Is there a fix for the "451 4.3.0 Error: queue file write error" yet? I
heard to increase the smtp_proxy_timeout = 600s in the main.cf file, but
then I heard that can run down your server.
Is there any patches or hot fixes that actually work? I have Postfix 9.3.0
and the 451 error is still not
Stefan Foerster put forth on 1/23/2010 11:08 AM:
> In case of severe server "overload", with postscreen(8) complaining
> about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
> (reasonably) safe as a last desperate measure to put $data_directory,
> or at least the file referenced by $
Stefan Foerster:
> In case of severe server "overload", with postscreen(8) complaining
> about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
> (reasonably) safe as a last desperate measure to put $data_directory,
> or at least the file referenced by $postscreen_cache_map, on a ramdi
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 05:59:37PM +0100, Jelle de Jong wrote:
> >> postconf -e 'smtp_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv2, !TLSv1'
> >
> > Why disable both SSLv2 and TLSv1?! Leave this setting at its default
> > value, or disable just SSLv2. Does your client or server correctly handle
> > SSLv3, but
On Jan 23, 2010, at 9:17, Martijn de Munnik
wrote:
"SHOULD" equals "MUST unless you have a really good reason". I'm
trying to figure out if somebody on the list knows a really good
reason.
There is no really good reason for a 3 second timeout in a public
server. There are really good rea
Jelle de Jong wrote:
Victor Duchovni wrote, on 23-01-10 17:48:
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 05:31:47PM +0100, Jelle de Jong wrote:
postconf -e 'smtp_tls_security_level = encrypt'
Is this SMTP client going to send all mail to a small set of TLS enabled
relay hosts? Or are you choosing to not be abl
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 06:08:40PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> In case of severe server "overload", with postscreen(8) complaining
> about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
> (reasonably) safe as a last desperate measure to put $data_directory,
> or at least the fil
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> >
> >> RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
> >>
> >> "An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while
> >> it is awaiting th
In case of severe server "overload", with postscreen(8) complaining
about lookup and update times around 400ms almost every mail, is it
(reasonably) safe as a last desperate measure to put $data_directory,
or at least the file referenced by $postscreen_cache_map, on a ramdisk
(e.g. "tmpfs" with Lin
Victor Duchovni wrote, on 23-01-10 17:48:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 05:31:47PM +0100, Jelle de Jong wrote:
>
>> postconf -e 'smtp_tls_security_level = encrypt'
>
> Is this SMTP client going to send all mail to a small set of TLS enabled
> relay hosts? Or are you choosing to not be able to send an
Martijn de Munnik:
>
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> >
> >> RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
> >>
> >> "An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while it
> >> is awaiting the next command from the s
Jozsef Kadlecsik:
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Jozsef Kadlecsik:
> > >
> > > How could one achieve that the held messages are separated from the normal
> > > traffic (i.e. hold queue on another partition), but if the messages cannot
> > > be held, then those gets rejected inste
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 05:31:47PM +0100, Jelle de Jong wrote:
> postconf -e 'smtp_tls_security_level = encrypt'
Is this SMTP client going to send all mail to a small set of TLS enabled
relay hosts? Or are you choosing to not be able to send any email to
the vast majority of domains whose MX host
Wietse Venema wrote, on 23-01-10 14:41:
> Jelle de Jong:
>> Can somebody show me an example how to setup up a simple outgoing only
>> email configuration that uses SMTP AUTH over SSL?
>
> Postfix SASL: http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html
> Postfix TLS: http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html
>
On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
>
>> RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
>>
>> "An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while it
>> is awaiting the next command from the sender."
>
> The key word is SHOULD,
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
>
> "An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while it
> is awaiting the next command from the sender."
The key word is SHOULD, as opposed to MUST.
> When I try to connect to an one.com mx (
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Jozsef Kadlecsik:
> >
> > How could one achieve that the held messages are separated from the normal
> > traffic (i.e. hold queue on another partition), but if the messages cannot
> > be held, then those gets rejected instead of queued?
>
> Given Pos
Dear
I don't understand why but i think that Postfix did want to send the
authentication request in the SMTP protocol.
In this case , the client (thunderbird) cannot send authentication
parameters trough Internet.
When executing saslfinger, there is not information in the -- mechanisms
on localho
Jozsef Kadlecsik:
> Hello,
>
> We plan to add the possibility for our users to choose that messages
> categorized as spam are put on the hold queue instead of the default
> reject. Thus it'll be possible to release the false positives, which
> can make life easier for them.
>
> Currently I can
Hello,
We plan to add the possibility for our users to choose that messages
categorized as spam are put on the hold queue instead of the default
reject. Thus it'll be possible to release the false positives, which
can make life easier for them.
Currently I can see two ways to accomplish it, bo
Jelle de Jong:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I got a hole set >20 of Debian systems connected to mobile broadband
> internet. They are behind a NAT of with dynamic ip's.
>
> I want these systems to be able to sent emails to my server for all
> kind of reasons like monitoring, security updates etcetera.
Hello everybody,
I got a hole set >20 of Debian systems connected to mobile broadband
internet. They are behind a NAT of with dynamic ip's.
I want these systems to be able to sent emails to my server for all
kind of reasons like monitoring, security updates etcetera.
I want to use postfix to aut
On 2010-01-22 Carlos Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
>> This is a client IP not a sender, e. g. 'MAIL FROM: br...@example.com'
>>
>> The IP should go into a file referenced by a check_client_access
>> restriction.
>
> I think I still don't have
23 matches
Mail list logo
