Dear Anthony!
You should be ashamed of yourself and the community should be ashamed
for allowing you to act this way to new people.
Essentially you are insulting someone because he didn't do your homework
for you. The link posted by Matthew was a very good starting point for
being able doing
schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Michael Weissenbacher:
>> Wietse Venema:
>>> Michael Weissenbacher:
>>>> I understand that every message should include the message-id Header,
>>>
>>> RFC 5322 (the current spec for Internet messages) says SHOULD, not
>&
Wietse Venema:
> Michael Weissenbacher:
>> I understand that every message should include the message-id Header,
>
> RFC 5322 (the current spec for Internet messages) says SHOULD, not
> MUST. Mail software must therefore not depend on the existence of
> this heade
Hi List!
Simple question: is there an easy way to add a message-id to every
incoming message that is missing it? I've digged the documentation and
the closest thing i found was the always_add_missing_headers parameters.
But i don't want to add any other fields besides a message-id.
I understand th
schrieb Noel Jones:
>
>
> The previously supplied link suggests using the postcat(1) command.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#dont_remove
> http://www.postfix.org/postcat.1.html
>
>
>
> -- Noel Jones
>
Noel, you have been MOST helpful, thanks again! This substantinates my
choice o
I wrote:
>
> Just one last question: what is the best way to inspect postfix's queue
> files? They look odd in vim :-)
>
OMG i'm sorry, i just found out about postcat [1] myself, silly me.
[1] http://www.postfix.org/postcat.1.html
Thanks for your help!
cheers,
Michael
schrieb Noel Jones:
>
>
> This sounds like one of the very rare cases where the obscure
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#dont_remove
> option might be helpful.
>
> something like
> # main.cf
> dont_remove = 1
> hash_queue_names = deferred, defer, saved
>
> If you expect to have more tha
>
> You may enable archive quarantine in your pre-queue amavis,
> e.g.:
>
> $archive_quarantine_method = 'local:archive-%m';
> $archive_quarantine_to = 'archive-quarantine'; # default
>
> to be able to compare a corrupted message to what was seen
> by amavisd. This would not help if a pr
schrieb James Day:
> It should be delivered via the local transport, just set "-o content_filter="
> under local in master.cf to override.
>
Clever. Tried it, but somehow it doesn't work. Mail still passes through
all the filters first. Maybe it's because of my odd filter chain:
postfix:25 -> ama
schrieb Alfonso Alejandro Reyes Jimenez:
> What about tcpdump capture?, then you can reasemble te tcp stream and see
> whats going on.
>
> You can save the capture to a file, then with wireshark you can reasemble the
> tcpstream looking to those emails like in postfix. You can capture traffic
>
Original Message
Subject: Re: Possibility to store all incoming mail (pre-content_filter)
From: Mark Goodge
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Date: Thu Dec 15 2011 18:04:06 GMT+0100 (CET)
> On 15/12/2011 16:58, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
>> schrieb Mark Goodge:
>>
schrieb Mark Goodge:
> On 15/12/2011 16:24, Michael Weissenbacher wrote:
>> Hi!
>>>
>>> You can do this with recpients_bcc_maps
>>>
>> Well, as far as i know this just adds a "bcc" address to the message and
>> as a result the mail wo
Hi!
>
> You can do this with recpients_bcc_maps
>
Well, as far as i know this just adds a "bcc" address to the message and
as a result the mail would still pass through amavis and through the
smarthost before leaving the system, thus it would get altered (and
destroyed if i hit the bug).
Hi Postfix Gurus!
Is there a possibility to store all incoming mail in a central folder at
postfix level. I am trying to find a nasty bug in one of our backend
systems which corrupts mail data before they arrive in the users's
inbox. Therefore i would like to store all imcoming mail unaltered
befor
Hi Blake!
