Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 7:02 AM:
Perhaps you missed this in prior email:
- Send non-verbose logging.
- Send logging that covers an entire message life cycle from the
SMTP port to final delivery.
Wietse
Wietse, check the listserv logs and your MUA. He sent that
Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 8:39 AM:
- Your mail server is suffering from 100x red-shift due to the
rapid expansion of the universe.
Sending Postfix off into space to study time dilation effects, that
is an option that I haven't considered before.
I deleted a very similar
Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 10:48 AM:
Humor is OK provided that the receiving end does not feel ridiculed.
That's pretty much the reason I removed the humor before sending.
In this case, I made my joke the end of a list of more serious
explanations for the observed delays. That
Y z put forth on 4/28/2010 1:36 AM:
Where do I start troubleshooting?
Start by making sure that these match:
/etc/resolv.conf
/var/spool/postfix/etc/resolv.conf
When cli dns tools work, that usually means the first file above is correct,
fsvo correct. When postfix can't resolve dns, it
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 4/28/2010 1:50 AM:
Y z put forth on 4/28/2010 1:36 AM:
Where do I start troubleshooting?
Start by making sure that these match:
/etc/resolv.conf
/var/spool/postfix/etc/resolv.conf
When cli dns tools work, that usually means the first file above is correct
Y z put forth on 4/28/2010 2:08 AM:
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 01:56:55 -0500
From: s...@hardwarefreak.com
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: 'Domain not found' errors after Ubuntu upgrade
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 4/28/2010 1:50 AM:
Y z put
Wietse Venema put forth on 4/29/2010 9:05 AM:
Stan Hoeppner:
I'm current using recipient_bcc_maps to forward spam trap emails to a dnsbl.
I've been asked by another dnsbl to provide them the same trap data.
According to recipient_bcc_maps, I can't bcc to more than one address
Uwe Dippel put forth on 5/12/2010 4:58 AM:
This is quite strange:
I have been running fetchmail from a cronjob for a few years now, to
collect my messages from an IMAP server and forward it to another one.
This was and is the (only) cronjob:
# m h dom mon dow command
5 * * * *
Josh Cason put forth on 5/13/2010 5:13 PM:
But this is a static ip number and the mail server it is using is mine.
These are customers of ours that we monitor our servers. Now If I put
the extact ip address into mynetworks. It works. But I don't think that
is proper.
Why would this not be
Punit Jain put forth on 5/19/2010 4:19 AM:
Throttling is not the solution to fight spam originating within your
network. If you know who is doing it, boot him. If you don't, identify
who it is, then boot him. Period. Why are you playing paddy cakes with a
spammer on your network?
Its not
JF Mezei put forth on 5/21/2010 4:20 AM:
connect from cpe-67-252-139-22.buffalo.res.rr.com [67.252.139.22]
May 19 01:09:15 velo postfix/smtpdP26473]: warning:
22.139.252.67.zen.spamhaus.org: RBL lookup error: Host or domain name
not found. Name service error for
brian put forth on 5/26/2010 1:53 PM:
FWIW, aside from aliases for the usual postmaster, abuse, and webmaster
addresses, this domain has just 2 actual addresses to be maintained. So,
might a whitelist approach be the way to go? Or, is this something i
should leave to iptables/fail2ban?
Care
Noel Jones put forth on 5/26/2010 3:56 PM:
Use ps or top to see how much RAM each smtpd uses, guesstimate from
there. If system swaps, reduce.
Postscreen will help with this, since a single postscreen process can
handle thousands of connections.
