Ralph Seichter:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On 05.09.10 22:07, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Are you running header_checks BEFORE or AFTER the external content
> > filter, or both? See the receive_override_options discussion in
> > the Postfix FILTER_README documentation.
>
>
Ralph Seichter:
> On 06.09.10 00:25, mouss wrote:
>
> > add "-o syslog_name=postsubmission" to both your submission and
> > cleanup_submission and see if it appears in your logs.
>
> I see postsubmission/smtpd in the mail log, but postsubmission/cleanup
> is not logged. So, I guess my cleanup_sub
On 06.09.10 00:25, mouss wrote:
> add "-o syslog_name=postsubmission" to both your submission and
> cleanup_submission and see if it appears in your logs.
I see postsubmission/smtpd in the mail log, but postsubmission/cleanup
is not logged. So, I guess my cleanup_submission service is not called?
On 05.09.10 22:07, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Are you running header_checks BEFORE or AFTER the external content
> filter, or both? See the receive_override_options discussion in
> the Postfix FILTER_README documentation.
Sorry, I re-read the FILTER_README multiple times, but I am not sure how
to ans
Le 05/09/2010 21:32, Ralph Seichter a écrit :
On 05.09.10 20:55, Wietse Venema wrote:
As documented header_checks are not implemented in smtpd(8) but
in cleanup(8).
Yup, that's why I asked if I needed a second cleanup service.
If you are courageous you can implement different cleanup
servic
Ralph Seichter:
> On 05.09.10 20:55, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > As documented header_checks are not implemented in smtpd(8) but
> > in cleanup(8).
>
> Yup, that's why I asked if I needed a second cleanup service.
>
> > If you are courageous you can implement different cleanup
> > services:
> >
>
On 05.09.10 20:55, Wietse Venema wrote:
> As documented header_checks are not implemented in smtpd(8) but
> in cleanup(8).
Yup, that's why I asked if I needed a second cleanup service.
> If you are courageous you can implement different cleanup
> services:
>
> /etc/postfix/master.cf"
> submissio
Ralph Seichter:
> I'm currently trying to figure out if it is possible to use different
> header_checks for TCP ports 25 (mail from world) and 587 (mail submitted
> by authenticated users). I tried the following without success:
>
> # cat /etc/postfix/master.cf
> smtp inet n - n - - smt
On 09/05/2010 07:20 PM, Ralph Seichter wrote:
I'm currently trying to figure out if it is possible to use different
header_checks for TCP ports 25 (mail from world) and 587 (mail submitted
by authenticated users). I tried the following without success:
Since header_checks is performed by cl
I'm currently trying to figure out if it is possible to use different
header_checks for TCP ports 25 (mail from world) and 587 (mail submitted
by authenticated users). I tried the following without success:
# cat /etc/postfix/master.cf
smtp inet n - n - - smtpd
-o content_filter=amav
On 09/05/2010 04:59 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Jeroen Geilman:
As for your original question, the combined processing time of all your
smtpd_* checks will still be reflected in the delay-"a" value (pre-queue).
Whatever time postfix itself adds for processing will be either static
or insignific
Jeroen Geilman:
> As for your original question, the combined processing time of all your
> smtpd_* checks will still be reflected in the delay-"a" value (pre-queue).
> Whatever time postfix itself adds for processing will be either static
> or insignificant (unless you have lots of expensive map
On 09/04/2010 10:42 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Victor Duchovni put forth on 9/4/2010 7:33 AM:
What do you mean by "filters"?
Spam filters in the form of table lookups and dnsbl queries. I'm
currently processing
12,581 CIDRs
1,568 regular expressions (PCRE)
5 dnsbl lookups
p
Frank Doege:
> The problem is that postfix seems to generate the bcc message before
> the spamfilter
> and then send it without checks to the exchange.
Look in the Postfix FILTER_README for no_address_mappings.
Wietse
Hi Jeroen,
i just checked again and now its run before the duplication, i still
have to investigate how this
mail (the reason i started to investigate) slipped through.
Working now as expected. thanks for your help
Frank
On 09/05/2010 02:52 PM, Frank Doege wrote:
Hi,
i have a postfix implementation where i use recipient_bcc maps to
duplicate
messages which are from users which are on my exchange server.
Don't you mean sender_bcc_maps in that case ?
This is needed
because users still want to be able to read
On 09/05/2010 11:02 AM, Carlos Velasco wrote:
Hello,
Is there any way to choose source IP address for LDAP query in postfix?
We have a multi-instance setup where one instance need to use a specific
source ip address in the system because LDAP queries must go trough a
VPN IPsec connection. I can
Hi,
i have a postfix implementation where i use recipient_bcc maps to
duplicate
messages which are from users which are on my exchange server. This is
needed
because users still want to be able to read there mail with the
conventional
imap system ( so forwarding is no solution ).
The problem
Hello,
Is there any way to choose source IP address for LDAP query in postfix?
We have a multi-instance setup where one instance need to use a specific
source ip address in the system because LDAP queries must go trough a
VPN IPsec connection. I can setup source ip address for smtp connections
bu
19 matches
Mail list logo
