hi Ralf ,
Thanks for help me .
with the below expression its is showing me the logs for both "from=< " and
"to=<" logs what i wanted was only
match the expression from each like only from= lines
i know this will be tricky i m to trying to solve this expression if u can
then pls help.
Regards,
K
On 2/10/2012 10:33 PM, Ori Bani wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> On 2/8/2012 8:24 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
>>
>>> I would stay away from btrfs until it is much more mature. As a general
>>> rule (very general) mail systems stress allocation and metadata
>>> efficiency m
>> I'd like to know if anyone here has any thoughts or opinions about the
>> best linux filesystem to use for an email system. There will be some
>> small amount of website data on the system (including webmail to read
>> the emails), although I could move that to another partition if need
>> be.
>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 2/8/2012 8:24 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
>
>> I would stay away from btrfs until it is much more mature. As a general
>> rule (very general) mail systems stress allocation and metadata
>> efficiency more than sustained data flow, so you'd want to
Thank you for the reply and sorry for the delay in responding.
>> I'd like to know if anyone here has any thoughts or opinions about the
>> best linux filesystem to use for an email system. There will be some
>> small amount of website data on the system (including webmail to read
>> the emails),
On Feb 10, 2012, at 10:29 PM, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
>>>
>>> [jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mailwrapper
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> > What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
>> > (it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
>>
>> [jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mailwrapper -oem -oi jorge < /etc/motd
>> WARNING: RunAsUser for MSP ignore
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
> > (it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
>
> [jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mai
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
> > (it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
>
> [jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mai
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Jim Long wrote:
> I should add:
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 03:44:16PM -0800, Jim Long wrote:
> ...
>> (Now confirm that the sendmail processes are gone:)
>> # ps -auxww | grep [s]endmail
>> #
>> (Good, no output from ps | grep)
>> (Now try to start sendmail)
>> #
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
> (it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
[jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mailwrapper -oem -oi jorge < /etc/motd
WARNING: RunAsUser for MSP ignored, check group
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
> lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 21 Feb 8 16:20 /usr/sbin/sendmail ->
> /usr/sbin/mailwrapper
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
> > AND
> >
> > 2) Your mail software invokes /usr/sbin/send
On 2/10/2012 12:44 PM, Chris wrote:
> 2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
>> The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
>
> You mean the "deep protocol tests"? Can I disable these "deep
> protocol tests" in postscreen?
I find it interesting that you ignored Wietse's response,
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> mailer.conf settings work only when:
>
> 1) /usr/sbin/sendmail is a symlink to /usr/sbin/mailwrapper, like this:
>
> lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 21 Feb 17 2011 /usr/sbin/sendmail ->
> /usr/sbin/mailwrapper
Precisely what I have:
lrwxr-xr-
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
> #
> # Execute the Postfix sendmail program, named /usr/local/sbin/sendmail
> #
> sendmail/usr/local/sbin/sendmail
> send-mail /usr/local/sbin/sendmail
> mailq /usr/local/sbin/sendmail
> newaliases/usr/local/sbin/sendmail
mail
>> Here are all the sendmail and postfix entries in rc.conf:
>>
>> sendmail_enable="NO"
>> sendmail_submit_enable="NO"
>> sendmail_outbound_enable="NO"
>> sendmail_msp_queue_enable="NO"
>> postfix_enable="YES"
>> dovecot_enable=YES
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:44 PM, CSS wrote:
>
> Drop all that and
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:50 PM, CSS wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote:
>
>> I'm posting this to the postfix list rather than the FreeBSD list
>> because I've found the level of expertise here to be almost
>> unsurpassed.
>>
>> In trying to substitute postfix for se
On Feb 10, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote:
> I'm posting this to the postfix list rather than the FreeBSD list
> because I've found the level of expertise here to be almost
> unsurpassed.
>
> In trying to substitute postfix for sendmail on FreeBSD 8.0, I've come
> across a problem w
I'm posting this to the postfix list rather than the FreeBSD list
because I've found the level of expertise here to be almost
unsurpassed.
In trying to substitute postfix for sendmail on FreeBSD 8.0, I've come
across a problem with mail sent from the command line (including mail
from the syslogd d
2012/2/10 Wietse Venema :
> Chris:
>> 2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
>> > * Chris :
>> >
>> >> > Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
>> >>
>> >> Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
>> >
>> > The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
>>
>> You mea
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
> * Chris :
>
>> > The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
>>
>> You mean the "deep protocol tests"?
>
> The stuff with the "deep" in it, yes
>
>> Can I disable these "deep protocol tests" in postscreen?
>
> By default they're not enabled :)
* Chris :
> > The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
>
> You mean the "deep protocol tests"?
