Re: What user should be specified for the opendikm -u UID option?

On 03 Sep 2017, at 12:38 PM, Tom Browder <tom.brow...@gmail.com> wrote: > The docs mention not to use root or postfix for the "-u UID" option. Then > what user should it be? Is a new user to be created for that purpose? Yes. > Should that same user own the /var/db

Re: What user should be specified for the opendikm -u UID option?

Tom Browder: > On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 06:44 Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> wrote: > > > Tom Browder: > > > The docs mention not to use root or postfix for the "-u UID" option. Then > > > what user should it be? Is a new user to be created for

Re: What user should be specified for the opendikm -u UID option?

On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 06:44 Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> wrote: > Tom Browder: > The docs mention not to use root or postfix for the "-u UID" option. Then > > what user should it be? Is a new user to be created for that purpose? > > Should that same u

Re: What user should be specified for the opendikm -u UID option?

Tom Browder: > The docs mention not to use root or postfix for the "-u UID" option. Then > what user should it be? Is a new user to be created for that purpose? > Should that same user own the /var/db/dkim directory and files? All my opendkim FILES are owned by root, in direct

What user should be specified for the opendikm -u UID option?

The docs mention not to use root or postfix for the "-u UID" option. Then what user should it be? Is a new user to be created for that purpose? Should that same user own the /var/db/dkim directory and files? Thanks. -Tom

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

Dominic Raferd: > On 3 June 2017 at 14:01, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > Marek Kozlowski: > > [ Charset ISO-8859-2 converted... ] > > > On 06/03/2017 02:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > >>> Canonical maps replace headers or envelopes before the entire message > > > >>> is

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

On 3 June 2017 at 14:01, Wietse Venema wrote: > Marek Kozlowski: > [ Charset ISO-8859-2 converted... ] > > On 06/03/2017 02:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > >>> Canonical maps replace headers or envelopes before the entire message > > >>> is received. Milters

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

Marek Kozlowski: [ Charset ISO-8859-2 converted... ] > On 06/03/2017 02:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > >>> Canonical maps replace headers or envelopes before the entire message > >>> is received. Milters replace/add/delete envelope or content after > >>> the entire message is received. > >> > >>

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

On 06/03/2017 02:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: >>> Canonical maps replace headers or envelopes before the entire message >>> is received. Milters replace/add/delete envelope or content after >>> the entire message is received. >> >> I'm not quite sure if I understand the term you use: `before/after

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

> > Canonical maps replace headers or envelopes before the entire message > > is received. Milters replace/add/delete envelope or content after > > the entire message is received. > > I'm not quite sure if I understand the term you use: `before/after the > entire message is received'. I'd really

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

:-) >> I'm reading http://www.postfix.org/MILTER_README.html and I'm still not >> quite sure. Both are performed by cleanup. What determines the order: >> which goes first and which goes then? I can't find any variable >> determining this... :-( Is it pre-defined (w

Re: non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

Marek Kozlowski: > :-) > > I'm reading http://www.postfix.org/MILTER_README.html and I'm still not > quite sure. Both are performed by cleanup. What determines the order: > which goes first and which goes then? I can't find any variable > determining this... :-( Is it pre-d

non_smtpd_milters and canonical_maps - what goes first?

:-) I'm reading http://www.postfix.org/MILTER_README.html and I'm still not quite sure. Both are performed by cleanup. What determines the order: which goes first and which goes then? I can't find any variable determining this... :-( Is it pre-defined (what order?). Can I force changing the order

Re: What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

- View this message in context: http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-the-best-anti-spam-and-anti-virus-combos-for-Postfix-tp90210p90369.html Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

On 5/7/17 9:58 PM, pbw wrote: ...the simplest lightweight solution (for me) is postscreen, SPF/ DKIM and Spamprobe via dovecot/sieve filters. Your approach seems applicable to me. I have set up postscreen from the postfix docs. What is the best documentation for the remainder of your setup

Re: What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do you all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best? I will add one more bit. I am one of the postmasters for mail.python.org. As such, I have nothing to do directly with the Postfix side of the shop. I maintain

Re: What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

Hi Mark, Your approach seems applicable to me. I have set up postscreen from the postfix docs. What is the best documentation for the remainder of your setup? Peter Mark Constable wrote > On 29/4/17 5:26 am, Linda Pagillo wrote: >> Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and a

Re: What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

On 29/4/17 5:26 am, Linda Pagillo wrote: Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do you all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best? I'm not sure about the absolute best spam filtering system but the simplest lightweight solution (for me) is

Re: What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

Am 28.04.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Linda Pagillo: > Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do > you all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best? mostly used amavis-new (framework, milter), spamassassin ( milter ), clamav ( milter ) with sanesecurity

What is the best anti-spam and anti-virus combos for Postfix?

