On 5/5/2010 10:18 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Evan Borgstrom:
The hardest thing for me to understand about this problem is why nscd is
causing the problem since postfix should be querying the LDAP server
directly.
It does, but glibc routines will invoke nscd for stuff in /etc/nsswitch.conf.
If
Evan Borgstrom:
> The hardest thing for me to understand about this problem is why nscd is
> causing the problem since postfix should be querying the LDAP server
> directly.
It does, but glibc routines will invoke nscd for stuff in /etc/nsswitch.conf.
Wietse
Hi,
I've been back through the lists and have been looking for answers on
google to no avail.
I have postfix configured to lookup aliases & virtual aliases from local
files first and then from LDAP. Relevant config bits are below.
main.cf:
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases,ldap:/etc/postfix/al
>... ${sasl_username:unknown} ${recipient}
>
> ie. if $sasl_username is empty, substitute "unknown"
>
> But nothing particularly wrong with what you're doing already.
That will work better for me since I won't have to parse out the sasl_username
from the [] if it's empty. I can just check
On 5/5/2010 4:57 PM, Gary Smith wrote:
I have a content filter in which I need the sasl_username. This works for most of our
outgoing email. The problem is sometimes locally generated email is submitted without SASL
(as they are in the mynetworks table). This leaves sasl_username blank. So
I have a content filter in which I need the sasl_username. This works for most
of our outgoing email. The problem is sometimes locally generated email is
submitted without SASL (as they are in the mynetworks table). This leaves
sasl_username blank. So to get around this I have wrapped ${sasl
Nataraj wrote:
Hi,
I would appreciate any suggestions anyone can offer on the following
problem that I'm having with postfix...
I'm running postfix+pgsql-2.3.3-2.1.el5_2 on a CentOS 5.4 server. I
see what looks likes a server in stress mode as described in
http://www.postfix.org/STRESS_REA
Noel Jones wrote:
On 5/5/2010 1:06 PM, Nataraj wrote:
Mike A. Leonetti wrote:
Thanks for the reply, Nataraj.
I did see that online and the server does have SASL Auth working,
but we
are having a difficult time getting it to try and provide a
username/password on the Exchange server so I was
On 5/5/2010 1:06 PM, Nataraj wrote:
Mike A. Leonetti wrote:
Thanks for the reply, Nataraj.
I did see that online and the server does have SASL Auth working, but we
are having a difficult time getting it to try and provide a
username/password on the Exchange server so I was wondering if there w
Mike A. Leonetti wrote:
Thanks for the reply, Nataraj.
I did see that online and the server does have SASL Auth working, but we
are having a difficult time getting it to try and provide a
username/password on the Exchange server so I was wondering if there was
a way to get around that.
On 05/05/10 13:31, Nataraj wrote:
> Mike A. Leonetti wrote:
>> I want to relay messages coming through a server with a dynamic IP
>> (Exchange) through my postfix.
>>
>> My postfix
>> my smtpd_recipient_restrictions already has a
>> "hash:/etc/postfix/allowed_relays" option on it, and I've tried ad
On 5/5/2010 1:10 PM, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 07:00:37PM +0200, Laurent CARON wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm basically trying to protect my users from the following:
>>
>> Spam
>> - Sent from accounts hosted on freemail providers (yahoo, ...)
>> - Originating from Afri
Noel Jones wrote:
On 5/5/2010 11:40 AM, Appliantologist wrote:
It seems pretty straight forward to me.
If you dont have any non-local users sending mail using this server you
could just shut down port 25. For those virtual-file id users use port
587 with smtp authentication.Forwarding for those
On 5/5/2010 12:00 PM, Laurent CARON wrote:
Hi,
I'm basically trying to protect my users from the following:
Spam
- Sent from accounts hosted on freemail providers (yahoo, ...)
- Originating from AfriNIC ranges
- Tergetted at several dozen of users
The headers look like this:
Received: from [41
Mike A. Leonetti wrote:
I want to relay messages coming through a server with a dynamic IP
(Exchange) through my postfix.
