Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
You add the IP of the ORIGINATING server; where the original message
comes from that triggers the DSN. This should prevent the DSN from
being generated in the first place.
Hi Noel, cant do that its a dyn ip
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinatio
Victor Duchovni wrote:
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 wakeu
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 02:52:11PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
> >>Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinational company arrives via a dyn ip?
> >
> >no the orginal mail is comming from there ( bigcompany) and wishes a
> >notify being delivered after recieve,
>
> the bigcompan
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinational company arrives via a dyn ip?
no the orginal mail is comming from there ( bigcompany) and wishes a
notify being delivered after recieve,
the bigcompany IP address is the one you put in the
smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_m
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
* Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
* Robert Schetterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi mouss, in this case its not up to me
decide here, its a customers mailservers
Ja und? Lass doch die Mails in der Queue verschimmeln :)
Nach 3-5 Tagen sind die eh weg. Delivered werden
Noel Jones:
> Seems more likely they are choking on the null sender address.
> You can use the setup described above with smtp_generic_maps
> to replace the null sender with something else. This breaks
> RFCs - DSNs MUST be sent with the null sender.
>-o smtp_generic_maps=regexp:/etc/postfi
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
You add the IP of the ORIGINATING server; where the original message
comes from that triggers the DSN. This should prevent the DSN from
being generated in the first place.
Hi Noel, cant do that its a dyn ip
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinatio
* Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Robert Schetterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Hi mouss, in this case its not up to me
> > decide here, its a customers mailservers
>
> Ja und? Lass doch die Mails in der Queue verschimmeln :)
> Nach 3-5 Tagen sind die eh weg. Delivered werden die EH nich
Robert Schetterer wrote:
You add the IP of the ORIGINATING server; where the original message
comes from that triggers the DSN. This should prevent the DSN from
being generated in the first place.
Hi Noel, cant do that its a dyn ip
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinational company arrives v
* Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they send mail to
> you.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
No, it the Outlook internal read receipt.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAI
* Robert Schetterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi mouss, in this case its not up to me
> decide here, its a customers mailservers
Ja und? Lass doch die Mails in der Queue verschimmeln :)
Nach 3-5 Tagen sind die eh weg. Delivered werden die EH nicht.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Finally it's working!.
You where right. There was something interfering.
Turns out that our cisco firewall had some smtp fix-up feature
enabled. After disabling it i could telnet smtp from the outside as i
did from the inside.
E-mail clients also working fine.
Thanks all for the help!.
Diego.
On
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Robert Schetterer:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
send mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key must be
Robert Schetterer:
> Wietse Venema schrieb:
> > Noel Jones:
> >> Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
> >> send mail to you.
> >> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
> >> The table entry would look like this, note the key must be a
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they send
mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key mus
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they send
mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key must be an IP, not
a ho
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
send mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key must be an
IP, not a hostname:
ip.of.bad.client
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
> exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain
( guess the smtp content inspector there has a problem only with this
type of mails if they are dkim signed, but that speculate )
If
> 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 giv
Noel Jones:
> Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
> send mail to you.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
> The table entry would look like this, note the key must be an
> IP, not a hostname:
> ip.of.bad.client dsn, silent-dis
Diego Ledesma wrote:
Oh. I guess i shouldn't have set that password in the first place...
Thanks for the hint. I could authenticate succesfuly via telnet
I got the command for base64 enconde from
http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html#server_test but didn't know
the octal digit thing.
The prob
Robert Schetterer wrote:
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
> exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain
( guess the smtp content
inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if they are
dkim signed, but that speculate )
If you can verify DKIM
mouss schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Hi,
on my postfix 2.5.5 relay
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain ( guess the smtp
content inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if
they are dkim signed, but t
2008/9/11 Алексей Доморадов <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
>>
>> > testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
>> > /var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
>> > 0: OK "Success."
>> >
>> > AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
>> > 535 5.7.0 Error: au
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Hi,
on my postfix 2.5.5 relay
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain ( guess the smtp content
inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if they are
dkim signed, but that speculate )
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
/var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
0: OK "Success."
AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
535 5.7.0 Error: authentication failed: bad protocol
Wrong base64 string:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
>
> > testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
> > /var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
> > 0: OK "Success."
> >
> > AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
> > 535 5.7.0 Error: authentication failed: bad protocol
>
> Wrong base64 str
Hi,
on my postfix 2.5.5 relay
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain ( guess the smtp content
inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if they are
dkim signed, but that speculate )
does anyone has an idea
> Hello.
> I'm running Ubuntu 7.04 (Feisty Fawn) Server Edition as a mail server
> with Postifix 2.3.8 and i'm trying to setup SASL in Postifx for smtp
> authentication (authenticate system users, using pam mechanism in
> sasl).
