On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> I will say generically that for an OP who has the time, avoiding content
> filters and using SMTP time blocking methods is probably more effective in the
> long run and makes more efficient use of network and server resources.
You
Steve put forth on 7/15/2010 4:16 PM:
> * if you feed wrong data to the Anti-Spam filter then the filter will make
> errors.
Content (header/body) filters have always been error prone and always will be.
The key to success is if the error rate is acceptable. For users to train
them, they have
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 02:09:43 +0300
> Von: Henrik K
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steve wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If you looking for something that is beyond just be
> -Original Message-
> From: Wietse Venema [mailto:wie...@porcupine.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 1:20 AM
> To: Morten P.D. Stevens
> Cc: Postfix users
> Subject: Re: TROUBLE in process_request: Error writing a SMTP response
> to the socket
>
> Morten P.D. Stevens:
> > Jul 13 17:57:24
Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:10:32PM +, Thomas Arnett wrote:
>
> > Jeroen Geilman adaptr.nl> writes:
> > > I completely agree that non-delivery to a (presumably dependable) MDA
> > > should never error out, but I thought a soft solution would be better
> > > than choosing
Morten P.D. Stevens:
> Jul 13 17:57:24 e200 postfix/master[27809]: terminating on signal 15
...
> Jul 13 17:57:25 e200 amavis[27308]: (27308-05) (!!)TROUBLE in
> process_request: Error writing a SMTP response to the socket: Broken pipe at
> (eval 83) line 957, line 78.
Well, you terminate the P
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steve wrote:
> > >
> > > If you looking for something that is beyond just being better then I
> > > recommend CRM114 or DSPAM or OSBF-Lua. If you insist in having the AV
> > > included in the Anti-Spam tool then use something like DSPAM.
> >
> > I'd consid
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 02:42:17PM -0700, motty.cruz wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm using two instances of postfix and lately I've been getting a lot of
> deferred email, any suggestions how to stop accepting email that can't be
> delivered. I do have local recipients table, server should not accept email
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:10:32PM +, Thomas Arnett wrote:
> Jeroen Geilman adaptr.nl> writes:
> > I completely agree that non-delivery to a (presumably dependable) MDA
> > should never error out, but I thought a soft solution would be better
> > than choosing the more extreme route (of al
Jeroen Geilman adaptr.nl> writes:
> I completely agree that non-delivery to a (presumably dependable) MDA
> should never error out, but I thought a soft solution would be better
> than choosing the more extreme route (of altering working code).
I believe the code is not working as intended and
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
> us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:30 PM
> To: Postfix users
> Subject: Re: TROUBLE in process_request: Error writing a SMTP response
> to the socket
>
> Mort
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Morten Stevens
IMT-Systems GmbH
Helfmann-Park 10
65760 Eschborn
Tel: +49(0)6196 95 48 10
Mobil: +49(0)179 66 38 401
E-Mail: mstev...@imt-systems.com
Internet: http://www.imt-systems.com
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Eschborn am Taunus
Eingetragen im Handelsregister Fr
Hello,
I'm using two instances of postfix and lately I've been getting a lot of
deferred email, any suggestions how to stop accepting email that can't be
delivered. I do have local recipients table, server should not accept email
that can't be deliver. Please help!
host# perl check_outmail
-Queue
Morten P.D. Stevens:
> > What the previous logfile record from process "amavis[27308]"?
> >
> > Wietse
>
> This one:
>
> Jul 13 17:48:34 e200 amavis[27308]: (27308-04) Passed CLEAN, [168.100.1.7]
> [80.101.24.220] ->
> ,, Message-ID:
> , mail_id: UkNOSaYmg+mw, Hits: -7, size:
> 4090, qu
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:54:22 +0300
> Von: Henrik K
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:02:52PM +0200, Steve wrote:
> >
> > Original-Nachricht
> > > Datum: Thu, 15
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 04:44:00PM -0400, Phil Howard wrote:
> > You are working too hard if you are trying to "optimize" mailbox
> > domains to alias domains when there are not yet any mailboxes.
>
> I *know* certain domains will never have mailboxes.
