Re: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 04.08.17 15:28, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: When the limit is exceeded should the sender receive a bounce back email ? postfix rejects additional recipients with temporary error, which means that the client should retry those. Proper SMTP clients retry remaining recipients until mail is sent to a

Re: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Noel Jones
On 8/4/2017 10:12 AM, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > Thank you. I see it maybe me doing the limiting > > smtpd_recipient_limit (default: 1000) > > The maximal number of recipients that the Postfix SMTP server accepts per > message delivery request. > > > > Q1 = So, can I assume it does not mat

RE: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Fazzina, Angelo
Hi, When the limit is exceeded should the sender receive a bounce back email ? You say "find the error" is that the error you are talking about ? To me it's sounding like I should ask sender to send emails with less than 1000 recipients and limit will not hit. It's too bad there is no way to know

Re: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Bastian Blank
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 03:12:16PM +, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > Thank you. I see it maybe me doing the limiting > smtpd_recipient_limit (default: 1000) > The maximal number of recipients that the Postfix SMTP server accepts per > message delivery request. > Q1 = So, can I assume it does no

RE: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Fazzina, Angelo
Thank you. I see it maybe me doing the limiting smtpd_recipient_limit (default: 1000) The maximal number of recipients that the Postfix SMTP server accepts per message delivery request. Q1 = So, can I assume it does not matter if the recipients are in the TO, CC, or BCC field, the hard

Re: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Bastian Blank
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 02:29:00PM +, Fazzina, Angelo wrote: > Did my postfix instance limit the number of recipients in the email that was > sent ? Yes, it restricts the amount of recipients to the number given. Your client needs to do another mail transaction with the remaining recipients.

RE: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Fazzina, Angelo
Isn't Systemd a RHEL 7 thing ? I think I run rsyslog. [root@mail5 home]# ps -ef |grep sys root 1522 1 0 Jul11 ?00:01:36 /sbin/rsyslogd -i /var/run/syslogd.pid -c 5 dbus 1537 1 0 Jul11 ?00:00:00 dbus-daemon --system root 30400 26453 0 10:51 pts/000:00:

Re: recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Wietse Venema
Fazzina, Angelo: > Hi, > > Did my postfix instance limit the number of recipients in the email > that was sent ? If you're missing recipients in the log, then that may be the result of unhelpful systemd rate limiting. Systemd is not part of Postfix. The Postfix scheduler has some safety features

recipient limit question

2017-08-04 Thread Fazzina, Angelo
Hi, Did my postfix instance limit the number of recipients in the email that was sent ? I was reading this at this link http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html default_extra_recipient_limit (default: 1000) The default value for the extra per-transport limit imposed on the number of in-memory

Re: Why there is no `reject_rbl_sender` restriction?

2017-08-04 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
You ask each dnsbl for client IP, now you will ask them for each A or MX record. That means, number of DNSBL lookups will increase ad least two times (for each dnsbl you already query). On 03.08.17 17:04, Martin Jiřička wrote: Hmm, I am not server administrator by profession, so maybe I do not

Re: Switch from LDA to Postfix - Dovecot LMTP delivery (with virtual users)

2017-08-04 Thread Nikolaos Milas
On 4/8/2017 1:59 μμ, Alex JOST wrote: Dovecot needs to know about the user. What does 'doveadm user -u imaptes...@noa.gr' print? Thank you Alex, I just found the problem. After switching to LMTP, Dovecot receives from Postfix a fully qualified username, whereas with LDA it was receiving a '

Re: Switch from LDA to Postfix - Dovecot LMTP delivery (with virtual users)

2017-08-04 Thread Alex JOST
Am 04.08.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Nikolaos Milas: Hello, I am setting up a new box with Postfix 3.2.2 and Dovecot. Until now I have been using LDA delivery successfully. On the new server LDA setup works fine too, but I am considering to move to LMTP. IMPORTANT NOTE: It is important in my setup

Re: Why there is no `reject_rbl_sender` restriction?

2017-08-04 Thread Martin Jiřička
> It seems natural (for me at least) to introduce a new map type > dnsbl: that maps those IP addresses to an action. That would be amazing! If I get it right this would also deprecate e.g. `reject_rhsbl_client` and `reject_rbl_client`. As a Postfix novice I would appreciate the reduction of config

Switch from LDA to Postfix - Dovecot LMTP delivery (with virtual users)

2017-08-04 Thread Nikolaos Milas
Hello, I am setting up a new box with Postfix 3.2.2 and Dovecot. Until now I have been using LDA delivery successfully. On the new server LDA setup works fine too, but I am considering to move to LMTP. IMPORTANT NOTE: It is important in my setup to keep functional all virtual_alias_maps & vi

HISTORY file typo

2017-08-04 Thread John Fawcett
Hi Just saw this comment in the HISTORY file and noticed that the original and replaced values look just the same. 20170704 Typos (introduced: Postfix 2.10): in comments about IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses, replace :::1.2.3.4 with the correct form :::1.2.3.4. Incorrect o

Re: postfix-tls error

2017-08-04 Thread hyndavirapuru
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 12:19:55PM +0530, hyndavirap...@bel.co.in wrote: > >> > He's not posted the configuration of the sending system or >> > its logs. This is a waste of everyone's time. > > The relevant logging is the TLS-related logging from the sending > postfix/smtp client process that h