> Two questions:
>
> 1) I assume it would not be a good thing just to copy main.cf & master.cf
> along with the associated .db files to the new server as I can see lots has
> changed. I'm assuming that a line-by-line walk-through and comparison of the
> old & new files is prudent copying over o
* cajun :
>
> I'm migrating a working Ver 2.1.5 server to Ver 2.5.5 (on a new box).
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1) I assume it would not be a good thing just to copy main.cf &
> master.cf along with the associated .db files to the new server as I
> can see lots has changed. I'm assuming that a line-b
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 21:37:40 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> check_client_access pcre://generic_rbl_clients.pcre,
>
> The content of generic_rbl_clients.pcre:
>
> # sutton-partners.com
> /^64\.191\.79\.245$/public_rbls
>
> # mabel.ca
> /^70\.38\.108\.42$/ publ
"Michael Orlitzky" September 23, 2010 9:37 PM
We run a private RBL, jerks.viabit.com, and check against it as well as
four other lists at SMTP time. Occasionally, I'll get a false positive
due to blocking an entire /24 and want to whitelist them from our
private RBL check but not against e.g. Spa
Michael Orlitzky put forth on 9/23/2010 9:44 PM:
> Alternatively, lookup tables can be specified in Perl Compatible Regu-
> lar Expression form. In this case, each input is compared against a
> list of patterns. When a match is found, the corresponding result is
> returned and the search i
I'm migrating a working Ver 2.1.5 server to Ver 2.5.5 (on a new box).
Two questions:
1) I assume it would not be a good thing just to copy main.cf &
master.cf along with the associated .db files to the new server as I can
see lots has changed. I'm assuming that a line-by-line walk-through and
On 09/23/10 22:29, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> I don't see anything in master.cf either. Hmmm
>
> Wait a second. My lack of regex foo may be showing. :)
>
> The content of generic_rbl_clients.pcre:
>
> # sutton-partners.com
> /^64\.191\.79\.245$/public_rbls
>
> # mabel.ca
>
I don't see anything in master.cf either. Hmmm
Wait a second. My lack of regex foo may be showing. :)
The content of generic_rbl_clients.pcre:
# sutton-partners.com
/^64\.191\.79\.245$/public_rbls
# mabel.ca
/^70\.38\.108\.42$/ public_rbls
# dsnews.com
On 09/23/10 21:55, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> I don't see your master.cf here. In a setup like this I'd assume you
> may be running more than one smtpd for submission. master.cf settings
> can override main.cf settings. This might explain why you're seeing
> behavior different than what main.cf says
I don't see your master.cf here. In a setup like this I'd assume you
may be running more than one smtpd for submission. master.cf settings
can override main.cf settings. This might explain why you're seeing
behavior different than what main.cf says you should be seeing. Please
post master.cf.
We run a private RBL, jerks.viabit.com, and check against it as well as
four other lists at SMTP time. Occasionally, I'll get a false positive
due to blocking an entire /24 and want to whitelist them from our
private RBL check but not against e.g. Spamhaus. I'm doing something
wrong w.r.t. restrict
Alejandro Facultad put forth on 9/23/2010 2:58 PM:
> A week ago my Postfix server goes down because of error disks...I have to
> review
> the disks and finally restore a backupI spent one dady and people from my
> company had not mail service and they were not happy :)
>
> I need a high ava
Wietse Venema:
> Victor Duchovni:
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 07:26:59PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > > More sensibly, it seems safe to skip the RESET_OWNER_ATTR() operation.
> > > That code is a remnant of a very early attempt to attribute bounces
> > > very accurately, and may be creating
Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 07:26:59PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > More sensibly, it seems safe to skip the RESET_OWNER_ATTR() operation.
> > That code is a remnant of a very early attempt to attribute bounces
> > very accurately, and may be creating more problems than it solv
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:13:30PM +0200, mouss wrote:
> Le 23/09/2010 16:11, Brian Pribis a ?crit :
>> O.k., I figured it out. I think. Problem wasn't with the MUA, or
>> postfix (which I knew), or the configuration. It was with me (who
>> would have thought?). Apparently what I am seein
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 07:26:59PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> More sensibly, it seems safe to skip the RESET_OWNER_ATTR() operation.
> That code is a remnant of a very early attempt to attribute bounces
> very accurately, and may be creating more problems than it solves.
I think this idea has
Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On 09/23/2010 11:03 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
> >> OK, now I know why my messages are not requeued.
> >>
> >> First of all: The owner- alias IS REALLY set up correctly. :-)
> >>
> >> But if me
On 09/23/2010 11:03 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
>> OK, now I know why my messages are not requeued.
>>
>> First of all: The owner- alias IS REALLY set up correctly. :-)
>>
>> But if members of the list are aliases themselves, requeuing via cleanup
>> won't work for them. Un
Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
> OK, now I know why my messages are not requeued.