Hi everyone. I was wondering which anti-spam and anti-virus programs do you all use with Postifx? Any advice on which programs work best?

Re: What am I missing?

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 04:06:04PM +, Michael Segel wrote: > Normally I�d leave this to the experts while I focus on my day job, but > since this is my SOHO domain, I have to ask these questions which of course > 3 months from now, I�ll forget and have to do it all over again. > Do I want to

Re: What am I missing?

I’m building a replacement for that server. I did a test where I sent the same message to both servers. In /etc/var/maillog on the one server, when the incoming message is being delivered, I see the hostname connect. On the new server, I see unknown connected. Both have DNS set up the sa

Re: What am I missing?

the incoming message is being > delivered, I see the hostname connect. > On the new server, I see unknown connected. > > Both have DNS set up the same. > > So what is happening during the initial connection? Why is one able to > capture the hostname, and the other is not

What am I missing?

. On the new server, I see unknown connected. Both have DNS set up the same. So what is happening during the initial connection? Why is one able to capture the hostname, and the other is not? Where should I be looking in the logs or services to be running? Or ports to be open on my firewall? One

Re: What does this log message mean?

On 3/23/2017 4:25 PM, Gerben Wierda wrote: >> Is this message still in the postfix queue or did it eventually get >> delivered? > > II haven’t been able to establish this yet. It’s hard to debug with > Apple’s logging issues. Th spool directory is good as empty (only > one entry in

Re: What does this log message mean?

Actually, those errors were unrelated. Looking at the time in amavisd log that corresponds with a deferred message in the smtp log: Mar 22 15:09:08 Dumbledore.local /Applications/Server.app/Contents/ServerRoot/usr/bin/amavisd[279]: sd_notify (no socket): STATUS=Starting child process(es),

Re: What does this log message mean?

> On 23 Mar 2017, at 21:59, Noel Jones wrote: > > >> >> maybe up the loglevel, or use tcpdump to capture some packets and >> see if the postfix logs are correct. >> > > Increasing the postfix log level is unlikely to give any further > useful information -- the other

Re: What does this log message mean?

> > maybe up the loglevel, or use tcpdump to capture some packets and > see if the postfix logs are correct. > Increasing the postfix log level is unlikely to give any further useful information -- the other end dropped the connection. Check the amavisd logs at this same time. If that

RE: What does this log message mean?

, Angelo <angelo.fazz...@uconn.edu> Cc: Postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org> Subject: Re: What does this log message mean? On 23 Mar 2017, at 20:16, Fazzina, Angelo <angelo.fazz...@uconn.edu<mailto:angelo.fazz...@uconn.edu>> wrote: Hi, I think this is how you read the

Re: What does this log message mean?

onnection setup time including DNS, > HELO and TLS; d=message transmission time > > That may explain why it’s deferred and not sent. I see. But what does that mean? "Lost connection while sending end of data” and what does ‘deferred’ exactly imply here. That it will be picked u

RE: What does this log message mean?

postfix-users@postfix.org> Subject: What does this log message mean? I’m using the postfix that is part of mac OS Sierra with Server 5.2. Apple has kind of damaged the logging system, so getting logs from sptmd/smtp has become a lot more difficult. I’ve now found a way to get the logs. Whi

What does this log message mean?

ending end of data -- message may be sent more than once) What could these imply? I don’t have the idea that mail is not coming through. My guess is that this is the link between postfix and amavisd, from main.cf:content_filter = smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10024 But for the rest: I haven’t bee

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 02:54:08PM +, Dominic Raferd wrote: > > Public MX servers can use mandatory encryption. It's not like you are going > > to be fined for not accepting insecure connections... > > We don't send any payment data by email but we did have a separate POS > machine at the

