On 10/21/2024 6:36 PM, Bill Cole via Postfix-users wrote:
On 2024-10-21 at 16:43:05 UTC-0400 (Mon, 21 Oct 2024 16:43:05 -0400)
Steve Matzura via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
[ big snip...]
Here's a returned mail message I received when I tried to simply
send a messa
checked and fixed all of that there will be something new
to say.
On Oct 21, 2024, at 1:44 PM, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 10/21/2024 3:06 PM, Andrew Athan via Postfix-users wrote:
Clearly something has changed. It may be simply that you are now
routing to the isp via ipv6
connecting to outside SMTP
servers have PTR records.
this will typically require you to contact your comms provider to add
the PTRs if they are missing.
On Oct 21, 2024, at 10:55 AM, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 10/21/2024 1:33 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote
On 10/21/2024 1:33 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Steve Matzura via Postfix-users:
On 10/21/2024 1:14 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Steve Matzura via Postfix-users:
On 10/21/2024 12:42 PM, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
2024-10-21T16:29:00.942189+00:00
On 10/21/2024 1:14 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Steve Matzura via Postfix-users:
On 10/21/2024 12:42 PM, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
2024-10-21T16:29:00.942189+00:00 theglobalvoice postfix/qmgr[3900]:
E53B5103176: from=<>, size=3212, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
2024-10
On 10/21/2024 12:42 PM, postfix--- via Postfix-users wrote:
2024-10-21T16:29:00.942189+00:00 theglobalvoice postfix/qmgr[3900]:
E53B5103176: from=<>, size=3212, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
2024-10-21T16:29:01.124528+00:00 theglobalvoice postfix/smtp[4038]:
E53B5103176: to=,
orig_to=,
relay=mail.ga
Everything's been fine up until this morning. With no knowledge of any
changes by anyone, I'm now getting entries in mail.log that look like this:
2024-10-21T16:29:00.942189+00:00 theglobalvoice postfix/qmgr[3900]:
E53B5103176: from=<>, size=3212, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
2024-10-21T16:29:01.124
d from the queue. I
expected to get a lot of test messages, but they were all removed.
Mail is now flowing nicely as it should when program streams complete.
On 9/30/2024 12:00 AM, Peter via Postfix-users wrote:
On 30/09/24 10:38, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
2024-09-29T2
On 9/30/2024 11:20 AM, Jarosław Rafa via Postfix-users wrote:
W dniu pon, 30.09.2024 o godzinie 09∶52 -0400, użytkownik Steve Matzura
via Postfix-users napisał:
I enabled port 25.
$ sudo ufw allow 25
/var/log/mail.log still shows connection timeout. Maybe ports 465 and
587 as well?
It'
On 9/30/2024 1:54 AM, Danjel Jungersen via Postfix-users wrote:
On 30 September 2024 06:00:32 CEST, Peter via Postfix-users
wrote:
>On 30/09/24 10:38, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
>> 2024-09-29T21:31:27.402601+00:00 tgv24 postfix/error[1775]:
B9E5510584F: to=, orig_to
Scott K:
On 9/30/2024 12:17 AM, Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users wrote:
On September 30, 2024 4:00:32 AM UTC, Peter via
Postfix-users wrote:
On 30/09/24 10:38, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
2024-09-29T21:31:27.402601+00:00 tgv24 postfix/error[1775]: B9E5510584F:
to=, orig_to
On 9/29/2024 8:11 PM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 05:38:16PM -0400, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
2024-09-29T21:31:27.402601+00:00 tgv24 postfix/error[1775]: B9E5510584F:
to=, orig_to=, relay=none,
delay=48744, delays=48594/150/0/0.01, dsn=4.4.1
On 9/29/2024 7:56 PM, Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote:
On 9/29/24 17:38, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
sudo hostname theglobalvoice.info
The bash prompt changes, but after the reboot, it reverted back to
TGV24. I'll take this up elsewhere, but I thought I'd expl
Wietse,
On 9/28/2024 6:33 PM, Wesley wrote:
On 2024-09-29 05:15, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
I just moved from Postfix 3.3.0 on an older Ubuntu system to 3.8.6 on
Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. I ran through the standard configuration script and
then edited /etc/postfix/main.cf on the new
Wietse,
On 9/29/2024 3:47 PM, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Steve Matzura via Postfix-users:
/var/log/mail.log is length 0, but here is /var/log/mail.err:
2024-09-28T20:15:02.207931+00:00 tgv24 sSMTP[58912]: Unable to locate mail
2024-09-28T20:15:02.208210+00:00 tgv24 sSMTP[58912
On 9/28/2024 6:33 PM, Wesley wrote:
On 2024-09-29 05:15, Steve Matzura via Postfix-users wrote:
I just moved from Postfix 3.3.0 on an older Ubuntu system to 3.8.6 on
Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. I ran through the standard configuration script and
then edited /etc/postfix/main.cf on the new system to
I just moved from Postfix 3.3.0 on an older Ubuntu system to 3.8.6 on
Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. I ran through the standard configuration script and
then edited /etc/postfix/main.cf on the new system to match the old one.
