Hi,
I have been following
http://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html#virtual_mailbox and I've made
the changes in my main.cf, I restarted postfix, added a domain and
mailbox using poftfixadmin, and this is what I am getting in
/var/log/mail.log. Any ideas?
Apr 6 05:58:33 vps postfix/virtua
Can you suggest me what changes should i do?
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Johan Pappu wrote:
> Can you suggest me what changes should i do in main.cf to get the speed
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Johan Pappu wrote:
>
>> to all destinations
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Ra
> > OK, thank you very much for the pointer to smtp_bind_address. That's what
> > I
>
> > need, but I'm stumbling at the transport map. I already have outgoing
> > mail
> > segregated how I want it when it exits my content filtering (ready to be
>sent
>
> > out). So ideally, the cont
- Original Message
> From: Ralf Hildebrandt
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Sent: Mon, April 4, 2011 2:12:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Multiple transport maps in master.cf?
>
> * email builder :
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've found that in main.cf, this works fine:
> >
> > transport_maps = ha
> > >>> Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> > >>> Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > >>> recipient email address as the
> > >>> nexthop value?
> > >>>
> > >>> master.cf:
> > >>>
> > >>> smtp2 unix - - n
Hi Wietse
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 22:07 -0400, "Wietse Venema"
wrote:
> Postscreen is an additional line of defense. It does not replace
> the other Postfix features, but rather, it aims to reduce the
> pressure on those features.
Okay.
Is that "doesn't replace" true for all its functions?
Specif
dchil...@bestmail.us:
> Also, if I'm going to deploy postscreen, am I correct in understanding
> that. in this example's case, I'd deploy it @ each of the two inbound
> pre-filter instances? in lieu of a separate filter stage?
Postscreen is an additional line of defense. It does not replace
the ot
Hi,
I've built & installed Postfix 2.8.2 from src, and followed the installs
steps & examples:
http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/STANDARD_CONFIGURATION_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/MULTI_INSTANCE_README.html
I've ended up with a 4-instance edg
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 01:02:11PM -0700, Fire walls wrote:
> I want to move to TLS, I already had my certs and they ware working, I want
> to setup Postfix MTA to use my Certs and be more secure.
TLS is not a synonym for security. Enabling TLS does not necessarily
make your mail server "more sec
> > > The configuration makes absolutely no sense at all.
> >
> > Hmm, I'm not sure why you see *no* sense in it.
>
> If you can configure Postfix to send some email to port 10024 (which
> uses a wild-card access map rule to send out all email via transport
> "smtp2")
>
> Then you can con
> >>> Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> >
> >>> Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> >>> recipient email address as the
> >>> nexthop value?
> >>>
> >>> master.cf:
> >>>
> >>> smtp2 unix - - n - -
email builder:
> > The configuration makes absolutely no sense at all.
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure why you see *no* sense in it.
If you can configure Postfix to send some email to port 10024 (which
uses a wild-card access map rule to send out all email via transport
"smtp2")
Then you can configure Po
> > > > Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> >
> > > > Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > > > recipient email address as the
> > > > nexthop value?
> > > >
> > > > master.cf:
> > > >
> > > > smtp2 unix - - n
On 4/5/2011 3:35 PM, email builder wrote:
Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
recipient email address as the
nexthop value?
master.cf:
smtp2 unix - - n- - smtp
email builder:
>
> > > Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
>
> > > Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > > recipient email address as the
> > > nexthop value?
> > >
> > > master.cf:
> > >
> > > smtp2 unix - - n-
> > Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> > Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > recipient email address as the
> > nexthop value?
> >
> > master.cf:
> >
> > smtp2 unix - - n- - smtp
> > -
email builder:
> Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> recipient email address as the
> nexthop value?
>
> master.cf:
>
> smtp2 unix - - n - - smtp
> -o smtp_bi
Hi people.
I have a server + spam gateway they are working.
I want to move to TLS, I already had my certs and they ware working, I want
to setup Postfix MTA to use my Certs and be more secure.
I had read postfix info and looks like I understand the setup, my doubt is
with my spam-gateway, ri
> > What I ran into while solving the add-a-header issue (see my last
> > post on this thread) was that I can use a FILTER action from a
> > smtpd_*_restriction check to select a specialized smtp process
> > that is bound to a given IP address.
