Hi,
We have an issue with integrating a spam filter into postfix. When a
mail enters the mail system a loop start between postfix and dspam. And
I don't know why the loop start because when the mail returns to postfix
(localhost:10026) we override mailbox_transport and the mail should be
del
On Sep 8, 2010, at 5:34 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Martijn de Munnik:
So I'm using a mailbox_transport to call dspam. Unfortantly the mail
doesn't show up in the logs after the lmtp part (I have lmtp -v in
master.cf) and the mail isn't delivered. When I remove the
The ma
Hi List,
I'm still struggling with dspam integration with postfix.
Now I have:
--
address_verify_map = btree:${data_directory}/verify
alias_maps = dbm:/etc/opt/redknot/postfix/aliases
config_directory = /etc/opt/redknot/postfix
disable_vrfy_command = yes
home_mailbox = Maildir/
mailbox_command
Is there a way to use virtual_tranport with virtual_alias for this case?
On Sep 3, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
Hi list,
I'm trying to integrate dspam filtering into my postfix system. The
way I have it now works for local users but when a user has an alias
to an ext
Hi list,
I'm trying to integrate dspam filtering into my postfix system. The
way I have it now works for local users but when a user has an alias
to an external domain the mail bounces. This server is for receiving
mail only, so no submission is needed.
---
This is the mail system at hos
Op 24 aug 2010, om 14:24 heeft Edward avanti het volgende geschreven:
> Halo,
>
> We are have odd occasional problem where, some customer that have made up
> name in hostname on pc and try send mail get rejected by us
>
> submission is told use - submission inet n - n -
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:29:21 +0200, Nicolas Michel
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I want to know if there is a way to reject connections from host not
> listed in the MX records of the domain it claims to be.
>
> For example : a host with IP WWW.XXX.YYY.ZZZ try so send a mail to my
> domain (we'll call i
9-154.adsl.xs4all.nl [80.101.149.154])
(Authenticated sender: mart...@youngguns.nl)
by stevie.youngguns.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0EABA3B5BA
for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:37:40
+0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <859284ee-dd63-4b7c-8cde-53b8baa90...@youngguns.nl>
From: Martijn de Munnik
To: munni
-o local_header_rewrite_clients=
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Martijn de Munnik
wrote:
> # /opt/csw/sbin/postmap -q mart...@youngguns.nl
> hash:/opt/csw/etc/postfix/maps/virtual
> martijn-youngguns.nl
>
> so that seems to work?
>
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Marti
# /opt/csw/sbin/postmap -q mart...@youngguns.nl
hash:/opt/csw/etc/postfix/maps/virtual
martijn-youngguns.nl
so that seems to work?
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Martijn de Munnik
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since this morning I get these error messages in maillog. This happens
> for a
Hi,
Since this morning I get these error messages in maillog. This happens
for all our users:
May 19 12:43:08 stevie.youngguns.nl postfix/error[23550]: [ID 197553
mail.info] EFEAC1C176: to=, relay=none,
delay=5511, delays=5509/1.6/0/0.04, dsn=4.0.0, status=SOFTBOUNCE (User
unknown in virtual alia
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:17:51 +0200, "Kammen van, Marco, Springer SBM NL"
wrote:
>>>Patric Falinder
>>Kammen van, Marco, Springer SBM NL skrev 2010-04-14 10:50:
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>
>> Searched on the web for this but couldn't find anything close to what
>> I'm looking for.
>>
>> Any of you kn
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:45:55 -0400 (EDT), Wietse Venema
wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Our smtp server has some issues when talking to some remote mx's. This
>> results in a timeout and the message not being delivered (this was
>> discussed on this
Hi,
Our smtp server has some issues when talking to some remote mx's. This
results in a timeout and the message not being delivered (this was
discussed on this mailinglist but there doesn't seem to be a real
solution available now). When we relay the message through another
server the remote mx ha
first.
Backscatter.org
SORBS-SPAM
UCEPROTECTL2
maybe others...
>
> Sam.
>
>
> Martijn de Munnik - Postfix List a écrit :
>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:06:42 +0100, Sam Przyswa
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On last Postfix install on new ser
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 15:47 +0100, Ilja Beeskow wrote:
> Hello @ll
>
> I have a little problem with postfix 2.5, trendmicro viruswall and an old
> exchange 2k behind it. Perhaps somebody could give me a hint because I'm
> really confused after some days of trying different things.
