My mail server is now bound to a public ip A. The PTR resolves fine
here. When ISP from public ip A becomes unavailable, the firewall
over to a different provider. Naturally, the mail server will now be
bound to a public ip B. What do I do if I want correct PTR querry
response?
Thanks in advan
ogrammer and doesn't really understand
the ins and outs of email and doesn't know if they can change their code or
not. The issue I'm running into is we have reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname
enabled on the mx host they connect to, which returns:
"504 5.5.2 : Helo command rejected
Dear,
my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail server
reject the Helo command:
NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from rrcs-70-60-37-220.central.biz.rr.com[70.60.37.220]:
450 4.7.1
: Helo command rejected: Host not found;
from= to= proto=ESMTP
helo=
Nov 8 17:55:46 genio postfix/
]: NOQUEUE: warn: RCPT from
201-88-100-143.gnace704.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br[201.88.100.143]:
Dynamic DSL looking address; from= to=> proto=ESMTP helo=
OK? But the line with that reject notice is in check_client_fqdn.pcre,
which is AFTER check_helo_access
/\.(dsl|\d+dsl|ds
Hello,
i have a problem with my postfix. It doesn't send HELO when the
hostname is set to a real FQDN name (A and PTR records are done). If i
change the hostname or smtp_helo_name to something that is not my
original FQDN, then it sends the HELO.
Thanks in advance
On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 04:30:55PM -0400, Roman Gelfand wrote:
> Subject: HELO
What does HELO have to do with this?
> My mail server is now bound to a public ip A. The PTR resolves
> fine here. When ISP from public ip A becomes unavailable, the
> firewall over to a differ
.com A B.B.B.B
If you want your HELO to be consistent regardless of which IP is
used, use a separate hostname that points to both A records.
mail.example.com A A.A.A.A
mail.example.com A B.B.B.B
-- Noel Jones
On 01 Sep 2013, at 15:35 , Noel Jones wrote:
> If you want your HELO to be consistent regardless of which IP is
> used, use a separate hostname that points to both A records.
>
> mail.example.com A A.A.A.A
> mail.example.com A B.B.B.B
Won't this cause a problem with
You could assume this server will never be used as incoming server.
From: LuKreme
Sent: 9/1/2013 8:05 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org postfix
Subject: Re: HELO
On 01 Sep 2013, at 15:35 , Noel Jones wrote:
> If you want your HELO to be consistent regardless of which IP is
> used, use a se
On 9/1/2013 7:04 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 01 Sep 2013, at 15:35 , Noel Jones wrote:
>> If you want your HELO to be consistent regardless of which IP is
>> used, use a separate hostname that points to both A records.
>>
>> mail.example.com A A.A.A.A
>> mail.exampl
On 09/02/2013 12:04 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 01 Sep 2013, at 15:35 , Noel Jones
> wrote:
>> If you want your HELO to be consistent regardless of which IP is
>> used, use a separate hostname that points to both A records.
>>
>> mail.example.com A A.A.A.A
&
On 9/1/2013 7:04 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 01 Sep 2013, at 15:35 , Noel Jones wrote:
>> If you want your HELO to be consistent regardless of which IP is
>> used, use a separate hostname that points to both A records.
>>
>> mail.example.com A A.A.A.A
>> mail.exampl
Hi,
I reject unknown hosts through the EHLO restrictions.
But my fritzbox wants to sent me something withou a valid EHLO value.
Is there a whitelist I can put my fritx on accept?
Adrian
--
Adri P. van Bloois
"The greatest threat to our planet is the belief that someone
Hi,
I have what appears to be a machine-generated email that's sending
with an invalid hostname and invalid helo hostname. In lieu of being
able to have the sender fix their broken email, I'd like to add
entries to bypass these checks for this specific host. I don't
otherwi
Hi All,
We have two customers who we're unable to receive email from.
It's failing the helo lookup as it can't resolve the hostname in the helo
message.
