On 09/10/2008 06:14:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Karl O. Pinc:
> When there's more than one subscriber the same thing
> happens for mail sent to the first subscriber, but
> then the same message is sent to the second subscriber.
> Again, smtp sends a DATA command, gets back a 354,
> sends the mes
Gerardo Herzig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all. Im triyng to have some fun building a maillog analizer.
> My starting point is to locate the emails actually sent via the
> /var/log/mail
>
> It is correct to look for the expression 'removed$' (that is, the word
> 'removed' at the end of the li
Hi!
I just couldn't avoid reading this post.
I actually make a live out of replacing MS solutions with Open
Source-based solutions. I know, it is not perfect, and there are some
features that you will not get, but in my experience these features
are not used very often.
Anyway, I would give a t
Karl O. Pinc:
> When there's more than one subscriber the same thing
> happens for mail sent to the first subscriber, but
> then the same message is sent to the second subscriber.
> Again, smtp sends a DATA command, gets back a 354,
> sends the message, ends with a period, and gets
> a 250 reply ba
On 09/09/2008 04:48:47 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Instead of guessing, run a network sniffer that captures the
packet content.
Thank you. I knew someone would send a good idea my way.
Here's what I found:
Nc seems to be left hanging when there's more than
one subscriber to the email list; wh
Mel Brand wrote:
Hi all,
I have some issues with receiving mail on a server that I've set up.
In particular, when I try to send an email to a user that I know
exists, I get an error message:
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; unknown user: "myusername"
Any ideas what I'm
Hi all,
I have some issues with receiving mail on a server that I've set up.
In particular, when I try to send an email to a user that I know
exists, I get an error message:
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; unknown user: "myusername"
And [EMAIL PROTECTED] does exist.
I u
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:03:26AM -0700, Chris St Denis wrote:
> I have been recently seeing in my logs a fair amount of
>
> postfix/master[64122]: warning: inet_trigger_event: read timeout for
> service [x.x.x.x]:465
mistake in your master.cf file. Don't set a wakeup trigger time for
inet ser
I have been recently seeing in my logs a fair amount of
postfix/master[64122]: warning: inet_trigger_event: read timeout for
service [x.x.x.x]:465
Where x.x.x.x is one of the mail server's IPs (not the server's main
IP). The mail server listens on multiple IPs and ports however this only
th
> As per the subject, I am about to pitch the idea of dumping
> Exchange
> and moving to Postfix. From what I can observe, the Calendar and
> Meeting functions are used very little if at all.
If you want true drop in replacement, and so on (IE still use active
directory, etc), you can check out
M. Fioretti wrote:
greetings,
I'm using a postfix server on a remote vps for all the email domains I
control. it is the official MX for all those domains and it only
accepts to relay email from my_networks and SASL authorized clients. I
am playing with the idea of making postfix remove all the R
Hi all. Im triyng to have some fun building a maillog analizer.
My starting point is to locate the emails actually sent via the
/var/log/mail
It is correct to look for the expression 'removed$' (that is, the word
'removed' at the end of the line)?
That would returns lines like:
postfix/qmgr[21861]
On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Tuesday, September 09, 2008 10:50 PM -0400 Aaron Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Adam Tauno Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The below isn't meant to shoot down your idea, but I'm an Open
So
M. Fioretti wrote:
greetings,
I'm using a postfix server on a remote vps for all the email domains I
control. it is the official MX for all those domains and it only
accepts to relay email from my_networks and SASL authorized clients. I
am playing with the idea of making postfix remove all the R
--On Tuesday, September 09, 2008 10:50 PM -0400 Aaron Wolfe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Adam Tauno Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The below isn't meant to shoot down your idea, but I'm an Open Source
groupware developer and am very familiar with the Exchang
greetings,
I'm using a postfix server on a remote vps for all the email domains I
control. it is the official MX for all those domains and it only
accepts to relay email from my_networks and SASL authorized clients. I
am playing with the idea of making postfix remove all the Received
headers of au
Jorey Bump wrote:
Jason Noble wrote, at 09/10/2008 08:51 AM:
It was my DNS.
I am using a black list from here:
http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/
to block ad-servers at the dns level.
I'll have to remember this next time I have weird mail issues.
Your mail server should use a reliable, honest DNS
Jason Noble wrote, at 09/10/2008 08:51 AM:
> It was my DNS.
> I am using a black list from here:
> http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/
> to block ad-servers at the dns level.
>
> I'll have to remember this next time I have weird mail issues.
Your mail server should use a reliable, honest DNS server.
best_mx_transport =
disable_dns_lookups = no
ignore_mx_lookup_error = no
parent_domain_matches_subdomains =
debug_peer_list,fast_flush_domains,mynetworks,permit_mx_backup_networks,qmqpd_authorized_clients,relay_domains,smtpd_access_maps
permit_mx_backup_networks =
smtp_defer_if_no_mx_address_fou
It was my DNS.