To lower memory consumption on your VPS, you
brian put forth on 5/26/2010 8:28 PM:
On 10-05-26 09:03 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
brian put forth on 5/26/2010 1:53 PM:
FWIW, aside from aliases for the usual postmaster, abuse, and webmaster
addresses, this domain has just 2 actual addresses to be maintained. So,
might a whitelist approach
Nataraj put forth on 5/26/2010 10:06 PM:
How does rate limiting work in conjunction with postscreen? Can the
various rate limits be applied to postcreen or would rate limiting no
longer be necessary. I run in a vmware virtual machine which used to
fall on its knees from both bot and
Ioannis Tsouvalas put forth on 5/28/2010 4:09 AM:
My guess so far is to go and lower the link speed between the Shorewall,
Postfix, and maybe even SBS2008, and that's because similar problems having
been encountered where the MTU is bigger than 1500. Now, the only reason I
haven't done it so
Ioannis Tsouvalas put forth on 5/28/2010 6:41 AM:
Stan thanks for the reply, as well as the insight regarding the difference
between soft and hard nic devices. The only reason I'm pointing out the link
pulse as well as the MTU, is that my search so far points me towards that
direction. Now if
Wietse Venema put forth on 5/28/2010 9:37 AM:
Ioannis Tsouvalas:
Ioannis Tsouvalas:
451 Requested action aborted: local error in processing
451 Temporary local problem - please try later
These you can do nothing about, except perhaps retry when the remote
system is under less stress.
Ioannis Tsouvalas put forth on 5/30/2010 9:47 AM:
Stan thanks for the reply, and please excuse me for the time interval in
between your post and my reply. Geek and neato! wasn't exactly what I
was aiming for, but still I appreciate that you identified the geeky
complexity of the idea that I
Ioannis Tsouvalas put forth on 5/30/2010 2:46 PM:
I have disabled shorewall on Postfix machine using #shorewall clear , but
I'm still working on clearing shorewall on the dedicated machine, but I
haven't managed to make it happen since all the NAT has been implemented on
the shorewall
Curtis Maurand put forth on 6/1/2010 2:13 PM:
I was editing the table by hand, but it seemed to be easier to do via
the dbmail administrator and the mysql lookup. two domains, I'm simply
filtering mail for and then sending along to their exchange server via
smtp (sort of a postini type
Matt Hayes put forth on 6/2/2010 9:46 PM:
Yes.. I know this has come up quite a bit, but on freenode in #postfix
this discussion once again erupted when someone mentioned a bug in
postfix and referencing this:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=214741
Now, I'm not all that
Jan Kohnert put forth on 6/3/2010 5:55 PM:
Or let the Debian people write that patch for their version, as their users
are apparently the only ones who comlain and such a fix could probably mess
up
more postfix-experienced users... ;)
Please don't paint the Debian user base with such a
Moe put forth on 6/3/2010 8:10 PM:
So with that, no hard feelings. I'll make sure to not bother
you guys again.
No hard feelings intended Moe.
What I just can't wrap my small brain around is how the pain and effort to
insert 'myhostname = mx1.example.com' into main.cf is greater than the pain
Victor Duchovni put forth on 6/3/2010 8:29 PM:
And Stan also.
As usual, you're right Victor. My apologies to Moe for the brain damaged
comment. Unprofessional and uncalled for.
Sorry Moe.
--
Stan
Paul McGougan put forth on 6/3/2010 9:42 PM:
So that's not really a possibility unfortunately.
What is possible is walking to a new provider.
--
Stan
Noel Jones put forth on 6/8/2010 8:58 AM:
and while I've never met anyone named Wietse, I seem to remember seeing
that name in the postfix copyright statement. His advice might be worth
paying attention to.
https://researcher.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-wietse
Покотиленко Костик put forth on 6/10/2010 4:15 AM:
I'd attack the problem from another angle. You may be better served by adding
some more dnsbl checks rather that fighting spoofs:
http://www.mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=blacklist%3a111.67.207.126
As you can see the IP sample you gave is
Покотиленко Костик put forth on 6/10/2010 8:04 AM:
Thanks for suggestion, I'll apply it.
You're welcome.