Helo command rejected: Host not found;
The postfix configuration for helo checks is as follows. It's failing on
reject_u
ostfix < 2.3:
reject_non_fqdn_hostname)
Reject the request when the HELO or EHLO hostname is not in
fully-qualified domain or address literal form, as required by
the RFC. Note: specify "smtpd_helo_required = yes" to fully
enforce this
: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Viktor Dukhovni
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:52 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Helo issue
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:41:05PM +, Kevin Miller wrote:
> smtpd_helo_restricti
On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli wrote:
> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail server
> reject the Helo command:
>
> NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from rrcs-70-60-37-220.central.biz.rr.com[70.60.37.220]:
> 450 4.7.1
> : Helo command rejected:
On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli wrote:
my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail server
reject the Helo command:
NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from rrcs-70-60-37-220.central.biz.rr.com[70.60.37.220]:
450 4.7.1
: Helo command rejected: Host not found;
from= to=
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:42:16 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> >On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli
> >wrote:
> >> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail server
> >> reject the Helo command:
> >>
> >&
: domi...@timedicer.co.uk [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] Namens
Dominic Raferd
Verzonden: vrijdag 10 november 2017 15:30
Aan: Postfix users
Onderwerp: Re: Helo rejected
On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli wrote:
my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our
>On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli
>wrote:
>> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail server
>> reject the Helo command:
>>
>> NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
>> rrcs-70-60-37-220.central.biz.rr.com[70.60.37.220]: 450 4.7.1
>
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 16:08:02 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> >> >On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail
> >> >> server reject the Helo comma
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 16:08:02 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> >On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli
>> > wrote:
>> >> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail
>> >> server reject the Helo command:
>> >&g
;> >> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail
> >> >> >> server reject the Helo command:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> >> >> >> rrcs-70-60-37-220.central.biz.rr.com[70.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 04:08:02PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > >On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli
> > > > wrote:
> > > >> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our
> > > >> mail server reject the
>> >> >On 10 November 2017 at 14:08, Enrico Morelli
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> my user don't receive mail from a real sender cause our mail
>> >> >> server reject the Helo command:
>> >> >>
>> >>
Hello,
Is anyone using Android's Aquamail to send mail through postfix? If
so, how do you have it configured?
My postfix is rejecting mail from Aquamail because it's helo is:
<[192.168.1.1]> basically it's internal ip.
I do not want to remove my restrictions can I get a
Hallo,
For as long as I can I remember, I have blocked connections purporting
to be my own domain/IP address using a postmapped file called
helo_checks.
This is checked AFTER permit_sasl_authenticated.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_non_fqdn_sender,
reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
permit_sasl_
Hi,
I saw that I had many such attacks...
Out: 220 MyServer ESMTP
In: EHLO Oi9oRGhc
Out: 250-MyServer
Out: 250-PIPELINING
Out: 250-SIZE 500
Out: 250-ETRN
Out: 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
Out: 250-8BITMIME
Out: 250-DSN
Out: 250 SMTPUTF8
In: AUTH LOGIN
Out: 503 5.5.1 Error: authenti
Hello All,
I have a clients who's email server is getting a lot of helo rejects from it
(windows box). The client has a .NET domain for their servers ( hardware )
and a .COM for their email address.
I manually had a conversation with my postfix server that has these
set
I have the following helo restriction in a pcre file:
!/[[:alpha:]]/REJECT helo non-alpha helo not allowed
I ran it with WARN for quite a while and didn't see any legitimate
messages that hit it, so I moved it to REJECT. However, my mailserver
is starting to see
> but in logs:
> May 23 14:48:17 mail postfix/smtpd[30899]: NOQUEUE: warn: RCPT from
> 201-88-100-143.gnace704.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br[201.88.100.143]:
> Dynamic DSL looking address; from=
> to= proto=ESMTP helo=
>
note that the IP is listed in zen (PBL and XBL via CBL), spa
ate namespace
>
> but in logs:
> May 23 14:48:17 mail postfix/smtpd[30899]: NOQUEUE: warn: RCPT from
> 201-88-100-143.gnace704.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br[201.88.100.143]:
> Dynamic DSL looking address; from=
> to= proto=ESMTP helo=
Hm, that "warn" does
On 24-May-2009, at 15:05, Sahil Tandon wrote:
Hm, that "warn" does not correspond to what you purportedly have in
your
smtpd_recipient_restrictions; it should have been an outright
rejection.
