On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 10:40:18 -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:37:32 -0400 (EDT), Wietse Venema stated:
> ...
> >Can you ping the maintainer?
> ...
> I have sent him an email
ACK.
--
Sahil Tandon
me time now and I would have thought that
> Postfix would have supported it.
Based on src/util/dict_db.c, the latest supported Berkeley DB major
version is 5.
--
Sahil Tandon
caching. The problem
did not recur. I see Wietse has already rolled out snapshot 20140507, to
which we will upgrade soon.
Thank you both.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 23:57:41 -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 03:31:13 +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 10:49:20PM -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> >
> > > We are experiencing a problem that seems to manifest *only* when
&
On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 03:31:13 +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 10:49:20PM -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>
> > We are experiencing a problem that seems to manifest *only* when
> > delivering to MXs that exhibit the SSL problem described by Viktor[1]
> >
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/243056
--
Sahil Tandon
lay/DEV/DMARC
i.e., set dmarc_moderation_action and dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action
in Mailman rather than changing Postfix.
--
Sahil Tandon
seems like this should be
> really simple. Any thoughts?
% dig +short MX cgdgoalies.com chdcentre.com completeathletics.ca
5 webmail.cgdgoalies.com.
10 webmail.cgdgoalies.com.
10 mail.cgdgoalies.com.
If you want mail for completeathletics.ca to go to your Postfix server,
update the MX entry.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2014-04-05 at 18:40:39 -0400, Curtis Maurand wrote:
> Sahil Tandon wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-04-04 at 14:55:49 -0400, Curtis Maurand wrote:
> >
> >> I'm getting local user unknown errors when I try to send email to the
> >> list., but as far as I kno
e to update the alias_maps definition, so that Postfix
is made aware of valid Mailman addresses. In your follow-up, include the
output of 'postconf -n' rather than snippets from main.cf. See:
http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-install/postfix-integration.html
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#alias_maps
--
Sahil Tandon
What, if anything, is output after you issue the following commands?
# ls -ld /var/spool/postfix/public{,/pickup}
and
# postfix check
--
Sahil Tandon
A81E01ED: uid=5001
> from=
During its periodic scan of the "maildrop" queue, pickup(8) sees the new
mail and passes it to cleanup(8), as logged below.
> Mar 12 08:00:06 postfix/cleanup[21191]: 5B5A81E01ED:
> message-id=<20140312130006.5B5A81E01ED@localhost>
> Mar 12 08:00:06 postfix/qmgr[20944]: 5B5A81E01ED: from=,
> ...
--
Sahil Tandon
sl setup
did not hiccup with Postfix, only ejabberd.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=181994
--
Sahil Tandon
in main.cf . Transport_maps will still be honored, won't it?
Yes, but remember that transport mapping occurs after address rewriting;
take care to accordingly specify the lookup keys in your transport
table.
--
Sahil Tandon
om courier -> dovecot, like I did many years
ago. :-)
http://sys4.de/en/blog/2013/04/08/postfix-dovecot-mailbox-quota/
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 11:09:33 -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
[ .. ]
> Instead, try:
>
> # main.cf
> check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/listed_senders, reject
To be clear, this will not help in your test case (but rather, only when
mail is received via smtpd) as Wietse points out
expected to see a 550 or something else from postfix/smtp
> --- Any ideas what I have done wrong?
[ .. ]
> smtpd_sender_restrictions = check_sender_access
> hash:/etc/postfix/listed_senders reject_unlisted_sender
Instead, try:
# main.cf
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/listed_senders, reject
--
Sahil Tandon
> http://marc.info/?l=postfix-users
*nod*
It seems the old link stopped working earlier this year; I remember
seeing a mention of this on the SA issues tracker and just found it:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6898
--
Sahil Tandon
epted, actual mail dropped.
Use virtual alias mapping to direct mail for user{1,2}@domain.tld to
actual accounts. Then, implement a catch-all which maps *@domain.tld to
an address that, via transport(5), directs mail to the discard(8)
service.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 05:10:09 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> ...