>
> for incom
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 15:43 +0100, Zoltan Balogh wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> I have an old postfix install where I am getting "timeout after
> CONNECT from" error messages upon e-mails being send from one
> particular host. The user is complaining that he is not able to send
> out any e-mail. Other user
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 13:23 +0200, Razvan Cosma wrote:
> Hello,
> While moving the IMAP services to a new host, I'd need to copy all
> messages addressed to anyu...@example.com to the old inbox, and to the
> new at anyu...@tempsubdomain.example.com
> Virtual maps allows this, but needs the full li
On Jan 23, 2010, at 4:24 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
>
>> RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
>>
>> "An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while it
>> is awaiting the next command from the s
Hi List,
RFC2821 section 4.5.3.2 Timeouts reads
"An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while it
is awaiting the next command from the sender."
When I try to connect to an one.com mx (mx-cluster1.one.com or
mx-cluster2.one.com) I notice they will close the connection after ab
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:35:25 -0500 (EST), wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse
Venema) wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik:
>> Jan 21 17:02:30 marcus postfix/qmgr[16421]: 523FD1C11A:
>> from=, size=650750, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
>> Jan 21 17:02:30 marcus postfix/smtp[16449]: 523FD1C11A: host
&
Hi list,
I had a problem with my primary mailserver which was not able to deliver
mail to some remote mx's. One of the mx's that we couldn't deliver to was
mx-cluster[1-2].one.com. After I modified the transport maps on
mx1.youngguns.nl (stevie.youngguns.nl) the message now is deliverd to
mx2.youn
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:30:54 -0500 (EST), wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse
Venema) wrote:
> It's nice for a change to work with someone who provides actual
> information, instead of that dork from last week who was just
> venting his opinions and not giving people a chance to help.
I don't know how on
On Jan 20, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:22:56PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> The broken router then throws away the bytes with higher sequence
>> numbers than 14233.
>>
>> Workaround: turn off window scaling support on the sender's kernel.
>
> This
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:20:01 -0500 (EST), wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse
Venema) wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik:
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I have a problem with delivering mail to a host and get this error:
>>
>> host mx2.amsterdam.nl[145.222.14.10] said: 421 enepmx02.amster
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:10:50 +0100, Martijn de Munnik
wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:56:39 +0100, Martijn de Munnik
> wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I have a problem with delivering mail to a host and get this error:
>>
>> host mx2.amsterdam.nl[145.222.14
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:56:39 +0100, Martijn de Munnik
wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I have a problem with delivering mail to a host and get this error:
>
> host mx2.amsterdam.nl[145.222.14.10] said: 421 enepmx02.amsterdam.nl
> Error: timeout exceeded (in reply to end of DATA comman
Hi list,
I have a problem with delivering mail to a host and get this error:
host mx2.amsterdam.nl[145.222.14.10] said: 421 enepmx02.amsterdam.nl
Error: timeout exceeded (in reply to end of DATA command)
This error only seems to occur with 'large' mails. Currently I have a mail
of ~600KB and ~8M
On Jan 10, 2010, at 9:24 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> On 1/10/10 10:17 PM, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
>> Hi List,
>>
>> This is not a real postfix related question…
>>
>> We offer e-mail services to our customers and some of our customers have a
>> har
Hi List,
This is not a real postfix related question…
We offer e-mail services to our customers and some of our customers have a hard
time configuring their mail client. I noticed that most mail clients try to
'find' the correct settings when an account is configured. So the mail client
(at le
ake available to these servers (via SQL replication) a list of 'valid'
> email addresses from the destination mail server(s), how can the
> valid/invalid address accept/deny be deployed?
>
Look for relay_domains and relay_recipient_maps, that will solve your
problem.
--
Martijn de Munnik
YoungGuns
On Dec 26, 2009, at 9:08 PM, Edwin Minneboo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wonder how and why mail is delivered in the following case:
>
> I own a domain, let’s say example.com. In this domain mail for user
> w...@example.com is delivered to e...@example.com.
> Now I find mail for To: wilma.vivi...@
On Dec 20, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Houssam El Hallak wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello
> this is my first post here , so If any mistake with this post please let me
> know .
>
> question 1 : is this a good postfix architecture ??
