OK this is how my header looks now. Is that almost perfection?
I still see Received: from inform.mymodeltalk.com (localhost.localdomain
[127.0.0.1]). Is that a HELO and is it a problem when sending bulk mail?
Delivered-To: mikemc...@gmail.com
Received: by 10.36.51.18 with SMTP id k18csp1587884itk;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.92.114 with SMTP id a105mr12182236qge.79.1434403580350;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <talk...@inform.mymodeltalk.com>
Received: from mymodeltalk.com (MyModelTalk.com. [52.0.148.79])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id fm10si9078365qcb.45.2015.06.15.14.26.19
for <mikemc...@gmail.com>;
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of
talk...@inform.mymodeltalk.com designates 52.0.148.79 as permitted
sender) client-ip=52.0.148.79;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
spf=pass (google.com: domain of talk...@inform.mymodeltalk.com
designates 52.0.148.79 as permitted sender)
smtp.mail=talk...@inform.mymodeltalk.com;
dkim=neutral (no signature) header.i=@mymodeltalk.com
Received: from inform.mymodeltalk.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by mymodeltalk.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 66F36325DF
for <mikemc...@gmail.com>; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 17:26:19 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mymodeltalk.com;
s=default; t=1434403579;
bh=OGM/bfUY4Whfe/tpcKi0I7F2EHGQODP0ggYbOKGyYNk=;
h=Date:To:From:Subject;
b=laHc/AQFeT5Dlhx8hHz/jk2Lg7kSrO8VIU2eU5eABphe4EYV7O7bMOk7EhyC4hlic
4RveckMb7bMO1As6Ix4rG2nPa6AEjtBkgGn7sr/j2iBSzi0ThwChY73IW2+jzvxqOV
96Dp8clECIwn98JtyeSQiaMhk9Kpr3zZTi+DzALg=
--
Mike McKoy
*404.590.7176*
http://MyForeverHair.com
http://www.MyModelTalk.com
http://InCrowdUSA.net
http://www.google.com/profiles/mikemckoy
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <postfix-us...@dukhovni.org
> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 05:14:36PM -0400, Mike McKoy wrote:
>
> > OK i have two instances... the first instance starts and then the second
> > instance tries too. I do appreciate the kind help thus far.
> >
> > *The error is*: postfix-immt/postfix-script[20418]: fatal: the Postfix
> mai
> > l system is already running
>
> What does "postmulti -l" report? On systems where multi-instance
> support is correctly configured "postfix stop" stops all enabled
> instances and "postfix start" starts all enabled instances.
>
> Perhaps you managed to stop just the default instance, and the
> secondary is still running. In that case you should be able to
> stop it with "postmulti -i immt stop", and then after also stopping
> the default instance "postfix start" should start both.
>
> --
> Viktor.
>