The stuff with the "deep" in it, yes
> Can I disable these "deep protocol tests" in postscreen?
By default they're not enabled :) according to
http://www.postfix.org/POST
Chris:
> 2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
> > * Chris :
> >
> >> > Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
> >>
> >> Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
> >
> > The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
>
> You mean the "deep protocol tests"? Can I d
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
> * Chris :
>
>> > Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
>>
>> Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
>
> The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
You mean the "deep protocol tests"? Can I disable these "deep
protocol
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
> * Chris :
>
>> > If you let the MX share one memcache instance, the second MX to
>> > receive a connection will immediately accept it. Works like a charm
>> > here.
>>
>> Okay, I see. That would be a solution.
>>
>> How did you realize that?
>
> On both my boxes I'm u
* Chris :
> > Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
>
> Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
The "deep inspection" and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Cam
2012/2/10 /dev/rob0 :
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 07:11:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
>> I noticed:
>>
>> http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
>>
>> > When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8)
>> > adds the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand
>> >
Chris:
> Hello Postfix Users :)
>
> I noticed:
>
> http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
>
> > When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
> > the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand off the
> > "live" connection to a Postfix SMTP serv
* Chris :
> > If you let the MX share one memcache instance, the second MX to
> > receive a connection will immediately accept it. Works like a charm
> > here.
>
> Okay, I see. That would be a solution.
>
> How did you realize that?
On both my boxes I'm using:
postscreen_cache_map = memcache:/e
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt :
> * Chris :
>> Hello Postfix Users :)
>>
>> I noticed:
>>
>> http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
>>
>> > When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
>> > the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand off the
>> >
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 07:11:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
> I noticed:
>
> http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
>
> > When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8)
> > adds the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand
> > off the "live" connection t
* Chris :
> Hello Postfix Users :)
>
> I noticed:
>
> http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
>
> > When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
> > the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand off the
> > "live" connection to a Postfix SMTP s
Hello Postfix Users :)
I noticed:
http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
> When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
> the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand off the
> "live" connection to a Postfix SMTP server process in the middle
Hi Noel,
thanks, I'll follow your advice.
Fabio
Il giorno 10/feb/2012, alle ore 17:44, Noel Jones ha scritto:
> On 2/10/2012 2:36 AM, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
>> Hi Wietse,
>>
>> thanks a lot for your help.
>> One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s)
>> to
On 2/10/2012 2:36 AM, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> thanks a lot for your help.
> One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s)
> to the catch-all address I'm using address rewriting with canonical maps. Is
> this the best way to do it? Or should I rely
On 2/10/2012 2:36 AM, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> thanks a lot for your help.
> One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s)
> to the catch-all address I'm using address rewriting with canonical maps. Is
> this the best way to do it? Or should I rely
On 2/10/2012 6:33 AM, Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> We are using postfix as an edge mx gateway for incoming mails.
>
> Our company has 3 domain names (@abpni.co.uk, @abpni.com,
> @abpni.net). @abpni.co.uk is our main domain.
>
...
> I also want all 3 of our domains to be able to be
On 10.02.2012 18:21, Simone Sanna wrote:
> Hi list,
> I am struggling to find a solution for a problem I have when relaying
> mails from Postfix to Exchange server 2010.
> The problem is that although messages are correctly sent, they do not
> show up in the Sent Items folder of Exchange, I have tr
Hi list,
I am struggling to find a solution for a problem I have when relaying
mails from Postfix to Exchange server 2010.
The problem is that although messages are correctly sent, they do not
show up in the Sent Items folder of Exchange, I have tried many
options, Exchange administrators, say that
Check the init scripts if you have any[depending on your Linux(Debian,
CentOS, Suse or Slackware) could change], postfix config, or a backup
program could be rewriting the transportList with the old one. Check and
tell us :D.
Best regards.
Participe en Universidad 2012, del 13 al 17 de febre
Hi Everyone,
We are using postfix as an edge mx gateway for incoming mails.
Our company has 3 domain names (@abpni.co.uk, @abpni.com, @abpni.net).
@abpni.co.uk is our main domain.
Each user may have a few "aliases". I list these aliases in the table
which virtual_alias_maps points to. To tak
Hi,
I'm new in this list but I need your help.
Every time my server reboots, the file transportList and
transportList.db are replaced by an old version,
without the new domains added last month.
I can not find any explanation and how its happens!
thanks in advance!
--
:) cumprimentos
--
Hi Wietse,
thanks a lot for your help.
One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s) to
the catch-all address I'm using address rewriting with canonical maps. Is this
the best way to do it? Or should I rely on virtual aliasing for some reason?
My configuration:
/et
43 matches
Mail list logo