> In our previous episode (Thursday, 11-Apr-2013), Sahil Tandon said:
> > As documented, Postfix uses the default Berkeley DB version that ships
> > with your system, which I am assuming is FreeBSD.
>
> Yes
or by explicitly linking against a different, non-default DB
version, which would then appear in ldd(1) output. Or, you can disable
Berkeley DB support entirely by including -DNO_DB in CCARGS.
--
Sahil Tandon
ment earlier in the thread is for others who
might chance upon this chain in the archives, and prefer the alternative
(and IMHO more robust) approach.
--
Sahil Tandon
reate a file
> with users listed:
>
> /hold-users:
> us...@domain.com HOLD
> us...@domain.com HOLD
> ...
The HOLD action affects all recipients; you can be more specific by
using the retry service. See the following thread:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/197989
--
Sahil Tandon
had cobbled
together a slower (it is Python rather than a set of grep(1)
expressions) script[1] to collect similar statistics. No promises that
it is error-free.
[1] http://people.freebsd.org/~sahil/scripts/mailstats.py.txt
--
Sahil Tandon
t require Maildir delivery, use .forward files that
specify a destination mailbox name ending in '/'.
--
Sahil Tandon
tp://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/148887
Read the entire thread before trying to implement the suggestion
"solutions".
--
Sahil Tandon
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 19:13:04 +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 08:18:09AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Sahil Tandon:
> > > Some background: upon deinstall, unaltered files installed by a FreeBSD
> > > package are supposed to be delet
On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 09:01:23 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ralf Hildebrandt:
> > * Sahil Tandon :
> ...
> > > test -n "`$POSTCONF -c $config_directory -n smtpd_relay_restrictions`"
> > >
> > > With this, the forward compatibility shim wou
orks before updating the FreeBSD port.
--
Sahil Tandon
o update
> done due to optimistic caching?
My understanding of this parameter is that a _successful_ refresh probe
updates the timestamp of an address verification result; positive expire
time is measured from that revised timestamp.
--
Sahil Tandon
mplish this?
Rather than the hold queue, use the retry service.
/path/to/main.cf:
transport_maps = hash:/path/to/transport
/path/to/transport:
mda.example.com retry:4.2.1 mda.example.com is temporarily disabled
--
Sahil Tandon
akemx += 1
if fakemx == len(answer):
print('200 REJECT mail not deliverable (only destination is fakemx.net)')
else:
print('200 DUNNO')
except:
print('200 DUNNO')
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 00:03:06 +0100, Ned Slider wrote:
> On 02/06/12 17:44, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> ...
> >I've separately engaged our DNS admins in case they could offer some
> >insight, but it would be interesting to learn if others are experiencing
> >the sam
learn if others are experiencing
the same issue /only/ with barracuda.
--
Sahil Tandon
multi_server driver. This one-line code change has no performance
> impact for other systems, and eliminates a high-frequency accept()
> race on a shared socket that appears to cause trouble on FreeBSD. The
> same single_server program driver has proven itself for many years in
> smtpd(
be my desired domain and added in one for
> the new subdomain.
>
> Thanks for any assistance. I've gone through the virtual and local
> readmes, but I am not seeing the solution.
Can we see the output of 'postconf -n'? Absent additional information,
I guess you may find a clue in virtual(5) under TABLE SEARCH ORDER.
--
Sahil Tandon
Just following up to close this discussion.
On Sun, 2012-05-06 at 09:35:24 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > May 5 10:00:26 mx1 postfix/postscreen[38500]: warning: psc_dnsbl_request:
> > connect to private/dnsblog service: Connection refused
> > May 5 10:0
rap.trblspam.com 469
1609/18263 zen.spamhaus.org 5
UNIQ/TOTAL DNSWLDNSBL
2514/2520list.dnswl.org 510
0/6 swl.spamhaus.org 0
--
Sahil Tandon
ts to the postscreen daemon; postscreen '-v' logging will
> show how it maintains DNSBL scores.