> After a while i could find some decent howtos about configuring sasl
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
> testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
> /var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
> 0: OK "Success."
>
> AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
> 535 5.7.0 Error: authentication failed: bad protocol
Wrong base64 string:
echo AHByd
Try:
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#no_chroot
If this fixes the problem PLEASE COMPLAIN TO THE UBUNTU POSTFIX MAINTAINER.
Wietse
No, Don, Thank _you_!
Mine:
1) Elect Libertarians.
2) Support libertarian candidates. I'll accept moving in the direction
of #1, i.e., setting the stage for electing Libertarians.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:24 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 11 September 2008
>
> Gentlemen:
>
> I seem to
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain.
what do you exactly mean by "not used"? if you think it can be
"recycled", contact me offlist.
I put the
domain in my recipient_checks f
Hello.
I'm running Ubuntu 7.04 (Feisty Fawn) Server Edition as a mail server
with Postifix 2.3.8 and i'm trying to setup SASL in Postifx for smtp
authentication (authenticate system users, using pam mechanism in
sasl).
After a while i could find some decent howtos about configuring sasl.
I followed
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 08:20 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Andrea Gozzi:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:25 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > Andrea Gozzi:
> > > > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:03 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It works, thanks.
> > > > > > I have one furt
Jason Noble wrote:
I changed it to one of our unused real-world IP address, and made a
firewall rule to reject all packets destine for that IP.
This seems to have the desired effect and I dont think there are any
security issues.
It first seems. then it breaks.
to prevent application from goi
Karl O. Pinc wrote:
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
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote, at 09/11/2008 08:49 AM:
> I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
> longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
> domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
> the file and did postfix reload.
Hi,
>
>
>
> The problem was in the configs of postgrey.
> So, the delivery of the messages delayed.
>
> Read about postgrey + postfix in the postfix´s documentation and ajusted
> the problem.
>
> thanks.
>
Actually, the warning of the postsuper was not caused by postgrey. But by:
1 - mailq |
On Thursday 11 September 2008 13:49:44 Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
> longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
> domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
> the file and did
I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
the file and did postfix reload. But still piling up in the logs with
address verification
Jason Noble wrote, at 09/11/2008 08:08 AM:
> On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:35 +0200, mouss wrote:
>> Jorey Bump wrote:
>>>
>>> Set up a separate DNS server if you want to block ad sites for your your
>>> LAN users. I do this, but I simply make the local DNS server
>>> authoritative for the offensive dom
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Nicolas Haller wrote:
Hi all,
I have a little problem with Postfix. I have a Postfix server acting as
fallback_relay. This box have a big queue (between 1 and 10
mails). The box is under FreeBSD and all is ok except this message I see
in syslog:
postfix/qmgr[52291]
I changed it to one of our unused real-world IP address, and made a
firewall rule to reject all packets destine for that IP.
This seems to have the desired effect and I dont think there are any
security issues.
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:35 +0200, mouss wrote:
> Jorey Bump wrote:
> > Jason Noble wr
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 08:25:48AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > I try to change some sysctl values like kern.maxfiles,
> > kern.maxfilesperproc, kern.ipc.maxsockets and kern.ipc.somaxconn but I
> > still receive too many open file message.
> See: http://www.postfix.org/TUNING_README.html#file_
Nicolas Haller:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a little problem with Postfix. I have a Postfix server acting as
> fallback_relay. This box have a big queue (between 1 and 10
> mails). The box is under FreeBSD and all is ok except this message I see
> in syslog:
>
> postfix/qmgr[52291]: fatal: socke
Andrea Gozzi:
> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:25 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Andrea Gozzi:
> > > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:03 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It works, thanks.
> > > > > I have one further question: how do I restrict access to postfix for
> > > > > any
> >
Hi all,
I have a little problem with Postfix. I have a Postfix server acting as
fallback_relay. This box have a big queue (between 1 and 10
mails). The box is under FreeBSD and all is ok except this message I see
in syslog:
postfix/qmgr[52291]: fatal: socket: Too many open files
I try to
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 09:00 +0200, Andrea Gozzi wrote:
>
> The REDIRECT check can easily be bypassed by changing the MAIL FROM: ,
> so I configured the webmail to allow mail originating from the real
> address only.
> Unfortunately, someone might still try to connect directly to postfix
> and fake
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:35 +0200, mouss wrote:
> 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 tim
Karl O. Pinc:
>
> 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 comma
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:25 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Andrea Gozzi:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:03 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It works, thanks.
> > > > I have one further question: how do I restrict access to postfix for any
> > > > user with @myfreemail.com account
52 matches
Mail list logo
