On 2/26/20 9:12 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
micah anderson:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
welcome to the internet. Can be misconfigured client, spamware somewhere,
scan, whatever. Firewalling those automatically is the only way to limit
those messages.
I'm curious what kind of firewalling r
On 6/21/19 4:13 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 04:04:52PM -0500, John Gateley wrote:
root@elephant:~# dpkg-reconfigure postfix-pcre
Removing pcre map entry from /etc/postfix/dynamicmaps.cf
Adding pcre map entry to /etc/postfix/dynamicmaps.cf
root@elephant:~# postmap -q
On 6/21/19 3:47 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 6/21/19 4:32 PM, John Gateley wrote:
This is Debian 9, with a fresh install of postfix,
postfix-policyd-spf-python and postfix-pcre packages.
I am getting the following error:
root@elephant:/etc/postfix# postmap -q foo
pcre:/etc/postfix
Hello,
This is Debian 9, with a fresh install of postfix,
postfix-policyd-spf-python and postfix-pcre packages.
I am getting the following error:
root@elephant:/etc/postfix# postmap -q foo
pcre:/etc/postfix/header_checks.pcre
postmap: warning: unsupported dictionary type: pcre (no/postfix-pcr
On 6/13/19 10:22 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
John Gateley:
Is there any reason the software upgrade would cause this behavior?
I can't think of one, but the timing is very coincidental.
There is no known problem with mail from Postfix ending up in
SPAM folders after a Postfix update
Hello,
I recently upgraded my mail server OS (Debian 7 to Debian 9), and at the
same time got
the latest postfix package for Debian 9.
It is hosted in the cloud (Linode), and I completely rebuilt the
instance, rather than
doing an upgrade. The IP addresses (v4 and v6) are the same. The config
Good morning Martin,
I have exactly the same scenario. Instead of using "include", I just use
the ipv4 addresses
of the mailserver:
v=spf1 ip4:97.107.132.79 ip4:50.116.29.164 -all
Here, the two IP addresses are for my two mx hosts.
This is the SPF record for all my domains, including the doma
Hello,
I am trying to build postfix with TLS support.
I have Debian, with the openssl package installed (as well as libssl-dev).
Reading the instructions here:
http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html#build_tls
It states "Do not use Gnu TLS".
The only libssl.so file I can find is:
/usr/lib/x86_64
On 7/19/15 10:47 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:44:09PM -0500, John Gateley wrote:
However, the question still remains: how can I test this without actually
making one of my domains live?
Define "test".
It will work as documented.
Test: ensuring that my und
On 7/19/15 10:36 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:08:07PM -0500, John Gateley wrote:
I have a host running postfix on port 25 (also 12345 for debugging
purposes[*]),
and I want to test the following line in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions
I have a host running postfix on port 25 (also 12345 for debugging
purposes[*]),
and I want to test the following line in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions = reject_unknown_client_hostname
The host is on the internet, publicly accessible, but I haven't pointed any
DNS MX records at it.
The
On 7/14/15 7:06 PM, John Gateley wrote:
I'm just starting to work on SASL support, and tried the postconf -A
and -a commands
to make sure SASL support was enabled at build time. It wasn't, both
commands return
nothing (and no error code).
Nevermind. Found it. In a place in the doc
I'm just starting to work on SASL support, and tried the postconf -A and
-a commands
to make sure SASL support was enabled at build time. It wasn't, both
commands return
nothing (and no error code).
I can't find any steps for telling postfix to build with SASL support
enabled in the docs.
Is
On 7/3/15 5:20 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
On 7/3/2015 9:56 AM, John Gateley wrote:
...
...
But if you're sending to the same IP as published in DNS, no real
reason to use a transport entry.
Thanks for the confirmation
Note secondary MX servers are no longer considered a benefit. ...
Hi,
I've found several websites for configuring backup MX servers
that recommend setting the transport_maps for the primary domains.
This seems wrong to me: the DNS MX record already has this info.
Is there another reason to set the transport_maps for the backup config?
Thanks
John
http://www.
Another newbie question:
I am setting up Postfix to replace a long-standing qmail system.
My plan is for all domains to be Virtual Mailbox domains.
My question: what do I set mydomain to?
I have myhostname set to mx[12].example.com,
myorigin to myhostname, and mydestination to myhostname, local
On 6/28/15 9:27 PM, Peter wrote:
On 06/27/2015 03:20 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
Is there a release of postfix planned to handle Linux 4?
Files: makedefs, util/sys_defs.h.
You can look at these two files at:
https://github.com/vdukhovni/postfix/commit/469db3d275fb467932ca0bd72e58ecd59f0d4
Hello,
Due to a forced upgrade, I'm running Linux Kernel 4.0:
xxx:~/hg/postfix/build/postfix-3.0.1$ uname -r
4.0.5-x86_64-xxx
The postfix build is failing while creating the Makefiles
as this is not handled in the makedefs script:
case "$SYSTEM.$RELEASE" in
And only linux.1*, 2* and
Hello,
I am new to postfix, in the process of converting my existing qmail
implementation to postfix.
Is it possible to make ALL domains virtual domains? Are there
advantages or disadvantages to doing so?
To be more specific: for control over mailboxes and to treat
all domains the same, I plan o
19 matches
Mail list logo