I'd just changed the WARN to REJECT today and the log entry was from
yesterday. It was while doub
On 24-May-2009, at 15:02, mouss wrote:
LuKreme a écrit :
May 23 14:48:17 mail postfix/smtpd[30899]: NOQUEUE: warn: RCPT from
201-88-100-143.gnace704.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br[201.88.100.143]:
Dynamic DSL looking address; from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
note that the IP is listed in zen (PBL and
Antanas Kneita:
> Hello,
>
> i have a problem with my postfix. It doesn't send HELO when the
> hostname is set to a real FQDN name (A and PTR records are done). If i
> change the hostname or smtp_helo_name to something that is not my
> original FQDN, then it sends the H
Antanas Kneita:
> The thing is that there is no error message and the email is delivered
> to the servers that do not require HELO. If the server requires HELO
> the error is:
> 550 Forged host name (in reply to RCPT TO command))
Please show evidence that Postfix sends no HELO or
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 09:59:21AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > to the servers that do not require HELO. If the server requires HELO
> > the error is:
> > 550 Forged host name (in reply to RCPT TO command))
>
> Please show evidence that Postfix sends no HELO or EHLO c
Good afternoon list
In Postfix, is it possible to use memcache to store IP & helo infomation
for a helo_access ?
We receive alot of spam from a single IP address using multiple helo's.
I would like to check the helo name against the memcache entry.
If it does not match, then REJECT
er at stackexchange about this (
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/161901/disable-postfix-helo-checks-completely),
and came to the conclusion that it's just not possible with postfix as is.
Would this be worth considering as a new feature? It certainly wouldn't
make sense as a default
Hello,
I'm needing to set up an helo exception for a single host.
Mar 20 18:19:11 mail postfix/smtpd[53636]: connect from
xxx.xxx.xxx[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]
Mar 20 18:19:11 mail postfix/smtpd[53636]: Anonymous TLS connection
established from xxx.xxx.xxx[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]: TLSv1.2 with cipher
IMO you should not reject widely based on HELO. Too many false positives.
More a place for basic checks.
But you can catch that if you want in your files.
smtpd_helo_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_invalid_helo_hostname, check_helo_access hash:/etc/postfix
Dnia 3.02.2022 o godz. 13:27:06 Adrian van Bloois pisze:
> I reject unknown hosts through the EHLO restrictions.
> But my fritzbox wants to sent me something withou a valid EHLO value.
> Is there a whitelist I can put my fritx on accept?
Isn't it better to whitelist it via IP address, for example
On 03.02.22 13:27, Adrian van Bloois wrote:
I reject unknown hosts through the EHLO restrictions.
But my fritzbox wants to sent me something withou a valid EHLO value.
Is there a whitelist I can put my fritx on accept?
you can enable connections from your fritz box by using check_client_access
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 03:31:43PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> Mar 7 13:25:36 armor postfix-113/smtpd[4009829]: NOQUEUE: reject:
> RCPT from unknown[173.213.231.144]: 504 5.5.2 : Helo command
> rejected: need fully-qualified hostname; from=<>
> to
> > Mar 7 13:25:36 armor postfix-113/smtpd[4009829]: NOQUEUE: reject:
> > RCPT from unknown[173.213.231.144]: 504 5.5.2 : Helo command
> > rejected: need fully-qualified hostname; from=<>
> > to= proto=ESMTP helo=
> >
> > reject_non_fqdn
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 07:05:53PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> > Replace "reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname" with:
> >
> > main.cf:
> > pcre = pcre:${config_directory}/
> >
> > # In the client, helo, sender or recipient restr
David Dolan skrev den 2022-12-01 16:23:
Has anybody come across this before and any idea how to resolve it?
32 ips with one single helo name ?
solution is 32 ips with not a single helo name
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 03:23:52PM +, David Dolan wrote:
> We have two customers who we're unable to receive email from. It's
> failing the helo lookup as it can't resolve the hostname in the helo
> message. Helo command rejected: Host not found;
Not surprisin
On 01.12.22 15:23, David Dolan wrote:
We have two customers who we're unable to receive email from.
It's failing the helo lookup as it can't resolve the hostname in the helo
message.
Helo command rejected: Host not found;
The issued hostname is logged just prior to this text.
On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 at 15:49, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> On 01.12.22 15:23, David Dolan wrote:
> >We have two customers who we're unable to receive email from.
> >It's failing the helo lookup as it can't resolve the hostname in the helo
> >message.
>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 04:06:30PM +, David Dolan wrote:
> This is the full line:
>
> NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[103.246.251.109]:
> 450 4.7.1 :
> Helo command rejected: Host not found;
> from=<#> to=<#####>
> proto=ESMTP he
On 01.12.22 15:23, David Dolan wrote:
>We have two customers who we're unable to receive email from.
