Please don't top-post. Put your answers below the text you
refer to.
Lists wrote:
Will have a go at those instructions thanks.
I don't want to make things difficult for our clients. I like the setup
that allows the client to use pop details to authenticate - I even
managed to get that workin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example in this hash I wanna OK for all domains except mail.ru and
> yandex.ru:
> hash:/etc/postfix/maps/check_sender:
No, you do not want an OK for all domains except those two. You want a
DUNNO, which is the default; so just REJECT those doma
On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 01:31:13PM +1100, Darragh Gammell wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am seeing some odd behaviour with virtual_alias_maps
>
> I have a domain set up in ldap directorylets call it whatIwant.com. It
> has an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] set up.
> Note: it is a different domain to
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 8 October 2008 2:12 PM
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Subject: how to specify any/catch_all domain/email in HASH
access map?
>
> For example in this ha
For example in this hash I wanna OK for all domains except mail.ru and
yandex.ru:
hash:/etc/postfix/maps/check_sender:
mail.ru REJECT
yandex.ru REJECT
OK
So what I must write insteed of ? Maybe . (single point)?
Thanks.
Will have a go at those instructions thanks.
I don't want to make things difficult for our clients. I like the setup
that allows the client to use pop details to authenticate - I even
managed to get that working ;)
What I was trying to do with TLS was to encrypt the password that gets
sent (but
Hi
I am seeing some odd behaviour with virtual_alias_maps
I have a domain set up in ldap directorylets call it whatIwant.com. It
has an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] set up.
Note: it is a different domain to the one specified in the mydomain
parameter.
I have mailman setup, it contains
Lists wrote:
I have spent the last couple of hours trying to get TLS working, sadly
no luck.
When I telnet and and do STARTTLS I get the error no server certs
available TLS won't be enabled.
I followed the instructions on the how to forge (the link I was given
before was a tad over my head)
Th
Wietse Venema wrote:
Victor Duchovni:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:07:28PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
As documented, relayhost takes precedence over
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
My reading of the code in 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6
Richard Wurman wrote:
I think my problem is related to my regular expression syntax. What is
the pcre equivalent to regexp's: /@example\.com$/ ?
I want to match on @billing.domain2.com .. AFAIK there are subtle
differences between pcre and regexp syntax and the most basic stuff
is the same? I'v
I think my problem is related to my regular expression syntax. What is
the pcre equivalent to regexp's: /@example\.com$/ ?
I want to match on @billing.domain2.com .. AFAIK there are subtle
differences between pcre and regexp syntax and the most basic stuff
is the same? I've been trying this in my
Hi folks,
Debian Etch
Postfix 2.3.8
Dovcot
I'm learning to setup "virtual mailbox domain class". Please shed me
some light on its setup;
On /etc/postfix/main.cf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 373 2008-09-30 03:26 dynamicmaps.cf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2108 2008-10-03 12:54 main.cf
-rw-r--r-
Victor Duchovni:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:07:28PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
>
> > As documented, relayhost takes precedence over
> > sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.
> > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
>
> My reading of the code in 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6 is th
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:07:28PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> As documented, relayhost takes precedence over
> sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
My reading of the code in 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6 is that sender dependent
relayhost o
I have spent the last couple of hours trying to get TLS working, sadly
no luck.
When I telnet and and do STARTTLS I get the error no server certs
available TLS won't be enabled.
I followed the instructions on the how to forge (the link I was given
before was a tad over my head)
The certs are al
> # /etc/postfix/sender_maps.regexp
> /@example\.com$/ [192.168.10.3]
> /./ [192.168.10.5
>
> - do not index a regexp table with postmap.
> - you can use pcre rather than regexp above if your postfix supports pcre
> tables.
Ah I misunderstood the precedence, thinking that relayhost in main.cf
wo
mouss wrote:
[snip]
unknown_hostname_reject_code = 550
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
reject_invalid_hostname
reject_non_fqdn_hostname
check_helo_access hash:/etc/postfix/helo_access
reject_unknown_hostname
In /etc/postfix/helo_access I will
Pat Grogan wrote:
We have implemented HELO restrictions for our postfix configuration to
attempt to cut down on the amount of spam.