My syslog shows timeouts to destination addresses I know are good from
the old sys
I'm not sure, but canonical address mapping sounds like
what you want:
http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html#canonical
This isn't the same as just delivering an email to an
alias address. It actually rewrites envelope and
message header addresses.
If this does what you want
Now my additions. If you are using RoundCube then almost certainly
RoundCube is using IMAP/IMAPS to communicate with a back end imapd
server. A backend imapd that is most likely Dovecot? This drifts
off-topic for Postfix so further discussion should be in a different
mail group, probably a
And I would use "check_client_access" instead?
Yes. Note that trailing comments are not part of the Postfix
map syntax. Any comment must occupy its entire line.
Good to know. I would have screwed this up at some point if I haven't
already.
You can use a CIDR map if you prefer, someth
Hi,
Postfix isn't the right thing for that. It's a mail
server, not a mail client. You'll need to investigate
the documentation for the mail client that you use when
reading and sending mail.
For example, with mutt, you can give it a list of all
of your email addresses with an "alternates" di
My scenario: I have several email accounts: EmailA, EmailB, EmailC,
EmailD, etc.. Then I have a fifth gmail account, EmailE, that I use to
funnel/forward all my other email addresses to. The gmail account then
forwards all email to my main email, EmailA. Yeah, it's a mess. Yes, I
will eventuall
I would have opted for "client" rather than "sender" checks, provided a
sufficiently stable/comprehensive range of source IP addresses for the
forwarding host were available.
OK, took a quick look at the documentation on this but still left with
questions. So would "client" be the same as HO
Anything else I can try?
Yes, far better to disable SPF checks on hostB when receiving mail from
hostA.
Thank you. Problem solved. For the benefit of others:
1) Add /etc/postfix/sender_checks file:
amazonses.com OK
2) Add check to smtpd_recipient_restrictions config in main.cf:
smtpd_re
smtp_generic_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/smtp_generic_map
Forgive the typo in this email. I have it correctly entered in the
actual config file as: "smtp_generic_maps =
hash:/etc/postfix/smtp_generic_maps"
I have a mail server the receives email from a website. The website uses
Amazon SES to send its email out. This email gets sent to
somebody@HOST_A address. Then, the email client on the server has a
filter installed to forward to a local address and then to an email
address on another adrees, s
I'm looking at config documentation for solr on dovecot:
https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/fts/solr/
In the suggested solrconfig.xml file
(https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dovecot/core/master/doc/solr-config-7.7.0.xml),
it has the following line:
7.7.0
I'm running solr version 8
So are you saying that amavis would replace the uses of the sendmail
command here to deliver the email? I'm not familiar with amavis. I'll
search on it.
yes.
Perhaps you could replace the sendmail with postfix' lmtp command.
But I'm not sure whether if could work and wht exact syntax to use
No. As Matthias pointed out, these are the settings before the content
filter (hint: it is before spamassassin).