>
> First of all: The owner- alias IS REALLY set up correctly. :-)
>
> But if members of the list are aliases themselves, requeuing via cleanup
> won't work for them. Unfortunately, this is currently the case for my
> re
Le 23/09/2010 16:11, Brian Pribis a écrit :
O.k., I figured it out. I think. Problem wasn't with the MUA, or
postfix (which I knew), or the configuration. It was with me (who
would have thought?). Apparently what I am seeing is normal for
MTA's and aliases. At least, it works the same f
On 09/23/2010 09:58 PM, Alejandro Facultad wrote:
A week ago my Postfix server goes down because of error disks...I have
to review the disks and finally restore a backupI spent one dady
and people from my company had not mail service and they were not happy :)
I need a high availability sy
A week ago my Postfix server goes down because of error disks...I have to
review
the disks and finally restore a backupI spent one dady and people from my
company had not mail service and they were not happy :)
I need a high availability system that let me have a second mail server online
On 09/23/2010 09:30 PM, Alejandro Facultad wrote:
I
*De:* Jeroen Geilman
*Para:* postfix-users@postfix.org
*Enviado:* jueves, 23 de septiembre, 2010 16:12:19
*Asunto:* Re: Postfix cluster fail-over
On 09/23/2010 08:36 PM,
I
De: Jeroen Geilman
Para: postfix-users@postfix.org
Enviado: jueves, 23 de septiembre, 2010 16:12:19
Asunto: Re: Postfix cluster fail-over
On 09/23/2010 08:36 PM, Alejandro Facultad wrote:
Dear, I want to have two Postfix SMTP servers, one active and one pas
On 09/23/2010 08:36 PM, Alejandro Facultad wrote:
Dear, I want to have two Postfix SMTP servers, one active and one
pasive, in a cluster fail-over schema.
Why do you want that ?
SMTP has built-in redundancy - just run multiple MX machines.
If you want instant IP-level failover, use a frontend
On 09/23/2010 03:48 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 03:36:27PM +0200, Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth wrote:
>> When the owner- alias IS configured correctly, HOW is delivery
>> distributed to multiple processes?
>
> See the deliver_indirect() code. A new message is put in the queue,
Hello,
Yes you can use heartbit with ip failover.
With a ptr
smtp.test.com A FAILOVER_IP
Regards
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:36:16
-0700 (PDT), Alejandro Facultad wrote:
Dear, I want to have two
Postfix SMTP servers, one active and one pasive, in a cluster fail-over
schema.
When the "mast
Dear, I want to have two Postfix SMTP servers, one active and one pasive, in a
cluster fail-over schema.
When the "master" server goes down, the "slave" server goes up.
I'm using Debian for my implementation.
How can I do that ???
Thanks a lot.
Alex
O.k., I figured it out. I think. Problem wasn't with the MUA, or
postfix (which I knew), or the configuration. It was with me (who
would have thought?). Apparently what I am seeing is normal for
MTA's and aliases. At least, it works the same for sendmail and
postfix. I hadn't realized tha
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 03:36:27PM +0200, Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth wrote:
> On 09/23/2010 01:11 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
> >> However, I didn't notice any change such as separate processing of
> >> destination addresses.
> >>
> >> And I also cannot confirm that it use
Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
> On 09/23/2010 01:11 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
> >> However, I didn't notice any change such as separate processing of
> >> destination addresses.
> >>
> >> And I also cannot confirm that it uses a new queue id for each
> >> recipient. At whic
On 09/23/2010 01:11 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
>> However, I didn't notice any change such as separate processing of
>> destination addresses.
>>
>> And I also cannot confirm that it uses a new queue id for each
>> recipient. At which stage should the split happen?
>
> Wh
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:09:44PM -0300, Alexandre Pires wrote:
> Thanks Viktor, but how can I set envelop sender address in postfix ?
With SMTP:
EHLO
MAIL FROM:
RCPT TO:
RCPT TO:
DATA
Message-Headers:
Message Body
.
On the comm
Jeroen Geilman put forth on 9/22/2010 5:06 PM:
>
> I don't know if anybody has run tests of this yet (it's still kinda
> new), but it would be instructive to compare a "regular" postfix setup
> (pre-postscreen) to a postscreen setup with fairly strict settings, with
> respect to the load when a la
Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
> However, I didn't notice any change such as separate processing of
> destination addresses.
>
> And I also cannot confirm that it uses a new queue id for each
> recipient. At which stage should the split happen?
When the owner- alias is configured correctly, Postfix cre
On 09/23/2010 01:01 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth:
>> Ah! The problem seems to be the duplicate_filter_limit!
>>
>> I set it to 1 and now everything works fine!
>
> For the last time, you really should use the proper owner- alias
> when delivering mail to a list. Then, on
36 matches
Mail list logo
