On Fri, 07 Aug 2009, James Hankins wrote:
> On a new postfix install, I noticed an uptick in bandwidth consumption
> for a period of time (ended up being about 6 hours). Bulk of traffic
> was from one host and it sourced from port 2392 (Tacical Auth). From a
> search on google it stated tha
Chris Simmons wrote, at 08/07/2009 05:19 PM:
> In testing (and by reading the archives) I have found that postfix only
> supports one level of wildcard SSL certificates. That is to say, I can
> get a certificate for *.example.com that will match host1.example.com
> and host2.example.com, but won’t
Chris Simmons:
> Hi all,
>
> In testing (and by reading the archives) I have found that postfix
> only supports one level of wildcard SSL certificates. That is to
> say, I can get a certificate for *.example.com that will match
> host1.example.com and host2.example.com, but won't match
> mail.host
Hi all,
In testing (and by reading the archives) I have found that postfix only
supports one level of wildcard SSL certificates. That is to say, I can get a
certificate for *.example.com that will match host1.example.com and
host2.example.com, but won't match mail.host1.example.com or
mail.hos
On Friday 07 August 2009 10:20:52 Gerardo Herzig wrote:
> Aug 7 15:36:11 pampa postfix/local[29893]: CBCAC39C2F2:
> to=, relay=local, delay=0, status=sent (delivered
> to command: IFS=' ' && exec /usr/bin/procmail || exit 75 #mmanoni)
Yikes! That is scary! Why are we doing this?
> -Procmail logs
Hi
I am looking for a way to send an mail through a perl script with the
directive virtual_transport (content_filter same problem), but I got only
the header and not the body.
Is there a solution or a particular configuration ?
Perl script:
use Sys::Syslog qw(:DEFAULT setlogsock);
setlogsock('unix
On Aug 7, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Gerardo Herzig wrote:
Well. This is weird. One of my co-workers is not getting any mail, not
even internal ones. The logs shows that the email is delivered without
any problems:
this happens when i (gherzig) send an email to my body (mmanoni). Both
in the same doma
Well. This is weird. One of my co-workers is not getting any mail, not
even internal ones. The logs shows that the email is delivered without
any problems:
this happens when i (gherzig) send an email to my body (mmanoni). Both
in the same domain.
"""
pampa:/home/mmanoni/Maildir # grep CBCAC39C2F
Noel Jones schrieb:
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> i...@lynet.de schrieb:
>>> Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
>>> [...]
You can reject such clients with a check_reverse_client_hostname
access table. Make sure this is after permit_mynetworks so you don't
reject the "
On a new postfix install, I noticed an uptick in bandwidth consumption
for a period of time (ended up being about 6 hours). Bulk of traffic
was from one host and it sourced from port 2392 (Tacical Auth). From
a search on google it stated that this is a vulnerability scanner.
Destination
"receive_override_options=no_unknown_recipient_checks" is an often
recommended amavis optimization that can be performed post content
filter (so likely would *not be in your main.cf* and would instead be in
your master.cf as an option to your post content filter smtpd).
What this option states
Robert Schetterer wrote:
i...@lynet.de schrieb:
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
[...]
You can reject such clients with a check_reverse_client_hostname
access table. Make sure this is after permit_mynetworks so you don't
reject the "real" localhost.
http://www.postfix.org/postcon
See attached log.
Magnus Bäck wrote:
>
> On Friday, August 07, 2009 at 08:07 CEST,
> jluros wrote:
>
>> I'm making good progress getting postfix up and running, but having
>> a persistent issue with a domain configured through ISPConfig. My
>> virtual domain Luros.eu has a catchall addre
i...@lynet.de schrieb:
> Noel Jones schrieb:
>> Robert Schetterer wrote:
> [...]
>> You can reject such clients with a check_reverse_client_hostname
>> access table. Make sure this is after permit_mynetworks so you don't
>> reject the "real" localhost.
>> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#che
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
[...]
You can reject such clients with a check_reverse_client_hostname access
table. Make sure this is after permit_mynetworks so you don't reject
the "real" localhost.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#check_reverse_client_hostname_access
#
Dear Ken and Noel
> Noel Jones [2009-08-04 19:06]:
>
> Lukas Ruf wrote:
>
>> # This is the access filter file for mail.securitysage.com, published by
>> SecuritySage
>> # This filter is the work of Jeffrey Posluns
>
> These header checks are no longer maintained. I strongly suggest you
> *remo
16 matches
Mail list logo