Unfortunately, your configuration uses the /usr/sbin/sendmail command
to inject filtered mail back into Postfix. That uses the same Postfix
pickup service for new mail and for filte
smtp inet n - y - -smtpd
-o content_filter=spamassassin
-o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings
So it looks like I have the no_address_mappings after the content
filter already. Is that right?
no, you have no_address_mappings BEFORE the content f
By doing the virtual_alias_maps *before* instead of after the content
filter, so that the content filter sees the final envelope recipient.
This is done by by NOT having ("receive_override_options" with
"no_address_mappings") before the content filter and by having
("receive_override_options" with
-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${user} -e /usr/sbin/sendmail
-oi -f ${sender} ${recipient}
When an email is sent to "st...@dondley.com", spamassassin does not do
any bayes filtering on the email. Presumably it's because the user
"steve" does not exist on the system and
Sending to pe...@example.org works with these SA settings in master.cf:
smtp inet n - y - -smtpd
-o content_filter=spamassassin
-o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings
spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe
user=debian-spa
OK, I found the solution. So the command needed for me was:
user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${user} -f -e
/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} ${recipient}
${recipient} returns the full email address whereas I just wanted the
bit before the @ sign (the user name).
user=d
spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe
user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -f -e /usr/sbin/sendmail
-oi -f ${sender} ${recipient}
I modified the above to:
user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -u ${recipient} -f -e
/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} ${rec
I'd like to configure postfix so the configuration settings in the
per-user configuration file at ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs get applied.
This user_prefs config file is used with the spamassassin command as
evidenced with spamassassin -D < spam.txt. But as far as I can tell, the
user_prefs fil
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 4:26 AM Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 03:41:06AM -0500, Steve Dondley wrote:
>
> > Here are postfix config file: https://pastebin.com/bZxjHF5y
>
> I don't usually go chasing pastebin URLs...
>
> > Hopefully something j
> 1. new email comes in, is delivered to content filter, with bcc to
> always_bcc recipient.
> 2. content filter re-injects email into the queue for final delivery,
> postfix performs final delivery, with bcc to the always_bcc recipient?
>
> Since these are 2 separate deliveries (with different rou
> You may also have disabled recipient duplication. We will
> never knwo unles yo reveal yur configration as described
> in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail.
I've been looking at this a lng time tonight. Despite my best
efforts, I did not find a reason for the duplicate email.
I
> If 'always_bcc' produces three copies (with spamassassin turned on)
> for one email message with three recipients, then Postfix is
It's actually generating 3 emails even if sending to only one recipient.
> mis-configured, for example, to deliver three one-recipient messages
> to the content fil
> do a lot of your own homework (because everyone here is busy). If this
> doesn't appeal, consider using a recipe for a postfix-based mail server
> such as https://mailinabox.email/ or https://www.iredmail.org/. You lose
> the flexibility of a bespoke setup but you get back some of your life -
> I
hat in (which I apparently do), how do I
properly stop duplicates from happening?
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 2:17 PM Steve Dondley wrote:
>
> I think I found the root cause of the problem (other than me being a
> clueless idiot). I had this in my master.cf:
>
> smtp inet n -
I think I found the root cause of the problem (other than me being a
clueless idiot). I had this in my master.cf:
smtp inet n - y - -smtpd
-o content_filter=spamassassin
submission inet n - y - -smtpe
-o content_filter=spamassassin
After staring at these logs some more and piecing together the advice
here, here's my understanding of what's happening:
* Mail comes in via smtpd as user sends mail. It's going to 3
recipients. I'm not sure who those might be. Maybe the catchall
account and the two users the email is going to?
*
Here's an anonymized pastebin example of my actual log entries of an
outgoing email that generated 3 copies: https://pastebin.com/cw2XB5jp
to the "catchall" mailbox.
> It is worthwhile to know if the duplicates are caused by adding
> multiple 'always_bcc' addresses to the same queue file.
>
> Look
> - mail comes to postfix (smtp or local injection)
> = address mappings (always_bcc) happen
> - postfix sends mail to spamassassin
> - spamassassin scans mail and sends to postfix
> = address mappings (always_bcc) happen
>
> one of those should be avoided by no_address_mappings but choose wise
> The info can be found in the maillog file, and the Received: headers
> of the messages as delivered. Welcome to the vortex.
