On Wednesday 18 February 2009 19:32:53 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> I won't make any claims as to the correctness or efficiency of this
> approach, but one way that I've seen this done is to store a record in
> the database immediately, and then have a (cron) PHP script running
> every 5 minutes or
* ram :
> The docs at http://www.postfix.org mention several features available in
> postfix 2.6(experimental).
>
> Where is the complete changelog of postfix 2.6 available
ftp://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/experimental/*.HISTORY
--
Ralf Hildebrandt (ralf.hildebra...@charite.de)
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 17:45:20 Sahil Tandon wrote:
> My point was to implement the delay based on the OP's criteria *outside* of
> Postfix. Whether this is done in the same application the OP mentioned or
> another one (say, a policy service as you mention below) is an interesting
> discu
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Rocco Scappatura
wrote:
> My aim, anyway, is to apply a such policy for outgoing messages
> (including internal-to-internal messages). So I have to define a group
> which contains the IPs enabled for relay through my mail server.
smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions =
smtpd_delay_reject = no ?
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Alexey V Paramonov
wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm looking for a good solution to make my postfix server operate faster.
> My setup is Postfix + Policyd-weight + fail2ban, but nothing helps under
> heavy load, and the problem is not with the server pe
The docs at http://www.postfix.org mention several features available in
postfix 2.6(experimental).
Where is the complete changelog of postfix 2.6 available
jeffs wrote:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
users subscript
> --- Original Message ---
> From: Melvyn Sopacua
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org, je...@speakeasy.net
> Sent: 18-Feb-09, 20:35:59
> Subject: Re: delay all outbound mail
>
> On Wednesday 18 February 2009 16:56:05 jeffs wrote:
> > Sahil Tandon wrote:
> > > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 February 2009 16:56:05 jeffs wrote:
> > Sahil Tandon wrote:
> > > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
> > >> Thank you for your prompt reply.
> > >
> > > No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
> > > quoted
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 16:56:05 jeffs wrote:
> Sahil Tandon wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
> >> Thank you for your prompt reply.
> >
> > No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
> > quoted text. Thanks.
> >
> >> I am working on a project in whic
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which -- depending
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which -- depending
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for your prompt reply.
>>
>> No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
>> quoted text. Thanks.
>>
>>> I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
>>
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
users subscription -- either
Thanks for the lesson, much appreciated.
secondary question, would I be better off using LMTP rather than SMTP
for the amavisd.
JLA
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
> Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
> I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
> users subscription -- either their mail is delayed for at
Thank you for your prompt reply.
I have a postfix smtp server which connects directly to the internet and
does not relay mail through an ISP.
I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
users subscription -- either their mail is delayed for at least 2 hours
or it is s
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Travis wrote:
> I recently started bouncing email because (it appears) I had a mixture
> of space-indentation and tab-indentation on the multi-line $mydestinations
> line.
Show logs and output of the following command:
% postconf mydestination
--
Sahil Tandon
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
> I need to delay all outbound email, not specific to destination domains.
> I have tried to make the smtp_destination_rate_delay = 180
This increases the delay that is inserted between individual deliveries to
the same destination via the smtp(8) delivery agen
Travis:
> I recently started bouncing email because (it appears) I had a mixture
> of space-indentation and tab-indentation on the multi-line $mydestinations
> line.
>
> Should postfix really be doing this? It seems straightforward to me
> to treat all whitespace the same, and it would prevent a
I recently started bouncing email because (it appears) I had a mixture
of space-indentation and tab-indentation on the multi-line $mydestinations
line.
Should postfix really be doing this? It seems straightforward to me
to treat all whitespace the same, and it would prevent a mail-losing
error li
Jon Drukman:
> : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in
> local recipient table; from=
USE relay_domains and relay_recipient_maps
NOT virtual_alias_*
NOT virtual_mailbox_*
NOT mydestination
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Jon Drukman wrote:
> unsuccessful delivery from the outside:
> Feb 18 15:39:41 181379-web1 postfix/smtpd[30983]: NOQUEUE: reject:
> RCPT from wf-out-1314.google.com[209.85.200.175]: 550 5.1.1
> : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in
> local recipient table;
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Jon Drukman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>> what am i missing?
>>
>> Are the transport map lookups configured?
