Thank you to all who replied with offers to help.
postfix does indeed work great out of the box with minimal configuration. Our
dns related issue was fixed after a 45 minute investigation with one of you,
thanks again - george
--- On Fri, 6/4/10, George wrote:
From: George
Subject: email/postf
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 08:23:56PM -0700, George wrote:
> Clearly we are no good with email servers, so we come to the experts.
Also, not too strong on asking questions that can be answered. :-(
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
> Recipient address rejected: User unknown in loca
Clearly we are no good with email servers, so we come to the experts.
Centos 5.3, dbmail, postfix, pgsql. All up and running.
1. Outgoing mail works fine.
2. Incoming we get the
Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table
virtual
queries return the 1 and empty per dbmail w
On 6/4/2010 8:10 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 6/4/2010 7:12 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 6/4/2010 6:59 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked
- see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.167;
from=
to= proto=
On 6/4/2010 7:12 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 6/4/2010 6:59 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked
- see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.167;
from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
OK, I get it. Facebook email i
On 6/4/2010 7:12 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 6/4/2010 6:59 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.167;
from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
OK, I get it. Facebook email is
On 6/4/2010 6:59 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.167;
from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
OK, I get it. Facebook email is being blocked because servers it uses
are on
On 6/4/2010 6:59 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.167;
from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
OK, I get it. Facebook email is being blocked because servers it uses
are on
On 06/05/2010 01:29 AM, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I'm finding the following in my mail log:
Jun 4 08:55:11 blacklamb postfix/smtpd[95132]: NOQUEUE: reject:
RCPT from outmail008.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.167]:
That is where it comes from; this is what check_client_access checks.
554 5.7.1 Servic
On 6/4/2010 6:29 PM, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I'm finding the following in my mail log:
Jun 4 08:55:11 blacklamb postfix/smtpd[95132]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from outmail008.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.167]: 554 5.7.1 Service
unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocke
I'm finding the following in my mail log:
Jun 4 08:55:11 blacklamb postfix/smtpd[95132]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from outmail008.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.167]: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client host [69.63.178.167] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010, Dan Burkland wrote:
> Relevant configuration entries:
>
> ---main.cf
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination
^
> ---master.cf---
> submissioninetn - n - - smtpd
>
Phil Howard:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 17:16, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > You need -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
> > to get relay permissions.
>
> Is that for the submission entry or the smtp entry (that he didn't
> provide)?
Allow me to place my advice in cont
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 01:57:17PM -0600, Josh Cason wrote:
> Okay So I want to convert my access list into a cidr list. Since postini
> has a simple cidr. The problem is I have some nos...@nospam.com addresses
> in the access list as well as ip numbers. Can I move the addresses to the
> check_
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 17:16, Wietse Venema wrote:
> You need -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
> to get relay permissions.
Is that for the submission entry or the smtp entry (that he didn't
provide)? It looks to me like he used mostly the example for
submission.
Dan Burkland:
> Hello all,
>
> I have been trying to setup my Postfix server as follows:
>
> a) Clients need to use STARTTLS + Authentication in order to send mail using
> my SMTP Server. They can only submit mail on port 587 (25 for submission is
> disallowed).
> b) Port 25 is to be used for
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 16:52, Dan Burkland wrote:
> My apologies, I typed the parameter in the email incorrectly. It is entered
> correctly in main.cf
> (smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject)
OK, then that looks fine. Since you are having trouble on port 25,
can you show
-Original Message-
My apologies, I typed the parameter in the email incorrectly. It is entered
correctly in main.cf
(smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject)
Regards,
Dan
-Original Message-
Seems like I am dyslexic today, I meant to say master.cf (TGIF :))
-Original Message-
From: Phil Howard [mailto:ttip...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 3:48 PM
To: Dan Burkland
Cc: Postfix users
Subject: Re: Submission service
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 16:21, Dan Burkland wrote:
> ---main.cf
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_myne
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 16:21, Dan Burkland wrote:
> ---main.cf
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination
>
> ---master.cf---
> submission inet n - n - - smtpd
> -o smtpd_enforce_tls=yes
> -
Hello all,
I have been trying to setup my Postfix server as follows:
a) Clients need to use STARTTLS + Authentication in order to send mail using my
SMTP Server. They can only submit mail on port 587 (25 for submission is
disallowed).
b) Port 25 is to be used for MTA-to-MTA communication and
On 6/4/2010 2:45 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
I have google apps managing mail for my domain but would like to use my
server to send newsletters and have run into an issue where I can send
with SMTP from accounts on the server using Postfix but when someone
replies to that email due to MX it routes t
On 6/4/2010 3:45 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
> I have google apps managing mail for my domain but would like to use my
> server to send newsletters and have run into an issue where I can send
> with SMTP from accounts on the server using Postfix but when someone
> replies to that email due to MX it ro
I have google apps managing mail for my domain but would like to use my
server to send newsletters and have run into an issue where I can send with
SMTP from accounts on the server using Postfix but when someone replies to
that email due to MX it routes to google and not the server.
What do I have
Okay So I want to convert my access list into a cidr list. Since
postini has a simple cidr. The problem is I have some
nos...@nospam.com addresses in the access list as well as ip numbers.
Can I move the addresses to the check_sender_access list?
This is what is in my access list. But from
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 14:58, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Phil Howard:
>> It looks like postmap can read stdin when getting a list of keys for
>> delete or query.
>
> As documented in the postmap manpage:
>
> -d key
> ...
