On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 03:27:14PM +0300, lists+postfix--- via Postfix-users
wrote:
> master.cf:
> dxunix - n n - 20 pipe
> flags=Rq argv=/usr/local/bin/someprog ${sender} ${recipient}
Works as documented for me:
$
On 2025-09-25 at 13:37:01 UTC-0400 (Fri, 26 Sep 2025 03:37:01 +1000)
Marc Lucke via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
fwiw this is what gpt-5 said:
[sewage]
Having and using an API key for an LLM does not make you seem to be an
expert but rather something quite the opposite, especially
no more copy/paste. Got it.
On 26/09/2025 4:12 am, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Marc Lucke via Postfix-users:
fwiw this is what gpt-5 said:
Oh great, now we have LLM feedback with incorrect examples (those
openssl command lines do not show the EHLO server response that it
is trying
Marc Lucke via Postfix-users:
> fwiw this is what gpt-5 said:
Oh great, now we have LLM feedback with incorrect examples (those
openssl command lines do not show the EHLO server response that it
is trying to extract with sed commands).
Wie
465.
If you want, paste a couple of your |postconf -n| lines for
submission/smtps and I’ll sanity-check them.
On 26/09/2025 2:51 am, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:37:18PM +0200, lejeczek via Postfix-users wrote:
Inasmuch I
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:37:18PM +0200, lejeczek via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > Inasmuch I do not, well, did not until now, use 465 but I've been using -
> > not with Ceph though - 587 all the time.
> > Is it ok to assume t
lists+postfix--- via Postfix-users:
> hello !
>
> I have an issue with transport_destination_recipient_limit setting.
> my config is like:
>
> master.cf:
> dxunix - n n - 20 pipe
>flags=Rq argv=/usr/local/bin/someprog ${sender} $
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:37:18PM +0200, lejeczek via Postfix-users wrote:
> Inasmuch I do not, well, did not until now, use 465 but I've been using -
> not with Ceph though - 587 all the time.
> Is it ok to assume that, that part - 587 - of the config is good and it's
&
Dnia 25.09.2025 o godz. 17:37:18 lejeczek via Postfix-users pisze:
> Inasmuch I do not, well, did not until now, use 465 but I've been
> using - not with Ceph though - 587 all the time.
> Is it ok to assume that, that part - 587 - of the config is good and
> it's only Ceph wh
humans could make use of it?___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> That's because with "foo" as the content filter, the nexthop is taken
> from the recipient domain. To force a single nexthop, the content
> filter should be "foo:dummy" or some other fixed nexthop value.
I agree. If the recip
ing default_destination_recipient_limit fixes the situation.
It looks like dx_destination_recipient_limit does not work for pipe
transport. but default_destination_recipient_limit does.
is this a postfix bug or it is misconfiguration ?
postfix-3.10.4
___
Postfix-us
lejeczek via Postfix-users:
> I don't know what "exactly" with _ssl_ means for ceph - not
> knowledgeable to comment on the source code and user manuals
> do not go into those details or I failed to find such
> detailed info.
> What I could find does not mention T
On 25.09.25 07:49, lejeczek via Postfix-users wrote:
I don't know what "exactly" with _ssl_ means for ceph - not
knowledgeable to comment on the source code and user manuals do not go
into those details or I failed to find such detailed info.
What I could find does not mention
after CONNECT from unknown[10.1.1.61]
Sep 25 07:43:49 postfix/submission/smtpd[1819876]:
disconnect from unknown[10.1.1.61] commands=0/0
Ceph's
...
[SSL: WRONG_VERSION_NUMBER] wrong version number
(_ssl.c:1147)
___________
Postfix-users mailing list --
On 2025-09-24 at 06:43:57 UTC-0400 (Wed, 24 Sep 2025 12:43:57 +0200)
lejeczek via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
Hi guys.
I'm looking for help over at Ceph community but I thought, I the
meanwhile, in case there might be something to do at postfix's end, I
should ask he
lejeczek via Postfix-users:
> Hi guys.
>
> I'm looking for help over at Ceph community but I thought, I
> the meanwhile, in case there might be something to do at
> postfix's end, I should ask here.
>
> With Ceph, I'm trying to set 'alerts' and wi
Sorry, I confused trusted and verified. Happens to the best.
Wietse
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 10:48:17AM +0200, A. Schulze via Postfix-users wrote:
> as documented [1], tls_eecdh_auto_curves configure "Postfix SMTP
> client AND server". This "AND" is hurts me a little bit:
> [...]
