On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 12:02:56PM -0700, Michael Durket wrote:
> I have a host (A) acting as an MX for host (B). Currently I do this via
> relay_domains and relay_recipient_maps. Is it possible to do this instead via
> virtual_domains and virtual_aliases? Or would a virtual_alias map entry on MX
On 8/2/2012 2:02 PM, Michael Durket wrote:
> I have a host (A) acting as an MX for host (B). Currently I do this via
> relay_domains and relay_recipient_maps. Is it possible to do this instead via
> virtual_domains and virtual_aliases? Or would a virtual_alias map entry on MX
> host A to forward
I have a host (A) acting as an MX for host (B). Currently I do this via
relay_domains and relay_recipient_maps. Is it possible to do this instead via
virtual_domains and virtual_aliases? Or would a virtual_alias map entry on MX
host A to forward user@B to user@B not work right (because the right
On Aug 2, 2012, at 7:03 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 8/2/2012 6:26 AM, Chad M Stewart wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 2, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>
>>> Chad M Stewart:
I am not understanding something correctly. I'm using postscreen
and noticed that a recently connected IP
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 11:27:52AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > On 2 Aug 2012, at 14:17, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > > The prime directive for Postfix is to deliver mail reliably without
> > > sucking from a performance or human interface point of view, and
> > > without granting unnecessary
Jim Reid:
> On 2 Aug 2012, at 14:17, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > The prime directive for Postfix is to deliver mail reliably without
> > sucking from a performance or human interface point of view, and
> > without granting unnecessary privileges to random strangers.
>
> Too bad your prime directiv
Wael MANAI:
> I do not want to touch the queue files. Well, I am developing an
> application for MMS which uses SMTP protocol. When a request msg is sent
> sometimes the destination MMSC does not answer or answer too late. In
> this case I need to close my context and to send an acknowledgement to
Am 02.08.2012 16:48, schrieb Wael MANAI:
> Le jeudi 02 août 2012 à 16:27 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
>> do not top-post
>>
>> Am 02.08.2012 16:17, schrieb Wael MANAI:
>> > Le mercredi 01 août 2012 à 10:50 -0400, Wietse Venema a écrit :
>> >> Wael MANAI:
>> >> > I am using sendmail to send emai
Le jeudi 02 août 2012 à 16:27 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
> do not top-post
>
> Am 02.08.2012 16:17, schrieb Wael MANAI:
> > Le mercredi 01 août 2012 à 10:50 -0400, Wietse Venema a écrit :
> >> Wael MANAI:
> >> > I am using sendmail to send emails to postfix and I would like to know
> >> > if
do not top-post
Am 02.08.2012 16:17, schrieb Wael MANAI:
> Le mercredi 01 août 2012 à 10:50 -0400, Wietse Venema a écrit :
>> Wael MANAI:
>> > I am using sendmail to send emails to postfix and I would like to know
>> > if there is a way to get the filename given by postfix?
>>
>> Wietse:
>> > > No
Why I want to replace sendmail by my own "sendmail" (open a tcp
connection to localhost on port 25) is because postfix when he sends the
250 Ok after DATA sending gives the file name:
250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 06F2F1C00B
where 06F2F1C00B is the filename.
Le mercredi 01 août 2012 à 10:50 -0400, Wie
Wietse:
> If you don't like the result, use one of the following in
> the SMTP daemon to block their mail:
>
> check_client_mx_access (ditto for helo, sender, recipient, etc.)
> check_client_mx_access (ditto for helo, sender, recipient, etc.)
[the second one should be check_mumble_ns_access, for
Wietse Venema:
> Chad M Stewart:
> >
> > On Aug 2, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > > Chad M Stewart:
> > >>
> > >> I am not understanding something correctly. I'm using postscreen
> > >> and noticed that a recently connected IP had was not marked as
> > >> PASS OLD but rather PAS
Chad M Stewart:
>
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Chad M Stewart:
> >>
> >> I am not understanding something correctly. I'm using postscreen
> >> and noticed that a recently connected IP had was not marked as
> >> PASS OLD but rather PASS NEW. See log entires below
> >
On 8/2/2012 6:26 AM, Chad M Stewart wrote:
>
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> Chad M Stewart:
>>>
>>> I am not understanding something correctly. I'm using postscreen
>>> and noticed that a recently connected IP had was not marked as
>>> PASS OLD but rather PASS NEW. See
On Aug 2, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Chad M Stewart:
>>
>> I am not understanding something correctly. I'm using postscreen
>> and noticed that a recently connected IP had was not marked as
>> PASS OLD but rather PASS NEW. See log entires below
>
> PASS NEW means there was no ca
Chad M Stewart:
>
> I am not understanding something correctly. I'm using postscreen
> and noticed that a recently connected IP had was not marked as
> PASS OLD but rather PASS NEW. See log entires below
PASS NEW means there was no cache entry. Postfix does not
keep expired entries for eternity
Jim Reid:
> On 2 Aug 2012, at 10:44, Varadi Gabor wrote:
>
> > The log also shows that the "warning: numeric domain name in
> > resource data of MX record for bond.com: 0.0.0.0"
>
> Yes, I saw that. This should have resulted in a hard error, not a
> warning.
If you don't like the result, use
On 2 Aug 2012, at 10:44, Varadi Gabor wrote:
The log also shows that the "warning: numeric domain name in
resource data of MX record for bond.com: 0.0.0.0"
Yes, I saw that. This should have resulted in a hard error, not a
warning.
I want solutions not only in this case in particular, but
On 2012-07-30 8:46 AM, Marco wrote:
Wietse Venema porcupine.org> writes:
Please show the problem without logs from other servers.
I'm sorry for word wrap and mix. This is an example:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B-09bt7bbY_0MHU4bGduZTFWeGc
An rtf file hosted on google???
Please hel
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 10:18:42AM +0100, Jim Reid wrote:
> First off, this is not a Postfix problem. The MX record for bond.com is
> spectacularly broken. It's an epic fail. That's what needs to be fixed.
I did not say that postfix would be a mistake :)
The log also shows that the "warning: num
On 2 Aug 2012, at 08:38, Varadi Gabor wrote:
Sorry because my English.
No problem. It's *far* better than my Hungarian. :-)
Besides, you've provided full, unedited information -- log entries,
dig output, etc -- which makes it clear exactly what the problem is.
If only everyone did that...
On 02.08.2012 09:53, Birta Levente wrote:
You can find the updated Postfix source code at the mirrors listed
at http://www.postfix.org/.
It's not downloadable yet ...
ftp://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/index.html
Best regards,
Morten
On 02/08/2012 02:21, Wietse Venema wrote:
[An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-2.9.4.html]
Postfix stable release 2.9.4, and legacy releases 2.8.12, 2.7.11,
2.6.17 are available. They contain fixes and workarounds that are
als
Hi all.
Sorry because my English.
I squeeze under debian use postfix.
# dpkg -l | grep postfix
ii postfix 2.7.1-1+squeeze1High-performance mail transport agent
Such an experience last night:
1. (smtp) Ask about DNS MX records for the bond.com
2. (smtp) DSN response 0.0.0.0
3. (smtp) con
25 matches
Mail list logo
