Re: allowing outside users access to mailman lists

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:35:23PM -0800, Jeff Weinberger wrote: > > Wietse: > > > > > 5.7.1 > > > > >: Relay access denied; > > > > You have not listed the domain in relay_domains, > > virtual_alias_domains, virtual_mailbox_domains or mydestination. > > > > Convince yourself

Re: allowing outside users access to mailman lists

--- In postfix-us...@yahoogroups.com, Wietse Venema wrote: > > Jeff Weinberger: > [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > > --- In postfix-us...@yahoogroups.com, mouss wrote: > > > > > > Jeff Weinberger a ?crit : > > > > I am hoping that this is something fairly simple that I am missing...

Re: ATRN reloaded

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 08:26:15PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > Then the transport map would look like: > > example.com atrn:[example.com] > example.org atrn:[example.org] ATRN supports multi-domain requests either explicitly or implicitly, in which case the domain -> nextho

Re: How to get rid of the "Received: from localhost" header?

On 1/26/2010 3:59 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, Noel Jones wrote: On 1/26/2010 12:33 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote: This needs to be more specific so you don't remove headers added by other servers. Maybe: /^Received: from localhost.*by lucidpixels\.com / IGNORE If you need specia

Re: allowing outside users access to mailman lists

Jeff Weinberger: [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > --- In postfix-us...@yahoogroups.com, mouss wrote: > > > > Jeff Weinberger a ?crit : > > > I am hoping that this is something fairly simple that I am missing > > > > > > I have a few lists on a mailman server that I run. Until rec

Re: ATRN reloaded

adrian ilarion ciobanu: > > > > You associate a fixed nexthop with each authenticated client, and their > > entire set of domains. You flush either all their domains, or the subset > > they requested. The scache entry is for the client-specific nexthop, not > > the recipient domain. > > > > e

Re: allowing outside users access to mailman lists

On 1/26/2010 7:15 PM, Jeff Weinberger wrote: --- In postfix-us...@yahoogroups.com , mouss wrote: > > Jeff Weinberger a �crit : > > I am hoping that this is something fairly simple that I am missing > > > > I have a few lists on a mailman server that

Re: allowing outside users access to mailman lists

--- In postfix-us...@yahoogroups.com, mouss wrote: > > Jeff Weinberger a �crit : > > I am hoping that this is something fairly simple that I am missing > > > > I have a few lists on a mailman server that I run. Until recently, only > > authenticated users (those who have actual accounts on my

Re: QUESTION about 'reject_sender_login_mismatch'

Коньков Евгений a écrit : > Hello, Postfix-users. > > 1. which option cause to warn: > reject_unknown_sender_domain reject_sender_login_mismatch > reject_unverified_sender > ? > It will be cleaner if: > ... Sender address rejected by 'reject_sender_login_mismatch' ... > the three reject_* tha

Re: allowing outside users access to mailman lists

Jeff Weinberger a écrit : > I am hoping that this is something fairly simple that I am missing > > I have a few lists on a mailman server that I run. Until recently, only > authenticated users (those who have actual accounts on my IMAP/Virtual > mailboxes server and can authenticate via SASL).

Re: ATRN reloaded

> > You associate a fixed nexthop with each authenticated client, and their > entire set of domains. You flush either all their domains, or the subset > they requested. The scache entry is for the client-specific nexthop, not > the recipient domain. > > example.com atrn:[client1.atrn.in

Re: ATRN reloaded

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 05:40:40PM -0600, adrian ilarion ciobanu wrote: > > > > > > So I would push the socket to scache after I'm done setting it up > > > from SMTPD (auth, policy checks) and forget about it. If it times > > > out before local smtp will start deliver then the client is welcome t

Re: ATRN reloaded

> > > > So I would push the socket to scache after I'm done setting it up > > from SMTPD (auth, policy checks) and forget about it. If it times > > out before local smtp will start deliver then the client is welcome to > > reconnect. > > This will happen if it has to happen in SMTPD or in SCACHE

QUESTION about 'reject_sender_login_mismatch'

Hello, Postfix-users. 1. which option cause to warn: reject_unknown_sender_domain reject_sender_login_mismatch reject_unverified_sender ? It will be cleaner if: ... Sender address rejected by 'reject_sender_login_mismatch' ... 2. and why it is warn if I am an authenticated user? Jan 27 00:40

main.cf - "paramter name" format

What is the valid format for a parameter name? It is not specified in postconf.5. Specifically is a - (dash) embedded in the name, a valid parameter name? Where this is of interest is the interplay between defining a service in master.cf (specifically using pipe(8)), and then wanting to create t

