--On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 5:01 PM -0400 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Wietse Venema:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
> --On Monday, August 29, 2016 10:40 AM -0400 Wietse Venema
> wrote:
>
> > [An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
> > http://www.postfix.org/
,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
think we'll just need to spin up different MTAs
that the haproxy points to, and then move our MX record, and move
everything off the direct connections.
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Manager, Systems Team
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the lead
re any ability to support a mixed mode, where some clients are coming
in via an upstream proxy and some are not?
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Manager, Systems Team
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of S
--On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 11:08 PM -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
I added an IP to the postscreen blacklist, but it still gets passed to
SMTPD?
Never mind, blacklist action was set to ignore instead of enforce... Fixed.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Manager
@edge02e:~$ cat /opt/zimbra/conf/postfix/postscreen_blacklist
10.43.0.41 reject
10.43.0.188 reject
I also stop postfix, deleted the postscreen cache, and restarted, but it
didn't work. :/ The logs above are from after doing that.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Ma
d use. ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Manager, Systems Team
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of Synacor, Inc
ommon/conf$ cat tag_as_originating.re
/^/ FILTER smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10026
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Manager, Systems Team
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of Synacor, Inc
--On Wednesday, April 06, 2016 1:23 PM -0500 Noel Jones
wrote:
On 4/6/2016 10:52 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Wednesday, April 06, 2016 6:36 PM +0200 lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
Zitat von Quanah Gibson-Mount :
Is anyone familiar with this RBL and its quality? Not a whole lot
of
--On Wednesday, April 06, 2016 6:36 PM +0200 lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
Zitat von Quanah Gibson-Mount :
Is anyone familiar with this RBL and its quality? Not a whole lot
of info at <http://bad.psky.me/about/>. Terms seem probably ok
<http://bad.psky.me/terms/>.
If there is
Is anyone familiar with this RBL and its quality? Not a whole lot of info
at <http://bad.psky.me/about/>. Terms seem probably ok
<http://bad.psky.me/terms/>.
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in
--On Friday, April 01, 2016 11:36 AM -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Thursday, March 31, 2016 9:15 PM -0400 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Is this a known issue with Barracuda? Anyone have an idea how to work
around this? Clearly having their spam appliance be non-functional
isn't a
d yet, here we see
a significant behavior change.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of Synacor, Inc
their spam appliance be non-functional isn't a
great start. ;)
I think I'd choose Barracuda OR postscreen, not sure how both of them
together could be useful?
Dunno. :)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leade
around this? Clearly having their spam appliance be non-functional isn't a
great start. ;)
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of Synacor, Inc
s does not even try to run a actual
test, it seems. but like the problem below, if it is running a 32 bit
test, it wont link with a 64 bit library
Sounds like a good time to ditch BDB for LMDB. ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the
--On Monday, October 07, 2013 3:16 PM -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Monday, October 07, 2013 6:07 PM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
Note, the new "%" substitution pattern for a comma-separated
list of DC= components is "%," not "%". I hope that&#
flowing smoothly. It also allows for things like
upgrading an LDAP server w/o worrying about the rest of the infrastructure
falling over.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of Synacor, Inc
-check for that.
OpenLDAP has a parameter for that where it will not answer queries if it is
currently refreshing. It would probably make more sense to set that
instead?
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source
ld default was host,
not subnet, so had the logic reversed. ;)
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
A division of Synacor, Inc
--On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 12:36 PM -0500 Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Feb 9, 2016, at 12:14 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
Even after setting the style to "host", it still generates the incorrect
netmask:
[zimbra@zre-ldap003 ~]$ postconf mynetworks mynetworks_style
--On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 8:56 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 11:00 AM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
The "inet_protocols" setting is not covered by this, because it hasn't
changed.
BTW, with inet_protocols=ipv4, Postfix has neve
uot; as the default.
I realize I don't use mynetworks the way you probably anticipated. ;) I've
redone my build so that it behaves the way I need it to work.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source
--On Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:14 AM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
--On Monday, February 08, 2016 8:00 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
> Quanah Gibson-Mount:
>> In Postfix > 3.0.x, the value from postconf mynetworks returns
>> incorrect netmask values,
--On Monday, February 08, 2016 8:00 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
In Postfix > 3.0.x, the value from postconf mynetworks returns incorrect
netmask values, and it is missing IPv6 entirely:
This depends on the inet_protocols setting.