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On 01/13/2017 06:30 AM, Bastian Blank wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 09:00:20PM +, Dominic Raferd wrote: Just for amusement (it's been a long day) I had a look at the selected encryption for incoming mails on one of our servers over the last few months. One cipher and one protocol

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On 13 January 2017 at 14:35, Alice Wonder wrote: > On 01/13/2017 06:30 AM, Bastian Blank wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 09:00:20PM +, Dominic Raferd wrote: >>> >>> I would prefer to disable TLSv1(.0) because it >>> does not pass PCI DSS v3.2 but evidently that is

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

ian snowshoe spam operation whose domains have DANE TLSA records. The correlation between lack of TLS support and spam is not very strong. What works well enough for you is unlikely to work well for most users. -- Viktor.

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 09:00:20PM +, Dominic Raferd wrote: > Just for amusement (it's been a long day) I had a look at the selected > encryption for incoming mails on one of our servers over the last few > months. One cipher and one protocol predominates > [ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On 12 January 2017 at 20:13, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > Thank you that is working perfectly as I need. > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_tls_loglevel > > # -ALF 2017-01-12 > smtpd_tls_loglevel = 1 > > example output for others to see > > Jan 12 14:21:59

RE: how to check what cipher was used to connect

] On Behalf Of Noel Jones Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 4:43 PM To: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect On 1/11/2017 3:27 PM, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > My questions: > > 1. can i turn up postfix debug level to see the actual cipher chos

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:27:25PM +, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > I plan on changing my postfix config from > smtpd_tls_exclude_ciphers = RC4, aNULL > smtpd_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv3, !SSLv2 > > to > > smtpd_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv3, !SSLv2 > smtpd_tls_exclude_ciphers =

Re: how to check what cipher was used to connect

On 1/11/2017 3:27 PM, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > My questions: > > 1. can i turn up postfix debug level to see the actual cipher chosen > when a mail server connects to my mail server ? Yes, in main.cf set the smtpd_tls_loglevel and smtp_tls_loglevel to 1. Higher levels of logging will flood you

how to check what cipher was used to connect

Hi, I plan on changing my postfix config from smtpd_tls_exclude_ciphers = RC4, aNULL smtpd_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv3, !SSLv2 to smtpd_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv3, !SSLv2 smtpd_tls_exclude_ciphers = DES-CBC3-SHA, EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA, RC4, aNULL I ran this openssl ciphers -v ALL|grep

Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)? On 4 January 2017 at 08:53, <li...@lazygranch.com> wrote: > Reread. I don't not block port 25. > > I assure you, OVH has been used f

Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

postfix-users@postfix.org; li...@lazygranch.com > Subject: Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent > numbers (depending on overall traffic)? > > On 4 January 2017 at 02:16, < > li...@lazygranch.com> wrote: >> >> ‎http://bgp.he.net/

Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)? On 4 January 2017 at 02:16, < li...@lazygranch.com> wrote: > > ‎http://bgp.he.net/AS16276#_prefixes > I'd switch to 587 and block everything OVH. Actually I do just that since OVH > is on my Web Access blocking list

Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

wcett Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 6:46 AM To: postfix-users@postfix.org Subject: Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)? On 01/03/2017 01:37 PM, Gerben Wierda wrote: > My postfix MTA has been under a lot of DOS-l

Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

rate limiting rule in my firewall. I was > wondering what rate to set if I want to limit access by the same IP. The > first pattern, I could stop by rate-limiting to maximally 3 per second or 180 > per minute. That is already pretty high. What MTA is going to send me 180 per > min

RE: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

-Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Gerben Wierda Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 7:37 AM To: Postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org> Subject: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent n

Re: Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

> > It does the first part from a multitude of machines. > > I want to stop this by setting a rate limiting rule in my firewall. I was > wondering what rate to set if I want to limit access by the same IP. The > first pattern, I could stop by rate-limiting to maximally 3 per secon

Rate-limiting access to postfix on the firewall, what are decent numbers (depending on overall traffic)?

this by setting a rate limiting rule in my firewall. I was wondering what rate to set if I want to limit access by the same IP. The first pattern, I could stop by rate-limiting to maximally 3 per second or 180 per minute. That is already pretty high. What MTA is going to send me 180 per minute and still

Re: What is the number means?