But if somebody can help discover (configuration) error which
prioritizing postmaster that would be nice.
postconf -d | grep mail_version might be helpful. IIRC some early versions
of
Does Postfix consider architettobellucci.com an FQDN? I've always
understood an FQDN as requiring all 3 of host.domain.tld. If my understanding
of FQDN is correct, then a spam slipped through that I believe should have
been rejected by reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname. What have I configured
Curtis Maurand put forth on 6/11/2010 7:30 AM:
currently I have in my smtpd_client_restrictions: ...
reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
permit
Is flat out rejecting clients on the RBL's considered too agressive?
should I just let spamassassin handle
Wietse Venema put forth on 6/11/2010 9:21 AM:
Stan Hoeppner:
Does Postfix consider architettobellucci.com an FQDN? I've always
understood an FQDN as requiring all 3 of host.domain.tld. If my
understanding
of FQDN is correct, then a spam slipped through that I believe should have
been
Покотиленко Костик put forth on 6/11/2010 1:37 PM:
В Чтв, 10/06/2010 в 16:48 +0300, Покотиленко Костик пишет:
В Чтв, 10/06/2010 в 08:32 -0500, Stan Hoeppner пишет:
Покотиленко Костик put forth on 6/10/2010 8:04 AM:
Thanks for suggestion, I'll apply it.
You're welcome.
But if somebody can
Покотиленко Костик put forth on 6/11/2010 2:24 PM:
This client name unmungled:
smtp.harddriveme.com [111.67.206.181]
This should have been caught by one of the two SORBS lists you said you added
per my advice. SORBS has been listing the parent /20 since Nov 2009.
Netblock:
JC Putter put forth on 6/13/2010 1:03 PM:
hi everyone,
i have a postfix (2.3.3) server running with fetchmail to retrieve mail from
the actual mailserver, the problem is that only the office users get their
my from the local postfix/fetchmail server, the remote users connect to the
actual
Mark Goodge put forth on 6/18/2010 4:28 AM:
1. Just discard spam.
By this I hope you mean rejecting the message at SMTP time, not accept and
move to /dev/null.
Regarding the OP's original issue, im my experience, nearly all spam that has
a 'from' address matching the local 'to' address is bot
Ben Munat put forth on 6/19/2010 5:20 PM:
What am I missing?
You are missing the required evidence that would allow us to help you. We
need actual error messages, log entries, postconf -n output, etc. The list
welcome message told you what to provide.
Based on what you've provided so far, we
Ben Munat put forth on 6/19/2010 5:52 PM:
On 6/19/10 3:33 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Ben Munat put forth on 6/19/2010 5:20 PM:
What am I missing?
You are missing the required evidence that would allow us to help
you. We
need actual error messages, log entries, postconf -n output, etc
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 6/19/2010 6:12 PM:
Ben Munat put forth on 6/19/2010 5:52 PM:
On 6/19/10 3:33 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Ben Munat put forth on 6/19/2010 5:20 PM:
What am I missing?
You are missing the required evidence that would allow us to help
you. We
need actual error
Wietse Venema put forth on 6/19/2010 5:51 PM:
Ben Munat:
main.cf:inet_interfaces = 64.69.38.41,127.0.0.1
and I hook up the main smtp process in master.cf like this:
master.cf:-o smtp_bind_address=64.69.38.41
This works only on the SMTP CLIENT. Not the SMTP SERVER.
And apparently it
Stefan Foerster put forth on 6/20/2010 5:16 AM:
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
For read maps, yes. And even better, one process will do multiple map types.
Ben Munat put forth on 6/20/2010 2:36 PM:
On 6/19/10 10:31 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Wietse Venema put forth on 6/19/2010 5:51 PM:
Ben Munat:
main.cf:inet_interfaces = 64.69.38.41,127.0.0.1
and I hook up the main smtp process in master.cf like this:
master.cf:-o smtp_bind_address
Rui Francisco put forth on 6/21/2010 7:22 PM:
Hi,
i would liek to know if its possible to forward emails in postfix with
virtual users, or to put a vacation message.