I am using a black list from here:
http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/
to block ad-servers at the dns level.
I'll have to remember this next time I have weird mail issues.
Problem solved
Thanks for all the help
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:36 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Jason Nobl
Victor Duchovni:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 05:09:16PM +1000, Colin Campbell wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can someone explain why we saw the following in our logs?
> >
> > Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005: message-id=:
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix po
* Jason Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> host -t mx juno.com
> juno.com mail is handled by 10 mx.vgs.untd.com.
> juno.com mail is handled by 10 mx.dca.untd.com.
Correct.
> host -t a juno.com
> juno.com has address 64.136.53.46
> juno.com has address 64.136.45.46
Correct.
> host -t a mx.vgs.untd.co
host -t mx juno.com
juno.com mail is handled by 10 mx.vgs.untd.com.
juno.com mail is handled by 10 mx.dca.untd.com.
host -t a juno.com
juno.com has address 64.136.53.46
juno.com has address 64.136.45.46
host -t a mx.vgs.untd.com
mx.vgs.untd.com has address 127.0.0.1
host
* Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Jason Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I tried commenting out a few more things now I get this error in the
> > logs.
> >
> > Sep 10 08:22:58 mail postfix/smtp[30058]: 8BF6718F79:
> > to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=none, delay=0, status=bounced (mail for
>
* Jason Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I tried commenting out a few more things now I get this error in the
> logs.
>
> Sep 10 08:22:58 mail postfix/smtp[30058]: 8BF6718F79:
> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=none, delay=0, status=bounced (mail for
> juno.com loops back to myself)
AHA! thus best_mx_tr
I tried commenting out a few more things now I get this error in the
logs.
Sep 10 08:22:58 mail postfix/smtp[30058]: 8BF6718F79:
to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=none, delay=0, status=bounced (mail for
juno.com loops back to myself)
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:29 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Tue
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 05:09:16PM +1000, Colin Campbell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can someone explain why we saw the following in our logs?
>
> Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005: message-id=:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005:
Jittinan Suwanrueangsri wrote:
Dear sir
What cause this error? How should I fix it?
the server on a.b.c.d refuses the message but doesn't say why. if you
have access to the logs of that server, check them. there isn't much we
can do to help you.
note:
I replace sender by [EMAIL PROTECTED
Dear sir
What cause this error? How should I fix it?
note:
I replace sender by [EMAIL PROTECTED] ,replace recipient by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] , replace an ip address by a.b.c.d
##
Sep 9 09:13:47 Mail
On 9/9/2008, Adam Tauno Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Yes, Thunderbird works with roaming profiles; albeit rather badly.
> Thunderbird has no auto-configuration mechanism so every user's
> account(s) need to be setup manually and it is prone to making HUGE
> cache files if not setup carefu
Andrew Sukharew wrote:
Hello!
When I do next settings
smtpd_client_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
permit
this is equivalent to a simple permit, which is the default.
Active queue slowly grow up and postfix can't deliver all this messages which
contains in active queue..
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Wed, September 10, 2008 08:53, mouss wrote:
and while you are at it, ask them to give you a custom reverse DNS.
$ host 79.116.195.248
248.195.116.79.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
79-116-195-248.dynamic.brasov.rdsnet.ro.
with this, many sites will block you, put you
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 13:50 +1000, MacShane, Tracy wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Tauno
> > > Williams
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 10 September 2008 12:13 PM
> > > To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> > > Subject: Re:
Hello!
When I do next settings
smtpd_client_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
permit
Active queue slowly grow up and postfix can't deliver all this messages which
contains in active queue..
How can resolve this ?
Thanks!
On Wed, September 10, 2008 08:53, mouss wrote:
> and while you are at it, ask them to give you a custom reverse DNS.
>
> $ host 79.116.195.248
> 248.195.116.79.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
> 79-116-195-248.dynamic.brasov.rdsnet.ro.
>
> with this, many sites will block you, put your mail in a
Colin Campbell wrote:
Hi,
Can someone explain why we saw the following in our logs?
Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005: message-id=: <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005:
message-id=newsletters.datapro.co.za
There's nothin
> you probably have an selinux problem.> > a workaround is to disable selinux
> ('setenforce permissive'. also check > /etc/selinux/config).> > If you want
> selinux, ask on centos lists how to setup a working policy. > you probably
> have a policy for port 25, which you can adapt to other > por
Hi,
Can someone explain why we saw the following in our logs?
Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005: message-id=:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sep 4 19:50:32 postfix postfix/cleanup[18097]: A68A6220005:
message-id=newsletters.datapro.co.za
# postconf mail_version
mail_version = 2
38 matches
Mail list logo
