Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why not use "-type f" to tell find to only show files, which does not > include directories? That is how I did it when I was using the brute > force method. Nice advantage in that you can have any amount of > hashing in a directory and still get an a

Re: Spam on deck!!

Terry Carmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sahil Tandon wrote: >> Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> Steven King wrote: >>> Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. I battered my postfix

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 04:26:54PM -0600, Gerald V. Livingston II wrote: > I seldom have to deal with REALLY large queues but I use this I hacked > up real quick to see if anything is starting to build up: > > #!/bin/bash > echo ACTIVE > echo > find /var/spool/postfix/active/. ! -name . ! -name

Re: [OT] postmaster@ for customers' domains?

On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 03:58:25 +0100, Gerald V. Livingston II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martin Strand wrote: >> We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can >> delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email >> accounts with a web interface. >> >> I figured

Re: [OT] postmaster@ for customers' domains?

On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 20:58:25 -0600 "Gerald V. Livingston II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Martin Strand wrote: >> We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can >> delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email >> accounts with a web interface. >> >> I figured

Re: [OT] postmaster@ for customers' domains?

On 7 Nov 2008, at 20:08, Martin Strand wrote: We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email accounts with a web interface. I figured it would be a good idea to reserve the postmaster@ and abuse@ address

Re: [OT] postmaster@ for customers' domains?

Martin Strand wrote: We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email accounts with a web interface. I figured it would be a good idea to reserve the postmaster@ and abuse@ addresses for hosted domains and forward

Re: Spam on deck!!

Sahil Tandon wrote: Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Steven King wrote: Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress test. The load on the se

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

eldom have to deal with REALLY large queues but I use this I hacked up real quick to see if anything is starting to build up: #!/bin/bash echo ACTIVE echo find /var/spool/postfix/active/. ! -name . ! -name '?' -print |wc -l echo echo DEFERRED echo find /var/spool/postfix/deferred/. ! -name . !

[OT] postmaster@ for customers' domains?

We're an email service provider hosting ~3000 domains. Customers can delegate their domains to our nameservers and administer email accounts with a web interface. I figured it would be a good idea to reserve the postmaster@ and abuse@ addresses for hosted domains and forward them to our own pos

Re: How to drop 450 bounces

David Koski wrote: I have Postfix blacklisting relay servers in front of Barracuda spam relay filters relaying to a CommuniGate mail host for about 100 domains. The Postfix blacklisters work great to reduce the load on the Barracuda relay filters but the queue accumulates bounce messages for i

How to drop 450 bounces

I have Postfix blacklisting relay servers in front of Barracuda spam relay filters relaying to a CommuniGate mail host for about 100 domains. The Postfix blacklisters work great to reduce the load on the Barracuda relay filters but the queue accumulates bounce messages for invalid recipients.

Re: Spam on deck!!

Linux Addict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steven King wrote: >> Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on >> RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. >> >> I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress >> test. The load on the server went up sharp

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

Victor Duchovni wrote: On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:42:49PM -0500, Ofer Inbar wrote: We track the number of messages in each postfix queue on our mailservers using a program I've written. For most queues, it simply does a readdir() and counts all files whose names don't begin with ".", which is

Re: Message-id logging (include rfc822-comments?)

Victor Duchovni: > > > > How would one decide that a (message-id) header is not mangled? > > > > This would require parsing the string, counting the "address" > > > > tokens, and if there is only one "address" token, use that as the > > > > logged message ID, otherwise log the entire original strin

Re: Message-id logging (include rfc822-comments?)

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 04:16:02PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > Victor Duchovni: > > > > On the other hand, for well-formed headers, the > > > > comment is not part of the message-id: for example: > > > > > > > > 2008-11-06T01:11:19-0500 amnesiac postfix/cleanup[13756]: > > > > AE620EF8001:

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

Ofer Inbar: > > Postfix hash_queue_names uses one-character (letter or digit) > > directory names. This is sufficient to implement a tree. > > > > Current queue file names are longer than 1, because they have two > > parts (inode number and time). > > Thanks! > > > A future queue implementation

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:42:49PM -0500, Ofer Inbar wrote: > We track the number of messages in each postfix queue on our > mailservers using a program I've written. For most queues, > it simply does a readdir() and counts all files whose names don't > begin with ".", which is quick and efficien

Re: Message-id logging (include rfc822-comments?)

