Re: from <> ->

Am 01.03.2013 04:16, schrieb Feel Zhou: > Hello, My friend > For now, I relly want to stop my customer send mail who use null sender > address, just like that > "Jan 20 23:26:51 shcx amavis[21760]: (21760-01) Passed CLEAN, [d.d.d.d] > [d.d.d.d] <> -> mailto:some...@examples.com>>" > It's always spa

Re: Getmail

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:14:50PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:17 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 05:51:08PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan > > wrote: > >> i am using virtual users and domains, where i have 2 virtual > >> domains and few users in

Re: Setting transport based on recipient MX records

Mark Goodge: > I have a slightly odd problem, in that my main outbound mail server is > seemingly being blocked by one of the UK's major budget web/mail hosts. > My postfix logs show things like this: > > status=deferred (lost connection with athena.hosts.co.uk[85.233.160.20] > while receiving

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

Am 28.02.2013 17:51, schrieb אנטולי קרסנר: > No, the mailing list is a legitimate way to connect with all postfix > users (I also sent mail to mailing lists of other free-software mail > tools). Otherwise, how could I reach everybody? Believe me, I carefully > chose the mailing lists before I sent

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

MANDATORY DISCLAIMER: - I think this is at least partly on topic here because it's (also) about promoting postfix for "free-as-in-freedom", responsible email usage, - but personally, I don't need any of what follows. I already built nexaima.net to do it for me, and it's meant to stay that w

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:00:58 -0500 James Seymour wrote: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 18:51:15 +0200 > אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > > > No, the mailing list is a legitimate way to connect with all postfix > > users ... > > The mailing list I thought was supposed to be about Postfix, or at > least vaguely Po

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 18:51:15 +0200 אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > No, the mailing list is a legitimate way to connect with all postfix > users ... The mailing list I thought was supposed to be about Postfix, or at least vaguely Postfix-related, issues. By your logic: If I want to interact with all Postf

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

the point is that this list is for TECHNICAL support of postfix itself, so it is for the admins which are installing, configureing and maintaining postfix servers, most of them are admins for business Am 28.02.2013 17:51, schrieb אנטולי קרסנר: > No, the mailing list is a legitimate way to connect

Re: postfix, dovecot, samba, winbind

Am 28.02.2013 17:39, schrieb Denis Witt: > > Am 28.02.2013 um 17:23 schrieb Reindl Harald : > >> yes, the dovecot-mailing list for dovecot problems! > > Hi Harald, > > at the moment I'm not sure if it really is a dovecot problem, so I posted it > here because this list was very helpful in th

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

No, the mailing list is a legitimate way to connect with all postfix users (I also sent mail to mailing lists of other free-software mail tools). Otherwise, how could I reach everybody? Believe me, I carefully chose the mailing lists before I sent anything. The goal is to get people to use a freed

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:16:26PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > Connection caching has nothing to do with concurrency. Sheesh. > > I was assuming that, when you already have a connection to a > receiving MX, you'd not open another one but reuse the existing > one, so it would, of course, hav

Re: postfix, dovecot, samba, winbind

Am 28.02.2013 17:20, schrieb Denis Witt: > Feb 28 17:17:59 tpdc postfix/pickup[30396]: 5DDAE2C0C2B: uid=0 from= > Feb 28 17:17:59 tpdc postfix/cleanup[30402]: 5DDAE2C0C2B: > message-id=<20130228161759.5ddae2c0...@mx0.concepts-and-training.de> > Feb 28 17:17:59 tpdc postfix/qmgr[30395]: 5DDAE2C0C2B

postfix, dovecot, samba, winbind

Hello List, we're currently working on the migration of our LDAP/Samba3-Domain to Samba4-Active-Directory. So far everything works fine. Postfix can deliver Mails using ProxyAddresses-Information from the AD and Dovecot delivers the mail. Unfortunately when Postfix tells Dovecot to deliver the

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

Isn't this *thoroughly* off-topic for this mailing list? Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

On 2/27/2013 4:11 PM, אנטולי קרסנר wrote: Hello e-mail software developers and users! I'd like to ask all of you a question. And of course hear relevant opinion. I've been using free software happily for a few years, and I found free/open source alternatives for many popular proprietary tools s

Setting transport based on recipient MX records

Some background... I have a slightly odd problem, in that my main outbound mail server is seemingly being blocked by one of the UK's major budget web/mail hosts. My postfix logs show things like this: status=deferred (lost connection with athena.hosts.co.uk[85.233.160.20] while receiving the

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

You pay nothing to Google but get an excellent mailbox. Not libre, but it does the job. Many people volunteer for free software. Somehow they find time. I realize a reliable server needs people to work on it full-time, it's not just a little web application you write in 10 minutes. But that's why

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

Am 28.02.2013 16:30, schrieb אנטולי קרסנר: > Persoanlly, I don't have time, knowledge or money (I'm a university > student) to setup and maintain a mail server and the people who have the knowledge and money do not have the time because maintain a RELIEABLE mailserver costs a lot of time, especi

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

Sorry, I missed that list... Two options are being examined: 1. Start a new server (I'll need your help here because I never worked with servers) 2. Use the MyKolab service. It saves all the hard work, but it's still in beta stage and it's going to cost money to use it. So I'm trying to get fund

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 11:51:10 AM +0200, אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > Hi Marco (and recipients), > > I read the articles and I'd like everybody to have a look too. Focus > thoughts on technology before everything else: Can we setup mail service > which is easy enough to maintain (enough to be reliable) a

