On 1/16/2020 4:46 PM, @lbutlr wrote:
On 16 Jan 2020, at 09:35, Noel Jones wrote:
On 1/16/2020 3:19 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
: Domain hotmal.com does not accept mail (nullMX)
So perhaps THIS is the issue on your server, you are not respecting nullMX
replies?
Of course not. It's an old list, and
On 16 Jan 2020, at 09:35, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 1/16/2020 3:19 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
>
>>> : Domain hotmal.com does not accept mail (nullMX)
>> So perhaps THIS is the issue on your server, you are not respecting nullMX
>> replies?
>
> Of course not. It's an old list, and I have no incentive to re
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:03:29PM +0100, Thomas wrote:
> How can I check whether the recipient / operator of an email server
> where I send email also operates one that offers it at all?
> Respectively. what is the state of the art that he should use / offer?
The answer is a matter of taste. I
On 16.01.20 17:48, Daniel Ryšlink wrote:
As someone already mentioned, that's what the Postfix limits are for,
namely
smtpd_recipient_limit
smtpd_client_recipient_rate_limit
smtpd_client_connection_rate_limit
smtpd_client_message_rate_limit
smtpd_soft_error_limit
smtpd_hard_error_limit
Even i
Dnia 16.01.2020 o godz. 18:03:29 Thomas pisze:
> Hello,
> how can I check whether the recipient / operator of an email server
> where I send email also operates one that offers it at all?
> Respectively. what is the state of the art that he should use / offer?
>
> Comments are e.g. that look more
Hello,
how can I check whether the recipient / operator of an email server
where I send email also operates one that offers it at all?
Respectively. what is the state of the art that he should use / offer?
Comments are e.g. that look more like "make me important" from the
manager "from such op
As someone already mentioned, that's what the Postfix limits are for,
namely
smtpd_recipient_limit
smtpd_client_recipient_rate_limit
smtpd_client_connection_rate_limit
smtpd_client_message_rate_limit
smtpd_soft_error_limit
smtpd_hard_error_limit
Even if it is a "spammer sending slowly", there
On 1/16/2020 3:19 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
: Domain hotmal.com does not accept mail (nullMX)
So perhaps THIS is the issue on your server, you are not respecting nullMX
replies?
Of course not. It's an old list, and I have no incentive to recheck
fake domains.
This is what works best for my sh
Emanuel:
> I think this option would be very useful for those who manage a server
> with many connections
Perhaps it is just me, but I think that there is a misconception
that mail systems must have a human traffic policeman. I'd like to
hear about more intelligent solutions than manual action.
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 15:37, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Dominic Raferd:
> > On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:34, Wietse Venema
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dominic Raferd:
> > > > Thanks Christian that was very helpful. I have it working now for
> > > > postscreen and I think (but am waiting for an incoming instanc
I think this option would be very useful for those who manage a server
with many connections
El 15/1/20 a las 16:07, Wietse Venema escribió:
A postsuper 'bounce' option would require
- Must be invoked by root.
- Drop privileges down to the postfix user.
- Lock the queue file for exclusive acces
Dominic Raferd:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:34, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Dominic Raferd:
> > > Thanks Christian that was very helpful. I have it working now for
> > > postscreen and I think (but am waiting for an incoming instance) for
> > > smtpd. Weird
> > > that they have such different appr
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:34, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Dominic Raferd:
> > Thanks Christian that was very helpful. I have it working now for
> > postscreen and I think (but am waiting for an incoming instance) for
> > smtpd. Weird
> > that they have such different approaches (postscreen_dnsbl_reply
Dominic Raferd:
> Thanks Christian that was very helpful. I have it working now for
> postscreen and I think (but am waiting for an incoming instance) for
> smtpd. Weird
> that they have such different approaches (postscreen_dnsbl_reply_map and
> rbl_reply_maps). And I could not find a way to use p
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 09:13, Christian Kivalo
wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-01-16 09:47, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> > I recently started using an RBL service where we have a 'private key'
> > and this operates very simply by prefixing the key to the RBL address.
> > But I just realised that this appears to
On 15.01.20 16:55, Emanuel wrote:
my question arose because of a user on my server who sent to many
recipients without MX, then the mail was queued until the expiration
time:
bounce_queue_lifetime = 5h
the idea was to reject emails manually with the error message that returned:
Example:
│Me
On 15 Jan 2020, at 15:12, Noel Jones wrote:
We've had problems with users mistyping domain names, such as
hotmal.com or aoil.com. And they ignore the delay warning message
because they still don't notice their typo.
Citát "@lbutlr" :
Then they get the bounce when the max queue expires.
The
Msd:
> > Which is why on outbound Postfix instances I tend to set:
> >
> > delay_warning_time = 2h,
>
> I'm interested by this functionality but I don't want the external
> senders to be informed of local delivery problems.
> And setting 2 postfix instances seems heavy for a small email serve
Viktor Dukhovni:
> Therefore, if this were to be made possible, the right mechanism would
> be to to somehow expedite message expiration, with normal processing
> on message expiration happening earlier than it would otherwise.
I have a list of alternatives. The more reasonable ones reuse the
para
> Which is why on outbound Postfix instances I tend to set:
>
> delay_warning_time = 2h,
I'm interested by this functionality but I don't want the external
senders to be informed of local delivery problems.
And setting 2 postfix instances seems heavy for a small email server.
Is it possible
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:43, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> Does Amavis actually connect to 127.0.0.1 when injecting mail back to
> Postfix? If yes, then maybe you don't have 127.0.0.1 in $mynetworks
>
> It can also be that Amavis doesn't connect to 127.0.0.1, but to some other
> IP on your server - the
On 16 Jan 2020, at 00:02, azu...@pobox.sk wrote:
> Citát "@lbutlr" :
>
>> On 15 Jan 2020, at 15:12, Noel Jones wrote:
>>> We've had problems with users mistyping domain names, such as hotmal.com or
>>> aoil.com. And they ignore the delay warning message because they still
>>> don't notice their
On 2020-01-16 08:48 GMT, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> Is there a way to cut out this private key in the response message? It
> happens both with postscreen and smtpd. Here is a barely-obfuscated example:
>
> 550 5.7.1 Service unavailable; client [51.88.120.222] blocked using
> sp8lefi4grtb7jftpslxxztu3
On 2020-01-16 09:47, Dominic Raferd wrote:
I recently started using an RBL service where we have a 'private key'
and this operates very simply by prefixing the key to the RBL address.
But I just realised that this appears to mean that for any rejections
the whole address - including the key -
I recently started using an RBL service where we have a 'private key' and
this operates very simply by prefixing the key to the RBL address. But I
just realised that this appears to mean that for any rejections the whole
address - including the key - is passed back to the offending client. Which
if
25 matches
Mail list logo
