On 03 Sep 2017, at 12:38 PM, Tom Browder wrote:
> The docs mention not to use root or postfix for the "-u UID" option. Then
> what user should it be? Is a new user to be created for that purpose?
Yes.
> Should that same user own the /var/db/dkim directory and files?
No.
The idea is that open
Hi all,
I am using the following version of postfix on CentOS7 as shipped by the distro:
postfix-2.10.1-6.el7.x86_64
I am trying to convert this configuration into the new per-file LDAP
configuration, and I have run into a problem:
virtual_mailbox_domains = ldap:acceptdomains
acceptdomains_ser
Rich Shepard wrote:
I just ran testsaslauthd for my wife's account from the server:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# testsaslauthd -u pamela -p
0: OK "Success."
You're testing this while running as root - you need to test this
running as the system user that ultimately will be used to run postfix.
Rich Shepard wrote:
I installed cyrus-sasl a couple of postfix versions back, so I should
learn how to properly configure it. I followed the SASL_README to set it
up.
Having changed perms to 777 on /var/spool/postfix/var and its
subdirectories, I have no idea what other permissions are preve
mouss wrote:
There are far more tools that integrate with sql than with other "stuff".
Not that I have found, but YMMV.
Email clients for example generally have functionality to query an
LDAP based address book, but not a SQL one.
and which email clients support configuring a vacation prog
Eduardo Júnior wrote:
my situation is different.
My virtual users are in MYSQL and not LDAP.
Initially, i want a reference generic explain how implement this.
Maybe, more latter, i use any tool specific if necessary.
The trouble you will run into by storing users in a SQL database is that
th
Eduardo Júnior wrote:
I have a postfix configured with virtual domains and virtual users.
And by how-to I found it was requested that the user set up your own
vacation is authenticating the system.
Any reference to how to do this?
I use a package called gnarwl, which handles vacation messag
John Baker wrote:
I user reported mail not getting to him from somebody and I found this
in the log:
NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bmmail.cwf.org[216.54.2.34]: 504 :
Helo command rejected: need fully-qualified hostname;
from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> proto=SMTP
helo=
Carlos Williams wrote:
My biggest complaint at work is that there is no global address book
for everyone to use. Obviously a file I create will be outdated weekly
based on the users I add and remove from my Postfix email server. My
Postfix email server does not do any kind of fancy authenticatio
Jeff wrote:
Out: 451 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Temporary lookup failure
In: RSET
Out: 250 Ok
In: QUIT
Out: 221 Bye
What is the end result of this? Does the sender see an immediate
error? Does the sending MTA queue and retry? I have googled in vain
for the answer.
Response codes starting wit
R Pradeepa wrote:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
hash:/etc/postfix/alluser,permit_sasl_authenticated,permit_mynetworks,reject_unauth_destination,check_relay_domains
Is it not the "permit_mynetworks" that is tripping you up?
As I understand it, postfix will walk down the list of restrictions f
DJ Lucas wrote:
Is
there any pitfalls aside from the possibility of blocking a good
address every now and then? If the message is from a real person, then
I'll hear about it.
You won't hear about it, because that person will be blocked from
sending you mail.
In addition, the person bein
Jason Voorhees wrote:
My problem begins here: I don't want to use the value returned by
result_attribute, instead I want to use a custom value to return (i.e.
[EMAIL PROTECTED])
You are looking for the result_filter option, which allows you to filter
the attribute returned, or even replacing
Sandy Drobic wrote:
Have a look at the subject of this thread. Many readers of this list
probably deleted the thread immediately after seeing the subject. (^-^)
Oops.
It didn't matter though, at least one person didn't, and helped root out
the source of the problem.
Regards,
Graham
--
sm
Sandy Drobic wrote:
inet_interfaces = $myhostname
That parameter sets the ips for LISTENING to SMTP connections.
Correct, and according to the docs at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html, when a single IP address is
specified, that single IP address is used as the source IP address.
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
Why can your end users "access an outgoing port"? You are not
addressing this problem at it's source. Police your outbound traffic.
If its from an end user and it isn't bound for port 80 or 443, why are
you allowing the traffic to leave your network?
Because that is thr
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
Blocking outbound SMTP traffic from sources other than your mail server
will prevent you from being blacklisted, plain and simple, unless of
course you are sending spam from your mail server.
It's not that simple.
Blocking outbound SMTP traffic keeps you off 99% of blackl
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
This doesn't prove Postfiix is using the wrong interface. It simply
means the traffic is seen by the upstream server as coming from the
wrong interface. It is much more likely that your NAT config is wrong
and is SNATing the mail traffic to the same address that it SNATs
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
If your network is doing things to get itself blacklisted, fix the
problem! Filter outbound SMTP, cleanup your network clients, whatever.
Been there, done that, way ahead of you.
You may not be aware of this, but while filtering outbound SMTP stops
outgoing spam, it does
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
What makes you think postfix is choosing the wrong interface?
The Received line added by the upstream mailserver receiving the test
messages from this box clearly shows that it received the email from the
second (NAT) public IP, instead of the primary public IP of the mail
Graham Leggett wrote:
Because traffic from machines behind the box can cause the mailserver's
IP to be blacklisted, the mailserver machine has two IP addresses, one
for the mailserver, and one for NAT.
Just to be clear - the box has two public routeable IPs on the same
interface.
Hi all,
I have a machine that is both a postfix mailserver, and a NAT router for
a number of machines behind the box.
Because traffic from machines behind the box can cause the mailserver's
IP to be blacklisted, the mailserver machine has two IP addresses, one
for the mailserver, and one for
Hi all,
For some time I have been successfully running a postfix install backed
with LDAP, and this query works great:
ldapvirtual_query_filter =
(&(|(mail=%s)(mailAlternateAddress=%s))(mailHost=$myhostname))
I have recently installed postfix v2.5.1 (as provided by FC9), and went
through t
23 matches
Mail list logo