On 12/2/16 2:34 PM, Michael Munger wrote: Linux man page numbers. The man page numbers have nothing to do with Linux.

Re: What is the number means?

> On 12/02/2016 04:26 PM, Gao wrote: > > I'd like ask a dumb question: I see there are many things in > > Postfix which named as pipe(8), smtp(5), lmtp(8). So what is > > number 5 or 8 mean? Version number? > > On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 04:34:04PM -0500, Michael Mun

Re: What is the number means?

Thanks. Gao On 2016-12-02 01:34 PM, Michael Munger wrote: Linux man page numbers. http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3586/what-do-the-numbers-in-a-man-page-mean#3587 Michael Munger, dCAP, MCPS, MCNPS, MBSS High Powered Help, Inc. Microsoft Certified Professional Microsoft Certified

Re: What is the number means?

Gao: > Hi, > > I'd like ask a dumb question: I see there are many things in Postfix > which named as pipe(8), smtp(5), lmtp(8). So what is number 5 or 8 mean? > Version number? The numbers refer to sections in the UNIX programmer's manual. The convention used in Postfix date

Re: What is the number means?

Linux man page numbers. http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3586/what-do-the-numbers-in-a-man-page-mean#3587 Michael Munger, dCAP, MCPS, MCNPS, MBSS High Powered Help, Inc. Microsoft Certified Professional Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist Digium Certified Asterisk Professional

Re: [postfix-users] What is the number means?

> I'd like ask a dumb question: I see there are many things in Postfix which > named as pipe(8), smtp(5), lmtp(8). So what is number 5 or 8 mean? Version > number? http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3586/what-do-the-numbers-in-a-man-page-mean Gabor

What is the number means?

Hi, I'd like ask a dumb question: I see there are many things in Postfix which named as pipe(8), smtp(5), lmtp(8). So what is number 5 or 8 mean? Version number? Gao

Re: No logs between Apr 25 - 27. What happened?

r shipped configurations and do it by default. (If you have /var/log/mail.info at all, you're using syslog, not systemd-journald.) > *From: *Matthias Andree > *Sent: *Monday, May 2, 2016 11:57 PM > *To: *tswmmeejsdad .; postfix-users@postfix.org > *Subject: *Re: No logs between Apr 2

Re: No logs between Apr 25 - 27. What happened?

between Apr 25 - 27. What happened?Am 3. Mai 2016 06:15:55 MESZ, schrieb "tswmmeejsdad ." <tswmmeejs...@gmail.com>: Hi All,Anyone know what I should check for to determine why logging to /var/log/mail stopped suddenly between Apr 25-27? I can see mail logs before and after those d

Re: No logs between Apr 25 - 27. What happened?

Am 3. Mai 2016 06:15:55 MESZ, schrieb "tswmmeejsdad ." <tswmmeejs...@gmail.com>: >Hi All, > >Anyone know what I should check for to determine why logging to >/var/log/mail stopped suddenly between Apr 25-27? I can see mail logs >before and after those dates but n

No logs between Apr 25 - 27. What happened?

Hi All, Anyone know what I should check for to determine why logging to /var/log/mail stopped suddenly between Apr 25-27? I can see mail logs before and after those dates but nothing was logged between those dates. Mail was working fine else we would have had customers call up during those three

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

In message <3qjzc32dcxzj...@spike.porcupine.org> Wietse Venema writes: > > > > No-one can connect to this from outside. > > > > That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in > > this configuration. > > If someone can connect from outside to your 127.0.0.1 port, then > you

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016, at 06:42 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > No-one can connect to this from outside. > > > > That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in > > this configuration. > > If someone can connect from outside to your 127.0.0.1 port, then > you have a serious

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

> > No-one can connect to this from outside. > > That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in > this configuration. If someone can connect from outside to your 127.0.0.1 port, then you have a serious infrastructure problem. Wietse

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 05:40 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Who cares? Obviously you don't. But I do. That's why I'm asking. That's good enough for me. > No-one can connect to this from outside. That's correct. Not currently, to this current machine/port, in this configuration. > But, if

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

jaso...@mail-central.com: > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 02:25 PM, jaso...@mail-central.com wrote: > > I think that's "in postfix". Looking around to see. > > is the issue of changing > > ... MTA(smtp:[127.0.0.1]:13002) ... Who cares? No-one can connect to this from outside. But, if you must,

