On 9/28/20 2:06 PM, PGNet Dev wrote:
> already posted; waiting on any interest/reply there.
>
> useful to know that this is completely !postfix, if indeed the case.
ironically, the problem's NOT that postfix *is* 'involved', but that it *isn't*.
use of dovecot's
submission_host = ...
t
> On Sep 28, 2020, at 7:09 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> We could log the DNSSEC status only if DNS was 'secure', like we
> log the connection reuse counter only when a connection was used
> more than once.
Makes sense I think, and would probably do the job. The key
question is what to signal, t
Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > > ... http://postmaster.comcast.net/smtp-error-codes.php#RL01 (in
> > > > reply to MAIL FROM command))
> > >
> > > Look carefully at the log entry. The "421" is send in response to "MAIL
> > > FROM", not "RCPT TO". So the recipient limit does
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 05:56:52PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > A draft manpage is below.
> >
>
> It looks very reasonable. The news might not reach the folks who
> only search for particular queue ids in the logs, but shoehorning
> a (say the MX lookup) DNSSEC status in
Bastian Blank wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > What's the best configuration for a web server that does not receive
> > mail but needs to send mail?
>
> Send only does not exist. Every e-mail can produce bounces, which are
> sent to the sender of the original e-mail and needs to be handled
> somewh
On 9/28/20 1:27 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 11:31:43AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
>
>> i've postfix + dovecot running on the same box; delivery between them
>> is via lmtp.
>
> The main thing that stands to me is the timeout connecing to the
> Dovecot submission port.
that
Wietse and Viktor:
Many thanks for your help, insight, and advice on this issue. I really
appreciate it.
Thanks!
Jonathan Hammer
e3 Software
https://e3software.com
> On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:14 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:42:44AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>
On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 09:08:55AM +0200, Marek Kozlowski wrote:
> First of all. The Directory structure and the config may seems a little
> bit strange but, in fact, there are some important historical reasons
> (backward compatibility, many, many years ago we started with Novell NDS
> and Net
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 11:31:43AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> i've postfix + dovecot running on the same box; delivery between them
> is via lmtp.
The main thing that stands to me is the timeout connecing to the
Dovecot submission port.
> ( this is a reproducible, exactly 30-second delay ... )
>
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 05:56:52PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> A draft manpage is below.
>
It looks very reasonable. The news might not reach the folks who
only search for particular queue ids in the logs, but shoehorning
a (say the MX lookup) DNSSEC status into each smtp delivery log
entry i
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:42:44AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Downside of this approach is that "postfix reload" will "close" the
> FIFO, so that the logfile analyzer reads EOF. Some extra action is
> needed to re-open FIFO or to restart the analyzer.
A custom analyzer can open both sides of t
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 07:20:00PM +, Antonio Leding wrote:
> I never used this but am now curious — in reading the docs on this, it
> looks like the proper content in the “{ }” fields would be the IP or
> FQDN to\from one wishes to restrict traffic — do I have this correct?
The "inline:" l
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 04:42:22PM +0200, Hans van Zijst wrote:
> I'm building a relayhost that should accept e-mail from a whole bunch of
> internal mailservers, and relay it to the Internet, after scanning,
> DKIM-signing and rate limiting.
>
> But I don't want to give Postfix one list of all h
Wietse Venema:
> Wietse Venema:
> If you can use the fifo solution, then it would be easier to run Postfix
> in the background with maillog_file=/path/to/fifo.
>
> - Ensure that the analyzer is running, reading from /path/to/fifo;
> this should be configured as a start-up dependency for Postfix.
On 9/27/20 3:34 PM, Steven Jones wrote:
Hi,
I set defer on the mailq to hold while I flushed it.
New mail is deferred, how do I un-defer the mailq?
My best guess is:
postsuper -H ALL
Unable to find the syntax on Google 😕
regards
Steven
--
Stephen Carville
626-332-1942 x1326
800-53
What about having multiple different smtpd services on different
ports; then set up the LAN mail agents to send to whichever port is
appropriate for their access, and you can have entirely bespoke
settings for each one.
On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 10:02, Hans van Zijst wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> Thanks f
Hi Nick,
Thanks for your reaction, it gave me some food for thought.
I can see how this works for a limited number of servers, but
unfortunately (?) our environment is a lot bigger than that.
I think my solution is to write a policy service:
http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html
That
17 matches
Mail list logo
