On 9/4/2010 12:53 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Seann:
That is what I was figuring. Trying two different locations with the
CA file I was using broke, when according to the list's information
and my own reading it should work, turned out to require me to
validate the CA file I was using agai
I am using exchange and want to migrate to postfix, The issue is users
should be authenticated from Active Directory and other thing is i have got
1000 users from which 150 users will remain on exchange and the rest
mailboxes will be created on postfix (Linux Box). the 750 users are actually
not v
* Seann :
> That is what I was figuring. Trying two different locations with the
> CA file I was using broke, when according to the list's information
> and my own reading it should work, turned out to require me to
> validate the CA file I was using again. What the case was, is I
> wasn't using Op
On 9/3/2010 5:04 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:21:06PM -0500, Seann wrote:
Sorry, I went back and RTFM, and found that. "TLS certificate verification:
Error, unable to get local issuer certificate" is my new debug error that I
am using Google to find out best places to
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:21:06PM -0500, Seann wrote:
> Sorry, I went back and RTFM, and found that. "TLS certificate verification:
> Error, unable to get local issuer certificate" is my new debug error that I
> am using Google to find out best places to look. I have the site CA file
> listed
On 9/3/2010 4:29 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Seann:
On 9/3/2010 4:16 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:07:13PM -0500, Seann wrote:
Enable LDAP debugging to see more logging. The OpenLDAP library will
return this error when the peer certificate CommonName does not m
* Seann :
> On 9/3/2010 4:16 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:07:13PM -0500, Seann wrote:
> >
> >>>Enable LDAP debugging to see more logging. The OpenLDAP library will
> >>>return this error when the peer certificate CommonName does not match
> >>>the hostname you specify,
On 9/3/2010 4:16 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:07:13PM -0500, Seann wrote:
Enable LDAP debugging to see more logging. The OpenLDAP library will
return this error when the peer certificate CommonName does not match
the hostname you specify, but there could be other error
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:07:13PM -0500, Seann wrote:
>> Enable LDAP debugging to see more logging. The OpenLDAP library will
>> return this error when the peer certificate CommonName does not match
>> the hostname you specify, but there could be other errors.
>>
>>> When I use the LDAPS URI, I g
On 9/3/2010 3:51 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 03:23:28PM -0500, Seann wrote:
When start_tls = yes, my error is:
Sep 2 09:46:03 server postfix/postmap[4650]: error: dict_ldap_connect:
Unable to set STARTTLS: -11: Connect error
Enable LDAP debugging to see more logging. T
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 03:23:28PM -0500, Seann wrote:
> When start_tls = yes, my error is:
> Sep 2 09:46:03 server postfix/postmap[4650]: error: dict_ldap_connect:
> Unable to set STARTTLS: -11: Connect error
Enable LDAP debugging to see more logging. The OpenLDAP library will
return this erro
On 9/3/2010 2:29 PM, Louis-Olivier Roof wrote:
Hello postfix-users,
We've recently been blocked by spam blacklists due to a
spambot running loose on our network. We found the virus,
cleaned the machine and closed all outbound connections to
port 25 for the whole network but for the mail server
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 02:45:41PM -0500, Seann wrote:
My current issue with Postfix is that I am not able to
get the LDAP account mapping to work correctly with my Active Directory
security settings.
Postfix supports LDAP servers that offer:
- No authenti
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 02:45:41PM -0500, Seann wrote:
> My current issue with Postfix is that I am not able to
> get the LDAP account mapping to work correctly with my Active Directory
> security settings.
Postfix supports LDAP servers that offer:
- No authentication, allowing anonymous q
On 9/3/2010 2:29 PM, Louis-Olivier Roof wrote:
Hello postfix-users,
We've recently been blocked by spam blacklists due to a
spambot running loose on our network. We found the virus,
cleaned the machine and closed all outbound connections to
port 25 for the whole network but for the mail server.