All the users are saved in a mysql database and postfix delivers emails
normally. The problem is how to forward emails. I
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de put forth on 6/22/2010 6:50 AM:
Zitat von Ram r...@netcore.co.in:
Does that mean I can have them over different partitions on different
disks. I had initially assumed all the postfix spool must be on the
same partition
From my understanding the spool must be on the
Steffan A. Cline put forth on 6/22/2010 8:01 PM:
It's a long post. Sorry.
Yeah, it was long, and probably overly ambitious for a single thread topic.
Instead of addressing your questions about individual main.cf parameter
settings and policy services, I'm going to make a few suggestions which
Jason Bailey, Sun Advocate Webmaster put forth on 6/22/2010 10:32 PM:
(Note: I do have to disclose one piece of information. Recently our
server was automatically blacklisted by our ISP for spam that was being
relayed through our system from a series of external sources. I've
tested both
Michael put forth on 6/24/2010 3:07 AM:
I want to be able to monitor SASL users to get quick notification if
something
is out of the ordinary - like a spammer using a compromised account to send
emails.
What tool(s) can be used to achieve this?
Given the nature of your requirement,
Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/24/2010 11:33 PM:
/etc/postfix/transport:
server2.com: relay:[10.0.2.73]
/etc/postfix/master.cf:
relay unix - - n - 200 smtp
-o smtp_helo_timeout=3s
-o smtp_connect_timeout=3s
-o
Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/25/2010 8:01 AM:
With the settings above, the queue is now down to 2442 within 20
minutes. It was at 21,000 mark when I sent my first email below
(nearly 12 hours ago), so the progress has been very minimal until the
change above. The bottleneck has now
Basanta shrestha put forth on 6/27/2010 3:53 AM:
Dear All,
CentOS 5.2
Followed http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/postfix and installed
postfix dovecot system-switch-mail system-switch-mail-gnome
Local delivery and local receipt works ok. Couldn't send email to
external mail using 127.0.0.1
Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/27/2010 5:50 PM:
From your questions above, I could see where you're coming from that if
Server2 has performance problem then it would make sense to see the
queue built up at Server1. I can confirm server2 is very underload at
any time, the server is
Basanta shrestha put forth on 6/27/2010 11:26 PM:
Dear Stan,
I doubt it is absolutely necessary to pay for that service.
Please refer
Yes, it is necessary. You can't host a mail server without paying someone
some amount of money. If you actually _read_ my previous email and followed
the
Mihira Fernando put forth on 6/28/2010 2:20 AM:
you can use the dyndns.org free account for email by using the dyndns
FQDN allocated for the server in your domain's MX entry.
May not be the perfect way but it works.
What domain MX entry?
Why would someone pay for DNS hosting for a single
Noel Jones put forth on 6/28/2010 6:56 AM:
Don't confuse mail routing (mail directed from the internet to your
server via DNS records) with mail hosting (mail accepted somewhere and
forwarded/proxied to your server). Dyndns provides mail routing for
free; their mail hosting service is a paid
Mihira Fernando put forth on 6/28/2010 3:28 AM:
Also its not CNAME that you use. Its the A record.
My mistake. You can actually point the MX for another domain at the dyndns
fqdn. I got my thought process screwed up due to all the goofiness of how
DynDNS does some things, and the specific
Dipak Biswal put forth on 6/30/2010 10:56 PM:
http://urbanmarketingnetwork.com/blog/index.php/2009/03/13/improve-mass-email-deliverablity-the-long-way/
The link to the main document you need to be reading is broken at the page
above. Here is where you should start reading:
James R. Marcus put forth on 7/1/2010 4:40 PM:
Slightly off topic, but a user has observed that any email sent in plain text
is bounced, any mail sent as HTML gets sent.
Has anyone encountered such an issue? My environment hasn't really changed
in months and I'm confused.
