On Mon, 25 May 2009, Stefan Förster wrote:
> * Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> > * mouss :
> >> and please remove the
> >> smtpd_banner = The eMail Service
> >> because it is invalid. The banner must contain the hostname... etc.
> >
> > and it must contain "ESMTP" or the client will not know the se
* Oliver Kohll - Mailing Lists :
> Hello,
>
> My postfix manages mail for a number of domains, e.g. gtwm.co.uk. The MX
> records are set so that mail is filtered through a third party spam
> catcher.
>
> However the server has one domain that is the 'main' hostname of the
> server, listed in /
* Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> * mouss :
>> and please remove the
>> smtpd_banner = The eMail Service
>> because it is invalid. The banner must contain the hostname... etc.
>
> and it must contain "ESMTP" or the client will not know the server can speak
> EXTENDED SMTP, which includes the capabil
On Sun, 24 May 2009, lists.postfix-us...@duinheks.nl wrote:
> WV> I assume that the message is still queued because DNS lookup
> WV> fails or because the (wrong) destination is not reachable.
>
> Correct. The domain dhs.nl does not exist. But it's such a habit
> to type that..
The dhs.nl domai
Hi,
In <20090522135110.ga...@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net>
"how to bypass milters, whitelist hosts" on Fri, 22 May 2009 15:51:10 +0200,
martin f krafft wrote:
> how can I bypass smtpd_milters for certain hosts?
>
> I have asked a related question previously [0], and the only
> solution seemed
On 24-May-2009, at 15:02, mouss wrote:
LuKreme a écrit :
May 23 14:48:17 mail postfix/smtpd[30899]: NOQUEUE: warn: RCPT from
201-88-100-143.gnace704.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br[201.88.100.143]:
Dynamic DSL looking address; from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
note that the IP is listed in zen (PBL and XBL
On 24-May-2009, at 15:05, Sahil Tandon wrote:
Hm, that "warn" does not correspond to what you purportedly have in
your
smtpd_recipient_restrictions; it should have been an outright
rejection.
I'd just changed the WARN to REJECT today and the log entry was from
yesterday. It was while doub
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Oliver Kohll - Mailing Lists
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My postfix manages mail for a number of domains, e.g. gtwm.co.uk. The MX
> records are set so that mail is filtered through a third party spam catcher.
>
> However the server has one domain that is the 'main' hostnam
Oliver Kohll - Mailing Lists a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> My postfix manages mail for a number of domains, e.g. gtwm.co.uk. The MX
> records are set so that mail is filtered through a third party spam
> catcher.
>
> However the server has one domain that is the 'main' hostname of the
> server, listed i
Hello,
My postfix manages mail for a number of domains, e.g. gtwm.co.uk. The
MX records are set so that mail is filtered through a third party spam
catcher.
However the server has one domain that is the 'main' hostname of the
server, listed in /etc/hosts:
62.73.174.227eul0001189.eu.v
On Sun, 24 May 2009, LuKreme wrote:
> I have the following:
>
> main.cf in smtpd_recipient_restrictions:
> check_helo_access pcre:$config_directory/helo_checks.pcre,
>
> in helo_checks.pcre:
> /(lan|home|example|local)$/ REJECT Mailserver name in
> private namespace
>
> but in
I have a primary and backup mx both running postfix with assp in front.
Assp performs all spam and recipient verification checks which is working
fine except for a limitation in assp whereby ldap recipient checks are
limited to one server so in the case where these two gateways are authoritative
fo
LuKreme a écrit :
> I have the following:
>
> main.cf in smtpd_recipient_restrictions:
> check_helo_access pcre:$config_directory/helo_checks.pcre,
>
> in helo_checks.pcre:
> /(lan|home|example|local)$/ REJECT Mailserver name in
> private namespace
>
> but in logs:
> May 23 14:
* mouss :
> Sthu Pous a écrit :
> > Thank You for Your time and answer, Wietse:
> >
> >> Another possiblity is anti-virus software on the sending machine.
> >
> > I use Linux Debian squeeze/sid - AFAIK I have no any antivirus software.