Re: ATRN reloaded

adrian ilarion ciobanu: > > > In both clases the client connects to the standard SMTP port. The > > biggest difference is that ETRN creates new SMTP connections for > > delivery, whereas ATRN delivers over the existing connection. > > So I should understand that RFC specifying port 366 as the ODMR

Re: ATRN reloaded

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 04:45:25PM -0600, adrian ilarion ciobanu wrote: > > Instead of using a DOMAIN_PORT kludge which requires "reserving" > > a TCP port or UNIX-domain pathname per customer, it would make > > sense to use the existing Postfix connection caching mechanism. > > > > The idea is

Re: ATRN reloaded

> Instead of using a DOMAIN_PORT kludge which requires "reserving" > a TCP port or UNIX-domain pathname per customer, it would make > sense to use the existing Postfix connection caching mechanism. > > The idea is to push an open socket into the scache daemon (with a > suitable time to live) und

Re: ATRN reloaded

> In both clases the client connects to the standard SMTP port. The > biggest difference is that ETRN creates new SMTP connections for > delivery, whereas ATRN delivers over the existing connection. So I should understand that RFC specifying port 366 as the ODMR port is just a "should" and not a

Mailserver Admin

I'm looking for someone to administer my Linux mail server that runs Postfix MTA. I know this isn't a job posting list and I apologize. Looking for remote contract work. Maybe 5 hours a week. Shawn Fee SGF IT Solutions, LLC | IT Manager 813.817.8706 s...@s

Re: How to get rid of the "Received: from localhost" header?

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, Noel Jones wrote: On 1/26/2010 12:33 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote: This needs to be more specific so you don't remove headers added by other servers. Maybe: /^Received: from localhost.*by lucidpixels\.com / IGNORE If you need special header_checks for your amavisd reinject

allowing outside users access to mailman lists

I am hoping that this is something fairly simple that I am missing I have a few lists on a mailman server that I run. Until recently, only authenticated users (those who have actual accounts on my IMAP/Virtual mailboxes server and can authenticate via SASL). Now I want to allow certain users w

sender policies (filter, sender_dependent_xxx)

As the result of repeated requests to make Postfix routing dependent on envelope or content properties, Postfix now has several mail delivery features that are not fully orthogonal. First there are sender_dependent_xxx_maps where xxx is relayhost, default_transport, and so on. These are "nice" in

Re: multiple IPs in and out

On 1/26/2010 1:52 PM, Dan Lists wrote: We host email for several domains. Occasionally an account will get phished and our outbound server will get blacklisted by hotmail and others. We'd like to separate the outbound email so that one domain with a phished account doesn't get all outbound emai

Re: multiple IPs in and out

Dan Lists: > We host email for several domains.? Occasionally an account will get > phished and our outbound server will get blacklisted by hotmail and > others.? We'd like to separate the outbound email so that one domain > with a phished account doesn't get all outbound email blacklisted. > > I'

Re: ATRN reloaded

Added a comment about how to avioid the transport:DOMAIN_PORT kludge. Wietse Venema: > adrian ilarion ciobanu: > > No matter how hard I try not to, I keep seeing similarities between > > ETRN and ATRN. > > In both clases the client connects to the standard SMTP port. The > biggest difference is

Re: One domain not receiving properly

On 1/26/2010 1:48 PM, The Doctor wrote: Got one domain not receviing mail at all. I did a DNS serial number restart, check the relevant files in postifx and still no go. When I do telnet mail. 25 The answer is correct. I am running 100s of Domains at this is the only one experiencing this

Re: ATRN reloaded

adrian ilarion ciobanu: > No matter how hard I try not to, I keep seeing similarities between > ETRN and ATRN. In both clases the client connects to the standard SMTP port. The biggest difference is that ETRN creates new SMTP connections for delivery, whereas ATRN delivers over the existing conne

multiple IPs in and out

We host email for several domains.  Occasionally an account will get phished and our outbound server will get blacklisted by hotmail and others.  We'd like to separate the outbound email so that one domain with a phished account doesn't get all outbound email blacklisted. I'm trying to set up an o

One domain not receiving properly

Got one domain not receviing mail at all. I did a DNS serial number restart, check the relevant files in postifx and still no go. When I do telnet mail. 25 The answer is correct. I am running 100s of Domains at this is the only one experiencing this problem. What do I need to do to fix this

Re: How to get rid of the "Received: from localhost" header?