> anyway: could I configure postfix fo offer
ing as smtp client?
Andreas
[1] https://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#tls_eecdh_auto_curves
[2] https://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#minimal_backoff_time
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 11:50:03AM -0400, Alex via Postfix-users wrote:
> Hi, Google Postmaster Tools recently started reporting that my TLS
> configuration is not properly set up.
Actually, the converse, the below is *your* Postfix SMTP client that is
telling you that *Google's* co
Bill Cole via Postfix-users:
> On 2025-09-21 at 11:50:03 UTC-0400 (Sun, 21 Sep 2025 11:50:03 -0400)
> Alex via Postfix-users
> is rumored to have said:
>
> > Hi, Google Postmaster Tools recently started reporting that my TLS
> > configuration is not properly set up. I
On 2025-09-21 at 11:50:03 UTC-0400 (Sun, 21 Sep 2025 11:50:03 -0400)
Alex via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
Hi, Google Postmaster Tools recently started reporting that my TLS
configuration is not properly set up. I don't think anything has
changed,
but perhaps it was never s
On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 11:59:09AM +0200, A.Schulze via Postfix-users wrote:
> German regulations (TR-02102-2 [1]) say, using 2048 bit Diffie-Hellman
> parameters is "deprecated". Not using DHE cipher suited is one option
> but that limit TLS communication with some sites th
ps://pastebin.com/FU2WwAbA
smtp
https://pastebin.com/2ZLp5dMD
Thank you,
Alex
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 09:57:53PM +1000, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> > $ openssl dhparam -out /etc/postfix/dh3072.pem 3072
> > $ postconf -e smtpd_tls_dh1024_param_file=/etc/postfix/dh3072.pem
>
> You could do that, but this does not quite get you the group
On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 12:26:13PM +0200, Dmitriy Alekseev via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Want to take your attention to https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7919 and
> https://ssl-config.mozilla.org/ as it can change your view a bit on DH.
> This keys are publicly available f.e.
>
break some old software
so there no reason to stick to 3072, go with 4096...
--
*Best Regards,*
Dmitriy Alekseev
DevOps Engineer
On Sun, 21 Sept 2025, 11:59 A.Schulze via Postfix-users, <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> German regulations (TR-02102-2 [1]) say, using
param_file
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7919
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
hello
I know that a sender host should have correct dns records for either A
or PTR.
for HELO hostname, does it require the same settings (both A and PTR are
set, and matching).
Thank you.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To
Rob Hoo via Postfix-users:
> hello
>
> I know that a sender host should have correct dns records for either A
> or PTR.
>
> for HELO hostname, does it require the same settings (both A and PTR are
> set, and matching).
I recommend that you specify the name of the sendin
tribute solutions. The number of people
that I trust to write code for Postfix itself is vanishingly small.
Wietse
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4cssr21jhmzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
|> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-u\
|> sers wrote:
|>
|>> p$ telnet localhost 25
|>> ...
|>>
efully open source, and not from Microsoft
or Google), where such impersonation protection is easily configurable. That
way, I could not only warn about the risk around here, but also present some
real-life examples of hosters or software which do take care in the right way.
Best regards,
rd
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> > Is this something that should be addressed in upstream, or it is
> > expected for package maintainers to do so?
>
> I can fix that upstream, having two options:
>
> Add meta_directory and shlib_directory to conf/main.cf. That
> c
Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On p?tek 19. z??? 2025 14:20:38, st?edoevropsk? letn? ?as Eray Aslan via
> Postfix-users wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:24:22PM +0200, Eray Aslan via P
Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users wrote in
<2437975.irdbgyp...@natalenko.name>:
|On pátek 19. září 2025 14:20:38, středoevropský letní čas Eray Aslan \
|via Postfix-users wrote:
|> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:24:22PM +0200, Eray Aslan via Postfix-users \
|> wrote:
|>&
On pátek 19. září 2025 15:22:20, středoevropský letní čas Wietse Venema via
Postfix-users wrote:
> Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
> > On p?tek 19. z??? 2025 14:20:38, st?edoevropsk? letn? ?as Eray Aslan via
> > Postfix-users wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 a
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > p$ telnet localhost 25
> > ...
> > 220 kent.sdaoden.eu ESMTP Postfix
> > ...
> > RCPT TO:<""
> >
On pátek 19. září 2025 14:20:38, středoevropský letní čas Eray Aslan via
Postfix-users wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:24:22PM +0200, Eray Aslan via Postfix-users wrote:
> > Right. However, postconf output seems to be non deterministic. i.e.
