On Nov 28, 2010, at 8:18 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> My current theory is that the issue is FrontBridge specific, and is the
> result of some firewall or proxy software in front of Microsoft Exchange.
An update; I gather there are eyes on the problem.
Aloha,
Michael.
--
"Please have your Inter
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:56:08AM -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> When testing with Postfix 2.7 compiled against OpenSSL 1.0.0a and also
> 1.0.0b with two patches from the upcoming 1.0.0c (due any day now)
> everything is normal. Your OpenSSL is perhaps less fortuitously selected
> than mine.
I
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 02:44:31AM +, Mueller, Martin (Messaging) wrote:
> After upgrading from 2.5.x to 2.7.1 mail started queuing up to one
> particular domain (TLS security level: verify) with "Server certificate
> not verified".
Postfix TLS support has not changed noticeably since 2.5.
>
Hello,
After upgrading from 2.5.x to 2.7.1 mail started queuing up to one particular
domain (TLS security level: verify) with "Server certificate not verified".
Systems still on 2.5.x versions of Postfix transmit messages to that domain via
enforced TLS just fine. Based on some testing with dif
On 11/29/2010 02:39 PM, Stirling, Scott wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/MULTI_INSTANCE_README.html
My client has Postfix 2.3.3. Must I update to 2.6+ to run multiple
instances side-by-side? Could I manually create an instance by, e.g.,
creating an /etc/postfix-foo with main.cf and master.cf, and c
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 05:39:40PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote:
> http://www.postfix.org/MULTI_INSTANCE_README.html
>
> My client has Postfix 2.3.3. Must I update to 2.6+ to run multiple
> instances side-by-side? Could I manually create an instance by,
> e.g., creating an /etc/postfix-foo with
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 05:39:40PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote:
> http://www.postfix.org/MULTI_INSTANCE_README.html
>
> My client has Postfix 2.3.3. Must I update to 2.6+ to run multiple
> instances side-by-side?
No, but you won't have the postmulti(1) tooling at your disposal.
> Could I manua
http://www.postfix.org/MULTI_INSTANCE_README.html
My client has Postfix 2.3.3. Must I update to 2.6+ to run multiple
instances side-by-side? Could I manually create an instance by, e.g.,
creating an /etc/postfix-foo with main.cf and master.cf, and configure
them to use different files and director
On 11/29/2010 12:28 PM, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
We simply alias
$user $u...@$othermailserver
The $users we forward to are known by our mail server and no mail will
forward otherwise. I cannot think of a scenario which rejected mail
from $othermailserver would be anything other than UCE in this
Zitat von Randy Ramsdell :
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 03:01:45PM -0500, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
So to rephrase, what would be the best practices way given I have
to do forward this email and am powerless to change the design
other than our setup which may only include try
Randy Ramsdell:
> We simply alias
>
> $user $u...@$othermailserver
>
> The $users we forward to are known by our mail server and no mail will
> forward otherwise. I cannot think of a scenario which rejected mail from
> $othermailserver would be anything other than UCE in this case. The
> frin
Zitat von Randy Ramsdell :
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
Zitat von Randy Ramsdell :
Hi,
I am going to have to implement something that drops rejected mail
from one of our aliases.
The scenario is that we forward to a external server and cannot
match its spam/UCE rules so our server backsk
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 03:01:45PM -0500, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
So to rephrase, what would be the best practices way given I have to do
forward this email and am powerless to change the design other than our
setup which may only include trying to mitigate backskatter?
> These are not "keywords", they are transport names. Transports are
> defined in master.cf.
Ahh, so the names are conventional, configurable. Flexible
configurability is a theme with Postfix.
> The "smtp" transport is for other people's domains, the "relay"
> transport is for your domains that a
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 03:07:43PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote:
> > > Thank you. With yours and Victor's input it sounds like I can do the
> > > first relay with the existing Postfix processes, configuring a
> > > sender_dependent relay to secondary instances of Postfix to handle
> > > candidates
On 2010-11-29 Randy Ramsdell wrote:
> lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>> Zitat von Randy Ramsdell :
>>> I am going to have to implement something that drops rejected mail
>>> from one of our aliases.
>>>
>>> The scenario is that we forward to a external server and cannot
>>> match its spam/UCE rules so
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 03:01:45PM -0500, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
> So to rephrase, what would be the best practices way given I have to do
> forward this email and am powerless to change the design other than our
> setup which may only include trying to mitigate backskatter?
If list expansion ha
> > Thank you. With yours and Victor's input it sounds like I can do the
> > first relay with the existing Postfix processes, configuring a
> > sender_dependent relay to secondary instances of Postfix to handle
> > candidates for custom routing from this Sender.
> >
> > Then in the secondary Postfi
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
Zitat von Randy Ramsdell :
Hi,
I am going to have to implement something that drops rejected mail
from one of our aliases.
The scenario is that we forward to a external server and cannot match
its spam/UCE rules so our server backskatters mail.
