On Sun, 08 Feb 2009, nik600 wrote:
> filterunix - n n - 20 pipe
> flags=Rq user=filter argv=/var/script/my_spamc_1.5 -f
> ${sender} -- ${recipient}
>
> Is there the possibility to know in some variables like ${sender} if
> the mail is coming from an authe
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 02:55:28PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
>
>> Where is the best place to put the DNS caching resolver? in the NAT
>> device? or in the Mail Server itself?
>
> What kind of NAT device is this? Is it capable of running a non
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 02:55:28PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
> Where is the best place to put the DNS caching resolver? in the NAT
> device? or in the Mail Server itself?
What kind of NAT device is this? Is it capable of running a non-forwarding
DNS cache? If the cache in question has sufficiently
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 02:02:14PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
>
>> > You should not use OpenDNS or any similar external DNS forwarder with
>> > Postfix. Especially, when doing RBL lookups. Just run a stand-alone DNS
>> > cache on your system (
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 02:02:14PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
> > You should not use OpenDNS or any similar external DNS forwarder with
> > Postfix. Especially, when doing RBL lookups. Just run a stand-alone DNS
> > cache on your system (127.0.0.1). If you are behind a NAT device that
> > de-randomi
On Sun, 08 Feb 2009, jan gestre wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Victor Duchovni
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 01:23:43PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
> >
> >> > Don't use ISP DNS servers that fabricate A records.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I'm not using our ISP's DNS , I'm using OpenDNS, I'm us
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 01:23:43PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
>
>> > Don't use ISP DNS servers that fabricate A records.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not using our ISP's DNS , I'm using OpenDNS, I'm using OpenDNS
>> since way back it's only now that I'm get
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 01:23:43PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
> > Don't use ISP DNS servers that fabricate A records.
> >
>
> I'm not using our ISP's DNS , I'm using OpenDNS, I'm using OpenDNS
> since way back it's only now that I'm getting this strange behavior in
> my SMTP server.
You should not
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 01:01:49PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
>
>> New logs with reject_rbl_client sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org added to main.cf
>>
>>
>> eb 8 12:49:52 kartero postfix/smtpd[6465]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
>> web57902.mail.re3.yahoo
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 01:01:49PM +0800, jan gestre wrote:
> New logs with reject_rbl_client sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org added to main.cf
>
>
> eb 8 12:49:52 kartero postfix/smtpd[6465]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> web57902.mail.re3.yahoo.com[68.142.236.95]: 554 5.7.1 Service
> unavailable; Client h
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> jan gestre wrote:
>>
>> Additional info:
>>
>> I have four mail servers running identical configurations and it's now
>> exhibiting the same problem, I've disabled MailScanner in one of the
>> server coz I thought it might be the culprit but aft
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 3:54 PM, bharathan kailath wrote:
> hi al
> sorry for this posting; my earlier posting was incomplete as to the header
> details
> the following surprise me because postfix rejected this message! sill it
> managed to get into inbox; the postfix logs are there; the message
On Sat, 07 Feb 2009, bharathan kailath wrote:
> sorry for this posting; my earlier posting was incomplete as to the header
> details
> the following surprise me because postfix rejected this message! sill it
> managed to get into inbox; the postfix logs are there; the message got
> first rejecte
hi al
sorry for this posting; my earlier posting was incomplete as to the header
details
the following surprise me because postfix rejected this message! sill it
managed to get into inbox; the postfix logs are there; the message got
first rejected and again gone throu amavis (q ids are same) (IPs
bharathan kailath:
> hi al
> the following surprise me because postfix rejected this message! sill it
Postfix rejected a RECIPIENT. Do not confuse a RECIPIENTS with MESSAGES.
Wietse
>
> Feb 7 19:39:11 relay2 postfix/smtpd[19938]: BC5A2211EF: reject: RCPT from
> deliver-2.mx.triera.net[
hi al
the following surprise me because postfix rejected this message! sill it
managed to get into inbox; the postfix logs are there; the message got
first rejected and again gone throu amavis (q ids are same) (IPs are
different); i don't know what is misconfigured;
help appreciated
Sat, 7
Nandini Mocherla(nandini.moche...@sun.com)@Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 09:49:53AM
-0800:
> Hi,
>
> I am new to postfix and thinking for a way to block the email address which
> does not come from that domain. For example, if someone with a @xxx.com
> email sends to a list it must come from a server in
Daniel V. Reinhardt wrote:
---Could there be a notification alert be sent via SMS or another means
to the administrator of the post server in question, stating something
is wrong with the server?
The discussion is about proposed default postfix behavior, so
no, out of band notifications c
I wanted to share part of my adventures getting Postfix to work with
Cyrus-IMAPD and SELinux.
All of the apps were installed using yum on a Fedora 10 server.
Postfix 2.5.5-1
Cyrus-IMAPD 2.3.12p2-3
SELinux
Here's the gist of it ...
SELinux is fairly restrictive, by default, which is good. Most
Daniel V. Reinhardt:
> ---Could there be a notification alert be sent via SMS or another
> means to the administrator of the post server in question, stating
> something is wrong with the server?
This could be implemented by configuring a logfile monitoring
program (swatch, logsurfer, etc.) to sen
On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 10:48:27 -0500
Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
> > reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org
> Wietse answered the main question, however dsbl.org is gone.
> Recommend to remove it from all configs to prevent breakage in the
> future.
I know, I just played with the config of a very
21 matches
Mail list logo