>
> and perhaps adding meta_d
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote in
:
|On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-u\
|sers wrote:
|
|> p$ telnet localhost 25
|> ...
|> 220 kent.sdaoden.eu ESMTP Postfix
|> ...
|> RCPT TO:<"" \
|> ()>
|>
On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:24:22PM +0200, Eray Aslan via Postfix-users wrote:
> Right. However, postconf output seems to be non deterministic. i.e.
and perhaps adding meta_directory and/or shlib_directory to the stock
main.cf file so that they are edited and not added via the postconf
command
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 07:24:55AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
> > readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix
> > inet_protocols = ipv4
> > -meta_directory = /etc/postfix
> > shlib_directory = /usr/lib/postfix
the message and any attachments. Any disclosure, reproduction,
distribution or other use of this message or any attachments by an individual
or entity other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@pos
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
wrote:
> p$ telnet localhost 25
> ...
> 220 kent.sdaoden.eu ESMTP Postfix
> ...
> RCPT TO:<""
> ()>
> 250 2.1.5 Ok
This is garbage in, confusing RFC2822 message head
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4csl2l1ywlzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|R. Diez via Postfix-users:
|> So my first question is: Is there a way to configure
|> 'reject_sender_login_mismatch' and/or 'smtpd_sender_login_maps'
|> so that they only apply
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 11:52:03AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via
> Postfix-users wrote:
> > On 08.09.25 18:37, John, Chris via Postfix-users wrote:
> > > I have a postfix 3.5.2 system that accepts messages from internal hosts
> &g
Dnia 18.09.2025 o godz. 16:08:53 R. Diez via Postfix-users pisze:
> Apparently, that particular user
> runs an ERP system which needs to send e-mails on behalf of any ERP user.
> I personally find it iffy for a number of reasons that the ERP system can
> impersonate any user when sen
On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 16:08:53 +0200
"R. Diez via Postfix-users" wrote:
[snip]
>
> Or may be there is some ready-to-use script which automatically
> replaces both the envelope address and the "From:" header to match
> the ones associated with the SMTP account, bu
R. Diez via Postfix-users:
> So my first question is: Is there a way to configure
> 'reject_sender_login_mismatch' and/or 'smtpd_sender_login_maps'
> so that they only apply to some SMTP accounts? The aim here is to
> designate one or more "superuser"
Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On ?tvrtek 18. z??? 2025 13:24:55, st?edoevropsk? letn? ?as Wietse Venema via
> Postfix-users wrote:
> > Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
> > > $
On čtvrtek 18. září 2025 13:24:55, středoevropský letní čas Wietse Venema via
Postfix-users wrote:
> Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
> > $ diff -u /etc/postfix/main.cf~ /etc/postfix/main.cf.pacnew
> > --- /etc/postfix/main.cf~ 2025-08-19 08:08:28.0 +0200
>
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 04:08:53PM +0200, R. Diez via Postfix-users wrote:
> I wonder whether Postfix is making this basic antispoofing feature too
> hard for basic/economic mail hosters to implement. I am thinking of
> some new, easy configuration option which rejects, or auto
isted in some configuration file? This
way, not every hoster must implement it all from scratch.
Thanks in advance,
rdiez
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Oleksandr Natalenko via Postfix-users:
> $ diff -u /etc/postfix/main.cf~ /etc/postfix/main.cf.pacnew
> --- /etc/postfix/main.cf~ 2025-08-19 08:08:28.0 +0200
> +++ /etc/postfix/main.cf.pacnew 2025-09-16 19:21:53.0 +0200
> @@ -685,5 +685,5 @@
> #
> readm
reporting this to the postfix project directly as it might be an
upstream issue.
Please check.
Thank you.
--
Oleksandr Natalenko, MSE
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@p
tls=dane?/requiretls?
DANE and REQUIRETLS policies were undecided, because the
connection failed before or in the TLS handshake.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
BuzzSaw Code via Postfix-users:
> We have a mail server running Dovecot (2.3.x) and postfix (3.5.x) on
> RHEL8, using the RPMs from RedHat. Postfix is configured to use the
> Dovecot lmtp for deliveries to the local maildir for each user.
>
> This server uses a virtual user setup
Travis Bean via Postfix-users:
> I want to know whether or not Postfix: The Definitive Guide (
> https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/postfix-the-definitive/0596002122/) is
> outdated. It was published in 2003. How much has Postfix changed since
> then? Is there content in this
will just stick with studying the documentation on
postfix.org.