>
> I have 2 postfix Servers :
> DMZ_postfix which has basic protection (192.16
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 14:24 +, Jaroslaw Grzabel wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik wrote:
>
> > > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html#caching
> > >
> >
> Hi Martin,
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> The only problem with tha
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:32 +, Jaroslaw Grzabel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just had a hard nut to crack, as I've got SMTP server which stores
> and forwards or I only hoped so. Why ? As I checked now if the
> remote server is down, and I use reject_unverified_recipient it gives me
> an err
On Dec 12, 2009, at 6:28 PM, Kārlis Repsons wrote:
> After seeing these:
>
> postfix/smtpd[14497]: warning: 118.71.107.14: hostname
> adsl-dynamic-pool-xxx.fpt.vn verification failed: Name or service not known
> postfix/smtpd[14497]: connect from unknown[118.71.107.14]
> postfix/smtpd[14497]: N
On Dec 4, 2009, at 8:08 PM, Carlos Williams wrote:
> I was just thinking today that if anyone knew a valid email address on
> my Postfix mail server, anyone could simply telnet to it (assuming
> they're on a trusted network / mynetworks) and send mail posed as that
> valid email address. I know t
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 16:27 +, Frog wrote:
> Perhaps your mail server is on a DNSBL?
>
> Regards
> Frog
Nope, this is a problem at the ip level, routing. This is not a postfix
or mail/smtp issue.
> - Original Message -
> From: "Carlos Williams"
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Sent
N MX 0 a.mx.premore.net.
>
> ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> a.mx.premore.net. 3093IN A 198.186.193.20
>
> However my mail server wont send to this destination address and I
> have no idea why. Can someone tell me how I can better examine this
> situation to understand where the fault lies.
>
> Thank you!
--
Martijn de Munnik
YoungGuns
h!
>
> Best regards
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
> [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Martijn de Munnik
> Sent: 11. november 2009 11:31
0 1000 * www.sdu.dk
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
> [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Martijn de Munnik
> Sent: 11. november 2009 09:54
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
&g
Hi,
Last night we had a issue with our mail server which went unnoticed till
this morning. Our spam filter crashed and postfix couldn't feed mails for
check to localhost:10024. The mails stayed in the queue till we noticed
that we didn't received any mail this morning. I restarted the spam filter
On Nov 4, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Eric B. wrote:
Hi,
I'm running postfix on an internal network with an internal DNS. My
internal DNS is configured for my particular domain (ie:
mydomain.com). I
have an MX pointer that points to my postfix machine so any email
being
generated for mydomain.com
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 13:03 +0200, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 06:35 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Martijn de Munnik:
> > > Hi List,
> > >
> > > Some of our customers use our mailservers as antispam/antivirus gateway.
> > > S
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 06:35 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik:
> > Hi List,
> >
> > Some of our customers use our mailservers as antispam/antivirus gateway.
> > So our server accepts mail, does some spam and virus checking and
> > delivers the mai
Hi List,
Some of our customers use our mailservers as antispam/antivirus gateway.
So our server accepts mail, does some spam and virus checking and
delivers the mail to a remote server. Of course I don't want to accept
mail for non existing users so our mailserver verifies the recipient. So
far so
On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 13:50 +0200, Martin Schiøtz wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm configuring a simple postfix smtp-server that is only used for
> outgoing emails for lots of users.
> I want to do some simple spam checking with postfix. I was thinking of:
>
> rbl
> spf
RBL and SPF are techniques only used f
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:46:01 -0400 (EDT), wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse
Venema) wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik:
>>
>> On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 07:38 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> > Martijn de Munnik:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > It
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 07:38 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems that e-mails which are relayed to other servers (using
> > relay_domains and transport_maps) don't go through content_filter. How
> > can I make sure that a
Hi,
It seems that e-mails which are relayed to other servers (using
relay_domains and transport_maps) don't go through content_filter. How
can I make sure that all mails go through the content_filter?