One way would be
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 02:51:53PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote:
> Thank you. With yours and Victor's input it sounds like I can do the
> first relay with the existing Postfix processes, configuring a
> sender_dependent relay to secondary instances of Postfix to handle
> candidates for custom rout
> >>> What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if
> >>> anyone has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability
> >>> to combine the sender_dependent configuration with a recipient
> >>> condition. Is there a straightforward way to configure this?
> >>> Or do I need to s
Randy Ramsdell :
> I am going to have to implement something that drops rejected mail
> from one of our aliases.
>
> The scenario is that we forward to a external server and cannot
> match its spam/UCE rules so our server backskatters mail.
If this alias is a mail distribution list, then it sh
Zitat von Randy Ramsdell :
Hi,
I am going to have to implement something that drops rejected mail
from one of our aliases.
The scenario is that we forward to a external server and cannot
match its spam/UCE rules so our server backskatters mail.
One way would be to drop all rejects. I th
Hi,
I am going to have to implement something that drops rejected mail from
one of our aliases.
The scenario is that we forward to a external server and cannot match
its spam/UCE rules so our server backskatters mail.
One way would be to drop all rejects. I think this will work because our
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:22:31PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote:
> > This requires a second internal delivery hop.
> >
> > The first to separate out the recipients or senders that are candidates
> > for bypassing Postini into a separate queue, and the second to route
> > appropriate mail from that
Le 29/11/2010 19:22, Stirling, Scott a écrit :
What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if
anyone has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability
to combine the sender_dependent configuration with a recipient
condition. Is there a straightforward way to configure this
Le 29/11/2010 08:53, Mauro a écrit :
On 29 November 2010 01:56, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 01:36:12PM -0700, ghe wrote:
I run postfix and my mail clients use smtps so I was thinking I may as
well close port 25. How can I do that?
I'd use iptables or equivalent.
I have
> > What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if
> > anyone has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability
> > to combine the sender_dependent configuration with a recipient
> > condition. Is there a straightforward way to configure this?
> > Or do I need to script a c
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:40:13AM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote:
> What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if anyone
> has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability to combine the
> sender_dependent configuration with a recipient condition. Is there a
> straightforw
Hi,
I have a client with Postfix used as the main mail relay for a high
volume e-commerce site. All mail to outbound destinations is relayed
from sendmail processes to 2 main Postfix processes in the DMZ. Postfix
relays everything to a separate Postini server outside.
They've come to me w
Am 29.11.2010 16:24, schrieb michael.h.gr...@googlemail.com:
Dear all,
Is it possible to configure postfix for the following scenario?
Our ERP-System wants to send emails over a dedicated account to it's
users. As it tries to send the email as the current user, using the
users address, the e-mai
On 11/29/2010 9:24 AM, michael.h.gr...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear all,
Is it possible to configure postfix for the following scenario?
Our ERP-System wants to send emails over a dedicated account
to it's users. As it tries to send the email as the current
user, using the users address, the e-mai
Dear all,
Is it possible to configure postfix for the following scenario?
Our ERP-System wants to send emails over a dedicated account to it's users.
As it tries to send the email as the current user, using the users address,
the e-mail gets rejected by our provider (who is running Exchange).
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:09:30PM +0100, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> On 2010-11-29 Jon L Miller wrote:
> > I'm getting a return error message when I try to send an email to a
> > particular user:
Do note, we strongly prefer to see logs here.
> > Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.domain.com.au
Also note, it
On 2010-11-29 Jon L Miller wrote:
> I'm getting a return error message when I try to send an email to a
> particular user:
>
> Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.domain.com.au
> X-Postfix-Queue-ID: B371FF687
> X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; jlmil...@mmtnetworks.com.au
> Arrival-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 17:26:33 +0
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:53:43AM +0100, Mauro wrote:
> On 29 November 2010 01:56, Victor Duchovni
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 01:36:12PM -0700, ghe wrote:
> >
> >>> I run postfix and my mail clients use smtps so I was thinking I may as
> >>> well close port 25. How can I do that?
> >>
On 11/29/2010 03:15 PM, Schwalbe, Oliver wrote:
Hi community,
i have set up a windows based GFI faxserver to send and receive fax
and sms messages.
the fax and sms connectors (faxmaker.com and smsmaker.com) for this
faxserver are hostet on a other external exchange server.
fax and sms messages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/25/2010 05:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Mark Watts:
>>
>> I have a requirement to be able to monitor a postfix queue over time,
>> and to determine whether any messages are delayed due to problems
>> connecting to a remote servers.
>>
>> The mai
Hi community,
i have set up a windows based GFI faxserver to send and receive fax and sms
messages.
the fax and sms connectors (faxmaker.com and smsmaker.com) for this faxserver
are hostet on a other external exchange server.
fax and sms messages are sended with smtp protocol.
every time my sus
I'm getting a return error message when I try to send an email to a
particular user:
Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.domain.com.au
X-Postfix-Queue-ID: B371FF687
X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; jlmil...@mmtnetworks.com.au
Arrival-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 17:26:33 +0800 (WST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; kathy.
40 matches
Mail list logo