>It's failing the helo lookup as it can't resolve the hostname in the helo
>message.
>Helo command rejected: Host not found;
On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 at 15:49, Matus UHL
On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 at 16:59, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> >> On 01.12.22 15:23, David Dolan wrote:
> >> >We have two customers who we're unable to receive email from.
> >> >It's failing the helo lookup as it can't resolve the hostname in the
&
Subject:Re: helo command rejected
> From: Viktor Dukhovni
> Date: 2022-12-01 16:56:13
> Message-ID: Y4jcrRxsEJPsWZVZ () straasha ! imrryr ! org
> [Download RAW message or body]
>
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 04:06:30PM +, David Dolan wrote:
>
>
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 10:33, David Dolan wrote:
>
>
> Subject: Re: helo command rejected
>> From: Viktor Dukhovni
>> Date: 2022-12-01 16:56:13
>> Message-ID: Y4jcrRxsEJPsWZVZ () straasha ! imrryr ! org
>> [Download RAW message or body]
>>
David Dolan:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 10:33, David Dolan wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Subject:Re: helo command rejected
> >> From: Viktor Dukhovni
> >> Date: 2022-12-01 16:56:13
> >> Message-ID: Y4jcrRxsEJPsWZVZ () straasha ! imrryr ! o
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:51:14AM -0500, Wietse Venema
wrote:
> David Dolan:
> > I guess it's using the musl resolver in Alpine so we need to migrate OS to
> > get past this issue?
>
> Yes. Don't use toy software in production.
>
> Wietse
I suspect that alpine is used in many many
dock
raf:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:51:14AM -0500, Wietse Venema
> wrote:
>
> > David Dolan:
> > > I guess it's using the musl resolver in Alpine so we need to migrate OS to
> > > get past this issue?
> >
> > Yes. Don't use toy software in production.
> >
> > Wietse
>
> I suspect that alpin
David Dolan:
> I guess it's using the musl resolver in Alpine so we need to migrate OS to
> get past this issue?
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:51:14AM -0500, Wietse Venema
wrote:
Yes. Don't use toy software in production.
On 03.12.22 00:59, raf wrote:
I suspect that alpine is used in many ma
Wietse Venema wrote in
<4nnwkv4frxzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|raf:
|> On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:51:14AM -0500, Wietse Venema e.org> wrote:
|>
|>> David Dolan:
|>>> I guess it's using the musl resolver in Alpine so we need to migrate \
|>>> OS to
|>>> get past this issue?
|>>
|>> Yes.
Felker has past history with this mailing list and postfix, as well as
some things related to annoyances like versioning.
Are you on a MUSL libc system? IIRC there's no support for TCP in
MUSL's stub resolver. See, for example:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28312935
https://news
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 06:03:51PM +0100, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Simply add a dnsmasq local cache. dnsmasq is a package on
> AlpineLinux, i use it. (Including dnssec, and it even serves its
> cache back into a VPN, so that effectively only one instance does
> all the web queries.) (I use it
Viktor Dukhovni wrote in
:
|On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 06:03:51PM +0100, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|
|> Simply add a dnsmasq local cache. dnsmasq is a package on
|> AlpineLinux, i use it. (Including dnssec, and it even serves its
|> cache back into a VPN, so that effectively only one instance do
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20221202180252.bmzqg%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
|Viktor Dukhovni wrote in
| :
||On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 06:03:51PM +0100, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
||> Simply add a dnsmasq local cache. dnsmasq is a package on
...
||Deploying dnsmasq does not do anything to address the li
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 09:47:03AM -0500, Wietse Venema
wrote:
> raf:
> > On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:51:14AM -0500, Wietse Venema
> > wrote:
> >
> > > David Dolan:
> > > > I guess it's using the musl resolver in Alpine so we need to migrate OS
> > > > to
> > > > get past this issue?
> > >
>
On 12/2/22 08:08, David Dolan wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 10:33, David Dolan wrote:
>> Subject: Re: helo command rejected
>>> From: Viktor Dukhovni
>>> Date: 2022-12-01 16:56:13
>>> Message-ID: Y4jcrRxsEJPsWZVZ () straasha ! imrryr ! o
Demi Marie Obenour wrote in
<6baaf997-0462-f5de-402b-c77f01ff5...@gmail.com>:
|On 12/2/22 08:08, David Dolan wrote:
|> On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 10:33, David Dolan wrote:
|>> Subject:Re: helo command rejected
|>>> From: Viktor Dukhovni
|>>>
Hello!