Unfortunately this has turn up a lot of legitimate servers that have been
incorrectly configured. That is to say, they do not have dns entries for
their mail serve
We have implemented HELO restrictions for our postfix configuration to
attempt to cut down on the amount of spam.
Unfortunately this has turn up a lot of legitimate servers that have been
incorrectly configured. That is to say, they do not have dns entries for
their mail servers.
Whilst we are att
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:32:06PM -0600, Steve Lindemann wrote:
> fyi... the systems giving me the most grief all use ironport filters and
> they all started complaining within a few days of each other. I suspect
> some software update on the ironport but need data to prove I'm not
> "overwhe
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 06:09:48PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> However, making the IP address dependent on the sender domain is
> not yet implemented. This it requires a sender-dependent transport
> map.
It is possible to cause the outgoing transport to depend solely on the
incoming IP in some
Wietse Venema wrote:
Tomasz Chmielewski:
mouss schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Basically, if Postfix can specify the source IP address, that should
be fine for me... provided that it can make some decisions here (i.e.,
which outgoing interface to choose, depending on From: or Received: etc
Wietse Venema wrote:
Steve Lindemann:
My problem is that I support a number of email lists (using mailman),
none are particularly big or busy and, until recently, have been
chugging merrily along without a problem. However, a number of domains
we deliver to have suddenly started complaining a
Tomasz Chmielewski:
> mouss schrieb:
> > Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>
> >> Basically, if Postfix can specify the source IP address, that should
> >> be fine for me... provided that it can make some decisions here (i.e.,
> >> which outgoing interface to choose, depending on From: or Received: etc)
mouss wrote:
> Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>> mouss schrieb:
>>> Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>>
Basically, if Postfix can specify the source IP address, that should
be fine for me... provided that it can make some decisions here
(i.e., which outgoing interface to choose, depending on Fro
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
mouss schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Basically, if Postfix can specify the source IP address, that should
be fine for me... provided that it can make some decisions here
(i.e., which outgoing interface to choose, depending on From: or
Received: etc).
since
mouss schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Basically, if Postfix can specify the source IP address, that should
be fine for me... provided that it can make some decisions here (i.e.,
which outgoing interface to choose, depending on From: or Received: etc).
since you have one network card,
Travis wrote:
[snip]
-- basics --
Postfix: 2.3.8
System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 \n \l
[snip]
-- listing of /usr/lib/sasl2 --
total 116
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Oct 7 22:47 .
drwxr-xr-x 60 root root 20480 Sep 28 02:03 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21726 Dec 13 2006 libsasldb.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 roo
postconf -n when trying to use SASL
alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
append_dot_mydomain = no
biff = no
config_directory = /etc/postfix
home_mailbox = Maildir/
inet_interfaces = all
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail -t -a
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Victor Duchovni schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:31:40PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one
network card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the
users (foru
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:15:24AM +0200, mouss wrote:
> >In both cases, the symptom is that postfix, upon being restarted,
> >responds to "nc -v -v localhost 25' with an accept and then an
> >immediate disconnect. A second connection succeeds, but no banner is
> >being printed.
> >
>
> no need t
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one
network card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
I woul
Victor Duchovni schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:31:40PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for
Richard Wurman wrote:
I'm attempting to get sender_dependent_relayhost_maps working on
postfix 2.5.1. What I'm trying to do is this: all mail from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] should be sent out from a different mail server,
because SPF has been set to that IP address. All others should use the
default rela
Erwan David wrote:
Le Tue 7/10/2008, Charles Marcus disait
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
yes, it's ok.
