: single domain - multiple smtp relayhosts
Wilson A. Galafassi Jr.:
> Hello,
>
> I want to use multiple relayhost parameter because i want to use more than
> one relay to send emails. My serve will handle emails for only one domain.
> My need is to have multiple relayhost.
List th
em: quinta-feira, 2 de julho de 2009 22:17
Para: Wilson A. Galafassi Jr.; postfix-us...@cloud9.net
Assunto: Re: single domain - multiple smtp relayhosts
Wilson A. Galafassi Jr. wrote:
> Hello to all,
>
> I need to configure postfix to use multiple smtp relayhosts for a single
> domai
Hello to all,
I need to configure postfix to use multiple smtp relayhosts for a single
domain.
This is possible? How?
Thanks,
Wilson
Ville Walveranta wrote:
Here's the completed script (the IP/CIDR extract worked perfectly --
thanks Barney!):
---
#!/bin/sh
ORIGINAL=/usr/local/etc/postfix/tables/client_access_maps.cidr
NEW=/tmp/postfix_clients.tmp
dig +short senderdomain.net TXT | grep 'v=spf1' | egrep -o
'ip4:[0-9./]+' | se
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Brian Collins :
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to
get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
Simon Mudd picks up the releases and makes good source and binary RPMs from
them with lots of options. However, he's a busy man and doe
Wade Williams wrote:
I'm having a problem where an installation of Mantis bug tracking
software cannot send mail to external addresses. It sends mail to me
(w...@dogwatchsw.com <mailto:w...@dogwatchsw.com>) fine. However, it
will not send to external email addresses. I'
Hi Steffen,
The following are links I did use before to create a
postfix.dovecot.mysql system, but on Fedora, but maybe some help.
http://wiki.rbcollins.net/index.php/Postfix_backend_server#Postfix.2BMySQL.2BDovecot.2BSquirrelMail.2BSpamAssassin.2BAmavisd-new.2BClamAV_on_Fedora_Core_5|RB
http
+ $manpage_directory/man5/aliases.postfix.5:f:root:-:644
> > > $manpage_directory/man5/body_checks.5:f:root:-:644
> > > $manpage_directory/man5/canonical.5:f:root:-:644
> > > $manpage_directory/man5/cidr_table.5:f:root:-:644
> >
> > This isn't OS specific.
Rod, This is the reject file. Think I will look at the possibility of
tweaking the postfix-files.patch as clearly the patch is finding a
difference it is not expecting.
I think you are right... its something to do with Fedora, but patching a
file should not really change.
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD
James A R Brown wrote:
Hi Alan,
Looks like its not the paths.
I edited /usr/lib/rpm/macros :-
#Path to top of build area.
#%_topdir %(echo $HOME)/rpmbuild
%_topdir/usr/src/redhat
Then I tried again from fresh.
You can see below same error, but new path is being
=fedora-10.0
+ '[' fedora-10.0 '!=' fedora-10.0 ']'
+ cd /usr/src/redhat/BUILD
+ rm -rf postfix-2.5.6
+ /usr/bin/gzip -dc /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/postfix-2.5.6.tar.gz
+ /bin/tar -xf -
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd postfix-2.5.6
+ /bin/chmod -
Hi Alan,
Have you managed a temporary workaround to build the rpm?
ie there a way of changing the build root directory which is indexed I
guess by
rpm --eval '%{_sourcedir}'
Or is this hard compiled into the RPM program?
If what you are saying is the case, bit concerned how to ge
x-2.4.5.tar.gz
+ /bin/tar -xf -
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd postfix-2.4.5
+ /bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w .
+ echo 'Patch #3 (postfix-files.patch):'
Patch #3 (postfix-files.patch):
+ /bin/cat /root/rpmbuild/SOURCES/postfix-files.patch
+ /usr/bin/patch -s -p1 -b
x-2.4.5.tar.gz
+ /bin/tar -xf -
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd postfix-2.4.5
+ /bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w .
+ echo 'Patch #3 (postfix-files.patch):'
Patch #3 (postfix-files.patch):
+ /bin/cat /root/rpmbuild/SOURCES/postfix-files.patch
+ /usr/bin/patch -s -p1 -b
Yeah, Thought of that a little after mailing. Oh well, I guess I need
to keep my efforts in later defenses (spamassassin).
Thanks.
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:28 PM, David A. Gershman
> wrote:
> > from an external source. I'm trying to see if there is a setting in
> >
Hello All,
I've been getting spam messages passing through my server because they
are "from" a local user account (spoofed). However, the connection came
from an external source. I'm trying to see if there is a setting in
master.cf (or other .cf file) which will reje
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 09:05:28AM -0700, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
Well, the only opportunity to respond an SMTP command is in respnse to
*that* command, so originally these took place at the time of the
correspoding SMTP command.
connect:client
Wietse Venema wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson:
I keep seeing and having questions on valid parameters and valid values
for them. The Postfix.org site and manual have great listings and this
list has provided excellent info on them.