On 1/26/2010 12:33 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote: Hi, How do I remove the: Received: from localhost line at the top of the e-mail message? Return-Path: X-Original-To: myusern...@mydomain.com Delivered-To: myusern...@mydomain.com Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lucidpi

Re: Cost based routing

> > > Ah, much clearer now. Your assistance is appreciated. > > Regards, > -David What you said first time was that you have the same smarthost but different routes. So if this is still the case, using different smtp_bind_address will help you later in doing some source routing. > > > > Fr

Re: Single domain with multiple postfix servers

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:44:07PM -0500, Andrew Nady wrote: > Thanks for the info, let me give you a more detailed scenario. > > The mailgateways (postfix ldap) on both sides do OU based verification > against MS AD, > so the serveron Canada side will query the ou=Canada,dc=domain,dc=local > an

ATRN reloaded

I got this task of implementing ODMR in postfix. Although I tried playing the "why-not-instead" game, 1. no one wants to hear about uucp probably because they thought we will also switch the fiber links to 9600baud modems. 2. ETRN was a good choice until ISP decided that ETRN is not a good choic

How to get rid of the "Received: from localhost" header?

Hi, How do I remove the: Received: from localhost line at the top of the e-mail message? Return-Path: X-Original-To: myusern...@mydomain.com Delivered-To: myusern...@mydomain.com Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lucidpixels.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9354321

Re: Cost based routing

Ah, much clearer now. Your assistance is appreciated. Regards, -David > From: Wietse Venema > Reply-To: Postfix users > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:51:29 -0500 (EST) > To: Postfix users > Subject: Re: Cost based routing > > DAVID HASSILEV: >> >> Thank your for the reply. While I am not to

Re: Cost based routing

DAVID HASSILEV: > > Thank your for the reply. While I am not too familiar (yet) with the Policy > Daemons, it seems somewhat straight forward. What I do not understand in > your suggestion is the multiple smtp_bind_address statements. It's not clear > to me how that will effect delivery to separa

Re: Single domain with multiple postfix servers

Thanks for the info, let me give you a more detailed scenario. The mailgateways (postfix ldap) on both sides do OU based verification against MS AD, so the serveron Canada side will query the ou=Canada,dc=domain,dc=local and the server on the US side will query to ou=States,dc=domain,dc=local The

Re: Cost based routing

Thank your for the reply. While I am not too familiar (yet) with the Policy Daemons, it seems somewhat straight forward. What I do not understand in your suggestion is the multiple smtp_bind_address statements. It's not clear to me how that will effect delivery to separate smarthosts or relay hos

Re: relay_recipient_maps: rejection of mails with valid recipient addresses

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 04:06:29PM +0100, Erik Sonn wrote: > > Dear everyone, > > I'm working on some Antispam-Proxy, using Postfix as MTA. Postfix is > 2.6.2-RC1 on an Ubuntu 8.04 LTS base-system. > > > Preconditions: > * Postfix shall only accept mails addressed to valid (=existing) > recip

Re: relay_recipient_maps: rejection of mails with valid recipient addresses

On 1/26/2010 9:06 AM, Erik Sonn wrote: Dear everyone, I'm working on some Antispam-Proxy, using Postfix as MTA. Postfix is 2.6.2-RC1 on an Ubuntu 8.04 LTS base-system. Preconditions: * Postfix shall only accept mails addressed to valid (=existing) recipients. To accomplish this, I'm using a

relay_recipient_maps: rejection of mails with valid recipient addresses

Dear everyone, I'm working on some Antispam-Proxy, using Postfix as MTA. Postfix is 2.6.2-RC1 on an Ubuntu 8.04 LTS base-system. Preconditions: * Postfix shall only accept mails addressed to valid (=existing) recipients. To accomplish this, I'm using a regexp:/ map on relay_recipient_maps (t

Re: Preventing outgoing local mail being delivered to certain domains

Craig Box: > I have a staging server running Postfix, which I want to only set up > to deliver mail to example.org.? This machine is running Mailman, and > gets lists copied back from the production server - we want to be able > to test on this server safe in the knowledge that if someone > acciden

Preventing outgoing local mail being delivered to certain domains

I have a staging server running Postfix, which I want to only set up to deliver mail to example.org.  This machine is running Mailman, and gets lists copied back from the production server - we want to be able to test on this server safe in the knowledge that if someone accidentally sends mail to t