On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:51 Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
>
> For further help, follow up with configuration details as requested by
> others.
The best advice for this dummy (me) was to check the firewall. I still had
a block on port 25 left from an aborted attempt to install Webmin a few
months ago
On 8/28/2017 3:18 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Ralph Seichter skrev den 2017-08-28 22:05:
>> usually score with deep negative values in SpamAssassin. You're
>> barking
>> up the wrong tree here. ;-)
>
> and Reply-To: is safe to remove in smtp_header_checks
Assuming your users neither use Reply-To:
Ralph Seichter skrev den 2017-08-28 22:05:
usually score with deep negative values in SpamAssassin. You're barking
up the wrong tree here. ;-)
and Reply-To: is safe to remove in smtp_header_checks
since its not default dkim signed
its not safe to remove in header_checks, if remotes sign it in
On 28.08.17 17:42, Rick van Rein wrote:
> I've been studying SPF, DKIM, DMARC and a bit of ARC. And I've been
> wondering if a list [including this one] could be more friendly by
> using Reply-To: to hold the message sender.
The Postfix mailing list is "friendly" already. It does not break DKIM
s
Rick van Rein skrev den 2017-08-28 19:09:
Interestingly,
This list is a modest exception -- DKIM should pass through it
perfectly,
mostly because it does not change the Subject: From: To: or body.
But the question was about soundness of the general Reply-To: idea
anyway.
i noted that it's
Interestingly,
This list is a modest exception -- DKIM should pass through it perfectly,
mostly because it does not change the Subject: From: To: or body.
But the question was about soundness of the general Reply-To: idea anyway.
-Rick
An MTA only looks at the envelope To for routing. You can put anything
you want in the message To header, so you could rewrite it any way you
need to.
On 8/28/2017 12:04 PM, Nils wrote:
Hi,
when composing an email, can I assign the header value "To" in a
way that it is shown by the ema
On 8/28/2017 11:04 AM, Nils wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when composing an email, can I assign the header value "To" in a
> way that it is shown by the email client but ignored by postfix?
>
> I've created a php-cronjob for a customer, that fetches mails
> from an imap box (mta is postfix), recompose
You might want to look into something like the Logstash
(https://www.elastic.co/products/logstash).
James
> On Aug 27, 2017, at 9:51 PM, Kev wrote:
>
> Hi postfixers,
>
> We have spam filter servers for our down, 5 of them to be exact. we use
> amavisd, bitdefender & clamav for spam and vir
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 05:53:11PM +0300, Deniss wrote:
> > If the destination domain is yours and the senders are remote
> > untrusted clients, then indeed "default_transport" won't do
> > unless you're a backup MX host (in that case it is possible
> > to allow relaying for the domain via "check_
Hi,
when composing an email, can I assign the header value "To" in a
way that it is shown by the email client but ignored by postfix?
I've created a php-cronjob for a customer, that fetches mails from
an imap box (mta is postfix), recomposes them and forwards them to a
list of recipi
Hi,
I've been studying SPF, DKIM, DMARC and a bit of ARC. And I've been
wondering if a list [including this one] could be more friendly by using
Reply-To: to hold the message sender.
These spam-fighting methods have the greatest difficulty with email
forwarding and lists because:
- changes to
On 2017.08.28. 17:36, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>> but only when the destination domain is not a "relay" domain or
>>> similar, that is, only if mail for the destination in questin just
>>> goes whereever the MX records point with no transport overrides
>>> beyond (sender_dependent_default_transport_
On 8/27/2017 6:05 PM, joao reis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a postfix server with antispam milter and policy daemons
> forwarding messages to various distinct remote servers. It works
> very well, all messages for the configured domains are forwarded
> using smtp / lmtp transport to each server.
>
>
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 04:46:19PM +0300, Deniss wrote:
> > You could use:
> >
> >
> > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_default_transport_maps
> >
> > but only when the destination domain is not a "relay" domain or
> > similar, that is, only if mail for the destinatio
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:06:39AM -0500, Tom Browder wrote:
> There was a temporary problem delivering your message to
> tbro...@novco1968tbs.com. Gmail will retry for 46 more hours. You'll be
> notified if the delivery fails permanently.
>
> Learn more here: https://support.google.com/mail/an
On 2017.08.25. 18:20, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> Yes, but ...
>
>> relay_transport = smtp:backend
>
> On MX gateway hosts that receive inbound mail, use "relay:..." not
> "smtp:..." for your relay transport, and let outbound mail from
> your system use "smtp". This reduces contention between in
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 01:35:12PM +, Tom Browder wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:22 Ralph Seichter
> wrote: ...
>
> > Please study http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html for starters.
>
> I had studied it and have done up through verbose messages with - v
> but saw nothing. However,
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:06:39AM -0500, Tom Browder wrote:
> My remote postfix installation can send but not receive, and I'm
> sure I have a bad setting somewhere. When sending to the remote
> server, from my personal gmail account I finally get a response
> from gmail as shown in the attach
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:22 Ralph Seichter
wrote:
...
> Please study http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html for starters.
I had studied it and have done up through verbose messages with - v but saw
nothing. However, I forgot about the peer setting which is probably why the
logs are quiet.
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:06:39 -0500, Tom Browder stated:
>My remote postfix installation can send but not receive, and I'm sure
>I have a bad setting somewhere. When sending to the remote server,
>from my personal gmail account I finally get a response from gmail as
>shown in the attached file.
>
On 28.08.17 15:06, Tom Browder wrote:
> I can put my main.cf, master.cf in a github gist if there is any
> interest. My mail logs are not interesting at all, at least to me,
> but I am happy to put one or more of them on github, too.
Please study http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html for start
My remote postfix installation can send but not receive, and I'm sure
I have a bad setting somewhere. When sending to the remote server,
from my personal gmail account I finally get a response from gmail as
shown in the attached file.
I can put my main.cf, master.cf in a github gist if there is a
A. Schulze:
>
> wietse:
>
> > A. Schulze:
> >> postqueue: panic: vbuf_print: output for '%s' exceeds space 0
> >
>
> this is pfqgrep:
>
>$mailq = "/usr/sbin/postqueue -p |"; # added 'strace -f' here
>open(MAILQ, $mailq) or die;
>while () {
> # read from STDIN
>}
>
> execve
A. Schulze:
>
> wietse:
>
> > A. Schulze:
> >> postqueue: panic: vbuf_print: output for '%s' exceeds space 0
OK, now please (install and) use ltrace. This provides more details
what happens in postqueue itself (strace gives insight into system
calls, i.e. the postqueue-kernel interface).
25 matches
Mail list logo
