Sieve prevents tigger of quota-warning
Hi All I have a few reports from Sieve users, that they are not receiving quota warnings. It appears that when a mailbox is reaching quota, and sieve is responsible for moving mail the mail due to a rule, the quota-warning directive is not triggered? It works fine if Sieve is not part of the flow, and lmtp is alone in handling mail saving. Does anyone have a fix or insights into this? 2.3.9.2 Thanks -- Tom
Re: Sieve prevents tigger of quota-warning
On 31.1.2020 11.25, Tom Sommer wrote: > Hi All > > I have a few reports from Sieve users, that they are not receiving > quota warnings. > > It appears that when a mailbox is reaching quota, and sieve is > responsible for moving mail the mail due to a rule, the quota-warning > directive is not triggered? > It works fine if Sieve is not part of the flow, and lmtp is alone in > handling mail saving. > > Does anyone have a fix or insights into this? > > 2.3.9.2 > > Thanks > Can you provide us with some way to reproduce this? mail_debug=yes logs could help too. Aki
Re: Vacation use different SMTP server
Op 28-1-2020 om 19:20 schreef azu...@pobox.sk: Really no more info? You could do something with the sendmail_path or submission_host settings. Regards, Stephan. Citát azu...@pobox.sk: Thanks for idea but it won't work for me as 'internal domains' can be anything, including gmail.com (and i don't know which of them are really internal/local, this is decided by sending SMTP everytime something is sent, based on MX records). Problem is that Dovecot/Sieve is using wrong SMTP server (one used for receiving e-mails which should NEVER be used for sending [and is never is, except sieve]). Citát "KOCIK Fabien (Acoss)" : Hi, I had the same problem and solved it at architectural design level. Instead of forcing Sieve to use a different SMTP server, I declared some transports in the sending SMTP server to force it to route internal domains directly to receiving SMTP server without going to the Internet. So, internal mails remains on internal network and there is only one SMTP server for all mail traffic. Sorry, I know that I don't answer directly to the original question. But in the context, may be an idea ? Regards. Fabien -Message d'origine- De : dovecot De la part de azu...@pobox.sk Envoyé : vendredi 24 janvier 2020 12:39 À : Dovecot Mailing List Objet : Vacation use different SMTP server Hi, in our setup, we have two SMTP servers: - one for receiving messages (this one is using Dovecot's LMTP for delivery) - one for sending messages (this one is used by our users as outgoing SMTP server) Only the first one has list of local domains, local e-mail accoutns etc. so the second one will ALWAYS use MX records for delivery - with this setup, we can allow to our users to add any domain to their accounts (for example, if someone will add gmail.com and create e-mail accounts on it, it's complete safe because we will never deliver mail for gmail.com locally). The only problem seems to be vacation messages (maybe other messages send by sieve), as Dovecot is using the first SMTP server for sending. My questions: Can i set different SMTP server for sieve messages? How exactly is Dovecot/Sieve choosing which SMTP server will be used? Thanks. azur
Re: Vacation use different SMTP server
Is Pigeonhole really using LDA for sending? My Dovecot is using LMTP, not LDA. Citát Stephan Bosch : Op 28-1-2020 om 19:20 schreef azu...@pobox.sk: Really no more info? You could do something with the sendmail_path or submission_host settings. Regards, Stephan. Citát azu...@pobox.sk: Thanks for idea but it won't work for me as 'internal domains' can be anything, including gmail.com (and i don't know which of them are really internal/local, this is decided by sending SMTP everytime something is sent, based on MX records). Problem is that Dovecot/Sieve is using wrong SMTP server (one used for receiving e-mails which should NEVER be used for sending [and is never is, except sieve]). Citát "KOCIK Fabien (Acoss)" : Hi, I had the same problem and solved it at architectural design level. Instead of forcing Sieve to use a different SMTP server, I declared some transports in the sending SMTP server to force it to route internal domains directly to receiving SMTP server without going to the Internet. So, internal mails remains on internal network and there is only one SMTP server for all mail traffic. Sorry, I know that I don't answer directly to the original question. But in the context, may be an idea ? Regards. Fabien -Message d'origine- De : dovecot De la part de azu...@pobox.sk Envoyé : vendredi 24 janvier 2020 12:39 À : Dovecot Mailing List Objet : Vacation use different SMTP server Hi, in our setup, we have two SMTP servers: - one for receiving messages (this one is using Dovecot's LMTP for delivery) - one for sending messages (this one is used by our users as outgoing SMTP server) Only the first one has list of local domains, local e-mail accoutns etc. so the second one will ALWAYS use MX records for delivery - with this setup, we can allow to our users to add any domain to their accounts (for example, if someone will add gmail.com and create e-mail accounts on it, it's complete safe because we will never deliver mail for gmail.com locally). The only problem seems to be vacation messages (maybe other messages send by sieve), as Dovecot is using the first SMTP server for sending. My questions: Can i set different SMTP server for sieve messages? How exactly is Dovecot/Sieve choosing which SMTP server will be used? Thanks. azur
Strategy for fts and Replication
Hi there, I got successfully to replicate my mail server to another dovecot install using dsync, mainly for redundancy, and it works great. I want to try to install fts, as some of the mailboxes have tens of thousands of messages, and it takes minutes to get some results when searching via IMAP on a Roundcube interface. I want to experiment with fts-solr first, and firstly on my redundant server, ie., not on my main dovecot install. Is it ok to do this? I ask because I am afraid of how this whole reindexing on the redundant install will affect the production server. Also, any tips on something else than fts-solr? I tried it once, but it was so hard to get it right, so many configurations, java, etc., that I'd rather try something else. I also could try fts-elastic or something like that, but, again, having to maintain an elasticsearch install might use more resources than I think is worth. Any thoughts on that? Best, -- Francis