# postconf inet_protocols=
Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::250:56ff:fe8f:cbcd/64 Scope:Link
inet6 addr: fc00:10:137:242::53/64 Scope:Global
loLink encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson
--On Saturday, January 09, 2016 9:06 AM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
Amavis passes it back to Postfix on port 25, and boom, the sasl bits are
called, even though no auth is involved.
If you know that an SMTP daemon will not receive AUTH commands,
disable SASL in
--On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 12:46 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Tuesday, January 05, 2016 3:43 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
I think I mentioned in this thread that the patch is not complete
because the Cyrus implementation expects a string of the form
"ipaddress:portn
lForwardingAddress
This would block multiple expansions. Does that seem correct?
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
set of emails shoudl be blocked by postfix. If that isn't
happening, then I'd be concerned.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
d and modularized.
Hi Markus,
This sounds pretty cool. Does it take care of the issue of handling
logging when multiple milters etc are in place?
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
7;re working on completing it. ;) It just had some unanticipated
side effects.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:49 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:29 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:02 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
> This is not completely trivial because the p
idea of a samba client being used to refresh tickets sounds
interesting. Louis, please do provide more detail.
I suggest reading up on kstart:
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/software/kstart/>
It's really the best way to do ticket management when dealing with Kerberos.
--Quanah
-
lmdb instead of hash dbs.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Saturday, December 19, 2015 2:40 AM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 05:58:30PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
However, when doing "make install" a few of these do not end up being
installed:
posttls-finger
qmqp-sink
qmqp-source
smtp-sink
smtp-source
usion in a
postfix build?
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Monday, December 14, 2015 6:03 PM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:36:33AM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
Given nginx's complete disregard for RFC's (*) and unwillingness to
examine or fix issues related to the email proxy portion of their
product
proxy portion of their product (IMAP,
POP, SMTP), I'd definitely avoid it. I.e., I would not recommend nginx as
a solution in front of postfix to anyone.
*<https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?29,252772,253147>
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
-
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:45 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 4:35 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
If some breakage is specific to one software distribution, then I
would investigate the distribution, instead of blaming the messenger.
You could
.
Thanks. Was more just trying to understand the cause than blaming the
messenger. ;) Now I have a good avenue to pursue.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:29 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
--On Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:02 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
> This is not completely trivial because the port information needs
> to be consistent with information from proxies, postscree
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
timeline on when that will be
available for testing?
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
ory on shutdown.
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
.
We are using this patch in our dev lab with postfix 3.0.3. So far, no
problems have arisen, and it is helping us with resolving an issue we had
with tracking originating IPs. Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the lead
--On Tuesday, December 01, 2015 12:03 AM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 03:11:39PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 3:08 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
>> Either default_destination_recipient_limit has to be bumped
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 3:08 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
Either default_destination_recipient_limit has to be bumped up via
postconf, or -o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings requires
setting to resolve this so far.
Hm, so according to our clients setting
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 3:01 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 2:56 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 7:00 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
I've always (since ~2001) used large recipient limits with f
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 2:56 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 7:00 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
I've always (since ~2001) used large recipient limits with filter
transports, this also improves efficiency, no need to scan the same
co
--On Monday, November 30, 2015 7:00 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
I've always (since ~2001) used large recipient limits with filter
transports, this also improves efficiency, no need to scan the same
content multiple times.
Hi Viktor,
Thanks for the reply! I've been on v
ltiple times.
Hi Viktor,
Thanks for the reply! I've been on vacation so catching up on email. It
sounds like the better solution then is to add:
-o default_destination_recipient_limit=5000
to the content filter definitions? ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Z
oblem. I've been reading over the docs, and it seems
that this is a bit aggressive. However, it does seem that at least some
set of these options should be set. I believe it is only necessary to set
"no_address_mappings". Does that seem correct?
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah G
--On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:36 AM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 07:29:56PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Monday, November 23, 2015 3:13 AM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
>> Setting lmtp_tls_CApath fixed this (although that wasn't necessary i
7;ll poke at
my other SSL/TLS settings and see if I can track down why OpenSSL is
unhappy now.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Sunday, November 22, 2015 6:49 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
Setting lmtp_tls_security_level to none allows mail delivery to succeed.