>
> whatever you use, you have something that breaks ESMTP,
On Sun, 24 May 2009, LuKreme wrote:
> I, like everyone I'm sure, have seen a large uptick in spam attempts to
> Message-Ids as if they were email addresses. Of course they are all
> rejected as unknown users, but is it worth putting in a rule to catch
> these specifically?
That wouldn't add
LuKreme a écrit :
> I, like everyone I'm sure, have seen a large uptick in spam attempts to
> Message-Ids as if they were email addresses. Of course they are all
> rejected as unknown users, but is it worth putting in a rule to catch
> these specifically?
>
put
reject_unlisted_recipient
Sthu Pous a écrit :
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Wietse:
>
>> Another possiblity is anti-virus software on the sending machine.
>
> I use Linux Debian squeeze/sid - AFAIK I have no any antivirus software.
whatever you use, you have something that breaks ESMTP, and in
particular STARTTLS
*** Antwoord op een bericht uit gebied LISTS.POSTFIX-USERS
(lists.postfix-users).
Hallo Wietse,
Op zondag 24 mei 2009 schreef Wietse Venema aan Postfix users:
>> Question is: can I resnd the message with the correct address
>> and if yes, how?
WV> I assume that the message is still queued bec
*** Antwoord op een bericht uit gebied LISTS.POSTFIX-USERS
(lists.postfix-users).
Hallo Ralf,
Op zondag 24 mei 2009 schreef Ralf Hildebrandt aan postfix-users@postfix.org:
>> Question is: can I resnd the message with the correct address
>> and if yes, how?
RH> I fail to see how this is a post
I have the following:
main.cf in smtpd_recipient_restrictions:
check_helo_access pcre:$config_directory/helo_checks.pcre,
in helo_checks.pcre:
/(lan|home|example|local)$/ REJECT Mailserver name in
private namespace
but in logs:
May 23 14:48:17 mail postfix/smtpd[30899]: NOQ
I, like everyone I'm sure, have seen a large uptick in spam attempts
to Message-Ids as if they were email addresses. Of course they are all
rejected as unknown users, but is it worth putting in a rule to catch
these specifically?
--
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges.
Thank You for Your time and answer, Wietse:
> Another possiblity is anti-virus software on the sending machine.
I use Linux Debian squeeze/sid - AFAIK I have no any antivirus software.
> sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes:
>
>> For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
>> to find:
>> postfix-2.6.0-1.src.rpm and
>> postfix-2.6.0-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
>
> Updated to 2.6.1 as I hadn't seen Wietse's 2.6.1 update.
>
> Simon
>
>
Thank you S
lists.postfix-us...@duinheks.nl:
> Hello,
>
> I typed the address in a message wrong. Pine copied ot to the
> sendmail folder anyway. But postfix saw the message that the
> address was wrong and put it in the mailq. (Fair enough).
> Question is: can I resnd the message with the correct address
> a
* lists.postfix-us...@duinheks.nl :
> Hello,
>
> I typed the address in a message wrong. Pine copied ot to the
> sendmail folder anyway. But postfix saw the message that the
> address was wrong and put it in the mailq. (Fair enough).
> Question is: can I resnd the message with the correct address
sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes:
> For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
> to find:
> postfix-2.6.0-1.src.rpm and
> postfix-2.6.0-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
Updated to 2.6.1 as I hadn't seen Wietse's 2.6.1 update.
Simon
Hello,
I typed the address in a message wrong. Pine copied ot to the
sendmail folder anyway. But postfix saw the message that the
address was wrong and put it in the mailq. (Fair enough).
Question is: can I resnd the message with the correct address
and if yes, how?
Regards,
Hans.
jd
Thomas Bergstam schrieb:
> Refering to the earlier subjects on RPMs and 2.6:
>
> I have Suse 11.1 which includes Postfix 2.5.5. It is not easy to
> uninstall that (YAST wants to replace it with EXIM or SENDMAIL) due to
> dependencies. Is it possible to just upgrade it if I manually compile
> 2.6.1
On Sun, 24 May 2009, Thomas Bergstam wrote:
> I have Suse 11.1 which includes Postfix 2.5.5. It is not easy to
> uninstall that (YAST wants to replace it with EXIM or SENDMAIL) due to
> dependencies. Is it possible to just upgrade it if I manually compile
> 2.6.1 and replace the old one? O
29 matches
Mail list logo
