On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 01:33:53PM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> Florian Piekert via Postfix-users:
> > Hello Wietse,
> >
> > >> Jan 15 12:40:48 butterfly postfix/local[3017382]: 225A9F8B1D1:
> > >> to=, relay=local, delay=1.7,
> > >> delays=1.7/0/0/0, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (
On 2025-01-15 22:31, Florian Piekert via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> I reversed the order of sender_bcc_maps and recipient_bcc_maps in main.cf,
> but that didn't change anything.
What could that possibly do? These settings are orthogonal - one applies
to original sender, second to original recipien
Florian Piekert via Postfix-users:
> Jan 15 21:38:10 butterfly postfix/local[3652656]: 475F8F8AC4C:
> to=, relay=local, delay=2.9,
> delays=2.9/0.01/0/0, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered to file: /dev/null)
You want to ADD a recipient with xxx_rcipient_bcc_maps. Done.
Sometimes that added reci
Hello (again),
Jan 15 12:40:48 butterfly postfix/local[3017382]: 225A9F8B1D1:
to=, relay=local, delay=1.7,
delays=1.7/0/0/0, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered to command:
/usr/local/sbin/devnull)
The BCC is delivered to /dev/null in some way or another.
Replace:
ignorethis: "|/dev/nu
Randy Bush via Postfix-users:
> hi,
>
> i am having timeouts receiving smtp from remote client over a long wire,
> half the planet. is there recommended tuning? thanks.
Postfix logs: "timeout after xxx from host[address]" where xxx is a the last
protocol state.
Where do your connections time
hi,
i am having timeouts receiving smtp from remote client over a long wire,
half the planet. is there recommended tuning? thanks.
randy
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@po
Florian Piekert via Postfix-users:
> Hello Wietse,
>
> >> Jan 15 12:40:48 butterfly postfix/local[3017382]: 225A9F8B1D1:
> >> to=, relay=local, delay=1.7,
> >> delays=1.7/0/0/0, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered to command:
> >> /usr/local/sbin/devnull)
> >
> > The BCC is delivered to /dev/nul
Hello Wietse,
Jan 15 12:40:48 butterfly postfix/local[3017382]: 225A9F8B1D1:
to=, relay=local, delay=1.7,
delays=1.7/0/0/0, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered to command:
/usr/local/sbin/devnull)
The BCC is delivered to /dev/null in some way or another.
Replace:
ignorethis: "|/dev/null
Florian Piekert via Postfix-users:
> Jan 15 12:40:48 butterfly postfix/local[3017382]: 225A9F8B1D1:
> to=, relay=local, delay=1.7,
> delays=1.7/0/0/0, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered to command:
> /usr/local/sbin/devnull)
The BCC is delivered to /dev/null in some way or another.
Replace:
Matt Saladna via Postfix-users:
> Did this opportunity provide any meaningful changes in
> documentation/usability? Any rebukes or insights to share some 90
> days later?
The results, both fascinating and amusing, contain a fraction of the
information in the Postfix READMEs that they were generate
Am 15.01.2025 um 17:22 schrieb Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
Florian Piekert via Postfix-users:
Hello postfix-users,
I run pf 3.10-20250107 on ubuntu 24.04.
I use sender_bcc_maps and recipient_bcc_maps with pcre: mapping. The files are
simple.
However, I am puzzled by some behaviour of
Dnia 15.01.2025 o godz. 16:29:41 Florian Piekert via Postfix-users pisze:
> I do not want a copy of mails from those senders. Therefore I have added
> it to the sender_bcc_maps-File (expression as above). (ignorethis is an
> alias for |cat > /dev/null).
I don't know solution to your problem, but I
Florian Piekert via Postfix-users:
> Hello postfix-users,
>
> I run pf 3.10-20250107 on ubuntu 24.04.
>
> I use sender_bcc_maps and recipient_bcc_maps with pcre: mapping. The files
> are simple.
>
> However, I am puzzled by some behaviour of postfix that doesn't fit my
> expectation somehow.
>
Hello postfix-users,
I run pf 3.10-20250107 on ubuntu 24.04.
I use sender_bcc_maps and recipient_bcc_maps with pcre: mapping. The files are
simple.
However, I am puzzled by some behaviour of postfix that doesn't fit my
expectation somehow.
In my main.cf the corresponding directives are
---8<
Did this opportunity provide any meaningful changes in
documentation/usability? Any rebukes or insights to share some 90 days
later?
- Matt
On 10/9/2024 9:34 AM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Matt Saladna via Postfix-users:
On 10/8/2024 6:36 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote
On 2025-01-15 15:44:35 +1100, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 03:47:19AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > As documented in https://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html
> > section "Mail forwarding domains", to forward mail to another user,
16 matches
Mail list logo
