It appears that @lbutlr said:
>On 2022 Feb 25, at 08:55, Viktor Dukhovni =
>wrote:
>> The moment TLS enters into the picture, you start to need much more
>> complicated certificate management to get MUAs to see an acceptable
>> certificate for its expected name on ports 587 and 465,
Also for STA
Nicolas JEAN:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Em 25/02/2022 11:39, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> > Nicolas JEAN:
> >> Tested: adding above randmap also 'supersedes' a local_transport_map
> >> containing the domain-matching "my.domain virtual:"...
> >>
> >>
Em 25/02/2022 11:39, Wietse Venema escreveu:
Nicolas JEAN:
Tested: adding above randmap also 'supersedes' a local_transport_map
containing the domain-matching "my.domain virtual:"...
I don't understand how "my.domain :" and "my.domain virtual:" can have
different results, isn't it only the left
> On 02-25-2022 2:58 pm, post...@ptld.com wrote:
>> No, they use "mail.example.com" which normally would not exist, both for
>> IMAP and SMTP.
>> If the clients do not care that the mail server is not the mailserver,
>> perhaps I am overthinking this.
>
>
> One idea would be to leave mail.examp
> No, they use "mail.example.com" which normally would not exist, both for IMAP
> and SMTP.
> If the clients do not care that the mail server is not the mailserver,
> perhaps I am overthinking this.
One idea would be to leave mail.example.com as an A record pointing to the
submission server I
On 2022 Feb 25, at 12:05, post...@ptld.com wrote:
>> (The reason to do this is to make the move over seamless for the user of
>> that domain, and that it how their previous host had the mail setup.
>> Duplicating the setup means I do not have to go in and change the mail
>> servers on every clie
> (The reason to do this is to make the move over seamless for the user of that
> domain, and that it how their previous host had the mail setup. Duplicating
> the setup means I do not have to go in and change the mail servers on every
> client computer, phone, and tablet, so this is desirable.
> Yes, I have been doing this for many many years, what I have not done
> previously
> is create an MX record for mail.otherdomain.com pointing to the same IP as
> main.maindomain.net
Clearly I am no expert, so this is just my 2cents. I think pointing
otherdomain.com to MX=mail.example.com is
On 2022 Feb 25, at 08:55, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> The moment TLS enters into the picture, you start to need much more
> complicated certificate management to get MUAs to see an acceptable
> certificate for its expected nameme on ports 587 and 465,
Ah. Hmm. That does sound like a bit of a problem
On 2022 Feb 25, at 08:12, post...@ptld.com wrote:
> On 02-25-2022 9:10 am, @lbutlr wrote:
>> For example, I use mail.exampl.net as the FQDN for the mail sever,
>> but if I have a hosted domain at example.com can I have its MX set to
>> mail.example.com and point to the same IP without issue,
>>
On 25.02.22 07:10, @lbutlr wrote:
Are there any issue with using multiple names for the same mail server?
none other that you might receive mail for every domain pointing to that
server, e.g. postmas...@www.example.com, postmas...@ns.example.com etc.
For example, I use mail.exampl.net as the
> On 25 Feb 2022, at 9:57 am, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> @lbutlr:
>> In short, does postfix need to know the name the client used to connect
>> to the server?
>
> By default, Postfix does not care how a client discovers an MTA
> (which MX record was used, if any, etc.).
>
> You can configure post
post...@ptld.com:
> > By default, Postfix does not care how a client discovers an MTA
> > (which MX record was used, if any, etc.).
>
> Oh, did i misunderstand this part?
> It is possible for postfix to know what domain MX the client used
> to get the IP?
By default, Postfix does not care.
You
> By default, Postfix does not care how a client discovers an MTA
> (which MX record was used, if any, etc.).
Oh, did i misunderstand this part?
It is possible for postfix to know what domain MX the client used to get the IP?
> On 02-25-2022 9:10 am, @lbutlr wrote:
> Are there any issue with using multiple names for the same mail server?
No, postfix does not know what domain the client looked up to find the IP to
connect to.
> For example, I use mail.exampl.net as the FQDN for the mail sever,
> but if I have a hos
@lbutlr:
> In short, does postfix need to know the name the client used to connect
> to the server?
By default, Postfix does not care how a client discovers an MTA
(which MX record was used, if any, etc.).
You can configure postscreen to require that a client tries a
more-preferred MX before a le
For clarification, I'm looking for someone with operational expertise,
more specifically in deliverability.
On 2/24/22 18:58, Leandro Santiago wrote:
Hi list,
(please let me know if this message somehow goes against the list rules)
my startup is looking for a Postfix expert for consulting. We
Nicolas JEAN:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Em 24/02/2022 17:14, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> > Nicolas JEAN:
> >> Having "my.domain :" or "my.domain lmtp:unix:private/dovecot-lmtp"
> >> doesn't modify default behaviour (set by virtual_transport =
> >> lmtp:unix:private/dovecot-lmtp), and yields s
Are there any issue with using multiple names for the same mail server?
For example, I use mail.exampl.net as the FQDN for the mail sever, but if I
have a hosted domain at example.com can I have its MX set to mail.example.com
and point to the same IP without issue, or do I need to do something i
Charles Sprickman writes:
> [...]
> In the above configuration, when I connect to relay using any of those
> accounts, there is no match and the default transport is used.
>
> If I add an entry to match the From address, that works fine, as expected.
>
> So can I do this, but use the SASL usernam
20 matches
Mail list logo
