be able to handle six digit deferred queues?
So long as you just drain this queue, and don't take
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 06:08:40PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
In case of severe server overload, with postscreen(8) complaining
about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
(reasonably) safe as a last desperate
In case of severe server overload, with postscreen(8) complaining
about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
(reasonably) safe as a last desperate measure to put $data_directory,
or at least the file referenced by $postscreen_cache_map, on a ramdisk
(e.g. tmpfs with
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
This is implemented by specifying FILTER actions with empty next-hop
destinations in access maps or header/body_checks, and by configuring
in master.cf one Postfix SMTP client for each SMTP source IP address,
where each client has its own -o myhostname and
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
One of the greatest improvements in the 2.7 tree is the ability to
defer transmission of received messages to a SMTP proxy until the
message receiption completes (smtpd_proxy_options = speed_adjust).
Can you be more specific about
* Dr. Lars Hanke l...@lhanke.de:
I had a quite strange issue. About a week ago my bind9 broke down and I
could not get it running again on the same machine. So moved it to
another machine and changed the /etc/resolv.conf of my machines to try
both IP. Apparently everything worked fine.
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
For STATISTICAL load balancing you can get by with multiple IP
addresses per proxy filter host name. However this requires new
The main difference I see here is that delivery to a content_filter
will try more than one server, giving us not only
* Michael p...@nettrust.co.nz:
In reference to the following page:
http://dkimproxy.sourceforge.net/postfix-outbound-howto.html
it includes the following:
submission inet n - n - - smtpd
-o smtpd_etrn_restrictions=reject
-o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
I _think_ (and I'm really not 100% sure if this would work) another
possibility would be to use a feature introduced with Postfix 2.7,
namely sender_dependent_default_transport_maps. You could define a
transport which passes all mail
As a side note:
* Stefan F??rster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
I took care of that problem - permanently. I understand that an UTF-8
encoded realname might pose serious problems to some MUAs and I don't
want to cause any, erm, inconveniences.
Stefan
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Systems that run close to the capacity limit probably should not
expire caches but simply rotate them. I already have a version of
Postfix that allows you to turn off cache cleanup.
I deployed 20091230-nonprod before I went to town this evening and
until
from /var/log/mail.log:
Dec 31 01:49:47 nemea postfix/postscreen[2994]: PASS OLD 168.100.1.4
# postmap -q 168.100.1.4 btree:/var/lib/postfix/ps_cache
1262188493
# date --date Dec 31 01:49:47 +%s
1262220587
# echo $(((1262220587-1262188493)/3600))
8
If a client that has passed postscreen in the
* Jon August jonaug...@gmail.com:
I've been running Postfix/MySQL/Courier for months with no problems.
Suddenly in the last day or so, mail has been taking around 3 hours to
process. I don't have a clue where to start looking. When I do a qshape, I
see this:
Taking a look at the output of
* Stefan Foerster cite+postfix-us...@incertum.net:
As mentioned in the documentation, the above is a union of the
active and deferred queues.
D**n. active and incoming queues.
Stefan
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Stefan Foerster:
Is it 100ms? I got exactly 882 messages like
postscreen[5486]: warning: ps_dict_put: /var/lib/postfix/ps_cache.db update
took 108 ms
with values ranging from 101 to 147 within the last 24 hours on a
moderately busy system
* Tobias tobs...@brain-force.ch:
I have two email adresses: a...@domain.tld and b...@domain.tld
Only a...@domain.tld is registred with several mailinglists. But the user
b...@domain.tld is the one I want to use.
Try subscribing twice and disable mail delivery for one account. All Mailman
based
After a few years of Postfix, one usually knows all warnings and
errors it reports. With the addition of postscreen(8), there appeared
two new warnings that I don't know yet:
postscreen[8790]: warning: getpeername: Transport endpoint is not connected
postscreen[8790]: warning: write
* Sahil Tandon sa...@tandon.net:
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009, Stefan Foerster wrote:
postscreen[8790]: warning: getpeername: Transport endpoint is not connected
postscreen[8790]: warning: write unknown_address:unknown_port: Connection
reset by peer
I think these messages in your log correlate
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 08:54:01PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
Now, about logging - I'd be really grateful if the existing logging
functionality could be extended in a way so that the pre-queue
content filter's response is logged.
I know
91 matches
Mail list logo