Still I stay a bit confused as I started with an older version
I keep seeing and having questions on valid parameters and valid values
for them. The Postfix.org site and manual have great listings and this
list has provided excellent info on them.
Still I stay a bit confused as I started with an older version (could
have been in the 1.x series) and got
On 3/4/2009 1:57 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 1:06 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote
On 3/4/2009 10:05 AM, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de Matemática wrote:
Victor Duchovni escribió:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:35:38AM -0200, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de
Matem?tica wrote:
The user was not "relaying": mail was sent to a domain you are
responsible
for, so this was not
On 3/4/2009 1:06 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
Right and that means the type is
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote
vi /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd :
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote
vi /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd :
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
There is some issue with Mandriva
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote
vi /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd :
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
There is some issue with Mandriva
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:56 AM, Scent-Sations Support wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix generated
error. It
On 3/4/2009 9:56 AM, Scent-Sations Support wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix generated
error. It does not like the -n .
Charles means 'postconf -n'.
This gives us a bett
On 3/4/2009 9:50 AM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Hi Robert,
You need to read the responses you are getting...
PS: postfix -n gives invalid option.
This is because of this:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Hi Robert,
You need to read the responses you are getting...
PS: postfix -n gives invalid option.
This is because of this:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix generated
error. It does not like the -n
On 3/4/2009 8:39 AM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:31:21AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 3/4/2009, Robert A. Ober (ro...@robob.com) wrote:
# "dovecot -n" command gives a clean output of the changed settings. Use it
# instead of copy&pasting
Hello Folks,
I am a longtime Linux user and admin. Server drive got somewhat corrupt
so I re-installed to new drive. Using Mandrive 2009.0 from the live CD
with Postfix retrieved via urpmi. Using 2.2 and Dovecot. Tried Cyrus
also. I have used uw-pop3 and pop-before-smtp in the past
Noel Jones wrote:
Vernon A. Fort wrote:
Noel Jones wrote:
Vernon A. Fort wrote:
I have a setup which we use an external mail filtering service and
need to limit/restrict external client access. Meaning the MX for
the domain points to the filtering service and they relay checked
email. I
Noel Jones wrote:
Vernon A. Fort wrote:
I have a setup which we use an external mail filtering service and
need to limit/restrict external client access. Meaning the MX for
the domain points to the filtering service and they relay checked
email. I need to limit access to just these network
I have a setup which we use an external mail filtering service and need
to limit/restrict external client access. Meaning the MX for the domain
points to the filtering service and they relay checked email. I need to
limit access to just these network blocks but also allow sasl
authenticated
mm, please speak up.
Jim,
Did you get any takers?
Rod
--
"Qualified" means at least as knowledgable as I about Perl (not
too-difficult a hurdle) and not the type to bloat a utility beyond all
reason by bowing to every piddling little feature request everybody
asks for in a bid to r
I'm still trying to get my head wrapped around all the options and how
they interact with each other and non-Postfix stuff.
I have questions in regards to a mail server that will be a virtual
mailbox server.
I have set virtual_mailbox_domains and virtual_mailbox_maps (I think I
got thi
As a hobby, I ran a mail server (Xmail) on on old machine, just for
myself and a few friends. It was very old, and the mail server was
getting slower and slower, and then the greylister broke. So I got a
newer old machine and set it up with Postfix on Ubuntu. Tested it on
the internal network
Everything I'm reading in "The Book of Postfix" and from the web site
seem to indicate that virtual_mailbox_domains has to be a list of values
in main.cf. Is this correct? Anyway to put them in a file instead?
TIA,
Rod
--
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 09:11:43AM -0800, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
mx.trendargentina.com.ar. 0INA10.0.0.208
mx.trendargentina.com.ar. 0INA10.0.0.207
What this says to me is every time Postfix requests the MX for
trendargentina.com.ar the name
, ADDITIONAL: 2
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;trendargentina.com.ar.INMX
;; ANSWER SECTION:
trendargentina.com.ar.0INMX10 mx.trendargentina.com.ar.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
trendargentina.com.ar.0INNSimsva.trendargentina.com.ar.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
mx
hi!
i'm struggling around to implement a before-queue spamcheck.
but the problem ist not the spamcheck itself, but a problem with
smtp-authentication (pam_mysql) :(
up to now i'm running the system with after-queue spamcheck with
postfix/spamassassin/amavid-new, everything works
ictions and smtpd_recipient_restrictions, email sent
to a mailman list address on the local server will be rejected because
it's considered an unauthorized relay when:
Jan 27 14:21:39 penguin postfix/smtpd[32089]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1]: 554 5.7.1 : Relay access
Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
Not too clear from the subject and probably a lame idea.