After a close inspection of the headers, I can see that all the email
received have headers injected by spamassassin and this revealing
line:
"Received: by email.example.c
> you only use should no_address_mappings if your mail loops back, not
> generally - you usually want alias expantion, canonical mapping, and
> automatic BCC (at least if you configure any of those).
Sorry, I don't follow you.
I'm on debian. As far as I can gather, all mail related activity is
lo
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 7:48 AM Dominic Raferd wrote:
>
> On 04/03/2021 11:42, Steve Dondley wrote:
> >> On 03.03.21 18:23, Steve Dondley wrote:
> >>> I have enabled the always_bcc setting with:
> >>>
> >>> always_bcc = exam...@example.org
>
>
>
>
> >-o content_filter=spamassassin
>
> the question is, how does spamassassin push mail back to postfix.
I have no earthly idea. Not sure how SA works, exactly. And it makes me
wonder if I'm breaking spam assassin by adding
-o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings
to my configuratio
> On 03.03.21 18:23, Steve Dondley wrote:
> >I have enabled the always_bcc setting with:
> >
> >always_bcc = exam...@example.org
> >
> >It works, but I'm getting everything three times. How do I prevent
> >duplicates?
>
> this can happen if you
PM Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Steve Dondley:
> > OK, I found some guidance here:
> > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html
> >
> > Adding in "-o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings" to the
> > smtpd section worked.
> >
>
hat explains it?
On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 6:23 PM Steve Dondley wrote:
>
> I have enabled the always_bcc setting with:
>
> always_bcc = exam...@example.org
>
> It works, but I'm getting everything three times. How do I prevent duplicates?
--
Prometheus Labor Communication
I have enabled the always_bcc setting with:
always_bcc = exam...@example.org
It works, but I'm getting everything three times. How do I prevent duplicates?
This is probably off-topic, but maybe slightly related. I can open a
support ticket with Gandi, but something's definitely amiss with their
support system these days, as I have two open tickets with them for
other things directly related to their service which have not yet even
been assigned nu
On 23 Oct 2019, at 14:33, Steve Matzura wrote:
[...]
On a whim, I change the DNS record for mail from A to CNAME.
That's a weird and dangerous whim. Hostnames that are used as the
value for MX records MUST have A records and hence MUST NOT have CNAME
records. The CNAME *MIGHT* work if done
e:
On 23 Oct 2019, at 12:33, Steve Matzura wrote:
I change the DNS record for mail from A to CNAME
Don’t do that.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2181
The domain name used as the value of a NS resource record, or part of
the value of a MX resource record must not be an alias. Not only is
,
the MX record was untouched. Now, when someone tries to send mail,
they're getting 554's and/or 5.7.1's about relays. I read an article at
https://bobcares.com/blog/554-5-7-1-relay-access-denied/ but don't know
what to change to affect this.
On 10/23/2019 11:23 AM, Noel Jon
from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
I don't know even where to start with this one. Time to go back to
school I think.
On 10/22/2019 7:10 PM, Steve Matzura wrote:
Thanks, Noel. Very helpful. MySQL is definitely installed and working,
but I don't know about Milter, as it was set up by some
nd
report back.
On 10/22/2019 3:46 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
On 10/22/2019 1:58 PM, Steve Matzura wrote:
I am running a copy of configurations from a running version 2
installation from Ubuntu 14.04, now alive as version 3 on Ubuntu 18.04.
I thought I'd be slick and port over all the user
I am running a copy of configurations from a running version 2
installation from Ubuntu 14.04, now alive as version 3 on Ubuntu 18.04.
I thought I'd be slick and port over all the user mailbox directories in
/var/mail/vmail, all the customized .cf's, and the MySQL database.
Everything ported
or), eventually it will either be rejected by a following
rule or greylisted by the final policy check.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org On
Behalf Of Wietse Venema
Sent: April 5, 2019 11:20 AM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: SPF and Greylisting
st...@dou
n spf result of Softfail?