Kind regards,
Travis Bean
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 07:01:58PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via
Postfix-users wrote:
> On 14.09.25 11:03, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
> > No, not a violation of DNS, rather such a rewrite is a violation of
> > RFC2321 (and its successors: 5321, 5321bis[1]) wh
On 08.09.25 18:37, John, Chris via Postfix-users wrote:
> I have a postfix 3.5.2 system that accepts messages from internal hosts
> and relays to internal destinations and to an email perimeter that
> delivers to external (Internet) domains.
>
> The issue I'm seeing is regard
b 10.11.14-MariaDB
--
Tommy Berglund
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 11:52:03AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via
Postfix-users wrote:
> On 08.09.25 18:37, John, Chris via Postfix-users wrote:
> > I have a postfix 3.5.2 system that accepts messages from internal hosts
> > and relays to internal destinations and to an email
Am 10.09.25 um 18:58 schrieb Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
The attached backport is just code, not documentation.
Thanks, Wietse!
I confirm, a slightly updated version (attached) works at a first test with
postfix-3.10.4
master.cf
12345 inet n - - - - smtpd
-o
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> The underlying concepts and more examples, incuding errors, can be
> found in
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L2decFpFo2CQBXMnq7f6m9htZ53X34N-v5rQDuxcCL0/
I have opened access.
Wietse
_______
Post
* Kladizkov theone via Postfix-users :
>
> From what I can tell, the limit is being enforced by the Postfix content
> filter (the localhost smtpd service). My global message_size_limit in
> main.cf is already higher, but the content filter listener seems to have
> its own s
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 05:31:54PM +0200, A. Schulze via Postfix-users wrote:
> We've an SMTP-Server, running intentionally with "smtpd_tls_security_level =
> encrypt"
>
> If an SMTP-Client fail to establish an TLS connection, the client fallback
> to plaintext.
its consistent across Postfix and
the filter?
My goal is to allow up to ~100 MB messages for outbound mail.
Thanks in advance for your help!
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users
t_plaintext_session" but I only found the option to change the
replycode (plaintext_reject_code)
So, this doesn't help directly and it also may be an other layer...
Is there any other option than patching postfix' source code?
Andreas
________
name to be the same as the server's A record hostname.
All problems solved. PTR matched.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:40:47PM +, Rob Hoo via Postfix-users wrote:
> I know that a sender host should have correct dns records for either A
> or PTR.
The IP address of an SMTP client needs to have an associated PTR record
(possibly after CNAME expansion of the re.ve.rse.ip.in-addr
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 06:08:11PM -0400, John Levine via Postfix-users
wrote:
> It appears that devonmors--- via Postfix-users said:
> >-=-=-=-=-=-
> >-=-=-=-=-=-
> >
> >Can Postfix be tweaked to hide being identified {not the version} by Nmap
> >scans?
It appears that devonmors--- via Postfix-users said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Can Postfix be tweaked to hide being identified {not the version} by Nmap
>scans?
I'd guess that changing the mail_name configuration parameter would do it.
Perhaps:
mail_name =
Can Postfix be tweaked to hide being identified {not the version} by Nmap scans?___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Hello Viktor,
Am 10.09.25 um 17:43 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
That, despite apparently some clients caught off guard. This choice
feels too aggressive to me. But, if you're willing to go out on a limb,
perhaps you're also willing to deploy a Postfix development sn
allation that was done on a physical host.
Thanks for the education!
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 9:02 AM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> BuzzSaw Code via Postfix-users:
> > We have a mail server running Dovecot (2.3.x) and postfix (3.5.x) on
> >
On 08.09.25 18:37, John, Chris via Postfix-users wrote:
I have a postfix 3.5.2 system that accepts messages from internal hosts
and relays to internal destinations and to an email perimeter that
delivers to external (Internet) domains.
The issue I'm seeing is regarding external domains
A. Schulze via Postfix-users:
>
> Hello,
>
> We've an SMTP-Server, running intentionally with
> "smtpd_tls_security_level = encrypt"
>
> If an SMTP-Client fail to establish an TLS connection, the client
> fallback to plaintext.
> That's nothin
size of the number of 'active queue' entries ?
Any guidance or pointers are greatly appreciated.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
om[y.y.y.y], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (Ok: queued
as 4cGDwq3YqbzjB8nV)
I presumed that the sendmail system did not rewrite the recipient domain
because it (the rewrite) was not present in the sendmail log.