Situation: We have a system (MX1) that is having hardware problems.
Currently they are irritations but we want to rebuild the system before
it really crashes. There are actually two systems so there is back
I'm running a mailman server, and was receiving a lot of errors like the
following:
Jan 26 07:36:39 host postfix/smtpd[13212]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1]: 554 5.7.1 : Relay
access denied; from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
I figured the problem was that I d
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 09:19:07PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
> This mail was submitted via the sendmail command, not via SMTP.
> Postfix smtpd_*_restrictions operate only on mail submitted via SMTP.
> The table will never be referenced.
Hmmm. This should have been obvious in retrospect. Thanks for
Not too clear from the subject and probably a lame idea.
Situation: We have a system (MX1) that is having hardware problems.
Currently they are irritations but we want to rebuild the system before
it really crashes. There are actually two systems so there is back up
(MX2) in case there is a
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 03:14:09PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> debug_peer_list = 127.0.0.1
This setting doesn't do what I was hoping for. What I really wanted out
of the debugging output was a way to see what rules postfix is matching
on for permit/deny, sort of the way procmail d
For those who've asked, here's the updated output of 'postconf -n' after
trying all the various suggestions I've gotten on-list and off:
alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
append_dot_mydomain = no
biff = no
boun
net
secureserver.net mail is handled by 0 smtp.secureserver.net.
so I'd expect that if I set a recipient restriction on the MX record,
that outbound mail to postmas...@secureserver.net would not get relayed
from my system to my $relayhost. That doesn't seem to be the case,
though,
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 01:49:02PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> If it's the first check, shouldn't all mail destined to the
> secureserver.net MX be bounced? Why is it still going through?
I'm curious to know whether setting relayhost is what is over-riding
this behavio
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:07:53PM +0100, mouss wrote:
> put permit_mynetworks reject_unauth_destination here please.
Why would I put them at the top, when I specifically want
/etc/postfix/mx_access to take precedence? I thought ordering was
important.
--
"Oh, look: rocks!"
-- Doctor Wh
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 04:26:27PM -0500, Jorey Bump wrote:
> Logically, it doesn't make sense to perform recipient checks before
> you know the recipient.
Okay, I'll buy that. But this still doesn't work:
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
check_recipie
Based on the feedback that I've gotten, I've made the following changes:
smtpd_client_restrictions =
check_recipient_mx_access hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access
check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/recipient_access
check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/domain
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:54:49AM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> I'm using postfix as a smarthost to forward mail through my upstream
> ISP. Is there any way to have postfix resolve the MX record of the
> destination domain and block outgoing mail on that basis?
So far, this is
After about three months of trying to get secureserver.net to fix their
highly-broken systems, I'd like to block all emails destined to all
virtual domains hosted by them. However, I'm not quite sure how to do
this with my setup.
I'm using postfix as a smarthost to forward
All:
I'm seeking a contact or a referral for a Postfix hacker.
We're looking to build additional functionality, probably share
it with the community.
Someone intimately familiar with internals. Project oriented
feature development gig. Firms are okay, but highly
a
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 11:02 AM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: mailman integration question
Mark A. Olbert:
> That's what I did, but it didn't work. Nor did chgrp nogroup.
Postfix does not use the "group" of the aliases file. You may have
to re-compile
That's what I did, but it didn't work. Nor did chgrp nogroup.
- Mark
"Too much sanity may be madness! But maddest of all -- to see life as it is and
not as it should be."
-Original Message-
From: mouss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 200
Thanks to mouss and others for helping me figure out how to configure postfix
and amavisd to route mail to different endpoints based on whether the address
is in a subdomain.
I'm running into a GID problem in the interface between mailman and postfix.
Here's the error message:
(Co
pe
flags=Fqhu user=uucp argv=uux -r -n -z -a$sender - $nexthop!rmail ($recipient)
ifmailunix - n n - - pipe
flags=F user=ftn argv=/usr/lib/ifmail/ifmail -r $nexthop ($recipient)
bsmtp unix - n n - - pipe
flags=Fq. user=foo
ma.comlocal:
localhostlocal:
# put in to support mailman
list.arcabama.commailman:
- Mark
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mouss
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 11:30 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Info
ddest of all - -to see life as it is and
not as it should be."
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark A. Olbert
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 4:35 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: RE: Info on Filtering Mail based on subdo
s and
not as it should be."