Setting lmtp_tls_CApath fixed this (although that wasn't necessary in
2.11.4). Sorry for the noise. :)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-
Quana
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Wednesday, October 14, 2015 7:59 AM -0400 Phil Stracchino
wrote:
But that was in 2011.
I don't think DSpam has updated since *before* 2011.
It is well known that DSPAM is a dead project. See
<http://sourceforge.net/p/dspam/mailman/message/32585111/>.
--Quanah
--
Qu
r every one of the emails sent out over the persistent connection,
even thought they actually only have auth'd when initially opening the
connection.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:07 PM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:52:36PM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> What would help is putting the "check_sasl_access" table in SQL.
>
>> I should've stopped/restarted immediately...
>
, that way you don't need reload or restart.
So if they are in the SASL table, does it force close their connection?
Just want to be sure that if I implement this via an LDAP table, that the
spammer doesn't go on spamming once the user password is changed and the
account is unlocked.
--On Tuesday, June 02, 2015 5:26 PM -0400 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
--On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:00 PM -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
> Hi Viktor,
>
> We've been able to start testing this patch. So far, it is working as
> expected.
It has con
--On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:00 PM -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
Hi Viktor,
We've been able to start testing this patch. So far, it is working as
expected.
It has continued to hold up through more extensive testing. Will this make
it into Postfix 3.1 or the next 3.0 re
ed at that
time has a timestamp of:
# Postfix PCRE bot spam killer
#
# Updated 10/2/2014
#
If you want a copy, let me know.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Monday, January 27, 2014 6:46 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
--On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 2:40 AM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 01:02:45AM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
The patch below may not even compile, but probably works, give it a try.
As you can
<http://www.postfix.org/postscreen.8.html>
Says that postscreen_dnsbl_timeout is available in Postfix 2.11 or later.
This is not correct. It is in postfix 3.0 and later.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader i
--On Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:17 AM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 02:03:52PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:17 PM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> --- Editorial ---
> Firstly, I've always strongly
--On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 5:55 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
Imagine al...@example.com e-mails b...@zimbra.com, but bob has set up
e-mail forwarding to char...@bbc.com
al...@example.com -> b...@zimbra.com -> char...@bbc.com
Standard scenario.
Bu
...@bbc.com configured. So
alice sends email to bob, and bob returns as being forwarded to charlie.
I.e., our MTA sends it on to bbc.com because of forwarding being configured
for bob.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in
-
It would not surprise me at all if this were set up incorrectly to start
with back in postfix 2.0, and has simply been pushed forward ever since.
I'll file a bug to re-examine the use of sender canonical maps here.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
-
--On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:17 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
We're looking to implement SRS support along the lines of
<https://www.mind-it.info/forward-postfix-spf-srs/>. The primary issue
I see when looking at this is we already have sender_canonic
So I'm not sure how to get this lookup to succeed AND have it then go
through SRS. Is something like:
sender_canonical_maps = proxy:ldap:/opt/zimbra/conf/ldap-scm.cf,
lmdb:/etc/postfix/pfix-no-srs.cf, tcp:127.0.0.1:10001
Workable?
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform A
result
in automatic failure (This issue was raised by one of our clients who ran
into this problem after enabling address_verify_map be used).
I would think the default values should not include unsupported database
formats.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc
--On Thursday, January 15, 2015 4:43 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount:
Hi,
I see on <http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html>, it
recommends using a btree database for the address verify map. For
example:
# Default setting for Postfix 2.7 and
onfirm that LMDB is a
suitable replacement for btree (and request a doc update if that is
correct).
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
]/64
The above is trimmed down significantly, but you can get the idea. There's
no reason such a thing couldn't be processed as an ordered value. If you
were trying to store it in a multi-valued LDAP attribute, that would be
problematic, since return order is not guaranteed.
--
then, I'd assume I
could then just use two ldap maps... One to do the domain rewrite, the
second to look up where to deliver.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On November 19, 2014 at 7:40:07 PM -0500 Wietse Venema
wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 03:07:19PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> > Sorry, the login table lookup must handle the original address as
> > the lookup key via a single query.
>
> And
--On November 19, 2014 at 11:14:49 PM + Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 03:07:19PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> Sorry, the login table lookup must handle the original address as
> the lookup key via a single query.