> If a key value of - is specified, the program r
On 2010-06-04 2:37 PM, Josh Cason wrote:
> my sender_access list.
>
> aol.com reject_unverified_sender
> hotmail.com reject_unverified_sender
> yahoo.com reject_unverified_sender
> gmail.com reject_unverified_sender
> bigfoot.com reject_unverified_sender
> apa...@dolifrontend1.installs.com OK
On 2010-06-04 1:27 PM, Dan Burkland wrote:
> For my Postfix + Postini setup I have the following configuration options
> set:
>
> relayhost = PostiniFQDNGoeshHere
> mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, PostiniIPBLockGoesHere
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> permit_mynetworks,permit_sasl_authenticated,re
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 12:37:14PM -0600, Josh Cason wrote:
> I'm just a tad confused.
>
> I currently only have one check client access file. That is
> /etc/postfix/access. Do I need another check client access file with
> postini's ip range?
I recommended a CIDR access file, e.g.:
#
I'm just a tad confused.
I currently only have one check client access file. That is
/etc/postfix/access. Do I need another check client access file with
postini's ip range?
As below I do have a senders access list. But I don't have a recipient
access list because this is mysql under virt
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 07:59:28PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> I think the manual is at best misleading in this statement.
This thread is over I think...
--
Viktor.
On 06/04/2010 03:25 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Moe:
The docs for 'myhostname' even explicitly state "The default is to use
the fully-qualified domain name from gethostname()", which makes no
sense as gethostname() does not normally return a FQDN.
Only a brain-damaged person would claim
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 12:27:56PM -0500, Dan Burkland wrote:
> For my Postfix + Postini setup I have the following configuration
> options set:
>
> relayhost = PostiniFQDNGoeshHere
> mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, PostiniIPBLockGoesHere
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> permit_mynetworks,permit_sas
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of fakessh
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 11:56 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Postini, Has bad idea for adding ip numbers. This is sendmail
example
postini give acces
postini give access
telnet postini 25
mail from:
rcpt to:
data
some date
.
emails is correctly delivred
its synonymy to open relay
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 10:53:58AM -0600, Josh Cason wrote:
> So postini wants me to add there servers into the my_network list.
They are giving you the simplest solution to explain, not the best one.
> To only
> accept e-mail from there servers. To me this is wrong. For send mail they
> wante
So postini wants me to add there servers into the my_network list. To
only accept e-mail from there servers. To me this is wrong. For send
mail they wanted the below setup. Now from what I could find. Should I
not be able to add the ip numbers or ranges to my access file.
check_client_acces
> Ram:
> > Jun 4 14:53:00 mmail postfix/smtpd[23565]: nss_ldap: reconnecting to
> > LDAP server (sleeping 4 seconds)...
>
> To make Postfix work while LDAP is down, put the Postfix-related
> users and groups in /etc/passwd, or remove LDAP from /etc/nsswitch.conf.
(and in /etc/group and /etc/shad
On 4 juin 2010, at 15:03, Wietse Venema wrote:
> I suppose you missed the Postfix RELEASE_NOTES files. I spend a
> great deal of time maintaining this document, in the hope that it
> will save system adminstrators time.
You're absolutely right. I always read the release notes before an upgrade,
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 5:44 AM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: DIsable connects to ldap
Ram:
> Jun 4 14:53:00 mmail postfix/smtpd[23565]: nss_ldap: reconnecti
Proniewski Patrick:
> Wietse,
>
> Thank you for your fast reply.
>
> On 2 juin 2010, at 17:28, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > If Postfix does not accept connections, then it will log warnings.
>
>
> No warning on postfix side, otherwise I would have posted a sample here of
> course.
> This is a b
Victor Duchovni schrieb:
> This is entirely inappropriate and unnecessary.
Well, I must admit, I got heated up a bit in this discussion, and should have
rethinked my words more before posting.
Sorry about that, and my apologies to Moe.
--
MfG Jan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitall
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010, Paul McGougan wrote:
> On 4/06/2010 1:08 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> >
> > That's unfortunate. Now that we have established the issue, it seems to
> > me this is no longer the appropriate forum to continue this thread.
> > Perhaps you can convince the host to exempt you from th
Ram:
> Jun 4 14:53:00 mmail postfix/smtpd[23565]: nss_ldap: reconnecting to
> LDAP server (sleeping 4 seconds)...
To make Postfix work while LDAP is down, put the Postfix-related
users and groups in /etc/passwd, or remove LDAP from /etc/nsswitch.conf.
Wietse
Hi Ram
apparently, its not postfix itself, which connects to LDAP, but the nss
library, which brings up the following idea:
postfix, when starting up, wants to verify the user it shall run under,
which is done via the nss library. If this user is not a unix user, the
nss library will try to co
On our postfix servers , we use a remote ldapserver for system-auth for
some FM users. System users login via /etc/shadow .. FM users login via
ldap.
The MTA is not configured to use any ldap connection.
Yet whenever postfix is being restarted , If the remote ldapserver is
not available postf
Hi Victor,
On 2 juin 2010, at 18:49, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 05:14:45PM +0200, Proniewski Patrick wrote:
>
>> So it appears that the connection between MAILGW and LB is not always
>> properly closed. Am I wrong?
>
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_connection
Wietse,
Thank you for your fast reply.
On 2 juin 2010, at 17:28, Wietse Venema wrote:
> If Postfix does not accept connections, then it will log warnings.
No warning on postfix side, otherwise I would have posted a sample here of
course.
This is a big jump between 2.0.10 and 2.7. I was not af
48 matches
Mail list logo