Roll Twilight
Asai put forth on 7/2/2010 3:41 PM:
Greetings,
For some reason, which I don't know how to figure out, our emails to
this one specific email domain are being refused. Can anyone point me
in the right direction? Here's an example of the log:
Jul 2 09:33:10 triata amavis[1162]: (01162-09)
Sahil Tandon put forth on 7/2/2010 4:13 PM:
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 13:41:06 -0700, Asai wrote:
For some reason, which I don't know how to figure out, our emails to
this one specific email domain are being refused. Can anyone point
me in the right direction? Here's an example of the log:
Morten P.D. Stevens put forth on 7/3/2010 2:40 PM:
Hi,
Does anyone know backported Postfix 2.6.x or 2.7.x RPM packages for RHEL5?
This binary rpm is for x86-64 only:
http://ftp.wl0.org/official/2.7/RPMS-rhel5-x86_64/postfix-2.7.1-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
You'll have to google more than I did to
junkyardma...@verizon.net put forth on 7/4/2010 9:53 PM:
What is stupid is to be so opposed to anti spam tools that have no
significant downside.
The problem is it has no significant upside either, which is why most sites
don't use it as an anti spam measure. Since spammers can simply create
Isaac Witmer put forth on 7/6/2010 9:27 AM:
I'm doing a custom install, and one of the packages in the install is postfix.
Each time, it prompts me to select no configuration Local use etc.
just after the package has been downloaded and right before it has
been installed. (similar to the
Jerry put forth on 7/7/2010 8:09 AM:
Why are you setting configuration parameters to their default setting?
It doesn't serve any purpose that I am aware of.
I've seen this quite a bit. It leads me to believe there are some Linux
distros that ship with this stuff in main.cf by default. IIRC
Ville Walveranta put forth on 7/8/2010 9:14 PM:
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps works except that the other settings
affecting the relay aren't conditionalized by the defined relayhost
maps. In this case the relayhost for the externally relayed
business domains requires TLS and authentication
Kammen van, Marco, Springer SBM NL put forth on 7/9/2010 6:00 AM:
Not sure if its related to your issue.
But there is a big spam/virus attack going on, where messages look like
NDR's but they aren't.
Various big anti spam vendors are having serious issues stopping this.
Some of my trap
Maybe putting them side-by-side will help.
Docs:
make makefiles CCARGS='-DDEF_CONFIG_DIR=\/some/where\'
You:
make makefiles CCARGS='-DDEF_COMMAND_DIR=\/usr/local/sbin\
Let's see what I did wrong :
You spotted the leading squote but you missed the trailing squote.
--
Stan
Johan Vromans put forth on 7/13/2010 2:36 AM:
The problem: although I have configured
mydomain = squirrel.nl
myorigin = squirrel.nl
postfix stil uses the real, local hostname in the SMTP envelope:
What do you want the SMTP host name to be? squirrel.nl ? johan.squirrel.nl ?
Joern Bredereck put forth on 7/14/2010 3:06 AM:
Hi,
how can I tell why the following mail has been rejected:
Jul 14 08:48:58 zarafa-xen postfix/smtpd[26113]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from ns.gbc.net[212.97.96.201]: 554 5.7.1 ns.gbc.net[212.97.96.201]:
Client host rejected: Access denied;
Joern Bredereck put forth on 7/14/2010 3:50 AM:
Am 14.07.10 10:45, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
Do you have more than one access table/type? I have 7 access tables,
including hash, CIDR, regexp, and PCRE. I add comments to my regexp and PCRE
tables to make matching REJECTs in the mail log
Ram put forth on 7/15/2010 1:29 AM:
Now this is the problem of all invites, especially those invites that
scrape my addressbook and invite everyone.
Should not all invites carry some header or any other identification ,
that list management software can automatically detect and /dev/null
Steve put forth on 7/15/2010 4:16 PM:
* if you feed wrong data to the Anti-Spam filter then the filter will make
errors.
Content (header/body) filters have always been error prone and always will be.
The key to success is if the error rate is acceptable. For users to train
them, they have
Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
Ram:
One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
the mails to other servers.
Since there is almost no mail queued on the server , I think it is will
be good to mount /var/spool/postfix on a tmpfs partition.
