On 12/16/2014 05:25 AM, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
> It's extra fun when they do so to an email with a DKIN signature
> covering the From: header.
MLMs should strip the DKIM header anyways and add their own if appropriate.
Peter
On 12/15/2014 01:36 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DMARC "verifies" the From: header against SPF, DKIM or both, but
> only a poorly-informed person would require that the From: address
> *always* verifies with SPF.
I agree, but unfortunately I'm in the minority. It appears that google
has gone down t
Experimental patch aside, we have changed the L7 health-check [1] to be L4
port-open checks instead. This stops Postfix from sitting in flush since no
command has been issued.
[1] One would argue a L7 check of banner+quit, isn't much better than L4
port-open anyway.
We will consider this issue
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
>
> No, Postfix read_wait() uses poll() unconditionally. If Solaris
> has an edge-triggered implementation (i.e. no notification when
> poll() is called after the connection is already closed), that
> sucks.
>
> Presumably there are other ways a way
Jorgen Lundman:
> * Compiling Postfix with -DNO_DEVPOLL with the theory it would use select()
> instead.
No, Postfix read_wait() uses poll() unconditionally. If Solaris
has an edge-triggered implementation (i.e. no notification when
poll() is called after the connection is already closed), that
>
> This looks like a bad poll(2) implementation. There is no reason
> for poll(2) to "hang" waiting for POLLOUT. All writes will fail
> immediately because the client has closed the connection.
>
I have tried:
* Upgrading OS from Solaris 10 u8 to Solaris 10 u11
* Upgrading Postfix to 2.11.0
On 2014.12.15 23.51, Peter wrote:
On 12/16/2014 07:22 AM, btb wrote:
with various sized netblocks rejected therein. this all works fine.
i have more than one mx, and would like to store this data in a
centralized location and query over the network instead of
duplicating the files on each mx.
Christian Rößner skrev den 2014-12-16 16:49:
Milter is ready for now. Support flat files, LDAP (with SASL) and
optionally memcached (for LDAP). ebuild will follow shortly ;-)
super, after you started code this, i begin to think about could it over
time be extended to be 100% replacement for o
Hi,
> Am 15.12.2014 um 06:27 schrieb Benny Pedersen :
>
> On 15. dec. 2014 01.19.02 Christian Rößner
> wrote:
>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base/?include_text=1
>
>> 2. Receivers compare the RFC5322 From: address in the mail to the
>> SPF and DKIM results,
Hi,
> Am 15.12.2014 um 06:15 schrieb Benny Pedersen :
>
> On 15. dec. 2014 00.21.30 Christian Rößner
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks. That was what I thought. People using the header-from field. But I
>> couldn’t believe that. But now that you gave me this feedback, I think this
>> might be the reason.
Am 16.12.2014 um 13:05 schrieb Jens Kubieziel:
I'm trying to set up Postfix to use two smarthosts. All mail sent from
domains example.(com|org) should be sent over smtp.gmail.com (default
smarthost) and mails from Domain.A should be sent over mailgw.Domain.A
(MUA is MS Exchange). I set everythin
Hi,
I'm trying to set up Postfix to use two smarthosts. All mail sent from
domains example.(com|org) should be sent over smtp.gmail.com (default
smarthost) and mails from Domain.A should be sent over mailgw.Domain.A
(MUA is MS Exchange). I set everything up like in the configuration
below. However
12 matches
Mail list logo