-Original Message-
From: mouss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 4:56 PM
To: Mark A. Olbert
Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Info on Filtering Mail based on subdomain
Mark A. Olbert a écrit :
> That almost makes sens
njects the result into
localhost (127.0.0.1) on port 10025 if it's not spam. But I'm not sure of that.
When I add a mailman transport, use a transport map and define the transport
map in main.cf I still get the same "cannot relay" error, which I think means
mail sent to @lis
I recently installed Exchange as my mail server, with postfix on a linux box
serving as an anti-spam front end. This works great for all my regular mail.
However, I'm having trouble figuring out how to integrate mailman into the
setup. Previously, when mail delivery took place on my linu
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 23:06 CET,
"Roderick A. Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Magnus Bäck wrote:
[...]
You can choose any username you like as long as it matches whatever
is in your credential database. So far we don't kno
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 19:52 CET,
"Roderick A. Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm trying to test my Postfix/Dovecot set up to determine why (what
I'm doing wrong) a Perl script using Mail::Sender is failing. Errors
say c
I'm trying to test my Postfix/Dovecot set up to determine why (what I'm
doing wrong) a Perl script using Mail::Sender is failing. Errors say
connection failed -- rather ambiguous I'd say! :-)
This is for a system with multiple (virtual?) domains.
I'm using telnet to
Hello all,
I have postfix(version 2.5.5-1) running on latest Ubuntu server (8.10)
along with an OpenLDAP server.
I have't setup virtual domain and all users have a normal directory
(with Maildir support) at /home/
The only relevant information how to query and build a mailing list
with Po
mouss wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
I'm implementing greylisting on CentOS 5 systems.
These are spools for the actual mailserver/mailbox systems.
Currently we have:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_unauth_pipelining,
useless.
reject_non_fqdn_s
Wietse Venema wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson:
I'm implementing greylisting on CentOS 5 systems.
These are spools for the actual mailserver/mailbox systems.
Currently we have:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_unauth_pipelining, cheap
reject_non_fqdn_s
the above listing look? It has been working for years
but maybe there is a better order or some additional checks that could
be done.
But mostly I'm wondering where I should place the check_policy_service line.
TIA,
Rod
--
mouss wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
[snip]
If your problem is that From: equals To:, then Postfix can help
only with an external content filter.
If your problem is that MAIL FROM equals RCPT TO, then Postfix can
help only with an external policy daemon or external content filter.
In
Wietse Venema wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson:
I'm starting to get a lot of SPAM where the Sender matches the To:.
You mean, the From: and To: headers, or the MAIL FROM and the RCPT
TO address in SMTP commands?
One of these days I'll stating thinking in the correct terms. Probab
I'm starting to get a lot of SPAM where the Sender matches the To:.
I hear the same from several others. There was the thread recently on
something similar but dealing with lists so it seems to not apply.
I'm at a complete loss after being six pages into a search using
Googl
After a recent server failure, I reinstalled the OS (NetBSD) which
came with a slightly newer version of Postfix than I had been
running. Now some of my procmail delivery rules no longer work
because they relied on the "Delivered-To" field in the header to know
which subaddress had been
Finally it seems the problem is "solved". The amount of backscatter is
much smaller then it was yesterday. It seems also the local users
addresses are not being used anymore in forged mail.
By the way, to keep going in this, I'll write a content-filter to check
From and Mess
Thanks Noel,
I double checked and even reran postmap on the tls_per_site file and did a
"postfix stop" "postfix start" just to make sure that "MUST_NOPEERMATCH" was
specified and everything was getting reset, but it is still giving me a
result of (TLS-failure: Could
incorrect
endif
endif
My idea is reject mail whose From header seems to have an e-mail from
my domain, but according to the Message-ID header this message could
not be sent from my server.
No. If you need to take decisions based on the contents of multiple
lines, use a content filter.
This is
Miguel Da Silva - Centro de Matemática escribió:
I wrote down the following regular expression, would it work properly?!
if /^[> ]*From:(.*)(cmat\.edu\.uy)/
if /^[> ]*Message-ID/
!/^[> ]*Message-ID:(.*)(cmat\.edu\.uy)/
REJECT Message-ID and From incorrect
endif
endif
My idea is reject mail
I wrote down the following regular expression, would it work properly?!
if /^[> ]*From:(.*)(cmat\.edu\.uy)/
if /^[> ]*Message-ID/
!/^[> ]*Message-ID:(.*)(cmat\.edu\.uy)/
REJECT Message-ID and From incorrect
endif
endif
My idea is reject mail whose From header seems to have an e-mail from my
I am trying to implement TLS on our server for a client requirement. I
believe I have the TLS settings correct, but I am not certain about what I
am seeing in the logs and I am uncertain as to how to know if a message was
delivered using TLS.
Is there anything in the message headers that would
501 - 582 of 582 matches
Mail list logo