You will
Charles Marcus put forth on 7/21/2010 7:46 AM:
Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
Port 25 outgoing will be blocked by most ISPs
This may be the case in your country, but from where I'm from, I've
never had a problem sending out on port 25, even on home residental
ISPs :)
Any ISP that does *not*
Daniel V. Reinhardt put forth on 7/21/2010 2:06 PM:
Your average joe doesn't need to be running servers, and if you want business
class services and abilities then pay for it.
Class warfare and/or financial means arguments are invalid in this discussion.
Bandwidth costs money. You can't
Patrick Ben Koetter put forth on 7/22/2010 2:11 AM:
* Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com:
Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
Ram:
One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
the mails to other servers.
Since there is almost no mail queued
Jesus Cea put forth on 7/23/2010 2:33 PM:
The email filesize is around 300Kbytes. The mailing list rejects it.
Should I send it to your personal email?. Send a ZIP file?
Put it on your httpd server, or upload it to pastebin.com, and publish the
appropriate link.
--
Stan
Jonathan Amiez put forth on 7/27/2010 8:26 AM:
Le mardi 27 juillet 2010 15:15:24, Fons van der Beek a écrit :
domain.com smpt:sbsserver:25
Anyone an idea what is wrong
Double-check your config, you wrote smpt instead of smtp
It's
Fons van der Beek put forth on 7/27/2010 10:53 AM:
sorry...
i just didn't see it.
very stupid, but also gratefull
Don't sweat it. Laugh about it instead. Exercise a little self deprecating
humor. Whenever this kind of thing happens, _always_ say something like:
That'll
Mark Scholten put forth on 7/31/2010 11:00 AM:
Any ideas if there are ready to use scripts for this part?
If you give us your exact requirement, instead of the vague I want to get
certain information, one of us might be able to hack up a simple shell
script, or even a single bash line, to do
Mark Scholten put forth on 7/31/2010 6:53 PM:
I want the following information (per day or per hour, it should be possible
to exclude email addresses or to only get information for certain email
addresses):
/usr/sbin/pflogsumm.pl --smtpd_stats /var/log/mail.log /var/log/mail.log.1
Grand
Mark Scholten put forth on 8/1/2010 5:46 AM:
Getting it in a single number is important for me, however looking at the
http://logreporters.sourceforge.net/ link you did give I see that all but
one thing is given the way I want it. This last option isn't given the way I
like it, but that can
Julio Cesar Covolato put forth on 8/7/2010 12:37 AM:
Is there anyone using postfix in cloud, like Amazon ec2?
Dunno about Postfix specifically, but there are/were many spammers operating
out of the Amazon cloud as well as the Rackspace cloud. Even if they are
clean now, their reputation is
Jonathan Tripathy put forth on 8/7/2010 8:09 AM:
Of course, VPS ISPs should always do checks to make sure
that a person signing up is who they say they are -
Herein lies the problem. The low cost business model of cloud/VPS precludes
providers from doing any kind of meaningful customer
Mark Scholten put forth on 8/7/2010 8:19 AM:
As long as it is with a reputable provider there should be no problem to use
them for SMTP mail.
I estimate 90%+ of all the VPS providers are in the disreputable category
WRT SMTP spam, most due to negligence, not evil. There are are a few dozen
Charles Marcus put forth on 8/7/2010 11:54 AM:
On 8/7/2010 11:32 AM, Mihira Fernando wrote:
This looks very interesting. I assume that SASL backend is also using
cyrus ?
Can I suggest/request you add options for Dovecot IMAP and SASL backend
as well ?
+10
+100
Postfix/Dovecot is a very
Jonathan Tripathy put forth on 8/7/2010 4:03 PM:
I guess my question is a little more general than this topic: do
providers ever block *who* mail is sent to?
You probably need to be much more specific, detailed, with this question.
--
Stan
Jonathan Tripathy put forth on 8/7/2010 7:32 PM:
On 08/08/10 01:33, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Jonathan Tripathy put forth on 8/7/2010 4:03 PM:
I guess my question is a little more general than this topic: do
providers ever block *who* mail is sent to?
