On 02/12/2017 07:06 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
After coming to IBM research in November 1996, I spent most of
December and January making notes on paper. I knew that writing a
mail system was more work than any of my prior projects
Dear Rob (I hope that is your name),
Thank you for your views/suggestion. My replies are inline tagged with my
name, as in [Nitin:]
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:53 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 01:55:26PM +0530, Nitin N wrote:
> > Now, I have to migrate to a new server that is ru
Am 12.02.2017 um 19:06 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
> After coming to IBM research in November 1996, I spent most of
> December and January making notes on paper. I knew that writing a
> mail system was more work than any of my prior p
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 13:28:17 -0500
D'Arcy Cain wrote:
> On 2017-02-12 01:06 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
>
> Congratulations and thanks!
Me too, as they say :-)
A reasonably straightforward, secure, and reliable piece of softw
On 13 February 2017 9:16:18 AM AEDT, mar...@fredo.co.uk wrote:
>Dear Wietse,
>
>In all the years I cannot think of any other software I have used that
>has maintained such an
>extraordinarily high standard of functionality, stability, security and
>usability.
>(I started hosting in 1994).
>
>You
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 21:26:55 +
Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > host -t txt _dmarc.artifact-software.com
> > "v=DMARC1; pct=100; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r"
> >
> > And as this mail is sent by cloud9, opendmarc does what it is
> > supposed to do.
>
> Say no to DMARC. Don't make the mistake of
wie...@porcupine.org skrev den 2017-02-12 20:59:
DKIM works just fine across multiple hops of forwarding as long as
one does not modify the message in transit (someone said that DKIM
is hop-by-hop; they don't understand what DKIM does). If anyone's
DKIM verifier fails on this posting, let me kno
On 2017 Feb 12, 21:26, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> DO NOT publish DMARC policy. DO NOT check DMARC policy, except
> perhaps as a small bump in a composite spam score.
The "DO NOT publish DMARC policy" is a bit extreme, IMHO.
I find it useful, and without any bad consequences, to publish a DMARC
po
Dear Wietse,
In all the years I cannot think of any other software I have used that has
maintained such an
extraordinarily high standard of functionality, stability, security and
usability.
(I started hosting in 1994).
Your work has been, and is, a key part of my humble Internet career.
Many
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 10:10:05PM +0100, richard lucassen wrote:
> host -t txt _dmarc.artifact-software.com
> "v=DMARC1; pct=100; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r"
>
> And as this mail is sent by cloud9, opendmarc does what it is supposed
> to do.
Say no to DMARC. Don't make the mistake of outsou
Maurizio Caloro:
[ Charset windows-1252 converted... ]
> hello
> i have this already done, with "Aliases", but here i don't have success!
>
> mauri...@caloro.ch exist all ready but i will that m...@caloro.ch are
> available
> from public, but here i become the message "User unknown in local
> re
sid-milter?
dont use it, its still checking sender-id
that is not spf
hello
i have this already done, with "Aliases", but here i don't have success!
mauri...@caloro.ch exist all ready but i will that m...@caloro.ch are
available
from public, but here i become the message "User unknown in local
recipient table".
# /etc/aliases
maurizio: mauri...@caloro.ch,m.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 01:06:42PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
It is good to see thanks from users who've been with you all for
almost the entire time. By that standard, I came on board late,
when Bennett Todd introduced me to
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 22:01:05 +0100
richard lucassen wrote:
It must be OpenDMARC:
host -t txt artifact-software.com
"v=spf1 mx -all"
host -t txt _dmarc.artifact-software.com
"v=DMARC1; pct=100; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r"
And as this mail is sent by cloud9, opendmarc does what it is supposed
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 15:43:09 -0500 (EST)
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> > I'm playing with a new setup and I'm mucking about with it quite a
> > lot of course, but sometimes I get messages sent to the hold queue
> > and I didn't postsuper them there. What could be the reason for
> >
On 2017-02-12 Maurizio Caloro wrote:
> i will that following e-mail Adresses (public) goes to one recipent
> address (local)
>
> n...@example.com = myname
> shortn...@example.com = myname
>
> i need to open differents accounts?, or i configure this with the
> Virtual maps?
Virtual maps w
richard lucassen:
> Hello list,
>
> I'm playing with a new setup and I'm mucking about with it quite a lot
> of course, but sometimes I get messages sent to the hold queue and
> I didn't postsuper them there. What could be the reason for this? The
> doc http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html#ho
Hello list,
I'm playing with a new setup and I'm mucking about with it quite a lot
of course, but sometimes I get messages sent to the hold queue and
I didn't postsuper them there. What could be the reason for this? The
doc http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html#hold_queue does not
clarify this
On 02/12/17 13:48, Ralph Seichter wrote:
> On 12.02.17 19:06, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
>
> Kudos, and thank you for freeing me (and consequently my customers) of
> Exim and Sendmail. ;-) Postfix is one of the most useful softwar
Josh Good:
> Old-style forwarding is when the forwarding MTA forwards the message
> re-using the original Return-Path in the SMTP envelope, instead of using
> its own address in the Return-Path. Because if the forwarding MTA uses
> its own address in the Return-Path while forwarding the email, SPF
hello friends
i will that following e-mail Adresses (public) goes to one recipent
address (local)
n...@example.com = myname
shortn...@example.com = myname
i need to open differents accounts?, or i configure this with the
Virtual maps?
me problem are that i don't understand this rig
Wietse Venema wrote:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
Wietse,
don't remember the exact date but probably a couple of months after your first
release
I've migrated a company's mail servers to postfix. postfix was chosen after
reading some
of your comments som
On 2017 Feb 12, 13:06, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
> After coming to IBM research in November 1996, I spent most of
> December and January making notes on paper. I knew that writing a
> mail system was more work than any of my prior pro
On 2017 Feb 12, 18:32, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> On 12 February 2017 at 12:54, Josh Good wrote:
>
> > Well, yes, SPF breaks old-style forwarding. This is well known and
> > undisputed.