And clearly postfix is already desig
even if it did, what address should it look
up in the sender login map? foo? bar? baz? All three of them? And
what if the client sends mail from bar?
They're required to use user@domain for the login. There won't be an issue
of foo vs bar vs baz.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Moun
the original address as
the lookup key via a single query.
And clearly postfix is already designed in some cases to do multiple
queries based on the results of previous queries.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra :: the leader in open
ng is the postfix piece to utilize LDAP.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
llow things to proceed.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Platform Architect
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
zimbraMailAlias zimbraAllowFromAddress
Nov 19 15:24:53 zre-ldap003 slapd[23266]: conn=7277 op=10 SEARCH RESULT
tag=101 err=0 nentries=1 text=
where we get one response while looking at the domain is from this:
zimbraMailCatchAllForwardingAddress: @zre-ldap003.eng.zimbra.com
which is set on the alias
mailings so as not to impact the more critical
functions.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
We've had one request so far for RFC 6710 support with Zimbra. Just
curious if there are any plans on the table for implementation of this RFC
within Postfix for 2.12 (or later).
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra ::
. I'm guessing what they really just
want is encrypted SMTPD, which as you note, can work just fine with any
valid certificate setup.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
extract how significant that is, since it'll depend on
traffic patterns, but it overall does indicate to me that securing the
smtpd layer is of importance to a number of organizations.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
.pem
-o smtpd_tls_key_file=domain2.key
10.0.0.103:25 inet . . . smtpd
-o smtpd_tls_cert_file=domain3.pem
-o smtpd_tls_key_file=domain3.ky
Thanks,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Thursday, September 04, 2014 1:47 PM -0400 Wietse Venema
wrote:
postscreen queries DNS[BW]Ls in parallel. The blame is based on the
DNSBL weight, as described in my other follow-up.
Ah, sorry, I should have noticed postscreen vs postfix. ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server
You list zen first, so
it is tested first. If it gets rejected by that RBL, then there is no
reason to evaluate any further RBLs.
Thus if you see anything being blocked by something other than zen, it
means it isn't in the zen list, but is listed elsewhere.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibs
--On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 1:05 AM +0200 li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 25.08.2014 um 23:42 schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount:
--On Monday, August 25, 2014 5:12 PM +0200 li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Aug 25 14:55:15 mail-gw postfix/postscreen[29302]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from [119.75.11.68]:53210: 550
don't count postscreen RBL rejects
already using pflogsumm-1.1.5.tar.gz Beta
sadly mailgraph and logwatch also hide them :-(
If you file a bug for postfix-logwatch with the pertinent info, I'll see
what I can do about adding it.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Archi
_sender_restrictions=reject_authenticated_sender_login_mismatch is not
a configuration we officially support anyway. Once I have it configured
per our supported bits (doing lookups out of ldap) it behaves correctly.
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra ::
hing
stupid about the <>'s. ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Thursday, August 14, 2014 3:32 PM -0700 Quanah Gibson-Mount
wrote:
235 2.7.0 Authentication successful
mail from:testus...@zre-ldap003.eng.zimbra.com
250 2.1.0 Ok
rcpt to:testus...@zre-ldap002.eng.zimbra.com
553 5.7.1 : Sender address
rejected: not owned by user testus...@zre-ldap003
re-ldap003.eng.zimbra.com
So I'll need to debug that next. :)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
SMTP Postfix
HELO zre-ldap003.eng.zimbra.com
250 zre-ldap003.eng.zimbra.com
MAIL FROM:
250 2.1.0 Ok
RCPT TO:
250 2.1.5 Ok
DATA
354 End data with .
This is a test email
.
250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 8AD091212CC
Thanks!
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc.
Zimbra
ot;libcrammd5.3.0.$so.so",
"libdigestmd5.3.0.$so.so", "libgssapiv2.3.0.$so.so", "liblogin.3.0.$so.so",
"libotp.3.0.$so.so", "libplain.3.0.$so.so", "libgs
2.3.0.$so.so", "libscram.3.so");
@files=<$dir/*.so>;
foreach $f
.
I've been (slowly) hacking up a LMDB version of the Bayes DB for SA, but I
keep having to defer that for other work. So someone else may beat me to
it.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Server Architect
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messagin
1 - 100 of 324 matches
Mail list logo