>>$ postconf -n transport_maps
>
> that was it. for some reason that option is not listed in the default
> main.c
I need to delay all outbound email, not specific to destination
domains. I have tried to make the smtp_destination_rate_delay = 180
but I believe that must work in conjunction with specific domains
(please someone tell me if that is the case because the documentation,
although it says one sho
Charles Account wrote:
Hi,
I found an email from Noel Jones:
>>At 09:51 AM 8/2/2007, Marshal Newrock wrote:
>>If not, what do I need to do in order to use header and body
>>checks to reject mail after it has been scanned with the milter?
>>
>>Header_checks does not inspect headers added by
Hi,
I found an email from Noel Jones:
>>At 09:51 AM 8/2/2007, Marshal Newrock wrote:
>>If not, what do I need to do in order to use header and body
>>checks to reject mail after it has been scanned with the milter?
>>
>>Header_checks does not inspect headers added by milters in the same instance
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> what am i missing?
>
> Are the transport map lookups configured?
>$ postconf -n transport_maps
that was it. for some reason that option is not listed in the default
main.cf on my box.
thanks!
-jsd-
Jon Drukman:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Jon Drukman:
> >> still getting this
> >> to=, relay=local, delay=0.05,
> >
> > This mail is sent to LOCAL not PIPE. Your transport map is not working.
>
> $ cat transport
> in.thismoment.com parsemail:
>
> $ grep pa
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Jon Drukman:
>> still getting this
>> to=, relay=local, delay=0.05,
>
> This mail is sent to LOCAL not PIPE. Your transport map is not working.
$ cat transport
in.thismoment.com parsemail:
$ grep parsemail master.cf
parsemail unix -
Jon Drukman:
> still getting this
> to=, relay=local, delay=0.05,
This mail is sent to LOCAL not PIPE. Your transport map is not working.
Wieste
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> i followed your instructions but i am getting "status=bounced (unknown
>> user: "input")" when i try to send to in...@in.mydomain.com
>
> You still have it configured as virtual domain. Don't do that.
I don't. I even removed the virtual_
Alexey V Paramonov wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm looking for a good solution to make my postfix server operate faster.
> My setup is Postfix + Policyd-weight + fail2ban, but nothing helps under
> heavy load, and the problem is not with the server performance (CPU load
> is not so high, about 30%), the probl
Simon Aquilina a écrit :
>[snip]
>>
>> >
>> > Enterting the command maildrop -V 4 -d sysad...@mydomain.com < 1 return
>> > the following:
>> > base 1: No such file or directory.
>>
>> well, you asked it to read from a file named "1". use "< /dev/null"
>> instead.
>
> I did as you suggested and th
Alexey V Paramonov:
> Hi,
> I'm looking for a good solution to make my postfix server operate faster.
> My setup is Postfix + Policyd-weight + fail2ban, but nothing helps under
> heavy load, and the problem is not with the server performance (CPU load
> is not so high, about 30%), the problem is
Jon Drukman:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > /etc/postfix/example-recipients
> >o...@example.com whatever
> >t...@example.com whatever
> >
> > This is a relay domain setup. Virtual aliases solve a different problem.
>
> could i use a virtual alias to r
Hi,
I'm looking for a good solution to make my postfix server operate faster.
My setup is Postfix + Policyd-weight + fail2ban, but nothing helps under
heavy load, and the problem is not with the server performance (CPU load
is not so high, about 30%), the problem is in the number of
smtp connect
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> /etc/postfix/example-recipients
>o...@example.com whatever
>t...@example.com whatever
>
> This is a relay domain setup. Virtual aliases solve a different problem.
could i use a virtual alias to relay an entire domain to a si
Jon Drukman:
> I read this page http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html but I am
> not having any luck getting my pipe set up.
>
> I want to make it so all mail destined for a particular subdomain is
> run through a script and then discarded.
For that, FILTER_README is not applicable (it delver
I read this page http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html but I am
not having any luck getting my pipe set up.
I want to make it so all mail destined for a particular subdomain is
run through a script and then discarded.
The 'all mail for a subdomain' requirement makes me think I need to
use the
Jim Seymour wrote:
Hi All,
I'm simplifiying my life. Amonst other things, that means I'm dropping
my business class DSL circuit and all of my involvement in projects,
documentation, anti-spam efforts, etc.
