Re: Defer All INET

From: Terry Carmen To: postfix users list Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 5:23:42 PM Subject: Re: Defer All INET > On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:42 -0400, Terry Carmen wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> # /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp >> >> /^/ DEFER Please try again durin

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 21:21 +0200, Len Conrad wrote: > >I think Barracude actually has a Postfix server on their appliance > > MailTraq and Barracuda SMTPD dialog phrases are verbatim stock postfix > phrases, as far as I've seen. > > Len > LOL - they do, on port 2525. It's the part of the

Re: Defer All INET

Victor Duchovni: > > If they send a fax will it get answered? No. > > Postfix does not "answer" mail, it delivers it. The fax will get > delivered, unless you also turn off your fax machines at night. I think that the original question has long been answered (turning on/off inbound email deliver

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

>I think Barracude actually has a Postfix server on their appliance MailTraq and Barracuda SMTPD dialog phrases are verbatim stock postfix phrases, as far as I've seen. Len

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:16:51PM +0100, EASY steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk wrote: > But it still does *not* mean there is anyone in the office to answer any > legitimate mail - come back later when we are open. It's simple enough. That has nothing to do with MTAs. MTAs accept and deliver m

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 03:07:59PM +0100, Steve wrote: > On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 08:28 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > > With Postfix, the format is: > > > >Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ... > > > > According to RFC 5321 section 4.4: > > > >This line MUST be structured as follows:

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:28:12AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > With Postfix, the format is: > >Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ... > > According to RFC 5321 section 4.4: Which matches the second form in each case of Extended-Domain and TCP-Info. Odd that they appear to be standardi

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:42:36 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:13:21PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote: > >>> # /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp >>> /^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours >> >> The sender may get a better error message if you change the above to >> /^/ DE

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 14:42 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:13:21PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote: > > >> # /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp > >> /^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours > > > > The sender may get a better error message if you change the above to > > /^/

Re: Defer All INET

On 6/18/2009, Steve (steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk) wrote: > That said, the IP tables idea is much better. Not from what you've said. Why not just shut the entire server OFF... power it down. But, I agree with everyone else... this is just plain silliness, a waste of time, energy, and will, i

Re: Defer All INET

On Tors, Juni 18, 2009 07:48, Steve wrote: > It's an odd request to be able to 'offline' with a defer so I won't be > surprised if I can't do it, but I would be Cindy Ecstacy Ecstatic if I > could. google postfwd, one of the problems you like to solve comes handy there :) -- xpoint

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:13:21PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote: >> # /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp >> /^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours > > The sender may get a better error message if you change the above to > /^/ DEFER 4.3.2 Please try again during business hours > > The 4.3.2 sugges

Re: Defer All INET

Noel Jones wrote: Steve wrote: Hi List, What is the quickest, easiest (and scriptable) way to have Postfix defer everything with a 4xx error. It's an extension to my 'after midnight' tests. Not allowing any connections is fine, but I would prefer to reject with a custom 4xx message such as "GO

RE: Defer All INET

Steve, That's not what the users will receive though. They will, probably after 4 hours receive a nicely formatted message from their local MTA that says something like Message to < j...@domain.tld > has been delayed. We will retry this message again in X hours... And remeber, anthing aft

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 13:23 -0400, Terry Carmen wrote: > > Even if I was a local customer, the concept of "email only works when the > lights are on" would make me look somewhere else. That is your prerogative and I respect that. It depends on what your core business is and how desperate you are I

RE: Defer All INET

Steve, I know it's already been mentioned, but greylist. That has cut down our spam 90%+. Restricting your email to hours when you office is open means that legit email gets backed on the senders servers queues. If you really don't think your need the email during that period of time, do so

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 11:23 -0500, Larry Stone wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Steve wrote: > > > I'm not so sure it's nonsense. Look at it this way if the office is > > closed there is nobody there to deal with email. So it's pointless to > > accept it. > > How about so that it is there when the o

Re: Defer All INET

> On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:42 -0400, Terry Carmen wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> # /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp >> >> /^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours >> >> >> >> You might want to do a little log exploration and see if 100% of everything you receive after hours is spam >> >> Not all m

Re: Defer All INET

>> >> >> # /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp >> /^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours >> You might want to do a little log exploration and see if 100% of everything you receive after hours is spam Not all mail received after hours is spam. Quite a bit is automated (package tracking, machin

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Steve wrote: I'm not so sure it's nonsense. Look at it this way if the office is closed there is nobody there to deal with email. So it's pointless to accept it. How about so that it is there when the office does reopen? But it's also pointless to defer it since most mail

Re: Defer All INET

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 10:07 -0500, Noel Jones wrote: > Steve wrote: > > Hi List, > > > > What is the quickest, easiest (and scriptable) way to have Postfix > defer > > everything with a 4xx error. It's an extension to my 'after > midnight' > > tests. Not allowing any connections is fine, but I wou

Re: SASL Problem

Those darn spammers! Thanks for your help, Noel. Rodman - Original Message - From: "Noel Jones" To: "Rodman Frowert" ; Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:41 AM Subject: Re: SASL Problem Rodman Frowert wrote: Noel, Your instructions worked perfectly. Now only clients that AUTH can

Re: SASL Problem

Yeah, that makes more sense, doesn't it?? :-) Thanks! Rodman - Original Message - From: "Brian Evans - Postfix List" To: Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:45 AM Subject: Re: SASL Problem Rodman Frowert wrote: Anyway, would you mind just looking over the end of my main.cf file and

Re: Defer All INET

Steve wrote: Hi List, What is the quickest, easiest (and scriptable) way to have Postfix defer everything with a 4xx error. It's an extension to my 'after midnight' tests. Not allowing any connections is fine, but I would prefer to reject with a custom 4xx message such as "GO AWAY - IT'S AFTER M