All,
i am working on a replacement for a mail server I have, that is
currently a Merak Mail /Icewarp mail system that I am moving over to
Postfix and Dovecot. My current issue with Postfix is that I am not able
to get the LDAP account mapping to work correctly with my Active
Directory secu
Hello postfix-users,
We've recently been blocked by spam blacklists due to a spambot running
loose on our network. We found the virus, cleaned the machine and closed
all outbound connections to port 25 for the whole network but for the
mail server. Lesson learned.
Now, a user complains that
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 12:05:10PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> After replacing pflogsumm with logwatch, I've noticed in each summary a
> "resent" stat I wasn't noticing before. What is the significance of
> "resent-message-id"? Log snippet:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.6
--
> Sep 2 13:00:47 ru amavis[87682]: (87682-15) TIMING [total 257879 ms] -
> SMTP greeting: 25055 (10%)10, SMTP EHLO: 0 (0%)10, SMTP pre-MAIL: 0 (0%)10,
> SMTP pre-DATA-flush: 7 (0%)10,
> SMTP DATA: 24052 (9%)19, check_init: 25053 (10%)29, digest_hdr: 1 (0%)29,
> digest_body: 0 (0%)29,
> gen_ma
After replacing pflogsumm with logwatch, I've noticed in each summary a
"resent" stat I wasn't noticing before. What is the significance of
"resent-message-id"? Log snippet:
Sep 3 11:24:38 greer postfix/smtpd[28881]: 07D976C317:
client=liszt.debian.org[82.195.75.100]
Sep 3 11:24:38 greer postf
On 3 sept. 2010, at 16:29, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>> Machine does not look busy at all during those problems. Load is under 0.5
>> and CPU is 90% idle. Even small emails are affected.
>
> Problem with DNS/RBL or something like that??
> It would explain slow responses without high machine loa
Zitat von Patrick Proniewski :
On 3 sept. 2010, at 13:02, Mark Martinec wrote:
Versions before amavisd-new 2.7.0 and SA older than 3.3.0 are
not particularly suitable for a pre-queue filtering setup.
The combined new features of 2.7.0, SA 3.3.* and the postfix
'speed_adjust' made such a setup
On 9/3/2010 12:43 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote:
Hi
On 3 September 2010 14:04, Noel Jones wrote:
This tells postfix to accept any re...@* address, for any domain postfix
accepts mail for. If postfix can't deliver to the computed recipient, it
will be bounced. Not good. Worst case: your serve
On 3 sept. 2010, at 13:02, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Versions before amavisd-new 2.7.0 and SA older than 3.3.0 are
> not particularly suitable for a pre-queue filtering setup.
> The combined new features of 2.7.0, SA 3.3.* and the postfix
> 'speed_adjust' made such a setup much better behaved.
>
> P
Josef Karliak:
>hi guys,
>is possible to change error codes for over-quota error ?
>Here is a thing - there are about 4 recipients in aliases :
> /etc/aliases:
> abuse: user1,user2,user3,user4
When sending mail to a multi-user alias, configure an an owner-abuse
alias with the address o
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 08:38:20PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Perhaps an improved error logging could save somebody the effort
> > of troubleshooting.
>
I think Mark is looking for improved logging in the SMTP server when
connections to the proxy fail. Perhaps something along the lines of:
Patrick,
Versions before amavisd-new 2.7.0 and SA older than 3.3.0 are
not particularly suitable for a pre-queue filtering setup.
The combined new features of 2.7.0, SA 3.3.* and the postfix
'speed_adjust' made such a setup much better behaved.
Please read the introductory sections of 2.7.0 (pre)
hi guys,
is possible to change error codes for over-quota error ?
Here is a thing - there are about 4 recipients in aliases :
/etc/aliases:
abuse: user1,user2,user3,user4
When someone has a full mailbox (user3 for example), system stop
delivering email and try it again after some time (we'
On 2 sept. 2010, at 21:07, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>> Theses days I've got a lot of warning in postfix logs like this one:
>>
>> smtp/smtpd[91607]: warning: timeout talking to proxy 127.0.0.1:10024
> Why ? What is amavis doing at that moment ?
not sure, but probably trying to end a +250 seco
29 matches
Mail list logo
