[pfx] Re: Implicit TLS via SRV record?

2024-12-31 Thread Noel Butler via Postfix-users
On 31/12/2024 09:35, Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users wrote: * Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: There is nothing to link. postfix already supports SRV. [...] Seriously? You refer to a draft, then don't bother to link to it, or mention that you are the author, with an agenda to boot? What

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

2023-11-05 Thread Noel Butler via Postfix-users
sys4.de are not removing original DKIM sigs just adding postfix.org's, which also fails for some reason, but ohh looky that - SPF passes :D Decided to have a look ater lunch, that looks like it would be because sys4 adds footers, where previously Wietse did not, again if they configured mailma

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

2023-11-05 Thread Noel Butler via Postfix-users
On 05/11/2023 20:02, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote: DKIM, was a problem, but for several years now mailman can do the right thing by stripping out the original DKIM headers and rewrites sender (although you need to know where to add the former) - but only if the admins set those setting

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

2023-11-05 Thread Noel Butler via Postfix-users
On 06/11/2023 02:48, Fred Morris via Postfix-users wrote: Let's step out of the echo chamber or petri dish or whatever. On Sun, 5 Nov 2023, Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote: Dnia 5.11.2023 o godz. 13:53:46 Noel Butler via Postfix-users pisze: If correctly forwarded it does not

[pfx] Re: Recommendation for dkim signing

2023-11-04 Thread Noel Butler via Postfix-users
On 03/11/2023 10:22, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote: - SPF breaks all hosts which have users that effectively want their email to be forwarded to a different address. This is basically any campus, and much, much more. FUD... why do people rely on 15+ years old problems to back their