manually" before invoking postmulti
and starting to configure the first of our pair of postfix instances which we will be migrating to?
thanks,
~c
--
Charlie Derr Director of Instructional Technology
Bard College at Simon's Rock https://simons-rock.edu
Encryption key: http://h
To forward mail from a primary DNS MX host to a system that is not
a DNS MX host,
https://www.postfix.org/STANDARD_CONFIGURATION_README.html#backup
Wietse
Thanks so very much; this is great.
~c
--
Charlie Derr Director of Instructional Technology
Bard College at Simon's
ny direction, guidance, and/or hints to
example configurations that are similar enough to what we want so we can
figure it out ourselves.
gratefully,
~c
--
Charlie Derr Director of Instructional Technology
Bard College at Simon's Rock https://simons-rock.edu
Encryption key:
(obviously listening on
different ports!), as well as start and stop them idependently of each
other, would be welcome.
thanks so very much in advance,
~c
[1] thanks to information provided via this list a number of months ago
when I asked a previous question about our email migr
elivery (arriving via hormel.simons-rock.edu) is just
delivered to a Dovecot mailbox.
Thanks so much for any direction you can provide us. Should there be
more information you would like us to provide, we'll be happy to do so.
gratefully,
~c
--
Charlie Derr Director of Instruct
dles in an older version than is current which doesn't
have the functionality i'm looking for? (the ability to display HTML
messages properly when possible).
Version 3.7.0 (Build 1185) is what i'm running (on currently stable
debian (on three different computers)).
thanks much in advan
ps
is the best I can come up with but given that I seem to be in the
minority here, I guess I'll stop whining and instead go off and
have a stab at setting up something with a policy service.
I enjoyed the discussion though :)
Charlie
t already using this approach in the first place.
Charlie
ild the recipient_maps db periodically (e.g. by
taking
the output of postmap -s btree:/path/verify | grep ':250 ' from the primary).
Charlie
7;s primary and secondary mx servers.
Of course, if there is a problem with the actual DNS records of the
receiving mta's primary and/or secondary mx machines then all bets are
off but that is probably outside the scope of the problem.
Charlie
- Original Message -
From: /dev/rob0
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, July 4, 2011 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: unverified_recipient_tempfail_action = permit
>On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 04:48:44AM -0700, Charlie Orford wrote:
>> unverified_recipient_tempfail_action = perm
- Original Message -
From: Wietse Venema
To: Postfix users
Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2011 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: unverified_recipient_tempfail_action = permit
>>Charlie Orford:
>> I will run the tests and get the output for you later tonight but my
>> suspicion
>>
- Original Message -
>From: Wietse Venema
>To: Postfix users
>Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2011 5:38 PM
>Subject: Re: unverified_recipient_tempfail_action = permit
>
>>Reindl Harald:
>> Am 05.07.2011 16:55, schrieb Wietse Venema:
>> > If no such problem exists, then we know that cache expirati
- Original Message -
From: Charlie Orford
To: Postfix users
Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2011 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: unverified_recipient_tempfail_action = permit
>Hi Wietse,
>
>Although the address caching should have worked as you describe, we
>found that it failed for a number
ver seen these addresses before (as it's cache is obviously
seperate from the primary's cache)?
If my second conclusion is correct, this situaiton could have been avoided with
unverified_recipient_tempfail_action=permit (I think).
Kind Regards,
Charlie
ied_recipient_tempfail_action = permit would have solved this
problem with the small penalty of a brief period of potential
backscatter.
Where is the down side?
Charlie
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:12 PM, mouss wrote:
> Charlie Root a écrit :
>> I've been fighting with it for a long time but still can't get the desirable:
>> - forward all local mail sent to valid unix users (+postmaster and
>> abuse redirects of course) to sp
I've been fighting with it for a long time but still can't get the desirable:
- forward all local mail sent to valid unix users (+postmaster and
abuse redirects of course) to specific email address.
I.e. forward all mail sent to:
[any-valid-unix-name-from-etc-pass...@[any-ip-address-of-the-host]
[
Noel Jones wrote:
> Charlie wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Looking to get educated on postfix, and I started browsing through
>> amazons reviews. I've found the book 'The book of postfix' and that
>> everyone seemed quite happy with it. But the problem is the
evisions that I
would be better off with a more current book?
Thanks,
Charlie
20 matches
Mail list logo