You can make these virtual alias domains, b
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
> us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:46 PM
> To: Postfix users
> Subject: Re: TROUBLE in process_request: Error writing a SMTP response
> to the socket
>
> Wha
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:02:52PM +0200, Steve wrote:
>
> Original-Nachricht
> > Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 19:37:48 +0200
> > Von: Ralf Hildebrandt
> > An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> > Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
>
> > * Josh Cason :
> >
> > > As most of you gu
Morten P.D. Stevens:
> Hi,
>
> does anyone know something about this error with postfix and amavis?
>
> Jul 13 17:57:25 e200 amavis[27308]: (27308-05) Passed CLEAN, [209.132.180.67]
> [213.165.64.20] ->
> ,, Message-ID:
> <1279036642.5733.7.ca...@maggy.simson.net>, mail_id: tsOvUhRB8Tnn, Hits
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 15:19, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 02:45:10PM -0400, Phil Howard wrote:
>
>> > This is all documented Phil, please read more carefully, and if not sure
>> > what something means, test your understanding in a test configuration that
>> > does not handle
Hi,
does anyone know something about this error with postfix and amavis?
Jul 13 17:57:25 e200 amavis[27308]: (27308-05) Passed CLEAN, [209.132.180.67]
[213.165.64.20] ->
,, Message-ID:
<1279036642.5733.7.ca...@maggy.simson.net>, mail_id: tsOvUhRB8Tnn, Hits: -4,
size: 3003, queued_as: 3095C1F
On 07/15/2010 12:29 PM, Steve wrote:
Or GROSS (the only greylisting application that I know working with a bloom
filter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter)).
http://code.google.com/p/gross/
Thanks for the link, what I see there is very interesting - I'll check
this out...
Joe
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 03:37:02PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > One might suggest that CIDR is not a good fit for this even if stored
> > just once, an IPC based server that walks trees rather than lists
> > would be far more suitable...
>
> I agree that the Postfix CIDR implementation achieve
Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 02:31:36PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > > Also, only use proxymap for IPC based tables (ldap, mysql, pgsql, tcp,
> > > ...),
> > > do not use proxymap for indexed files, cidr tables, pcre/regexp tables,
> > >
> >
> > It depends on what the tr
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:03:17 -0700
> Von: Bradley Giesbrecht
> An: postfix-users
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> Or sqlgrey, a fork of postgrey.
>
> http://sqlgrey.sourceforge.net/
>
Or GROSS (the only greylisting application that I k
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 02:45:10PM -0400, Phil Howard wrote:
> > This is all documented Phil, please read more carefully, and if not sure
> > what something means, test your understanding in a test configuration that
> > does not handle live mail traffic.
>
> Fortunately I have that test machine,
Or sqlgrey, a fork of postgrey.
http://sqlgrey.sourceforge.net/
On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Kai Krakow wrote:
Use greylisting, eg postgrey and set it up to work before amavisd-new
or mailscanner.
2010/7/15 Josh Cason
As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
recomendati
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 19:37:48 +0200
> Von: Ralf Hildebrandt
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> * Josh Cason :
>
> > As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
> > recomendations of what else to
Use greylisting, eg postgrey and set it up to work before amavisd-new
or mailscanner.
2010/7/15 Josh Cason
>
> As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like recomendations of
> what else to use. I prefer a all in one package like what mailscanner does.
> It also utilizes clamav and
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 02:31:36PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Also, only use proxymap for IPC based tables (ldap, mysql, pgsql, tcp, ...),
> > do not use proxymap for indexed files, cidr tables, pcre/regexp tables,
>
> It depends on what the trade-offs are. I know of one user with
> ver
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 14:17, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 06:38:17PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> Phil Howard:
>> > Every address in these domains will be rewritten to some other address
>> > (not all with the same domain) and sent on their way. Some of them
>> > will be
Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:52:35AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Ralf Hildebrandt:
> > > * Stefan Foerster :
> > >
> > > > While I agree that it is totally obvious that table are re-read as
> > > > soon as a new proxymap(8) process is spawned, on a resonably busy
> > > > sy
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:52:35AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ralf Hildebrandt:
> > * Stefan Foerster :
> >
> > > While I agree that it is totally obvious that table are re-read as
> > > soon as a new proxymap(8) process is spawned, on a resonably busy
> > > system, this won't happen too often
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 06:38:17PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Phil Howard:
> > Every address in these domains will be rewritten to some other address
> > (not all with the same domain) and sent on their way. Some of them
> > will be rewritten to addresses that do fall into other classes for
>
* Josh Cason :
> As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
> recomendations of what else to use. I prefer a all in one package
> like what mailscanner does. It also utilizes clamav and spamassion.