If somebody *qualified* wants to officially take over maintenance of
Pflogsumm, please s
Noel,
Thanks for pointing out the obvious!!!
I had my head in the weeds. I'm in the processes of setting up a valid DNS
entry for the authoritative query and it should then connect to my rbldnsd
server.
Charles
> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:39:15 -0600
> From: njo...@megan.vbhcs.org
> To: george
Halassy Zoltán wrote:
Halassy Zoltán írta:
(sorry pushed the send button accidentally previously)
Take a look at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unverified_recipient_reject_code
> man 5 postconf
>
>reject_unverified_recipient
Yes, i know this one exists. But i guess this o
Thanks for the help guys, I was unaware of that option and have no
idea why I enabled it in the first place. Sorry about that.
--
Sincerely
Erik Paulsen Skålerud
Alexandre Balistrieri wrote:
I am not receiving from ukranz-r...@unfccc.int
Why? - reject_unverified_sender??
== maillog =
Feb 17 09:02:30 guarani postfix/smtpd[18968]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
unknown[62.225.2.61]:550 5.1.7 : Sender address
rejected: undeliverable addr
2009/2/18 Simon Aquilina :
> What command did you use to install maildrop? Also did you have the
> configure maildrop to use the authmysqlrc file? if so where?
aptitude install courier-maildrop
aptitude install courier-authlib-mysql
authmysqlrc then needs to be completed with MySQL server details
I am not receiving from ukranz-r...@unfccc.int
Why? - reject_unverified_sender??
== maillog =
Feb 17 09:02:30 guarani postfix/smtpd[18968]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
unknown[62.225.2.61]:550 5.1.7 : Sender address
rejected: undeliverable address: host svmviruswall01.unfcc
Sorry for taking long ... tried to do some research on the hints I got
from over here but failed miserably... below are my comments ...
> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:13:32 +0100
> From: mo...@ml.netoyen.net
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Subject: Re: Postfix + Maildrop
>
> sim085 a écrit :
> >
> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:50:49 +
> Subject: Re: Postfix + Maildrop
> From: wyldf...@gmail.com
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
>
> 2009/2/17 mouss :
> > $ maildrop -v
> > maildrop 2.0.4 Copyright 1998-2005 Double Precision, Inc.
> > GDBM extensions enabled.
> > Courier Authentication Libr
--
С уважением,
Пименов Д.А.
Halassy Zoltán írta:
(sorry pushed the send button accidentally previously)
Take a look at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unverified_recipient_reject_code
> man 5 postconf
>
>reject_unverified_recipient
Yes, i know this one exists. But i guess this one would reject mails
(sorry pushed the send button accidentally previously)
Take a look at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unverified_recipient_reject_code
> man 5 postconf
>
>reject_unverified_recipient
Yes, i know this one exists. But i guess this one would reject mails
with 5xx, when the foreig
Take a look at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unverified_recipient_reject_code
Halassy Zolt??n:
> Hello!
>
> I am using Address verification now with ~90% success (using it over a
> year now).
>
> The only flaw i didn't find a solution yet is the following:
>
> When a server rejects an e-mail address with 5xx, mine rejects it only
> with 4xx. But! I would like to reject
Halassy Zoltán schrieb:
> When a server rejects an e-mail address with 5xx, mine rejects it only
> with 4xx. But! I would like to reject them with 4xx if the foreign
> server sends 4xx, or unreachable, DNS failures etc... Is this possible?
Take a look at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unve
Hello!
I am using Address verification now with ~90% success (using it over a
year now).
The only flaw i didn't find a solution yet is the following:
When a server rejects an e-mail address with 5xx, mine rejects it only
with 4xx. But! I would like to reject them with 4xx if the foreign
ser
2009/2/17 mouss :
> $ maildrop -v
> maildrop 2.0.4 Copyright 1998-2005 Double Precision, Inc.
> GDBM extensions enabled.
> Courier Authentication Library extension enabled.
> Maildir quota extension enabled.
> This program is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public
> License. See COPY
Hello,
I have a number of networks from which is possible to use my mail
gateway system (Postfix+Amavisd-new+MySQL) to relay email messages
(directly through a mail client or through another MTA that uses my mail
gateway system as smart host). The mail gateway system moreover is used
as MX record
58 matches
Mail list logo