Ok, good... :)
Note t
On 10/7/2008, Victor Duchovni ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> This is false. DNS allows SOA, NS and A (or ) records to exist at
> the same level (for the same domain name). So a delegated domain name
> (zone cut) can also be a host. What is not legal is CNAME records in
> combination with NS or SO
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
I would like to configure each "w
I'm attempting to get sender_dependent_relayhost_maps working on
postfix 2.5.1. What I'm trying to do is this: all mail from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] should be sent out from a different mail server,
because SPF has been set to that IP address. All others should use the
default relay, indicated in main.cf'
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
yes, it's ok.
Ok, good... :)
Note that both smtp.example.com and exampl
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:31:40PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
> card), running Postfix.
>
> The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
> (forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
>
Tomasz Chmielewski:
> I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
> card), running Postfix.
>
> The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
> (forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
>
> I would like to configure each "website" to se
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 03:51:28PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> > Note that both smtp.example.com and example.com are FQDN.
>
> Right, but the latter can never be a _host_ name...
This is false. DNS allows SOA, NS and A (or ) records to exist at
the same level (for the same domain name). S
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
I would like to configure each "website" to send mails via a different
IP add
Le Tue 7/10/2008, Charles Marcus disait
> On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
> >> but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
> >> virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
> >>
> >> Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
>
> > yes, it's ok.
>
> Ok, good... :)
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
Note that both smtp.example.com and example.com are FQDN.
Right, but the latter can never be a _host_ name...
of course it can:
# hostname example.com
# hostname
example.com
Is there any place that discusses the pros/cons of per ma
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
>> but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
>> virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
>>
>> Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
> yes, it's ok.
Ok, good... :)
> Note that both smtp.example.com and example.com are FQDN
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/7/2008, Wietse Venema ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But the virtual how-to says the opposite... "never list a
virtual_mailbox_domain in mydestination"...
If you list smtp.example.com as a virtual domain, then do not list
it in mydestination.
Ok... more confusion...
Paul Cocker wrote:
This server is only the secondary mail server for incoming mail, so it
won't be bouncing anything just passing it onto the primary server which
does perform valid recipient checks.
and the primary will bounce! This is backscatter.
Recipient validation must be performed at th
Kenneth Marshall a écrit :
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 02:58:52PM +0200, mouss wrote:
>
>> Johan Andersson wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our sites
>>> and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
>>> that this group have found rel
raffe reinoso wrote:
Hi! I have looked in www.postfix.org (docs, howto & FAQ, thats how I
got it working so far) Googled and I have searched the archives, but
can't get it to work (but as a postfix noob, I could search for wrong
things :-( ). I also have Dovecot, spamassassin, amavisd-new,
postfi
raffe reinoso:
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated,
> permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination, check_policy_service
> inet:127.0.0.1:2501
If this is your greylisting service, and you don't want to greylist
local network clients, then you need to change your mynetworks
s
Hi,
Check: http://www.postfix.org/basic.html#relaying
Seems to me like you just need to add your lan addresses in mynetworks.
/Victor
raffe reinoso wrote:
> Hi! I have looked in www.postfix.org (docs, howto & FAQ, thats how I
> got it working so far) Googled and I have searched the archives, bu
Hi! I have looked in www.postfix.org (docs, howto & FAQ, thats how I
got it working so far) Googled and I have searched the archives, but
can't get it to work (but as a postfix noob, I could search for wrong
things :-( ). I also have Dovecot, spamassassin, amavisd-new,
postfixadmin & RoundCube (wor
On Tuesday 07 October 2008 16.14.37 Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 03:13:20PM +0200, L?VAI D?niel wrote:
> > postfix/smtpd[23810]: warning: 78.131.56.68: hostname
> > 78-131-56-68.static.hdsnet.hu verification failed: no address
> > associated with name
> > postfix/smtpd[23810]: c
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 06:00:53PM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> I need to send a semiannual newsletter to a short, manually
> maintained list of people. While I run a couple Mailman lists
> this appears to be an overkill for the job (besides that
> Mailman/postfix on a virtual host is no setup I e
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 11:54:59AM -0400, Darek M. wrote:
> >This is a transient failure. What are your unknown_mumble_reject_codes
> >set to? After tuning and testing your rules, you should have:
> >
> >unknown_address_reject_code = 550
> >unknown_client_reject_code = 550
> >unknown_h
I need to send a semiannual newsletter to a short, manually
maintained list of people. While I run a couple Mailman lists
this appears to be an overkill for the job (besides that
Mailman/postfix on a virtual host is no setup I ever care
to tackle again).