Am 2011-12-01 18:09, schrieb Blake Hudson:
> I was under the impression that hosts using SMTP were required to have a
> valid reverse DNS entry. The reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
> restriction would then enforce this requirement. However, I can't find a
> basis for this in RFC 82
On Wed Aug 31 2011 12:01:20 GMT+0200 (CET), wrote:
> Hello,
>
> annyone can acknowledge that following dnsbl services are not reachable?
>
> zen.spamhaus.org*2DOWN
> b.barracudacentral.orgDOWN
> bl.spamcop.net*2
> combined.rbl.msrbl.net*2
> ix.dnsbl.manitu.net*2DOWN
> dnsrbl.
Hi again!
>
> OK, yes I see my error, however it's still a valid range.
> I do mean 94.149.64.0-255 and 94.149.65.0-255
It isn't valid CIDR notation. Maybe this little tool will help you:
http://www.subnet-calculator.com/cidr.php - key in your numbers and
you'll see that it will correct your range
Hi Jack!
> If I am blocking 194.149.65.0/23 this is a standard format, it tells us that
> the IP's are the 194.149.65.0-255 and 194.149.66.0-255.
This is where you've got it wrong, it means 94.149.64.0-255 and
94.149.65.0-255. If you need 65 and 66 you will need to specify two /24
CIDR entries: 194
Hi Wietse!
> Michael Weissenbacher:
>> Sep 21 15:04:58 smtp1 postfix/smtpd[14679]: warning: unknown smtpd
>> restriction: "med"
>
> That is also a configuration error.
>
This error was really HARD to track. Took me the whole day. But now i
finally found the rea
Hi Wietse!
>
> Oops. You are getting postmaster noticifications because of the
> "Server configuration error". See the maillog file for details.
> You need to fix that regardless.
>
Sorry for the stupid question, but is maillog == /var/log/mail.log ?
I think i may have found the problem, i foun
Hi Wietse!
>
> Perhaps some helpful maintainer changed the default setting.
>
> Please try the following:
>
> $ postconf -d notify_classes
>
> The command output should be:
>
> notify_classes = resource, software
>
> Apparently, YOUR machine was configured to also notify the postmaste
Hi Wietse!
Wietse Venema:
>
> Please look at the output from this command:
>
> $ postconf -n notify_classes
>
> This parameter was changed from its default value. Why?
>
> Wietse
>
No, i didn't change that parameter before:
# postconf -n notify_classes
#
Now i changed it to:
noti
ion closed by foreign host.
+++ snip2 +++
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: REJECT mails to a specific domain -> ERROR mail to postmaster
Von: Michael Weissenbacher
An: postfix-users@postfix.org
Datum: 21.09.2010 13:00
> Hi List!
> I have the following problem: one of our
Hi List!
I have the following problem: one of our customers got a new domain
"newdomain.com" where all mail addresses have been transferred to. They
also got an old domain "olddomain.com" which had some mail addresses
before. It was decided to not use the old domain for receiving emails
any more (a
> Conclusion: the spam is passed! I could stop sending notifications but I
> > think my employer would not like it...
Short answer:
You should NEVER notify anyone about detected spam! This will
effectively make yourself a spam source. It's even worse when you attach
the original message.
hth,
Mich
Hi,
> Find out why the host rejected the mail. I assume your mails are not
> spam and they dont have a virus ( Email virus is almost a non-issue now
> a days ) Are all the forwarded mails getting rejected , or only a few
Well, i assume that those messages that get rejected (like 1 out of 10)
real
>
> Do NOT forward mail to destinations that bounce mail. Either get the
> final destination to accept the forward mail or disable the forwarding
> when bounces are detected.
> Disable bounces is NOT a solution but making the problem worse.
>
Well, as i already said the destination usually DOES a
Hi List!
I am having the problem that our Postfix Mail Server generates too many
bounces which unfortunately results in getting listed (at least at
backscatterer.org). Having digged deepter into the problem i already
read and followed [1] as well as the obvious stuff like correct
local_recipient_ma
28 matches
Mail list logo