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 02:25 PM, jaso...@mail-central.com wrote: > I think that's "in postfix". Looking around to see. is the issue of changing ... MTA(smtp:[127.0.0.1]:13002) ... to something descriptive that I specify ... MTA(my_internal_server_A) ... a matter of

Re: what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

# CC_MTA.',1','id=%n - Temporary MTA failure on relaying', >>> # CC_MTA.',2','id=%n - Rejected by next-hop MTA on >>> relaying', # CC_MTA, 'id=%n - Unable to relay message back to MTA', ... #

what error is being reported back to sender, and how to avoid reporting back internal server ports?

I added SPF and header_checks to my Postfix setup. I'm following the message path, and have a couple questions about what error gets reported back to the sender. After postscreen PASS, I check for SPF, then hand off to Amavis preque for DKIM psint pass - - n - - smtpd -o

What is needed build postfix for /usr/local (not default location) or do I need to?

I have postfix built with the standard configuration it comes with, well, everything that is is installed in the “default” places on my Mac. OSX 10.11 Trouble is, that’s the same place that Apple put their own Postfix build. Which is not the same as mine, so with every major OS upgrade, I have

Re: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

On 2015-10-21 01:51, John Allen wrote: I have not looked at the code, so I am guessing, but it seems that mail/mailx hadle a continuous block of text differently to a multi-line block. I am not competent to decide if the as it should be or not. I have a script that checks for various

Re: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

That is in fact what is installed. Mail and mailx are symlinks to heirloom-mailx.

Solved: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

Switched to sendmail, problems seem to have been solved. THNX

Re: Solved: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

On October 20, 2015 1:17:46 PM John Allen wrote: Switched to sendmail, problems seem to have been solved. THNX are you in case sending the google lotto numbers so ?

Re: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

On 2015-10-20 12:38, John Allen wrote: That is in fact what is installed. Mail and mailx are symlinks to heirloom-mailx. True, symlinked to the same binary. Just tried your initial command. The resulting email has the text "message text" in the body when run as echo "

Re: Solved: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

No, I switched from sing heirloom-mail which I believe is a cli MUA to Postfix sendmail. On 2015-10-20 9:33 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: John Allen: Switched to sendmail, problems seem to have been solved. Please clarify: you switched MTA alternatives? Wietse

Re: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

of text differently to a multi-line block. I am not competent to decide if the as it should be or not. thanks everyone John A On 2015-10-20 10:07 AM, Christian Kivalo wrote: On 2015-10-20 12:38, John Allen wrote: That is in fact what is installed. Mail and mailx are symlinks to heirloom-mail

Re: Solved: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

John Allen: > Switched to sendmail, problems seem to have been solved. Please clarify: you switched MTA alternatives? Wietse

This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

We want to send alerts to our admin staff from some of our remote servers. All the servers are Debian based and supply, smtp, imaps, file sharing (webdav), calendar and address book capabilities. To send the alerts we have tried email and sms messaging. eMail works but can be slow depending

Re: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

That should say echo -e "message text \r" | Sorry about that

Re: This maybe off topic, but could somebody tell me what i am doing wrong?

Am 20. Oktober 2015 02:58:43 MESZ, schrieb John Allen <j...@klam.ca>: >That should say echo -e "message text \r" | >Sorry about that I'd recommend you install the package heirloom-mailx, it's much more flexible in what you can do with it. Regards Christian

Can someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is?

Hello, I have some notion about what email is, about what a domain is, and about what a gateway (routing) is, but I don't know what a "mail domain gateway" is. I have searched for this and I am getting a lot of information to the effect that "On a mail domain # gateway,

RE: Can someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is?

someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is? Hello, I have some notion about what email is, about what a domain is, and about what a gateway (routing) is, but I don't know what a "mail domain gateway" is. I have searched for this and I am getting a lot of infor

Re: Can someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is?

Bernard Higonnet: > Hello, > > I have some notion about what email is, about what a domain is, and Right-hand side of email address. > about what a gateway (routing) is, but I don't know what a "mail domain > gateway" is. Typically the host(s) that receive(s

Re: Can someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is?