> >
> >
> > I found, however, that the FILTER
* David Brown :
> Hello, I have recently replaced my old postfix with 2.7.0. And, for the
> first time I am trying to use IMAP (dovecot). Receiving email is OK but I
> cannot send because of the relay domains issue. Attempts to use SASL with
> postfix presents problems I don' t know how to resolve.
Check the permissions on the sasldb2 file. Postfix user needs to have
access to it.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> David Brown:
> > Hello, I have recently replaced my old postfix with 2.7.0. And, for the
> > first time I am trying to use IMAP (dovecot). Receiving email
email builder:
> What I ran into while solving the add-a-header issue (see my last
> post on this thread) was that I can use a FILTER action from a
> smtpd_*_restriction check to select a specialized smtp process
> that is bound to a given IP address.
>
>
> I found, however, that the FILTER actio
> > master.cf smtpd process entry:
> > -o
> > smtpd_data_restrictions=check_sender_access,pcre:/etc/postfix/add_my_header
> >
> > /etc/postfix/add_my_header:
> > /^/ PREPEND X-My-Header: Hello_world
> >
> > Easier than I thought. Now, PLEASE don't take this the wrong way, but
> > > OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking
>by
> > > using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
> >
> > It is possible to override header_checks by defining a
> > different cleanup_service_name for smtpd, then defining that
> >
email builder:
> some smtpd_*_restrictions checks. It turns out (from my testing, but I can't
> find this in the docs) that you can still use PREPEND to add a header even
> though you're looking at certain envelope data.
ACCESS(5)ACC
On 4/5/2011 12:54 PM, email builder wrote:
master.cf smtpd process entry:
-o
smtpd_data_restrictions=check_sender_access,pcre:/etc/postfix/add_my_header
/etc/postfix/add_my_header:
/^/ PREPEND X-My-Header: Hello_world
Easier than I thought. Now, PLEASE don't take this the wrong
> On 4/4/2011 9:54 PM, email builder wrote:
> >
> > OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking by
> > using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
>
> It is possible to override header_checks by defining a different
>cleanup_service_na
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:33:20PM -0700, email builder wrote:
> > I am testing a simple header_check that uses PREPEND to add a
> > custom header to messages.
>
> Uh, no, I think it is not simple at all. Is this the same issue
> you're working on? You have spent much time, and gotten muc
David Brown:
> Hello, I have recently replaced my old postfix with 2.7.0. And, for the
> first time I am trying to use IMAP (dovecot). Receiving email is OK but I
> cannot send because of the relay domains issue.
OK, so you can't send mail.
> Apr 5 15:12:57 myhost postfix/smtpd[30973]: warning:
On 2011-04-05 Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote:
> ## Wietse Venema (wie...@porcupine.org):
>>> Well, postfix still doesn't relay mail to hosts with it's own host
>>> name in the server greeting ("host ... greeted me with my own
>>> hostname ..." and "host ... replied to HELO/EHLO with my own
>>> host
Hello, I have recently replaced my old postfix with 2.7.0. And, for the
first time I am trying to use IMAP (dovecot). Receiving email is OK but I
cannot send because of the relay domains issue. Attempts to use SASL with
postfix presents problems I don' t know how to resolve. I havev Google SASL
rel
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 02:38:16PM +0200, ??hsan Do??an wrote:
>> 2.8.1. I have upgraded to 2.8.2 and don't have the problem with that
>> version. (In fact I wasn't aware a newer version already existed.)
>
> Is this maybe related to:
>
> - Portability: the SUN compiler had trouble with a pointer
On Tue, April 5, 2011 2:02 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
> I'm
> not good at diplomacy.