> >
> > Many old-style SMTP "customs" no longer apply, like open relays, etc.
> >
> > Old-style forwarding is nowad
Am 12.02.2017 um 19:06 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
> After coming to IBM research in November 1996, I spent most of
> December and January making notes on paper. I knew that writing a
> mail system was more work than any of my prior p
On 12.02.17 19:06, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
Kudos, and thank you for freeing me (and consequently my customers) of
Exim and Sendmail. ;-) Postfix is one of the most useful software systems
I have the pleasure of working with, and t
A great contribution to the Internet.
Your 20 years of fantastic support and sustained commitment has made
Postix successful.
Thanks
Ron
On 12/02/2017 1:12 PM, Dominic Raferd wrote:
On 12 February 2017 at 18:06, Wietse Venema wrote:
Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Post
On 12 February 2017 at 12:54, Josh Good wrote:
> On 2017 Feb 12, 07:53, Dominic Raferd wrote:
>>
>> To go back to a point made by OP about SPF being 'good', it seems to me
>> that SPF is fundamentally and irretrievably flawed - and frankly should
>> be dropped.
>
> Wow! Those are big words.
>
>> T
On 2017-02-12 01:06 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
Congratulations and thanks!
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
System Administrator, Vex.Net
http://www.Vex.Net/ IM:da...@vex.net
VoIP: sip:da...@vex.net
On 12 February 2017 at 18:06, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code...
Amazing what a mighty oak has grown from such an acorn. Thanks to you
for the original planting and to all those, including you, who have
nurtured its growth, and continue to
Last month it was 20 years ago that I started writing Postfix code.
After coming to IBM research in November 1996, I spent most of
December and January making notes on paper. I knew that writing a
mail system was more work than any of my prior projects.
The oldest tarball, dated 19970220, contains
Josh Good wrote:
> On 2017 Feb 12, 16:17, Michael Ströder wrote:
>> Josh Good wrote:
>>> On 2017 Feb 11, 19:18, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
So technically integrity is assured from server to server, but not between
clients
and server.
>>>
>>> That is correct. DKIM is for MTA-to-MTA
On 2017 Feb 12, 16:17, Michael Ströder wrote:
> Josh Good wrote:
> > On 2017 Feb 11, 19:18, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
> >> So technically integrity is assured from server to server, but not between
> >> clients
> >> and server.
> >
> > That is correct. DKIM is for MTA-to-MTA integrity.
>
> The
On 11/02/2017 10:38, /dev/rob0 wrote:
This appears to be from Mailchimp, so reporting it as abuse is likely
to yield some satisfactory results.
Thanks to everyone for the advice.
P.V.Anthony
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Josh Good wrote:
> On 2017 Feb 11, 19:18, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
>> So technically integrity is assured from server to server, but not between
>> clients
>> and server.
>
> That is correct. DKIM is for MTA-to-MTA integrity.
There are no widely used MUA implementations making use of DKIM but
On 12.02.2017 08:39, Kiss Gabor (Bitman) wrote:
> Maybe DKIM verification should ignore list tags in the subject
> if the first attempt was unsuccesful.
> I.e. I could imagine a smarter canonicalization.
There can be no "interpretation" of what the signing party distributes.
I deliberately use DK
On 2017 Feb 12, 08:14, John Allen wrote:
> Josh Good - your DKIM signaturesare showing up as invalid.
I don't see how that is possible, given that I currently do not do DKIM
signing of my posts to this list.
Perhaps did you mean to say that my posts to the list are getting a
DMARC result of fail
Josh Good - your DKIM signaturesare showing up as invalid.
On 2017-02-12 7:54 AM, Josh Good wrote:
On 2017 Feb 12, 07:53, Dominic Raferd wrote:
To go back to a point made by OP about SPF being 'good', it seems to me
that SPF is fundamentally and irretrievably flawed - and frankly should
be dro
On 2017 Feb 12, 07:53, Dominic Raferd wrote:
>
> To go back to a point made by OP about SPF being 'good', it seems to me
> that SPF is fundamentally and irretrievably flawed - and frankly should
> be dropped.
Wow! Those are big words.
> The fact that it works in 99.5% of situations just makes
On 2017 Feb 12, 08:39, Kiss Gabor (Bitman) wrote:
> > > Further, how does DKIM prove the message wasn't altered? To my knowledge,
> > > SPF proves the message came from a qualified server and DKIM proves the
> > > FQDN
> > > is a match.
> >
> > DKIM signs a hash of the canonicalized message body
On 12.02.2017 03:13, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> Theres no relay between me and postfix. And this is the report:
>
> Feedback-Type: auth-failure
> Version: 1
> User-Agent: OpenDMARC-Filter/1.3.2
> Auth-Failure: dmarc
> Authentication-Results: mx01.nausch.org; dmarc=fail header.from=sebbe.eu
> Orig
42 matches
Mail list logo