When a postfix server replies to the HELO/EHLO command, the response
starts with this line:
250-mail.dialtelecom.cz
However, when Exim or other server replies, the first line contains
additional information:
250-mx01.dialtelecom.cz Hello office.dialtelecom.cz [212.24.132.66
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:24:42PM -0400, David Mehler wrote:
> Is anyone using Android's Aquamail to send mail through postfix?
> If so, how do you have it configured?
>
> My postfix is rejecting mail from Aquamail because it's helo is:
>
> <[192.168.1.1]>
and-IP: TLSv1.2 with
cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)
Apr 22 13:40:13 hostname postfix/submission/smtpd[34144]: NOQUEUE:
reject: RCPT from Connecting-Host-and-IP: 554 5.7.1 :
Relay access denied; from= to=
proto=ESMTP helo=<[192.168.1.107]>
Apr 22 13:40:13 hostname postfix/s
> On Apr 22, 2018, at 11:29 PM, David Mehler wrote:
>
> Thanks for your reply. My postconf -nf and postconf -Mf are below as
> is the relevant log portions. I'm suspecting that my various smtpd*
> restrictions are wrong.
Start with the default upstream master.cf file template for submission:
Hello Viktor,
Thank you for your reply. I do see the differences between the
master.cf you reference and the one I've got. One thing do you have an
upstream reference for main.cf in GitHub? I'd looking for the mua*
definitions, my system does not have them.
Thanks.
Dave.
On 4/22/18, Viktor Dukh
> On Apr 23, 2018, at 12:10 AM, David Mehler wrote:
>
> Thank you for your reply. I do see the differences between the
> master.cf you reference and the one I've got. One thing do you have an
> upstream reference for main.cf in GitHub? I'd looking for the mua*
> definitions, my system does not
Hi,
Thanks. So I can drop in master.cf upstream without inputting mua*
parameters in my main.cf?
I've got a few options in my master.cf file submission service that
are not in the upstream file, are they still relevant in 3.3?
smtp inet n - n - 1 postscreen
> On Apr 23, 2018, at 12:29 AM, David Mehler wrote:
>
> Thanks. So I can drop in master.cf upstream without inputting mua*
> parameters in my main.cf?
Generally not the whole file, but you can use the stock file as a
starting template from which to borrow appropriate service definitions
or spe
Hello Viktor,
Thank you again for your reply.
I had to remove the mua* options in submission from the upstream
master.cf that I loaded, otherwise it loaded fine. I'm not using them.
I think I have it, the pfs that is. Can I get a postconf -nf and a
postconf -Mf sanitized of your configuration? I
> On Apr 23, 2018, at 12:55 AM, David Mehler wrote:
>
> Thank you again for your reply.
>
> I had to remove the mua* options in submission from the upstream
> master.cf that I loaded, otherwise it loaded fine. I'm not using them.
That's surprising. They should work just fine, with any custom
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:24:42PM -0400, David Mehler wrote:
Is anyone using Android's Aquamail to send mail through postfix?
If so, how do you have it configured?
My postfix is rejecting mail from Aquamail because it's helo is:
<[192.168.1.1]> basically it's internal
Hi,
I don't have any mua* options set in main.cf.
As for helo I'm going to post my restrictions and their corresponding
files going to be a few hours, but I'm sure it's helo.
Thanks.
Dave.
On 4/23/18, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 0
On 23.04.18 09:25, David Mehler wrote:
I don't have any mua* options set in main.cf.
that is not what I have asked.
As for helo I'm going to post my restrictions and their corresponding
files going to be a few hours, but I'm sure it's helo.
you did post your restricti
Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
> >Apr 22 13:40:13 hostname postfix/submission/smtpd[34144]: NOQUEUE:
> >reject: RCPT from Connecting-Host-and-IP: 554 5.7.1 :
> >Relay access denied; from= to=
> >proto=ESMTP helo=<[192.168.1.107]>
>
> this does not look like HELO reje
Is it safe (or mostly safe) to simply block attempts to deliver mail with a
helo that is only an IP address? (I am talking about only on postfix/stmpd and
obviously not on postfix/submit or related).
I have about 50,000 NOQUEUE reject from "helo=<[193.32.160.151]>" over the
On 10.01.20 12:42, Simon B wrote:
For as long as I can I remember, I have blocked connections purporting
to be my own domain/IP address using a postmapped file called
helo_checks.