thanks,
Martijn
address_verify_map = btree:${data_directory}/verify
alias_maps = hash:/opt/csw/
On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 15:48 +0200, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 09:41 -0400, Carlos Williams wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Martijn de Munnik
> > wrote:
> > > I think this is not too restrictive and the sending mailserver should
> &
t; smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/ssl/mail.key
> smtpd_tls_loglevel = 1
> smtpd_tls_security_level = may
> smtpd_tls_session_cache_database = btree:/var/spool/postfix/smtpd_tls_cache
> smtpd_tls_session_cache_timeout = 3600s
> tls_random_source = dev:/dev/urandom
> unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
>
Met vriendelijke groet,
Martijn de Munnik
--
YoungGuns
Kasteleinenkampweg 7b
5222 AX 's-Hertogenbosch
T. 073 623 56 40
F. 073 623 56 39
www.youngguns.nl
KvK 18076568
4:47 mail postfix/smtpd[21591]: connect from my.company.sk
> [pu.bl.ic.ip]
>
> Sep 21 15:44:47 mail postfix/smtpd[21591]: 5BA29411BEE2: client=
> my.company.sk [pu.bl.ic.ip] [senders local IP address]
>
> Sep 21 15:44:47 mail postfix/cleanup[28274]: 5BA29411BEE2:
> mes
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:00:15 +0100, "Laurence Moughan"
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Would someone just please give me a headsup on the format for reg exp
> headerchecks files,
>
> Im not sure how to format for searching for a string within an email
> address,
>
> eg
>
> to reject all mail with the
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:05:42 +0100, Mark Goodge
wrote:
> wiskbr...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> I am seeing a few spams coming through with a from address (seen on my
>> postfix logs) that does not match the "From" address shown on my users
>> Outlook. In fact my users are seeing a "From" addres
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:59:20 -0400, wrote:
> I am seeing a few spams coming through with a from address (seen on my
> postfix logs) that does not match the "From" address shown on my users
> Outlook. In fact my users are seeing a "From" address as their own,
> something that my postfix server cu
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:12:52 +0100, Mark Goodge
wrote:
> Dan Slay wrote:
>> Thanks, that's what I have read. Which is why this make things more
>> awkward.
>>
>> I cannot see that holding a recipient list is a solution. If, for
>> instance, you relay for thousands of domains all going to differe
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:45:53 +0100, Dan Slay
wrote:
> I'm looking for some information on preventing the sending of backscatter
> from a Postfix gateway mail server.
>
> The server itself does not and will not hold a recipient list, therefore
I
> don't know what the best way forward would be? The
On Aug 24, 2009, at 8:31 PM, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
On Aug 24, 2009, at 7:57 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Monday 24 August 2009 12:43:16 Martijn de Munnik wrote:
How can I write a message to syslog when a check_client_access
rule matches?
See the WARN result. If you mean that you want to
On Aug 24, 2009, at 7:57 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Monday 24 August 2009 12:43:16 Martijn de Munnik wrote:
How can I write a message to syslog when a check_client_access
rule matches?
See the WARN result. If you mean that you want to log and to trigger
some other action, do note that REJECT
Hi,
How can I write a message to syslog when a check_client_access rule
matches?
thanks,
Martijn
> Most of this spam is also blocked using spamhaus. Also you could add SPF
> to your own domain so no other servers could send mail using your
> domain.
> http://www.openspf.org/Introduction
Off course your server should check the SPF records for incoming mail.
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 10:28 -0400, Daniel L'Hommedieu wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2009, at 10:10, Mikael Bak wrote:
> > Daniel L'Hommedieu wrote:
> >>
> >> The spam I see pretty much all originates in China & Brazil, with
> >> some
> >> originating in Korea & US. It also pretty much all originates on
>
On Aug 22, 2009, at 8:16 PM, AMP Admin wrote:
Ø Does anyone use iptables or something to defend against attacks?
Like if x amount of requests per x amount of time send away. If so
I would love some examples. Thanks!
Thanks for the tips guys. How does that do with search engine
bots
On Aug 22, 2009, at 7:53 PM, AMP Admin wrote:
Does anyone use iptables or something to defend against attacks?
Like if x amount of requests per x amount of time send away. If so
I would love some examples. Thanks!
Hi,
I use fail2ban with ipf on Solaris 10. When a host produces to many
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 09:10 -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > How can I enable the address_verify_map only for the relay_domains?
> >
> To answer the query:
> Replace reject_unverified_recipient with "
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 09:10 -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
> Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > How can I enable the address_verify_map only for the relay_domains?
> >
> > postconf -n
> >
> > smtpd_client_restrictions = reject_rbl_
Hi list,
We are using address_verify_map to cache and limit the number of checks
on remote smtp servers. This is done because we act as a spam/virus
filter for some domains that have there own mail server. Now it seems
the address_verify_map is also used for local domains.
One of our clients crea
Hi list,
What is the use of mailbox_size_limit when mail is delivered to
Maildirs?
I have mailbox_size_limit > message_size_limit but I think I can safely
change it to 0?