OK, thanks; I'm now running postscreen with '-v' and will report back if
the same scenario recurs.
--
Sahil Tandon
find references to this issue in the archives, and I know
others manage much higher-volume sites, so I suspect it just indicates a
severely borked system (FreeBSD 8.3) on my side.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 19:49:18 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > May 5 15:24:07 mx1 postfix/postscreen[38500]: CONNECT from
> > [88.23.204.109]:40294 to [69.147.83.52]:25
> > May 5 15:24:07 mx1 postfix/dnsblog[45237]: addr 88.23.204.109
col tests. As per design, future connections are passed on
to smtpd(8) which then delivers the mail.
Please let me know if any other portions of the log or a full 'postconf
-n' (I'll just have to sanitize certain portions) would be useful.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 11:24:26 -0400, Julien Vehent wrote:
> On 2012-04-01 1:11, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> >Before enabling DNSBL blocklists on one site, I was tasked with
> >gathering some postscreen(8) statistics. I liked the information
> >display in a previous thread[1], bu
3783/16010 reject (550)
35/220 reject (all server ports busy)
3/374 reject (too many connections)
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/224979
[2] http://people.freebsd.org/~sahil/scripts/mailstats.py.txt
--
Sahil Tandon
t; smtpd_reject_footer features would work as before.
Elegant. +1 FWIW.
--
Sahil Tandon
torials to help gain the
> "big picture" overview of what you need.
> ...
e.g. http://rob0.nodns4.us/howto/
--
Sahil Tandon
Most people should not have to
fiddle with this parameter.
--
Sahil Tandon
..
Rather than the local aliases(5) database, use virtual aliasing to
explicitly split 'gul-test' into two distinct recipients 'gul+1' and
'gul+2'. Then, procmail should receive both copies of the message.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 16:00:26 +0200, Pavel Gulchouck wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 09:19:15AM -0400, Sahil Tandon writes:
> > On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 13:48:17 +0200, Pavel Gulchouck wrote:
>
> >> I use recipient_delimiter feature and procmail processing local
> >&
,
> because cleanup decides that me+xmpp and me+sms is the same user, and
> leaves only one copy of the message.
Do you have logs of this occurring?
--
Sahil Tandon
On Thu, 2012-03-15 at 02:08:15 +0200, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
> On 15/3/2012 1:54 πμ, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>
> >/usr/local/openldap/lib != /usr/local/openldap/lib64
>
> I know; I am wondering whether this is the problem.
> ...
> My first try used precisely "/usr/lo
"liblber-2.4-releng.so.2 ... libldap-2.4-releng.so.2"
> or
> "libldap.so... libldap.so"
> which are in /usr/local/openldap/lib64 and belong to LTB v2.4.x
> ...
/usr/local/openldap/lib != /usr/local/openldap/lib64
--
Sahil Tandon
ff
debugging, and the phrase:
IMPORTANT: Be sure to get the quotes right. These details matter a lot.
> ...
> I tried with both DEBUG= and DEBUG='', but with the same above
> outcome. Are there any other parameters to pass to disable debug?
> ...
DEBUG=
--
Sahil Tandon
the thread, thus preserving Wietse's safety net for incompatible
changes in IPv6 defaults.
PS: if anyone on this list is a FreeBSD user with interest in the
maintenance of the Postfix ports, please get in touch off-list.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 19:48:48 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > I do not believe Mark should have to jump through extra hoops, or that
> > you should revert the change. This is a FreeBSD port-specific problem
> > created by me that I will address as soon as I
t of this thread, your
accusing of *me* for lacking respect towards *you* is disappointingly
ironic.
I do not believe Mark should have to jump through extra hoops, or that
you should revert the change. This is a FreeBSD port-specific problem
created by me that I will address as soon as I can.
--
Sahil Tandon
pgpAExDgZOayr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 10:08:05 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > FWIW, the FreeBSD Postfix port is patched so that post-install does not
> > add "inet_protocols=ipv4" to main.cf during upgrades. Instead, users are
> > notified[1] about the recent c
ults, and asked to append the
ipv4 line to their main.cf, if necessary.
[1] This is in ports/UPDATING, a file users consult before upgrading any
port. I elected to go this route to force users to pay attention to
this particular change.
--
Sahil Tandon
--- conf/post-install.orig 201
Yes, as I already indicated in my second response to your query. And
your "sticky beaks" comment laughably strains credulity; no one cares
about the ins and outs of your configuration. Before asking for help
again, make sure to review the DEBUG_README (a document to which you
were ref
On Sat, 2011-12-24 at 23:09:24 -0500, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-25 at 13:37:52 +1000, Nick Edwards wrote:
>
> In the absence of full information, here's a WAG:
>
> > ...
> > : NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[41.203.141.1]: 450 4.7.1 Client host
&
a not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
This is treated as a temporary error condition, so Postfix applies
reject_tempfail_action, which defaults to defer_if_permit.
> ...
--
Sahil Tandon
gt; unverified_sender_reject_code = 550
> unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
>
> the relevant smtpd_recipient_restrictions options I using for this are
> ...
Show the output of 'postconf -n' instead of cut & pasting from your
main.cf.
--
Sahil Tandon
e this thread has veered off into a general discussion about mail
operation/policy, would you consider taking it off-list or to a more
appropriate forum, e.g. the mailop list?
--
Sahil Tandon
er bug in FreeBSD file descriptor passing code.
OK, thanks for the context.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 07:09:15 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > These warnings appear a few times daily, and are sometimes followed by:
> >
> > warning: disabling connection caching
> >
> > This occurs on a slightly older Postfix (2.7.1). The m
lay=9.5, delays=0.56/8.8/0/0.1, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok:
queued as 41BCD1065676)
Dec 14 03:00:14 mx0 postfix/smtp[53020]: B60FD8FC14:
to=, relay=internal.example.org[ip_address]:25,
delay=9.9, delays=1.1/8.6/0/0.07, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok:
queued as 5325E1065677)
...
--
Sahil Tandon
everse hostname; following that, the client foolishly sends
DATA, to which Postfix responds with a 554. Finally, instead of
gracefully QUITing, the client drops the connection.
--
Sahil Tandon
: the OP's question is explicitly about how Postfix
functions when MySQL *is* down. The answer to that question - as noted
earlier - depends on which facet of Postfix is impacted, which in turn
depends on the parameters/tables configured to query an SQL backend.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 10:42:30 +0100, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote:
> * Sahil Tandon [2011-12-05 03:24]:
> > > I'm using Postfix with MySQL via proxy:mysql maps. The documentation
> > > states that mails should get deferred if no mysql server is reachable.
> > &
e.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/168112
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/140543
--
Sahil Tandon
gt; I've been using the clamav-milter along with the Sanesecurity add-on
> spam signatures to reject quite a bit of the freemail garbage.
+1, FWIW.
--
Sahil Tandon
ostfix/2009-01/0483.html
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 18:08:34 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > When trying to install snapshot 2018, I get a fatal postconf error
> > if master.cf does not exist in the $config_directory. There is no
> > problem if main.cf is missing from $config_directo
master.cf is not found. This is new to me, and could very
well be idiosyncratic to my installation procedure. But before I
troubleshoot further on my end, I wonder if anyone else can generally
reproduce this?
--
Sahil Tandon
postfix/smtpd[15778]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
> unknown[193.83.162.5]: 450 4.7.1 Client host rejected: cannot find
> your reverse hostname, [193.83.162.5]
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unknown_client_reje
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 20:41:08 -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > This error was reported to me by a FreeBSD user, but I cannot reproduce
> > it on any of my development machines. It occurs during build (sorry for
> > line wraps):
> >
> > rm -f .
matic
machine and troubleshoot further.
[1]
http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-errorlogs/e.8.2003071512/postfix-current-2.9.20111012,4.log
[2] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2011-November/071419.html
--
Sahil Tandon
e
mailing list archive for similar discussions.
> If it could indexed for easier searching that would be great!
This has to happen outside of Postfix.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Sun, 2011-10-02 at 12:34:41 -0700, Cameron Smith wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2011-10-02 at 10:29:20 -0700, Cameron Smith wrote:
> >
> >> telnet 74.63.3.132 smtp
> >> Trying 74.63.3.132...
> >> Con
hange the SMTP banner for just the vhost dedicated IP
> 74.63.3.132 to 220 www.alwaysbuywholesale.com ESMTP Postfix and
> still keep the correct banner of 220 vps.velvetpixel.net ESMTP Postfix
> for 74.63.2.190?
Set an alternative smtpd_banner for the smtpd(8) listener on
74.63.3.132.
--
Sahil Tandon
s somewhat of a FAQ:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/183665
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/123550
You may search the list archives for other examples, but the underlying
notion is that multiple deliveries require multiple recipients.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 18:38:22 -0400, john wrote:
> Does anybody know of a program... that can white list inbound email
> based upon the addresses of emails that have been sent?
http://mailfud.org/postpals/
--
Sahil Tandon
gt; need to add/change to get this to work?
Show logs and the output of 'postconf -n' on the machine with a problem.
--
Sahil Tandon
erts/
>
> Correct location would be:
>
> /var/spool/postfix/etc/postfix/certs/
Ouch, that sucks. Hopefully the Debian folks fix it soon.
--
Sahil Tandon
that this could be related to
Incompat 20100610 noted in the RELEASE_NOTES for 2.8.
--
Sahil Tandon
aps on the
gateway might solve your problem.
--
Sahil Tandon
t-install are still placed in the $daemon_directory; their
redundant placement in $config_directory is obsolete. Similarly,
the other files noted above were replicas of man pages which are still
installed.
--
Sahil Tandon
in.cf;
instead, paste the output of 'postconf -n'.
--
Sahil Tandon
on?
Based on a cursory glance, it seems to me that a simple virtual alias
mapping is more suitable than jumping through canonical hoops.
Oh, and in your follow-up: please, show logs that relate to your problem
description.
--
Sahil Tandon
users = !www, static:all
Yes, and incidentally, that is the example provided in the postconf(5)
manual.
--
Sahil Tandon
please direct them to the appropriate maintainer.
--
Sahil Tandon
?, list at rfc-ignorant
This is something the OP can do in *addition* to more practical things
(as Noel suggested) to help mail reach its recipients on a remote site.
--
Sahil Tandon
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 19:20:52 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > Appears to work in bash and zsh; not in (t)csh. I quickly tested on
> > FreeBSD and Darwin. Likely related to handling of null byte/char.
>
> I'm away from home, so I can't quickly
l this applies to.
Appears to work in bash and zsh; not in (t)csh. I quickly tested on
FreeBSD and Darwin. Likely related to handling of null byte/char.
--
Sahil Tandon
ameter to... $mydestination
> (!):
Sorry, I am not familiar with eventum; but piping certain recipients to
a script is doable in Postfix. Please follow the documentation, and
follow-up in this thread if you have a specific problem with your
configuration.
--
Sahil Tandon
> address.
Perhaps you could direct those emails to a pipe(8) transport.
http://www.postfix.org/pipe.8.html
http://www.postfix.org/transport.5.html
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#transport_maps
--
Sahil Tandon
oot is in any way
recorded in main.cf?
--
Sahil Tandon
n-standard installation locations very well, and it
> has become some sort of standard for C projects.
There are no plans for moving to the beast that is autoconf; that, IMHO,
is a good thing.
--
Sahil Tandon
il server
> and I was thinking having the reject_rbl_client on the
> smtpd_sender_restrictions.
>
> If someone could clarify this to me it would be great.
http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html
--
Sahil Tandon
which you were introduced upon joining this
mailing list:
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
For general information about LDAP support in Postfix:
http://www.postfix.org/LDAP_README.html
http://www.postfix.org/ldap_table.5.html
--
Sahil Tandon
1 - 100 of 851 matches
Mail list logo