Chris John
-Original Message-
From: Bill Cole via Postfix-users
Sent: Monday, S
Hi Wietse,
That fixed it.
Thank you for helping me out. It was a custom written content filter built
with python. The python modules defaulted to 32M size.
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 10:08 PM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Kladizkov theone via Post
On 2025-09-08 at 14:37:59 UTC-0400 (Mon, 8 Sep 2025 18:37:59 +)
John, Chris via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
I have a postfix 3.5.2 system that accepts messages from internal
hosts and relays to internal destinations and to an email perimeter
that delivers to external (Internet
John, Chris via Postfix-users:
> Sep 2 01:35:39 mailhost postfix/cleanup[26989]: 4cGDwq3YqbzjB8nV:
> warning: header Received: from use1otomprd01 (unknown [x.x.x.x])??by
> mailhost (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4cGDwq3YqbzjB8nV??for
> ; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 0 from
> unknown[x.x.x.x]; fr
Kladizkov theone via Postfix-users:
> Hello there,
>
> I?m running Postfix and have configured a custom content filter on
> localhost ( a python service that listens at 10025 ). When sending large
> messages, Postfix rejects them with the following error:
>
> message size
reasonably
used for general email deliveries at this time.
The underlying concepts and more examples, incuding errors, can be
found in
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L2decFpFo2CQBXMnq7f6m9htZ53X34N-v5rQDuxcCL0/
Wietse
_______
Postfix-use
Abusix has had me blocked for the past year... they sent me some email
claiming they're going to delete my account with any "delists" associated
with it... which is extremely ironic under the circumstances.
--
FWM
_______
Postfix-use
tsCopy) {
$recipient = $changes;
}
The $ctx->recipients is now protected from loop mutations and the alias remains
during all of DATA.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix
On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 11:08:52AM -0400, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> > So I'm inclined to speculate that the alias in question is via a
> > (recipient?) canonical mapping, rather than virtual(5) aliasing?
> >
> > Or, perhaps more likely, that alternatively
On 2025-09-05 at 15:22:59 UTC-0400 (Fri, 05 Sep 2025 15:22:59 -0400)
postfix--- via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
> Postfix is setup using virtual domains and addresses, using SQL queries to
> get user addresses and aliases.
> I am using a milter that runs during the RCPT
c/postfix/mysql_email_domains
virtual_mailbox_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_email_addresses
virtual_alias_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_email_aliases
virtual_transport = lmtp:unix:private/dovecot-lmtp
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@po
On Sat, Sep 06, 2025 at 11:27:36AM +0300, Tuomo Soini via Postfix-users wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 15:39:40 -0400
> Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > The solution to this problem turned out to be to modify my LE
> > deployment post-hook to also deploy fu
Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
>cleanup_milter_emul_rcpt() emulates an rcpt event for mail that does
>not arrive via the smtpd(8) server. This reports a server configuration
>error condition when the milter rejects an emulated rcpt event.
>...
W
On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 15:39:40 -0400
Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote:
> The solution to this problem turned out to be to modify my LE
> deployment post-hook to also deploy fullchain.pem into /etc/postfix
> as well as cert.pem, and then change dovecot's ssl_cert configur
On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 03:22:59PM -0400, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> Postfix is setup using virtual domains and addresses, using SQL
> queries to get user addresses and aliases. I am using a milter that
> runs during the RCPT and DATA stages. An email is received t
On 8/23/25 13:57, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
It appears that starting a couple of days ago, newly issued/renewed
Let's Encrypt (LE) certificates will be signed by R12, R13, E7 and E8,
rather than the previously active R10, R11, E5 and E6. See the
announcement at:
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> postfix--- via Postfix-users:
> > Postfix is setup using virtual domains and addresses, using SQL queries to
> > get user addresses and aliases.
> > I am using a milter that runs during the RCPT and DATA stages.
> > An email is recei
postfix--- via Postfix-users:
> Postfix is setup using virtual domains and addresses, using SQL queries to
> get user addresses and aliases.
> I am using a milter that runs during the RCPT and DATA stages.
> An email is received to an al...@example.com address that maps to
ic is working with
the alias during DATA?
I don't know if it's relevant but i also have:
milter_protocol = 6
milter_rcpt_macros = i {rcpt_addr} {rcpt_host} {rcpt_mailer} {tls_version}
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4ch3gp5r5kzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
|> Is it somehow possible to improve the interaction in between
|> addressverification on the local, and greylisting on the remote
|> side? I have very good
1 - 100 of 7071 matches
Mail list logo