--
Martijn de Munnik
--
YoungGuns
Kasteleinenkampweg 7b
5222 AX 's-Hertogenbosch
T. 073 623 56 40
F. 073 6
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 12:46 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Martijn de Munnik :
>
> > > Do you have a caching DNS server?
> >
> > Yes, but still things can go wrong and I don't want a failing DNS lookup
> > to be fatal.
>
> Postfix always returns
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 12:46 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Martijn de Munnik :
>
> > > Do you have a caching DNS server?
> >
> > Yes, but still things can go wrong and I don't want a failing DNS lookup
> > to be fatal.
>
> Postfix always returns
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 11:28 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Martijn de Munnik :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Sometimes our mail server is 'under attack' and we get a lot of these
> > entries in our log file:
> >
> > Aug 17 11:08:19 stevie.youngguns.
r returned.
The 450 error triggers the spammer to retry sending the mail.
The to address is an unknown user on my system so postfix could return a
550 error. How can I do this?
I've attached postconf -n output in main.cf.
--
Martijn de Munnik
address_verify_map = btree:${data_directory}/ve
On Jul 30, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 7/30/2009 8:26 AM, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
I assume it is better to put the reject_unknown_recipient_domain and
reject_unverified_recipient controls after the rbls en policy
services.
This way only address verification is needed when
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 07:06 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 7/30/2009, Martijn de Munnik (mart...@youngguns.nl) wrote:
> > Of course we don't know which email addresses are valid so all mail for
> > the domain is accepted on our servers.
>
> That is your problem to
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 19:56 +0200, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> I guess I need prohibit the catch all account and offer the solution
> with the delimiter instead. That way all spam to bogus email addresses
> get rejected because the address does not exist.
>
> But still I wonde
What do these log entries mean and how can I fix this problem:
Jul 29 02:19:39 stevie.youngguns.nl postfix/postfix-script[24806]: [ID
197553 mail.info] starting the Postfix mail system
Jul 29 02:19:41 stevie.youngguns.nl postfix/master[24807]: [ID 197553
mail.info] daemon started -- version 2
On Jul 27, 2009, at 7:18 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Monday 27 July 2009 05:47:29 Simon Waters wrote:
On Monday 27 July 2009 11:13:34 Martijn de Munnik wrote:
Losing catchall seems to be the best solution but some of my
customers
want to create an emailaddress for every website the register on
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 10:55 +0100, Simon Waters wrote:
> On Monday 27 July 2009 10:40:34 Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> >
> > I'm using a couple of anti-spam techniques which successfully reject
> > (5xx) or ban (ipfilter firewall rule) most spam before even getting in
>
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 11:40 +0200, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using a couple of anti-spam techniques which successfully reject
> (5xx) or ban (ipfilter firewall rule) most spam before even getting in
> the queue. A couple of days ago about 2600 spam messages whe
soft_bounce = no
tls_random_source = dev:/dev/urandom
transport_maps = hash:/opt/csw/etc/postfix/transport
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/opt/csw/etc/postfix/virtual
Kind regards,
Martijn de Munnik
--
YoungGuns
Kas
Hi,
On Jul 13, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Martijn de Munnik wrote:
smtpd_recipient_limit = 25
only if you have 25 or fewer users.
I thought this means a user can send an e-mail to 25 users max at once?
On Jul 13, 2009, at 11:12 PM, Martijn de Munnik wrote:
On Jul 13, 2009, at 10:59 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Martijn de Munnik wrote:
Hi Noel, List,
Thanks for your reply! I changed things according to your settings
but I guess I overlooked a thing? Still they backup mailserver
relays
On Jul 13, 2009, at 10:59 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Martijn de Munnik wrote:
Hi Noel, List,
Thanks for your reply! I changed things according to your settings
but I guess I overlooked a thing? Still they backup mailserver
relays everything for *...@validdomain.org. Invalid domains are not
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 450
On Jul 13, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Martijn de Munnik wrote:
Hi List,
A script just screwed my main.cf of a backup mx. Unfortunately I
don't
have a backup of the main.cf. I restored the main.cf but one thing is
still not working as before. The
ender, reject_unknown_sender_domain,
reject_unauth_pipelining, permit
smtpd_soft_error_limit = 3
soft_bounce = no
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 450
Met vriendelijke groet,
Martijn de Munnik
--
YoungGuns
Kasteleinenkampweg 7b
5222 AX 's-Hertogenbosch
T. 073 623 56 40
F. 073
86 matches
Mail list logo