What I thought about is a magic alias (se
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:49:46AM -0400, Darek M. wrote:
I have a weird issue where a sender with a valid reverse DNS entry is
getting rejected.
main.cf:
===
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_client_restrictions =
...
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
Oct 4
Lists wrote:
Hi,
I have got dovecot setup as the postfix smtp authentication now YAY -
man its cool!
Just wanted to check if my setup was good practice.
I have it authenticating against a mysql database(MailEnable mysql db)
with passwords stored as plain text.
Is this ok?
the passwd-file i
Bill Cole:
> >so I guess the answer is to
> > tell him no, and if whatever it is is important, and he gets the
> > warning, to follow the message up with a phone call (he should be doing
> > that anyway for anything mission critical, but getting some people to
> > understand that email is not a 100
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:49:46AM -0400, Darek M. wrote:
> I have a weird issue where a sender with a valid reverse DNS entry is
> getting rejected.
>
> main.cf:
> ===
> smtpd_delay_reject = yes
> smtpd_client_restrictions =
> ...
> reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
>
>
> Oct 4 19:0
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Paul Cocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This server is only the secondary mail server for incoming mail, so it
> won't be bouncing anything just passing it onto the primary server which
> does perform valid recipient checks. I don't see any point doing it here
> too
I have a weird issue where a sender with a valid reverse DNS entry is
getting rejected.
main.cf:
===
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_client_restrictions =
...
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
Oct 4 19:04:21 postfix/smtpd[231]: connect from unknown[64.68.XXX.XXX]
Oct 4 19:04:21 postf
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/6/2008 12:40 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
I probably am using bad terminology, but...
I have set the delay_warning_time to 15m on my system (boss demanded
it), and now the boss wants more than just the one notification...
This is not implemented.
Bummer...
However
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 03:13:20PM +0200, L?VAI D?niel wrote:
> postfix/smtpd[23810]: warning: 78.131.56.68: hostname
> 78-131-56-68.static.hdsnet.hu verification failed: no address associated
> with name
> postfix/smtpd[23810]: connect from unknown[78.131.56.68]
> postfix/smtpd[23810]: NOQUEUE:
This server is only the secondary mail server for incoming mail, so it
won't be bouncing anything just passing it onto the primary server which
does perform valid recipient checks. I don't see any point doing it here
too as it just means more hits against the AD servers for no greater
effect, unles
On 10/7/2008 9:26 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> Does the default:
>>
>> delay_warning_time = 0h
>>
>> really mean that the sender would get the warning immediately if the
>> message wasn't able to be delivered immediately?
> Please read the docs carefully:
>
> To enable this feature, specify a n
* Charles Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> What is probably a *very* obvious question...
>
> Does the default:
>
> delay_warning_time = 0h
>
> really mean that the sender would get the warning immediately if the
> message wasn't able to be delivered immediately?
Please read the docs caref
Hi,
What is probably a *very* obvious question...
Does the default:
delay_warning_time = 0h
really mean that the sender would get the warning immediately if the
message wasn't able to be delivered immediately?
--
Best regards,
Charles
mouss wrote:
LÉVAI Dániel wrote:
Hi!
I'm using postfix-2.5.4.
I have this in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access
hash:/etc/postfix/client_access, permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_unknown_client_hostname
It seems that the reject_unknown_client_hostname is applied alwa
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 02:58:52PM +0200, mouss wrote:
> Johan Andersson wrote:
>> Hi,
>> We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our sites
>> and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
>> that this group have found reliable?