So does amavisd-new
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Phil Howard:
> This new server only needs to send mail.
Then is is a null MAIL client.
Wietse
In http://www.postfix.org/STANDARD_CONFIGURATION_README.html this text ...
A null client is a machine that can only send mail. It receives no
mail from the network, and it does not deliver any mail locally. A
null client typically uses POP, IMAP or NFS for mailbox access.
... is confusing (the pa
As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
recomendations of what else to use. I prefer a all in one package like
what mailscanner does. It also utilizes clamav and spamassion. The
problem is most of the information I find on the net is outdated or
for projects that stops. Se
Phil Howard:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:53, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Phil Howard:
> > [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> >> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 18:38, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >> > Phil Howard:
> >> >> Every address in these domains will be rewritten to some other address
> >
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:53, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Phil Howard:
> [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
>> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 18:38, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> > Phil Howard:
>> >> Every address in these domains will be rewritten to some other address
>> >> (not all with the same
Phil Howard:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 18:38, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Phil Howard:
> >> Every address in these domains will be rewritten to some other address
> >> (not all with the same domain) and sent on their way. ?Some of them
> >> will be re
Ralf Hildebrandt:
> * Stefan Foerster :
>
> > While I agree that it is totally obvious that table are re-read as
> > soon as a new proxymap(8) process is spawned, on a resonably busy
> > system, this won't happen too often. So getting a definitive answer on
> > that one would still be helpful.
>
* Stefan Foerster :
> While I agree that it is totally obvious that table are re-read as
> soon as a new proxymap(8) process is spawned, on a resonably busy
> system, this won't happen too often. So getting a definitive answer on
> that one would still be helpful.
Has this been answered? It also
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 18:38, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Phil Howard:
>> Every address in these domains will be rewritten to some other address
>> (not all with the same domain) and sent on their way. Some of them
>> will be rewritten to addresses that do fall into other classes for
>> some kind of
* Stefano Villa :
> Hi to all!
> I've a environmetn with two postfix server, with relaying scope.
>
> If I send an email without domain:
>
> 220 *
> helo test
> 250 relay2.A.com
> mail from:test
> 250 2.1.0 Ok
>
> it will arrive with the domain suffix A ap
Hi to all!
I've a environmetn with two postfix server, with relaying scope.
If I send an email without domain:
220 *
helo test
250 relay2.A.com
mail from:test
250 2.1.0 Ok
it will arrive with the domain suffix A appended.
I want to send an email without a
* Adrian P. van Bloois :
> Hi,
> Can I automagically attach a different disclaimer for each domain?
> if so, how? Are there different options?
Which program is appending the single disclaimer now?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berl
Hi,
Can I automagically attach a different disclaimer for each domain?
if so, how? Are there different options?
Adri
--
Adrian P. van Bloois
Postbus 2575 email: adr...@accu.uu.nl
3500 GN Utrecht voice: +31-(0)-30-68-94649
The Netherlands
Le mardi 13 juillet 2010 17:47:21, John A. a écrit :
> Le mardi 13 juillet 2010 14:12:22, John A. a écrit :
> > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:42:42 +0200
> > >
> > > John A. articulated:
> > > > I tried to use transport as following:
> > > >
> > > > transport_maps = local.cf remote.cf
> > > > - local
Ram put forth on 7/15/2010 1:29 AM:
> Now this is the problem of all invites, especially those invites that
> scrape my addressbook and invite everyone.
>
> Should not all invites carry some header or any other identification ,
> that list management software can automatically detect and /dev/nul
50 matches
Mail list logo
