On 10/28/13, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 10/27/2013 4:30 PM, Nick Edwards wrote:
>> submission_client_restrictions =
>> check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/submission.hosts
>
> Typically this first line is all that would be used here to reject
> unwanted clients.
>
>>
>> submission_recipie
On 10/27/2013 4:30 PM, Nick Edwards wrote:
> Following from Charles's thread, but, not directly related, did not
> want to hijack it so I'll ask for clarification here.
>
> Having Seen Viktors statement about submission_*_restrictions = and
> not putting all that crud into master.cf (yes, my bad t
Noel,
Thanks for the info. I was grepping for my name which was showing those
errors, and there was another;
Oct 27 20:44:53 mail postfix/smtpd[22841]: warning: non-null host address
bits in "publicIP/30", perhaps you should use "publicIP-2/30" instead
That I didn't think was relevant as that wa
Following from Charles's thread, but, not directly related, did not
want to hijack it so I'll ask for clarification here.
Having Seen Viktors statement about submission_*_restrictions = and
not putting all that crud into master.cf (yes, my bad too)
If I use:
submission_client_restrictions =
On 2013-10-27 3:58 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
(disclaimer - no BB users left here, so this is based on past
behavior. They could have changed, but I doubt it.)
Yes, BB would fetch all IMAP messages from the company server, then
push them to the client.
Outbound would originate from BB's SMTP server
On 10/27/2013 2:58 PM, Lance Raymond wrote:
> Afternoon all, as the subject states, I have a central postfix
> server running which the web servers use along with some other
> processes with no problems. I added a new server and not sure where
> the problem is, and a lot of the readings discuss my
Afternoon all, as the subject states, I have a central postfix server running
which the web servers use along with some other processes with no problems. I
added a new server and not sure where the problem is, and a lot of the readings
discuss mysql (which is not used) so looking for some help.
On 10/27/2013 10:38 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2013-10-25 4:51 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
>> Blackberry has done pretty much this same thing for years, and not
>> too many people have been bent out of shape about it. Or maybe the
>> different business model of BB convinced folks their email wasn't
On 2013-10-27 1:13 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Ok, first attempt isn't working properly...
Sorry - started that email before I fixed the 'bad address pattern' error...
Current hashed version seems to be working...
--
Best regards,
*/Charles/***
Ok, first attempt isn't working properly...
On 2013-10-25 3:21 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
# banned_clients
linkedin.com REJECT mail from LinkedIn not welcome here
I have (changed cidr to hash for obvious - after I got the 'bad address
pattern' error on first try with the cidr map - reasons):
On 2013-10-27 12:35 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
Parameters understood by Postfix are reported on stdout in a
normalized form with all runs of whitespace characters replaced by
a single space.
Parameters not understood by Postfix are reported as warnings on
stderr largely verbatim, the only chang
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 12:01:47PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> But... in the postconf -n output, used parameters have only ONE
> space between the parameter name and the parameter argument (in
> spite of the fact that there are actually two spaces in main.cf),
> while unused parameter have two
Hello,
While adding the new client restriction class to block the new Intro App
accessing our mail server, I noticed a tiny/minor discrepancy in
postconf -n output of used vs unused parameters/arguments. Not even sure
it is worth mentioning, but decided to do so anyway...
The first thing I d
On 10/25/2013 04:44 PM, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
Hello,
I was wondering if I could add a access map (to deny access in fact)
for specific sasl authenticated users?
E.g. even if the login succeeds that user can't send email.
I couldn't find anything in the docs, but maybe I'm looking in the
wrong
On 2013-10-25 4:51 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Blackberry has done pretty much this same thing for years, and not
too many people have been bent out of shape about it. Or maybe the
different business model of BB convinced folks their email wasn't
being mined. Mostly a moot point now...
Are you sure
15 matches
Mail list logo