Victor Duchovni: > > > On the other hand, for well-formed headers, the > > > comment is not part of the message-id: for example: > > > > > > 2008-11-06T01:11:19-0500 amnesiac postfix/cleanup[13756]: AE620EF8001: > > > message-id=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (added by [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > >

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

> Postfix hash_queue_names uses one-character (letter or digit) > directory names. This is sufficient to implement a tree. > > Current queue file names are longer than 1, because they have two > parts (inode number and time). Thanks! > A future queue implementation may use a different organizati

Re: telling queue files from subdirectories

Postfix hash_queue_names uses one-character (letter or digit) directory names. This is sufficient to implement a tree. Current queue file names are longer than 1, because they have two parts (inode number and time). A future queue implementation may use a different organization: one tree that com

telling queue files from subdirectories

We track the number of messages in each postfix queue on our mailservers using a program I've written. For most queues, it simply does a readdir() and counts all files whose names don't begin with ".", which is quick and efficient. For the deferred queue, it does a find-style walk through the dir

Re: Message-id logging (include rfc822-comments?)

On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 04:38:41PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (test) > > > > 2008-11-06T13:13:35-0500 amnesiac postfix/cleanup[10832]: AF24675A3D: > > message-id=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (test) > > > > postfix logs both the "id" and the "comment". T

Re: Spam on deck!!

Linux Addict wrote: Steven King wrote: Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a bit sluggish but post

Re: Spam on deck!!

Thanks! I am not just worried about the system performance, but possible blacklisting as it may send flurry of mails to external domains. ~LA That's a different story, but happily depends mostly on the type of mail you're sending. Some sites may rate-limit you, but if you leave it all a

Re: Spam on deck!!

I wouldn't sweat it. About the worst that would happen is that your filesystem might get gummed up for a while. The mail will end up in a queue and the queue will br processed until all the mail as been handled. Terry Linux Addict wrote: We have a java mailer application which was hung a

Re: timeout after END-OF-MESSAGE (still)

Justin, > Even after using: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg11500.html > > I still get these occasionally, both from localhost and other (real) hosts: > > 13:28:27 p34 postfix/smtpd[21926]: > timeout after END-OF-MESSAGE from localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1] > Is there anothe

Re: Spam on deck!!

You can set the connection limits somewhere in main.cf. It will only try to make so many connections to the same IP. Postfix is also mindful of resources on the remote MTAs as to not over load them. Linux Addict wrote: > Linux Addict wrote: >> Steven King wrote: >>> Postfix is very cautious about

Re: Spam on deck!!

Linux Addict wrote: Steven King wrote: Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a bit sluggish but post

Re: Spam on deck!!

Steven King wrote: Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a bit sluggish but postfix chugged along thr

Re: Spam on deck!!

Postfix is very cautious about system resource usage. It keeps an eye on RAM usage, disk space, and CPU usage. I battered my postfix server with 200K mails once. Just for a stress test. The load on the server went up sharply and was a bit sluggish but postfix chugged along through it with very lit

Spam on deck!!

We have a java mailer application which was hung and queued more than 100k mails. People are working to fix it. I am worried that all 100k mails may hit postfix server and cause some damage. Anyway I can prepare for it? ~LA

timeout after END-OF-MESSAGE (still)

Even after using: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg11500.html I still get these occasionally, both from localhost and other (real) hosts: Oct 29 17:54:59 p34 postfix/smtpd[9883]: timeout after END-OF-MESSAGE from oss.sgi.com[192.48.170.157] Oct 29 17:55:00 p34 postfix/smtpd[9906

Re: Delete port 465 in master.cf

Josep M. wrote: Hello. I have Postfix running since some years ago and always ok, now when upgraded to Debian Lenny started giving to me these error messages when tested port 465 Nov 7 09:15:57 140 postfix/smtpd[26674]: fatal: bad boolean configuration: smtpd_tls_auth_only = Nov 7 09:15:58

Re: Get IP on check_client_acces

Noel Jones: > Wietse Venema wrote: > > Iker Perez de Albeniz: > >> In my main.cf for example i have added: > >> > >> smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre > > > > It is not called "smtps_data_restrictions". > > > >> and in that example access file i have putte

Re: Add sender IP on the header

mouss wrote: Henrik K wrote: On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 09:49:43AM +0100, mouss wrote: # Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address: /[^\d.:]/ DUNNO Viktor probably meant /[^\d\.:]/ DUNNO No need to escape things in character classes. Indeed. I am so

Re: Get IP on check_client_acces

Wietse Venema wrote: Iker Perez de Albeniz: In my main.cf for example i have added: smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre It is not called "smtps_data_restrictions". and in that example access file i have putted: /^(.*)$/ PREPEND X-Sender-I

Re: Add sender IP on the header

Alvaro Marín wrote: Hi, i have tried something like this (in main.cf ): smtp_data_restrictions = check_lcient_acces cidr:/etc/postfix/add_header and add_header file is like : 0.0.0.0/0 PREPEND X-Send-IP: ${client_addr} Perhaps you can do it w