>> I know postfix has its builting one f
On 10/7/2008, Wietse Venema ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> But the virtual how-to says the opposite... "never list a
>> virtual_mailbox_domain in mydestination"...
> If you list smtp.example.com as a virtual domain, then do not list
> it in mydestination.
Ok... more confusion...
1. 'smtp.example.
Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a while back, but feel unsure
if it viable for our site... pos
LÉVAI Dániel wrote:
Hi!
I'm using postfix-2.5.4.
I have this in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access
hash:/etc/postfix/client_access, permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_unknown_client_hostname
It seems that the reject_unknown_client_hostname is applied always
before the
Hi!
I'm using postfix-2.5.4.
I have this in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access
hash:/etc/postfix/client_access, permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_unknown_client_hostname
It seems that the reject_unknown_client_hostname is applied always
before the other rules, and I
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 01:44:25PM +0200, Johan Andersson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our sites
> and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
> that this group have found reliable?
>
> I know postfix has its builting one from a while back
Yes it is.. It's pretty much a full featured spam fighting system that
you can configure to your liking... But if all you want is grey
listing, you can turn all the other checks off. It works real well,
very active community and developer.
On Oct 7, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Tom Allison wrote:
I
Tom Allison wrote:
I'm going by recent memory so please be kind if I miss something.
I recall in the greylisting docs that under DATA and something else only
one recipient is transmitted. Is that also true immediately following
the RECIPIENT block?
Is just the first one listed or any particu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From http://jimsun.linxnet.com/misc/postfix-anti-UCE.txt
"OK" stops processing of an access list and the restriction stage
that contains it. Processing resumes with the next restriction
stage (if any).
Situation
smtpd_restric
Paul Cocker wrote:
Thanks for the clarifications. I've compiled virtual and progress is being made.
As we receive around 100 000 mails a day, I assume that doesn't fall into the category of
"low volume", so I don't think reject_unverified_recipient would be suitable,
nor is maintaining a list
Charles Marcus:
> On 10/6/2008 7:18 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >> Can I set up DNS (and MX records) for several different domains to
> >> point to the same postfix instance/host/IP address and reference
> >> that same postfix instance/host/IP by different DNS host names
> >> (smtp.example1.com, smt
Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a while back, but feel unsure
if it viable for our site... p
Isnt ASSP more than just greylisting?
On Oct 7, 2008, at 8:08 AM, Jason Pruim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
tha
On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a while back, but feel
unsure
Postgrey is based on a Berkeley database. So it's going to tricky
getting your 6 MTA's to play nice. But it has a sound approach for
managing the list.
I don't know about the others. But you might want to look for
something that has a networked database.
On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Johan
I'm going by recent memory so please be kind if I miss something.
I recall in the greylisting docs that under DATA and something else
only one recipient is transmitted. Is that also true immediately
following the RECIPIENT block?
Is just the first one listed or any particular order?
What I
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a while back, but feel unsure
if it viable for our site... postgrey and gps seems they
>From http://jimsun.linxnet.com/misc/postfix-anti-UCE.txt
"OK" stops processing of an access list and the restriction stage
that contains it. Processing resumes with the next restriction
stage (if any).
Situation
smtpd_restriction_classes = check_recip
On 10/6/2008 7:18 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Can I set up DNS (and MX records) for several different domains to
>> point to the same postfix instance/host/IP address and reference
>> that same postfix instance/host/IP by different DNS host names
>> (smtp.example1.com, smtp.example2.com, etc), and
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:24:38AM +0100, Paul Cocker wrote:
>
> So at this point I'll see to setup a method for queering AD, and I see the
> HOWTO section has a couple of articles which cover this. My only concern
> would be the risks in opening up communications to AD from the DMZ.
Simply creat
Thanks for the clarifications. I've compiled virtual and progress is being made.
As we receive around 100 000 mails a day, I assume that doesn't fall into the
category of "low volume", so I don't think reject_unverified_recipient would be
suitable, nor is maintaining a list of valid e-mail addre
91 matches
Mail list logo