You probably need to be much
ABPNI put forth on 8/8/2010 1:54 AM:
On 8 Aug 2010, at 03:22, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
Jonathan Tripathy put forth on 8/7/2010 7:32 PM:
On 08/08/10 01:33, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Jonathan Tripathy put forth on 8/7/2010 4:03 PM:
I guess my question is a little more
Nicolas Michel put forth on 8/9/2010 9:29 AM:
For example : a host with IP WWW.XXX.YYY.ZZZ try so send a mail to my
domain (we'll call it mydomain.be) and claims that the sender is
u...@otherdomain.com
Example of forging, typical of spammers:
Return-Path: coltenarmi...@yahoo.dk
michael.lar...@wellsfargo.com put forth on 8/9/2010 12:47 PM:
I have a very simple postfix relay set up with client.access, sender.access
and recipient.access rules. I need to set it up such that it will relay *all
addresses* from a specific host, but keep the default rejection for all other
Patrick Ben Koetter put forth on 8/10/2010 6:37 AM:
* Bjorn Mork bjron.m...@gmail.com:
i have tried to answer your queris, (Please correct, if I am wrong in
understanding your question...)
We do have multiple IBM Blade server with 2.4 Xeon + 16GB + NAS over iSCSI
protocol..
How many
Michael Orlitzky put forth on 8/10/2010 4:02 PM:
I think he just wants to know which smtpd restrictions list contains the
rule that caused the rejection.
This is relatively easy to accomplish with custom rejection messages. Simply
insert a unique symbol at the beginning of each rejection
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 8/11/2010 2:35 AM:
* Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com:
Michael Orlitzky put forth on 8/10/2010 4:02 PM:
I think he just wants to know which smtpd restrictions list contains the
rule that caused the rejection.
This is relatively easy to accomplish
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 8/11/2010 3:31 AM:
I was just looking at a Logwatch summary. The data the OP is requesting _is_
in the Postfix logs somewhere, as Logwatch is tallying the disconnection
phases:
81 Connections lost (inbound)
61 After DATA
11
Alex put forth on 8/14/2010 7:34 PM:
I'm running an older version of postfix and a 2.6.35 Linux kernel, and
recently started seeing these messages:
Aug 14 19:52:01 smtp01 postfix/postsuper[2634]: fatal: setuid(103):
Resource temporarily unavailable
How can I troubleshoot this?
Does the
Jack Knowlton put forth on 8/15/2010 4:53 PM:
Is it possible to store a CIDR access table on a mysql database?
I'm pretty sure the answer is, NO.
The solution to your problem is sticking the Postfix access table files you
want shared across your MX farm on an NFS/CIFS server and mounting the
Noel Jones put forth on 8/16/2010 10:03 AM:
On 8/16/2010 9:36 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Ram put forth on 8/16/2010 8:19 AM:
But Enterprise quality SSD's are so expensive. I can get an additional
server and still save money.
I call BS:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item
Noel Jones put forth on 8/16/2010 4:46 PM:
Move reject_unauth_destination to below your white/black lists.
Thanks for the quick advice for Michael, Noel.
I should have thought of this, however I didn't realize until asking Michael
to bring this thread back on list that he was dealing with all
Wietse Venema put forth on 8/16/2010 2:36 PM:
Stan Hoeppner:
Google uses less than 1/10th of 1% Enterprise grade hardware, using the
typical definition of Enterprise grade, in their operations. And Google is
the undisputed single largest operator of servers on the planet. I think
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 8/16/2010 6:56 PM:
Wietse Venema put forth on 8/16/2010 2:36 PM:
Stan Hoeppner:
Google uses less than 1/10th of 1% Enterprise grade hardware, using the
typical definition of Enterprise grade, in their operations. And Google
is
the undisputed single largest
301 - 400 of 1223 matches
Mail list logo