Re: Get IP on check_client_acces

Iker Perez de Albeniz: > In my main.cf for example i have added: > > smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre It is not called "smtps_data_restrictions". > and in that example access file i have putted: > > /^(.*)$/ PREPEND X-Sender-IP: ${1} Use a

Re: Delete port 465 in master.cf

On 11/7/2008 3:59 AM, Josep M. wrote: > I have Postfix running since some years ago and always ok, now when > upgraded to Debian Lenny started giving to me these error messages when > tested port 465 > > Nov 7 09:15:57 140 postfix/smtpd[26674]: fatal: bad boolean > configuration: smtpd_tls_auth_o

Re: Add sender IP on the header

Hi, i have tried something like this (in main.cf ): smtp_data_restrictions = check_lcient_acces cidr:/etc/postfix/add_header and add_header file is like : 0.0.0.0/0 PREPEND X-Send-IP: ${client_addr} Perhaps you can do it with header_checks: h

Re[8]: How to run patch file making correction

> > > I suppose the 2nd link is correct. > > How did you install cyrus-sasl2? > > > I followed this howto; > http://www.postfixvirtual.net/postfixvirtual.html#cyrussasl Don't use this howto at all. It's a .! > New discovery, on manually running; > > # su - amavis -c

Get IP on check_client_acces

In my main.cf for example i have added: smtps_data_restrictions = check_client_acces pcre:/etc/postfix/access.pcre and in that example access file i have putted: /^(.*)$/ PREPEND X-Sender-IP: ${1} the problem is that check_client_access matches against client hostname no against I

Re: Which FileSystem do you use on your postfix server?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wietse Venema) writes: > Dave Chinner: >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:37:58AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: >> > Eric Sandeen: >> > > > This >> > > > would violate a basic requirement of Postfix (don't lose data after >> > > > fsync). Postfix updates existing files all the time: i

Re: Re[6]: How to run patch file making correction

--- áÌÅËÓÅÊ äÏÍÏÒÁÄÏ× <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > # ldd /usr/libexec/postfix/smtpd > > > > linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb7fa) > > > > libmysqlclient.so.15 => > > > > /usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.15 (0xb7f23000) > > > > libm.so.6 => /lib/tls/i686/cmov/l

Re[6]: How to run patch file making correction

> > > # ldd /usr/libexec/postfix/smtpd > > > linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb7fa) > > > libmysqlclient.so.15 => > > > /usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.15 (0xb7f23000) > > > libm.so.6 => /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libm.so.6 (0xb7efe000) > > > libsasl2.so.2 => /usr/loc

Re: Mutiple Rules in header_checks regex lookup table

sosogh wrote: > Hi All > > There are two rules in my header_checks PCRE lookup tables : > > /From:.*sosogh.cn/ OK > /^Received:/ HOLD > > But why the following mail still be hold : > > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:29:17 +0800 > From: "sosogh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "sosogh" <[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Add sender IP on the header

Henrik K wrote: On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 09:49:43AM +0100, mouss wrote: # Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address: /[^\d.:]/ DUNNO Viktor probably meant /[^\d\.:]/ DUNNO No need to escape things in character classes. Indeed. I am so used to es

Mutiple Rules in header_checks regex lookup table

Hi All There are two rules in my header_checks PCRE lookup tables : /From:.*sosogh.cn/ OK /^Received:/ HOLD But why the following mail still be hold : Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:29:17 +0800 From: "sosogh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "sosogh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message

Delete port 465 in master.cf

Hello. I have Postfix running since some years ago and always ok, now when upgraded to Debian Lenny started giving to me these error messages when tested port 465 Nov 7 09:15:57 140 postfix/smtpd[26674]: fatal: bad boolean configuration: smtpd_tls_auth_only = Nov 7 09:15:58 140 postfix/mast

Re: Add sender IP on the header

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 09:49:43AM +0100, mouss wrote: >># Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address: >>/[^\d.:]/ DUNNO > > Viktor probably meant >/[^\d\.:]/ DUNNO No need to escape things in character classes.

Re: OT: Sender Header

On 7 Nov 2008, at 02:54, mouss wrote: Neil wrote: By pure luck, I had an epiphany and figured it out. good. Can you provide details so that other people who get into the same problem find the answer in the archives? Well, it's very setup-specific... The short of it is that I used to h

Re: Add sender IP on the header

Iker Perez de Albeniz wrote: the problem is that with Victor's PCRE: Please do not top post. put your reply after the text you reply to. smtpd_data_restrictions = check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/add_header.pcre add_header.pcre: # Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address

Re: Add sender IP on the header

the problem is that with Victor's PCRE: smtpd_data_restrictions = check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/add_header.pcre add_header.pcre: # Client name, not an IPv4/IPv6 address: /[^\d.:]/ DUNNO # Otherwise: /^(.*)$/PREPEND X-Send-IP: ${