>
> Wietse
We know. We like you anyway. :-)
Noel Jones:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On 4/4/2011 9:54 PM, email builder wrote:
> >
> > OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking by
> > using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
>
> It is possible to override he
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:49:28PM +0200, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote:
> It would be a shame if we spend more time on the discussion of the
> short-sightedness of my patch than I'd have to spend on fixing my
> patch - just to have a better patch documented for those trapped with
> broken setups
On 4/4/2011 9:54 PM, email builder wrote:
OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking by
using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
It is possible to override header_checks by defining a
different cleanup_service_name for smtpd, then de
Christoph Moench-Tegeder:
> ## Wietse Venema (wie...@porcupine.org):
>
> > > Well, postfix still doesn't relay mail to hosts with it's own
> > > host name in the server greeting ("host ... greeted me with my own
> > > hostname ..." and "host ... replied to HELO/EHLO with my own hostname
> > > ...
## Wietse Venema (wie...@porcupine.org):
> > Well, postfix still doesn't relay mail to hosts with it's own
> > host name in the server greeting ("host ... greeted me with my own
> > hostname ..." and "host ... replied to HELO/EHLO with my own hostname ..."),
> > so it's not that easy to shoot one'
Christoph Moench-Tegeder:
> ## Wietse Venema (wie...@porcupine.org):
>
> > > for some admittedly special and braindead setup I needed to relay
> > > outgoing mail via another MTA running on localhost:25. In order to
> > > bypass some of the mail loop safety catches, I exteded inet_interfaces
> > >
Hello Wietse and Rudy,
On 04/ 5/11 12:22 PM, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps =
smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords =
smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions14374: write(1, " o w q\n s m t p _ a d
d".., 4096) = 4096
14374: Incurred fault #6, FLTBOUNDS %pc = 0x080775C4
14374: siginfo:
## Wietse Venema (wie...@porcupine.org):
> > for some admittedly special and braindead setup I needed to relay
> > outgoing mail via another MTA running on localhost:25. In order to
> > bypass some of the mail loop safety catches, I exteded inet_interfaces
> > to accept "none".
> > In case someone
On 4/5/2011 6:19 AM, kshitij mali wrote:
Which version has postscreen functioanality?
Regards,
Kshitij
The current stable version; postfix 2.8.2 at this time.
* kshitij mali :
> Which version has postscreen functioanality?
2.8.x
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962
ralf.h
Which version has postscreen functioanality?
Regards,
Kshitij
Christoph Moench-Tegeder:
> Hi,
>
> for some admittedly special and braindead setup I needed to relay
> outgoing mail via another MTA running on localhost:25. In order to
> bypass some of the mail loop safety catches, I exteded inet_interfaces
> to accept "none".
> In case someone might find this
Can you suggest me what changes should i do in main.cf to get the speed
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Johan Pappu wrote:
> to all destinations
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
> ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
>
>> * Johan Pappu :
>> > How do I Increase my mail send
to all destinations
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * Johan Pappu :
> > How do I Increase my mail sending speed in postfix
>
> First step is to find out what exactly is slow.
>
> * Injection of the messages?
> * Sending the actual messages?
* Johan Pappu :
> How do I Increase my mail sending speed in postfix
First step is to find out what exactly is slow.
* Injection of the messages?
* Sending the actual messages?
* to all destination
* or just to some?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Uni
On 04/04/2011 07:16 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Rudy Gevaert:
Hello list,
I am getting a segfault when I run postconf on Solaris 10
SunOS horus 5.10 Generic_142910-17 i86pc i386 i86pc
postconf -n doesn't segfault!
running it with truss:
smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps =
smtpd_discard_eh
How do I Increase my mail sending speed in postfix
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * postfix :
> > Hi
> >
> > How can tell me why the "delay_warning_time" parameter is set to 0 per
> > default?
> > ( traffic increase risk?)
>
> Users usua
Hi,
for some admittedly special and braindead setup I needed to relay
outgoing mail via another MTA running on localhost:25. In order to
bypass some of the mail loop safety catches, I exteded inet_interfaces
to accept "none".
In case someone might find this useful, I'll publish the path (against
2
On Friday 01 April 2011 14:42:33 Stefan Jakobs wrote:
> PS: Mike's logreporter script supports postscreen logging, see:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/logreporters/
Sorry, that's not quite correct. A pre-version he posted on the logreporters
mailinglist supports postscreen logging (see:
http
52 matches
Mail list logo