Re: mx_access error/warning

Joey J: > Hello All, > > I couldn't find anything on this error online. > /usr/sbin/postconf: warning: /etc/postfix/main.cf: unused parameter: > mx_access=hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access It is telling you that "mx_access" is a typo. Wietse

Re: possible localhost dns spoof attack

Jamie skrev den 2013-02-26 11:32: We would appreciate your thoughts. check that you have not external nameservers that can resolve localhost into 127.0.0.1, but show logs on what postfix really did, even if sender ip is localhost it should not allow relaying, unless you have permit_mynetwo

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

Thorsten Glaser: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > > That?s untrue because it certainly makes a difference whether you > > > send mails in parallel or serial, especially when the receiving > > > > Connection caching has nothing to do with concurrency. Sheesh. > > I was assuming t

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Wietse Venema wrote: > > That?s untrue because it certainly makes a difference whether you > > send mails in parallel or serial, especially when the receiving > > Connection caching has nothing to do with concurrency. Sheesh. I was assuming that, when you already have a conn

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

Thorsten Glaser: [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > No, connection caching has nothing to do with concurrency. Whether > > connections are cached, or not, Postfix will attempt parallel > > delivery up to the configured concurrency limi

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

Thorsten Glaser: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > Well, how does one migrate **AN OPEN TLS SESSION** from one process > > into the other? I am not aware an OpenSSL API for doing that. > > Then just don?t do that? keep it in the other process. > > (I think OpenSSH does that, thou

Re: 250 Data Dropped

* Ram Prasad : > Hi > > Am facing this issue for certain time. The logs > > Feb 28 15:54:32 mail postfix/smtp[529]: EF95621C0FA1: > to=, > relay=gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.79.26]:25, delay=2.2, > delays=0.15/0/0.96/1.1, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Data Dropped) > > This does not happen t

Re: 250 Data Dropped

Am 28.02.2013 12:41, schrieb Ram Prasad: > Hi > > Am facing this issue for certain time. The logs > > Feb 28 15:54:32 mail postfix/smtp[529]: EF95621C0FA1: to=, > relay=gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.79.26]:25, delay=2.2, > delays=0.15/0/0.96/1.1, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 > Data Dropped

250 Data Dropped

Hi Am facing this issue for certain time. The logs Feb 28 15:54:32 mail postfix/smtp[529]: EF95621C0FA1: to=, relay=gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.79.26]:25, delay=2.2, delays=0.15/0/0.96/1.1, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Data Dropped) This does not happen to all mails Neither the sen

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

On ה', 2013-02-28 at 10:15 +0100, Georg C. F. Greve wrote: > On 2013-02-27 22:11, אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > > If it's possible, we'll do it. Also, if users had to pay for such a > > service, it would be okay. I don't mind paying for my free software > > stack. I'd actually find it a way to contribute b

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Reindl Harald wrote: > if you have a VERY HIGH amount of outgoing mails to send > you can not expect that this works in burst with only > one outgoing server - nothing will change this Yes well, we have three, but I’m running into firewall admins currently so in practice ther

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

Am 28.02.2013 10:45, schrieb Thorsten Glaser: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Reindl Harald wrote: > >>> Then just don’t do that… keep it in the other process > >> did you try to understand how postfix works? i guess no > > If the way something works makes it impossible to do > something that is a requ

Re: Public free (libre) mailbox hosting service for everybody!

On ה', 2013-02-28 at 09:33 +0100, M. Fioretti wrote: > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 23:11:32 PM +0200, אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > > Hello e-mail software developers and users! > > > > I'd like to ask all of you a question. And of course hear relevant > > opinion. > > > ...But I couldn't find a replacement to

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

On Thu, 28 Feb 2013, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Then just don’t do that… keep it in the other process > did you try to understand how postfix works? i guess no If the way something works makes it impossible to do something that is a requirement it says something about the way that particular somet

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > No, connection caching has nothing to do with concurrency. Whether > connections are cached, or not, Postfix will attempt parallel > delivery up to the configured concurrency limit: Hrm. Okay, lowering default_destination_concurrency_limit is certain

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

Am 28.02.2013 10:38, schrieb Thorsten Glaser: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Wietse Venema wrote: > >> Well, how does one migrate **AN OPEN TLS SESSION** from one process >> into the other? I am not aware an OpenSSL API for doing that. > > Then just don’t do that… keep it in the other process and how

Re: Connection caching/SMTP piggybacking and postfix?

On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Wietse Venema wrote: > Well, how does one migrate **AN OPEN TLS SESSION** from one process > into the other? I am not aware an OpenSSL API for doing that. Then just don’t do that… keep it in the other process. (I think OpenSSH does that, though probably not standard TLS.) b

Re: Address rejected

Am 28.02.2013 10:18, schrieb Radwa Hamed: > Hi, > > in postfix mail log file I get this error > > Feb 21 15:46:46 postfix/smtp[26600]: C221F171D7A: to=, > relay=..[yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy]:25, delay=4.4, delays=0.23/0.48/2/1.7, > dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host > ..[yyy.yy

Address rejected

Hi, in postfix mail log file I get this error Feb 21 15:46:46 postfix/smtp[26600]: C221F171D7A: to=, relay=..[yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy]:25, delay=4.4, delays=0.23/0.48/2/1.7, dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host ..[yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy] said: 550 #5.1.0 Address rejected xx@

Re: Getmail

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:17 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 05:51:08PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: >> i am using virtual users and domains, where i have 2 virtual domains >> and few users in both. i would like getmail to fetch email via pop3 > > First, I'll note that this is