Re: SASL Problem

Rodman Frowert wrote: > Anyway, would you mind just looking over the end of my main.cf file > and seeing if you see anything "out of the ordinary" or anything I > could improve on? I've been using Postfix for about 3 years, but like > most people, once it is running for a while I forget how to adm

Re: SASL Problem

Rodman Frowert wrote: Noel, Your instructions worked perfectly. Now only clients that AUTH can relay AND send mail to systems users. The system user thing was really bothering me. What would stop a spammer from connected to my server and spamming the hell out of my system users (domain t

Re: blacklists

Quoting "EASY steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk" : On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 15:04 +0200, polloxx wrote: Dear, we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese lists at our postfix server: reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, reject_rbl_c

Re: SASL Problem

Noel, Your instructions worked perfectly. Now only clients that AUTH can relay AND send mail to systems users. The system user thing was really bothering me. What would stop a spammer from connected to my server and spamming the hell out of my system users (domain that Postfix receieves for

Re: blacklists

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 15:04 +0200, polloxx wrote: > Dear, > > we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese > lists at our postfix server: > > reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org, > reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, > reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, > reject_rbl_clie

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 08:28 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > With Postfix, the format is: > >Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ... > > According to RFC 5321 section 4.4: > >This line MUST be structured as follows: > >o The FROM clause, which MUST be supplied in an SMTP environmen

Re: blacklists

On Tors, Juni 18, 2009 15:04, polloxx wrote: > reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org, change to zen.spamhaus.org > reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, still aktive ? > reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, good > reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net, properly ok, but i dont use it here >

Re: blacklists

* Ralf Hildebrandt : > Of course. > > Read: http://dsbl.org/ > Remove list.dsbl.org > > Replace pbl.spamhaus.org with zen.spamhaus.org > > Remove cbl.abuseat.org, which is included in cbl.abuseat.org Remove cbl.abuseat.org, which is included zen.spamhaus.org :) (sorry) -- Ralf Hildebrandt P

Re: blacklists

Quoting Ralf Hildebrandt : * polloxx : Dear, we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese lists at our postfix server: reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net,

Re: blacklists

* polloxx : > Dear, > > we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese > lists at our postfix server: > > reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org, > reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, > reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, > reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net, > reject_rb

blacklists

Dear, we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese lists at our postfix server: reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org, reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net, reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net, reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org, Since

Re: [ Urgent ] Problem with realy

ram wrote: > > >> Note When I send mail from this very server the mails are forwarded >> according to the virtual_alias_maps. >> but when I do the same from another server the second server mail.info >> shows that the message is successfully. But the first server >> where my postfix is runnin

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 07:19 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 06:57:39AM +0100, Steve wrote: > > > I've just realised that I don't understand something clearly. I have > > this top header in a mail; > > > > Received: from instantinfo.com (unknown [74.10.219.114]) > > Receive

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

With Postfix, the format is: Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ... According to RFC 5321 section 4.4: This line MUST be structured as follows: o The FROM clause, which MUST be supplied in an SMTP environment, SHOULD contain both (1) the name of the source host as presented

Re: [ Urgent ] Problem with realy

> Note When I send mail from this very server the mails are forwarded > according to the virtual_alias_maps. > but when I do the same from another server the second server mail.info > shows that the message is successfully. But the first server > where my postfix is running with vitual_alias don

Re: xxxxxx (unknown [x.x.x.x])

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 06:57:39AM +0100, Steve wrote: > I've just realised that I don't understand something clearly. I have > this top header in a mail; > > Received: from instantinfo.com (unknown [74.10.219.114]) > Received: from ipnet5-host235.subictel.com (unknown [210.14.36.235]) > > and e

DNS based virtual domains?

Hello! I am maintaining several virtual e-mail domains, and they're growing. I made my own scripts to modify those, in postconf/vmailbox, then issuing postfix reload and postmap is working fine. The mailbox backend is Cyrus over lmtp + i am using address verification, so postfix doesn't know

Re: [ Urgent ] Problem with realy

ram wrote: > On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:21 +0530, J. Bakshi wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> Here is a very urgent problem with **relay** in my postfix. >> >> My postfix is allowed to relay a particular domain. I have put the >> configuration as >> >> >> relay_domain

Re: Put mails in maildrop on hold

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 03:12:05PM +0530, ram wrote: > I am trying to put some mails into hold with > > postsuper -h queue_id > > This doesnt seem to work for maildrop directory. Is there a way I can do > this ? Messages in "maildrop" are typically not yet fully formed (have not been through)

Re: SSL_accept error - somebody that could tell me what to do

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 06:43:34PM +0200, Jelle de Jong wrote: > Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 05:20:38PM +0200, Jelle de Jong wrote: > >> Would you be willing to have an other look at the logs? I still have the > >> issue and I had to turn smtpd_tls_security_level to none, so t

Re: [ Urgent ] Problem with realy

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:21 +0530, J. Bakshi wrote: > Dear list, > > Here is a very urgent problem with **relay** in my postfix. > > My postfix is allowed to relay a particular domain. I have put the > configuration as > > > relay_domains = < domian_name allow

Put mails in maildrop on hold

I am trying to put some mails into hold with postsuper -h queue_id This doesnt seem to work for maildrop directory. Is there a way I can do this ? Thanks Ram

Re: [ Urgent ] Problem with realy

K bharathan wrote: > what about 'transport' ! If you are asking about the main.cf configuration then it is a s below. ` virtual_transport = lmtp:unix:/var/lib/imap/socket/lmtp ``` > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 8:51 AM, J. Bakshi