On 01/05/17 13:17, Simon Wilson wrote:
>
> 3. Any other ways to speed it up, or should I accept the trade-off
> between speed and accuracy of result?
>
If you can create a postscreen white-list of your "regular" remote
hosts, they will be almost instantly passed on to the mail server.
Hope this
I did a whois on your domain, checked the Trend Micro list, and it was not
found.
Replies to this email will be no different than your previous email. Basically
all you can do is request the block be removed. These RBLs have little sympathy
for those they block.
My best solution for non-repo
So, I've done some searches and reviewed the mailing list and don't find much...
[Though effectively searching this "topic" is difficult, so it's certainly
possible I've missed something...]
For example, lfd/cfs allow you to track that user "X" sent Y piece of mail, and
it will alert you.
Now I
Am 01.05.2017 um 06:19 schrieb Steve Jenkins:
> Yahoo! has always been problematic (no surprise) because unlike all the other
> big mailers that Postwhite queries, they don't expose the IP addresses of
> their outbound mailers via their SPF records.
Hello Steve,
SPF is intended for an other u
Hi all
We have submission enabled behind an haproxy. The setup works like a charm:
/smtp01#cat /etc/postfix/master.cf//
//...//
//submission inet n - - - - smtpd//
// -o syslog_name=postfix/submission//
// -o content_filter=smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10024//
// -o smtpd_tls
> On May 1, 2017, at 10:28 AM, Simon Wilson wrote:
>
> Can anyone comment on the value / no value of having zen.spamhaus as an RBL
> in smtpd in addition to it being used by postscreen?
Keep both. If you have SpamAssassin doing RBL lookups, raise the
concurrency limit of the filter transport.
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On May 1, 2017, at 8:17 AM, Simon Wilson wrote:
>
> ostscreen is using (threshold 3):
>
>zen.spamhaus.org*3
>bl.mailspike.net*2
>b.barracudacentral.org*2
>bl.spameatingmonkey.net
>bl.spamcop.net
>dnsbl.sorbs.net
>hostkar
Viktor Dukhovni:
>
> > On May 1, 2017, at 8:17 AM, Simon Wilson wrote:
> >
> > ostscreen is using (threshold 3):
> >
> >zen.spamhaus.org*3
> >bl.mailspike.net*2
> >b.barracudacentral.org*2
> >bl.spameatingmonkey.net
> >bl.spamcop.net
> >dnsbl.sorb
> On May 1, 2017, at 8:17 AM, Simon Wilson wrote:
>
> ostscreen is using (threshold 3):
>
>zen.spamhaus.org*3
>bl.mailspike.net*2
>b.barracudacentral.org*2
>bl.spameatingmonkey.net
>bl.spamcop.net
>dnsbl.sorbs.net
>hostkarma.junkemailfilte
Simon Wilson:
On my new Postfix 2.10 system incoming mail is slow to process (about
15 seconds end to end), and I think it is mainly because DNS queries
are slowing things down.
The server runs local caching DNS BIND, so it's as quick as I can get
it on the slow Internet connection we are on.
A
Simon Wilson:
> On my new Postfix 2.10 system incoming mail is slow to process (about
> 15 seconds end to end), and I think it is mainly because DNS queries
> are slowing things down.
>
> The server runs local caching DNS BIND, so it's as quick as I can get
> it on the slow Internet connecti
Hi, i need an help. A Trend micro QIL list re-include Continuously my
mail server (Linux Centos).
All other list not include my ip.
TrendMicro don't give me specific motivation.
I don't see in postfix log any meaningful spam activities.
There is a method to trace eventually spam activity don
And if you running debian you can set the min-cache-ttl..
That bind is patched with :
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/users/lamont/bind9.git/commit/?h=patches&id=84fa402750fab5cd887d357501e2896494ac551f
So you can set these if needed.
min-cache-ttl 90;
min-ncache-ttl 90;
Greetz,
Louis
- Message from Marco Pizzoli -
Date: Mon, 1 May 2017 11:18:30 +0200
From: Marco Pizzoli
Subject: Re: Optimising new system and postscreen questions
To: si...@simonandkate.net
Cc: Postfix users
Hello Simon,
The server runs local caching DNS BIND, so it's as quick
Hello Simon,
The server runs local caching DNS BIND, so it's as quick as I can get it on
> the slow Internet connection we are on.
>
I don't qualify mysef expert enough to answer the rest of your points, but
for the DNS part I suggest you think about replacing BIND with Unbound, as
the DNS resolv
- Message from Simon Wilson -
Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 18:43:41 +1000
From: Simon Wilson
Reply-To: si...@simonandkate.net
Subject: Optimising new system and postscreen questions
To: Postfix users
On my new Postfix 2.10 system incoming mail is slow to process
(about
On my new Postfix 2.10 system incoming mail is slow to process (about
15 seconds end to end), and I think it is mainly because DNS queries
are slowing things down.
The server runs local caching DNS BIND, so it's as quick as I can get
it on the slow Internet connection we are on.
At the mo
Have you tried to look at whois and DNS records for these addresses? They might
have something in common.
Also, you seem to be doing something that's really Yahoo's job. Did you try to
bug them directly why they don't do it? (Would improve security or
something?..) If they use third party cloud
18 matches
Mail list logo