This is checked AFTER permit_sasl_authenticated.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_non_fqdn_sender,
reject_non_
ing line and rely on other
> >rejection parameters, but it still rejects a significant of spam
> >attempts, so I'd prefer to keep it.
>
> logs?
Quite difficult to get logs off the production environment onto my
office client, hence the redacted smtpd_recipient_restrictions
Jan 10 13
0 14:50, Simon B wrote:
Quite difficult to get logs off the production environment onto my
office client, hence the redacted smtpd_recipient_restrictions
Jan 10 13:42:22 mail postfix/smtpd[18730] : NOQUEUE: rejectRCPT from
localhost [127.0.0.1]: 550 5.7.1. : Helo command
rejected: Your server is
t;> >rejection parameters, but it still rejects a significant of spam
> >> >attempts, so I'd prefer to keep it.
>
> >On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 13:39, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> >wrote:
> >> logs?
>
> On 10.01.20 14:50, Simon B wrote:
> >Quite diffic
asl authenticated.
> > >> >
> > >> >Can someone help me figure out why?
> > >> >
> > >> >I can probably remove/comment the offending line and rely on other
> > >> >rejection parameters, but it still rejects a significant of spam
&
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 06:25:27PM +0100, Simon B wrote:
> > > >> >Since upgrading to 2.11 yesterday (yes, I am on a path to move up
> > > >> >through debian versions), all mail coming in on
> > > >> >postfix/submission/smtpd is being rejected by the domain check in that
> > > >> >file, even thoug
tRCPT from
localhost [127.0.0.1]: 550 5.7.1. : Helo command
rejected: Your server is misconfigured as you are not a member of this
domain; from= to= proto=ESMTP
helo=
On 10.01.20 15:52, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
ok, this looks like recipient reje
e problem - or at least just kicked it
down the road. Now there's a slightly different format of the error
when receiving mail from the amavis filter...
Jan 15 11:39:31 mail postfix/smtpd[31588]: connect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
Jan 15 11:39:31 mail postfix/smtpd[31588]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCP
blem - or at least just kicked it
down the road. Now there's a slightly different format of the error
when receiving mail from the amavis filter...
Jan 15 11:39:31 mail postfix/smtpd[31588]: connect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
Jan 15 11:39:31 mail postfix/smtpd[31588]: NOQUEUE: reject: R
this...
> >
> > 10 submission inet n - n - - smtpd
> > 11 -o syslog_name=postfix/submission
>
> >Which seems to have solved the problem - or at least just kicked it
> >down the road. Now there's a slightly different format of the err
_name=postfix/submission
> >
> > >Which seems to have solved the problem - or at least just kicked it
> > >down the road. Now there's a slightly different format of the error
> > >when receiving mail from the amavis filter...
> > >
> > >Jan 1
025?
>>
>> Hi Matus,
>>
>> Yes, very sure.
>>
>> if I turn on -v logging for that hop, I am concerned about these lines
>> in the log.
>>
>> Jan 15 13:09:01 mail postfix/smtpd[466]: < localhost[127.0.0.1]: EHLO
>> amavisd.localhost
>&
Dnia 15.01.2020 o godz. 17:26:48 Simon B pisze:
>
> Amavis listens on 10024, and postfix listens on 10025
>
> That means mail comes in on 587, it goes to amavis on 10024 and comes
> back on 10025 before going out.
[...]
> and mail is flowing. I am not happy since the solution to the
> original p
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:43, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
>
> Dnia 15.01.2020 o godz. 17:26:48 Simon B pisze:
> >
> > Amavis listens on 10024, and postfix listens on 10025
> >
> > That means mail comes in on 587, it goes to amavis on 10024 and comes
> > back on 10025 before going out.
> [...]
> > and mai
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 16:50, Simon B wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:43, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> >
> > Dnia 15.01.2020 o godz. 17:26:48 Simon B pisze:
> > >
> > > Amavis listens on 10024, and postfix listens on 10025
> > >
> > > That means mail comes in on 587, it goes to amavis on 10024 and
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 18:00, Dominic Raferd wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 16:50, Simon B wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:43, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
>> >
>> > Dnia 15.01.2020 o godz. 17:26:48 Simon B pisze:
>> > >
>> > > Amavis listens on 10024, and postfix listens on 10025
>> > >
>>
1 - 100 of 564 matches
Mail list logo