So, for a machine running a mail server NOT to be a "mail domain gateway" it does not receive mail from the Internet for a particular domain AND does not host a mail server receiving/sending mail within a domain? What kinds of hosts/mail servers are not a "mail

Re: Can someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is?

Bernard Higonnet: > So, for a machine running a mail server NOT to be a "mail domain > gateway" it does not receive mail from the Internet for a particular > domain AND does not host a mail server receiving/sending mail within a > domain? > What kinds of hosts/mai

Re: Can someone tell me what a "mail domain gateway" is?

On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 17:50 +0200, Bernard Higonnet wrote: > Hello, > > I have some notion about what email is, about what a domain is, and > about what a gateway (routing) is, but I don't know what a "mail > domain > gateway" is. As already indicated it's usually

Re: Restricting what Groups can send mail to off-site destinations

On 8/25/2015 12:04 AM, Ashish Yadav wrote: Hi, postconf -nf output and logs showing what happens. Output of postconf -nf shows all the parameters which I have configured, everything seems to be *ok* here. In the logs it does not shows any error, it just sends the mail

Re: Restricting what Groups can send mail to off-site destinations

On 8/24/2015 7:07 AM, Ashish Yadav wrote: Hi, The RESTRICTION_CLASS_README example works. http://www.postfix.org/RESTRICTION_CLASS_README.html#external If you have trouble, show what you did and what happened. Sorry for late reply, 1. I have configured the main.cf

Re: Restricting what Groups can send mail to off-site destinations

Hi, The RESTRICTION_CLASS_README example works. http://www.postfix.org/RESTRICTION_CLASS_README.html#external If you have trouble, show what you did and what happened. Sorry for late reply, 1. I have configured the main.cf like below in order to block all user to send mail outside

Re: Restricting what Groups can send mail to off-site destinations

Hi, postconf -nf output and logs showing what happens. Output of postconf -nf shows all the parameters which I have configured, everything seems to be *ok* here. In the logs it does not shows any error, it just sends the mail to outer domain without applying any restrictions. May

Re: Restricting what Groups can send mail to off-site destinations

-box-gets-routed-to-the/234347#234347 Every time the restricted user was able to send the email to outside domain liike gmail.com http://gmail.com although after not giving that user access to do so. Please tell me what I am missing in the above procedure. --Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav

Restricting what Groups can send mail to off-site destinations

to send the email to outside domain liike gmail.com although after not giving that user access to do so. Please tell me what I am missing in the above procedure. --Regards Ashishkumar S. Yadav

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

On 2015-06-09 06:38, DTNX Postmaster wrote: from the perspective of the recipient, your mail is originating from '81.88.62.172', which isn't included in your SPF record. Your SPF record dictates that it should be rejected, so they do. That's what the error message tells you. ALL this had been

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

, so they do. That's what the error message tells you. ALL this had been very clear to me since before I posted. I posted here to be sure that this was the case AND that there was no error in my **postfix** configuration, not only the spf one, that may have contributed to confuse the recipient

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

record dictates that it should be rejected, so they do. That's what the error message tells you. ALL this had been very clear to me since before I posted. I posted here to be sure that this was the case AND that there was no error in my **postfix** configuration, not only the spf one, that may have

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

of spf failure??? Can I be confused, or what? 81.88.62.172 is an IP address in the recipient's network. For example, scott01.register.it = 81.88.49.168. It certainly looks like the confusion is on their side. Wietse The error returned from the remote server is/was: 5.7.1 centan

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

on the nexaima vps which is ALSO the mx of that domain, and is in the Netherlands. From all I can see, I could have passed through 81.88.62.172 ONLY as https traffic going to the vps, not as smtp. That, and the fact that sending an email in the SAME way to google gives no spf failure is what makes me

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

the Received: and Receive-SPF headers of the rejected message, which do NOT report 81.88.62.172 as source, or spf failures... So THEY acknowledge I emailed from 213.179.193.33, THEY say SPF-pass, then THEY reject because of spf failure??? Can I be confused, or what? The error returned from

Re: what is the reason for THIS spf failure?

failure??? Can I be confused, or what? It's quite simple, really. Your mail is being sent via '81.88.62.172'. Probably as part of a forward from 'i...@centesimusannus.org' to 'centan...@foundation.va', which is not hosted at the same ISP. Therefore, from the perspective of the recipient, your

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >