ot a venomous creature.
If 'more' than a benign Postfix is required, then one must add filters
and policies.
(maybe some DDOS etc anti-measures would be closer to the idea of
venomous spurs on the back legs of Postfix?)
https://environment.des.qld.gov.au/wildlife/animals/a-z/platypus
--
Regards =dn
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Ram wrote:
>
> On 10/04/2012 04:30 PM, DN Singh wrote:
>
>> Hello group,
>>
>> I want to implement a catch-all address on my system. This is a very
>> simple setup where the users are system users. Hence, the unrouted mail
>
You can setup multiple postfix instances for each ip.
On Sep 24, 2012 9:34 PM, "Kingsquare.nl - Marc van Duivenvoorde" <
m...@kingsquare.nl> wrote:
> Hi, I've got a question. Let's say I have a machine with 4 ipnumbers,
> all of which are being used to send e-mail. Is it possible to enforce
> that
On Sep 22, 2012 8:16 PM, "Reindl Harald" wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 22.09.2012 16:41, schrieb Андрей Клаус:
> > 1) At webserver postfix generates a message-id field. And it always has
the same hostname (hostname, which i
> > defined in $myhostname). I would like to have message id use domain
which will dep
On Sep 11, 2012 8:43 PM, "Wietse Venema" wrote:
>
> DN Singh:
> > We some trouble with rediff deliveries, and therefore were trying this
> > combination. While searching the archives, we found that rediff does not
> > like connection caching, and about th
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:26:07PM +0530, DN Singh wrote:
>
> > domain3_destination_rate_delay = 30s
> > domain3_destination_recipient_limit = 1
>
> This combination is unlikely to yield the results you expec
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > > > > > What is the output from:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > postmap -q rediffmail.com hash:/etc/postfix/transport
> > > > > >
> > > &g
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Domain Singh:
> [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:13 PM, DN Singh wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Sep 10, 2012 7:02 PM, "Wietse Venema" wrote:
> &
On Sep 10, 2012 7:02 PM, "Wietse Venema" wrote:
>
> DN Singh:
> > Sep 10 *18:15:34* hostname postfix/master[1227]: reload -- version
2.9.3,
> > configuration /etc/postfix
> > Sep 10 *18:15:47* hostname postfix/smtp[11163]: 03A6C4C71E4:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > I have configured rate delays for different domains, but it seems that
> > rate delays are not working. Please help me understand if there is any
>
> Wietse:
> > Please define "not working&quo
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > > > I have configured rate delays for different domains, but it seems
> that
> > > > rate delays are not working. Please help me understand if there is
> any
>
> Please defi
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Am 10.09.2012 13:11, schrieb DN Singh:
> > Hello List,
> >
> > I have configured rate delays for different domains, but it seems that
> > rate delays are not working. Please help me understand if ther
Hello List,
I have configured rate delays for different domains, but it seems that rate
delays are not working. Please help me understand if there is any problem
in the configuration.
The case in question is rediffmail.
postconf -n output
-
bounce_queue_li
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 8/28/2012 1:13 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:48:19AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >
> >> So maybe for this particular application a ramdisk isn't a horrible
> >> idea. But he still has the problem of implement
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 7:52 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 09:03:47AM -0500,
>Alfonso Alejandro Reyes Jiménez wrote:
> > I've postfix working great but I cant make the rbl works, I have
> > the configuration but when I test the configuration it seems not
> > to be working.
>
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> On 2012-08-03 DN Singh wrote:
> > I have a setup to receive mails for a subdomain, which is also the
> > hostname of the server. I want to use system users as mailboxes. This
> > used to work fine until I implemented
Hello Group,
I have a setup to receive mails for a subdomain, which is also the hostname
of the server. I want to use system users as mailboxes. This used to work
fine until I implemented catch-all address. I added an entry "@domain.tld
u...@domain.tld" in virtual map. But, all mails
Thank You very much for the answer. Prompt and apt as always
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > Hello group,
> > While implementing our own DNSBL, I came across a phenomenon. Right now
> in
> > testing phase, I found that the dns q
Hello group,
While implementing our own DNSBL, I came across a phenomenon. Right now in
testing phase, I found that the dns queries were being cached in postfix
itself. I had made some changes in the dns side, and wanted them to be
reflected on the mta.
I tried flushing the dns cache by restarting
The setting can be changed in the parameter "smtpd_sender_restrictions"
reject_unknown_sender_domain, if it is necessary.
Postfix looks up the the domain, and if it does not find any info, it
rejects the mail.
Anyways, the domain in the mail is indeed non-existent.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:45 AM,
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:07 PM, James Seymour wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2012 11:23:46 -0500 (EST)
> Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >
> > Thanks, Jim.
>
> You're welcome, Wietse. And thank *you* for Postfix.
>
> Regards,
> Jim
> --
> Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
> fi
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Am 14.01.2012 04:40, schrieb Benny Pedersen:
> > On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:31:17 +0100, Jiri Vitek wrote:
> >
> >>> slow_destination_concurrency_limit = 2
> >>> slow_destination_concurrency_limit = 2
> >
> > ymvw, only one line is needed :)
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:03:22PM -0600, I wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:08:30PM +0530, DN Singh wrote:
> > > Guys, I did find find the culprit, but it was not in the yahoo
> > > list, but the
ls to every .com domain. Please let me know if this true.
Anyways, thanks again group.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Am 25.01.2012 15:59, schrieb Ralf Hildebrandt:
> > * DN Singh :
> >> Duane, I am not using sender restrictions right now, b
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Duane Hill wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 13:41:54 UTC,
> dnsingh.dns@gmail.comconfabulated:
>
> > Duane, I am not using sender restrictions right now, but I can implement
> it.
>
> > Ralf, can you please tell me a method to append incremental numbers
alf Hildebrandt <
> > ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
>
> >> * DN Singh :
> >> > Hello Group,
> >> >
> >> > I have configured some rejection domains in postfix access file,
> where it
> >> > rejects bad domains, or domains that do not
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * DN Singh :
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > I have configured some rejection domains in postfix access file, where it
> > rejects bad domains, or domains that do not exist.
Hello group,
I was configuring some restrictions on the Postfix level using access map.
It is in has format.
It is has a pretty good number of domains in it. So, I was wondering, how
large can be the file, without affecting the performance?
These are configured in recipient restrictions, so during
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 12:40 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * DN Singh :
>
> > So Ralf, with a score of 99 with ReturnPath, what is the maximum delivery
> > that you have got to hotmail in a single day?
>
> on mail.python.org for the l
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * Dominik Schulz :
> > Am Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2011, 16:41:49 schrieb Helder Oliveira:
> > > Has anyone experience with ReturnPath that can share ? Is the paid
> money
> > > worth the results ?
> > Yes, but
You could also have done that by using,
domain.com.brsmtp:pop.domain.com.br
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Alfredo Saldanha <
asalda...@corp.infolink.com.br> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I solved this problem!
>
> I change the transport map:
>
> from:
> domain.com.brsmtp:pop.domain.com
Hello,
I was searching for nginx as load balancer, but couldn't quite figure it
out. Also, I am not sure, it would be able to pickup queues from Mysql
database.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:49 PM, DN Singh wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> DN
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > I am trying to implement an architecture, where there will be one Postfix
> > instance acting as load balancer/relay. I need this instance to relay
> mails
>
> Use
Hello Group,
I am trying to implement an architecture, where there will be one Postfix
instance acting as load balancer/relay. I need this instance to relay mails
only to number on MTAs specified in a list, no outside delivery involved.
My questions are:
1) Is this this possible?
2) If possible,
Can you please name the topic, so I can search about it? It would be of
great help.
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 2011-12-05 15:36, DN Singh wrote:
>
>> Yes, I tried to figure it out that way, but the numbers aren't constant.
>>
>
> Hav
Yes, I tried to figure it out that way, but the numbers aren't constant.
Which is I was experimenting on the delays, and then ended up on this
topic...
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > The problem is that I am unable to find any hard limit of
12.2011 12:12, schrieb DN Singh:
> > SPF, DKIM, FBL everything being followed, but still no more than 3-4k
> > delivery to hotmail/rediff. Any ideas group?? Can these destinations be
> > classified as dead, when they start deferring?
>
> sorry ,they arent "dead" at
SPF, DKIM, FBL everything being followed, but still no more than 3-4k
delivery to hotmail/rediff. Any ideas group?? Can these destinations be
classified as dead, when they start deferring?
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 10:59 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Friday 02 December 2011 08:23:53 Mark Goodge wrote:
empts. Is it only me facing such issues, are there other people facing
these??
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:13 PM, DN Singh wrote:
> I guess Mark does have some experience with TS01 defers of Yahoo. Can
> anyone confirm for upto how long does Yahoo accept the mails, after we stop
> it for 4 ho
I guess Mark does have some experience with TS01 defers of Yahoo. Can
anyone confirm for upto how long does Yahoo accept the mails, after we stop
it for 4 hours. I mean is it worth stopping delivery for "4 hours", and
gathering those mails?
If so, I could on the path Wietse is suggesting, of taili
Okay. This means I was going in the wrong direction itself.
Thank you guys, for making this clear.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:37:02AM +0530, DN Singh wrote:
>
> > Yes, I am trying some workarounds, like rate delays, to add
e
matter, or am I in the wrong direction?
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > I will get more clear with an example:
> >
> > yahoo.com has different rejection codes, common of which is TS01. They
> say,
> > after TS01, you aren't
ll up the disk. Should I create a different postfix altogether
for such domains?
I am sorry, if my mail seems more on complaining side :(
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> DN Singh:
> > Yes Jeroen,
> >
> > That is the case. I am suffering backlog of m
Yes Jeroen,
That is the case. I am suffering backlog of mails to one domain, due to its
deferral policy. This is why I want to handle it manually. Could you help
in the matter?
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 2011-12-01 08:35, DN Singh wrote:
>
>>
t any options, I may have to go with the script. Then, I may
need some more help...
Thanks,
DN Singh
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Am 01.12.2011 08:35, schrieb DN Singh:
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > I am trying some extra configuration for postfix wh
ions. This is because, I do not want any delivery attempts during
the time when a destination is marked dead.
Is this possible? If yes, then how?
Thanks.
DN Singh
46 matches
Mail list logo