My postfix
my smtpd_recipient_restrictions already has a
"hash:/etc/postfix/allowed_relays" option on it, and I've tried adding
the Dynamic DNS name that resolves to that IP
On 5/5/2010 11:40 AM, Appliantologist wrote:
It seems pretty straight forward to me.
If you dont have any non-local users sending mail using this server you
could just shut down port 25. For those virtual-file id users use port
587 with smtp authentication.Forwarding for those users is not relev
I want to relay messages coming through a server with a dynamic IP
(Exchange) through my postfix.
My postfix
my smtpd_recipient_restrictions already has a
"hash:/etc/postfix/allowed_relays" option on it, and I've tried adding
the Dynamic DNS name that resolves to that IP address and put it in the
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 07:00:37PM +0200, Laurent CARON wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm basically trying to protect my users from the following:
>
> Spam
> - Sent from accounts hosted on freemail providers (yahoo, ...)
> - Originating from AfriNIC ranges
> - Tergetted at several dozen of users
>
> The hea
Hi,
I'm basically trying to protect my users from the following:
Spam
- Sent from accounts hosted on freemail providers (yahoo, ...)
- Originating from AfriNIC ranges
- Tergetted at several dozen of users
The headers look like this:
Received: from [41.207.213.162] by web1104.biz.mail.sk1.yahoo.
On 5/5/2010 12:40 PM, Appliantologist wrote:
>> It seems pretty straight forward to me.
>>
>> If you dont have any non-local users sending mail using this server you
>> could just shut down port 25. For those virtual-file id users use port
>> 587 with smtp authentication.Forwarding for those users
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 04:21:37PM +0100, Simon Croome wrote:
> We are replacing sendmail as our MTA to Postfix and our internal mail relay
> receives mail from our edge MTA server <#> in the DMZ, once mail is
> received then any email address to a staff member for instance : name>.< last name
> It seems pretty straight forward to me.
>
> If you dont have any non-local users sending mail using this server you
> could just shut down port 25. For those virtual-file id users use port
> 587 with smtp authentication.Forwarding for those users is not relevant
> here.
Hello,
I was assuming thi
Hi
We are replacing sendmail as our MTA to Postfix and our internal mail
relay receives mail from our edge MTA server <#> in the DMZ, once mail
is recieved then any email address to a staff member for instance :
.< last name >@example.com is sent to a Lotus Notes server,
and any other email
Hello,
I have both .forward files and /etc/postfix/virtual and it seems the
the .forward file takes priority, I can't check now, because I am
under a spam attack again. The .forward file should be in the users
home directory and needs to be readable by postfix
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Al
On 05/05/2010 04:19 PM, Alexander Erameh wrote:
* Alexander Erameh:
Is there any reason why Postfix doesn't read .forward files set up in users
Mail folders, even after modifying main.cf to include the forward_path
option.
Yes. If postfix/local is not involved, the files will be ignor
* Alexander Erameh :
> Is there any reason why Postfix doesn't read .forward files set up in users
> Mail folders, even after modifying main.cf to include the forward_path
> option.
Yes. If postfix/local is not involved, the files will be ignored.
> Do I have to disable /etc/postfix/virtual whi
* Alexander Erameh :
> Is there any reason why Postfix doesn't read .forward files set up in users
> Mail folders, even after modifying main.cf to include the forward_path
> option.
Yes. If postfix/local is not involved, the files will be ignored.
> Do I have to disable /etc/postfix/virtual whi
Is there any reason why Postfix doesn't read .forward files set up in users
Mail folders, even after modifying main.cf to include the forward_path
option.
Do I have to disable /etc/postfix/virtual which was hitherto handling
forwarding?
Alexander
On 2010-05-05 ram wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 12:29 +0300, Appliantologist wrote:
>> I still need to accept mail for the email addresses we host on our
>> machine from the net, so blocking port 25 or mynetworks as local host
>> would seem to prevent that. we still have users on the domain that
29 matches
Mail list logo