TIA,
Steve
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:12 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Steve Atkins:
>> I suspect the answer to this is going to be "Well, don't do that then." but
>> I may as well ask...
>>
>> I have a VM that's running two services. One of them is a va
not an unreasonable thing for it to think, but is there any way
to tell postfix that it's just a smarthost, not an MX listening on port 25, and
it shouldn't worry it's little head about mail loops?
Cheers,
Steve
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 9:28 AM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> On 15.05.18 16:54, Steve Huston wrote:
> >To do so, I'd like to send a copy of all locally-delivered
> >mail from the old machine to the new one to have it processed there.
> always_bcc and *_bcc_maps will not
maps, but I'm not sure if that's the
right answer. A transport map seems like the right answer, but that
appears to only have a single target.
--
Steve Huston - W2SRH - Unix Sysadmin, PICSciE/CSES & Astrophysical Sci
Princeton University |ICBM Address: 40.346344 -74.65224
, but apparently not enough to keep Gmail happy.
3) Should I consider setting up SpamAssassin with some very low thresholds
to pick up the obvious stuff?
Thanks in advance,
Steve
ance anyone can provide will be helpful.
Thanks
--
Steve Kuekes
Private Pilot: N9259R '95 Saratoga based at Sanford-Lee County Regional (TTA)
Fisherman: 2007 Sea Fox 225 Bay Fisher
email:st...@kuekes.com
I know many of us have used the fqrdns.pcre in Postfix's
smtpd_client_restrictions for many years to help block "low hanging" spam.
Long ago, after the project was abandoned by Stan H, I adopted it and moved
it to GitHub:
https://github.com/stevejenkins/hardwarefreak.com-fqrdns.pcre
One of Stan's
I use Postwhite to create a whitelist for Postscreen based on
user-configurable "trusted" mailers:
https://github.com/stevejenkins/postwhite (disclaimer: I'm the author).
Yahoo! has always been problematic (no surprise) because unlike all the
other big mailers that Postwhite queries, they don't e
Thank you. I know it's been about three weeks since I asked the
question, but I've been swamped with other projects so haven't had a
chance to try it. I will, and will report back.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:22:57 -0500 (EST), you wrote:
>Steve Matzura:
>> I'm currently
Peter:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2017 11:01:25 +1300, you wrote:
>F17 came with postfix 2.9 (the 9 is important here). I would also do
>this to make a new setting in 2.10 compatible to previous versions:
>
>postconf smtpd_relay_restrictions=permit
I must be lucky then, because 'postconf -d|grep mail_versi
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:47 AM Vernon Fort
wrote:
> What’s the best way to get the latest version of postfix on centos 7?
>
Google "centos postfix build" and click on the first link, which is my
walk-thru for upgrading Postfix on CentOS, including CentOS 7.
I've been manually building Postfix
I'm currently running an implementation of version 2 on a Fedora
version 17 system, moving to a Ubuntu 16.04 LTS system which gave me
version 3. Before I start pulling my hair out, which I already did
going from version 1 to 2, is there an easy migration path for a
configuration file that's working
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Sebastian Nielsen
wrote:
> You need to be more clear here.
>
> When you say Gmail account on port 587 I don’t entirely understand what
> you are doing. Are you using Gmail as upstream smarthost?
>
1. Open Gmail
2. Press gear icon and select "Settings"
3. Select "
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:23 PM, wrote:
> Have you tried to add the certs to the root store on your phone? I'm not
> on an iPhone, but that is what I did for Let's Encrypt. And it doesn't seem
> to always work.
>
I can do that, but I don't want to make all the other users on this mail
server (a
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> > On Nov 14, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Steve Jenkins
> wrote:
> >
> > # postconf -n | grep tls
> > smtp_tls_CAfile = $smtpd_tls_CAfile
> > smtp_tls_loglevel = 1
> > smtp_tls_security_level = may
I've had TLS working great on my Postfix servers for years, and I recently
tried switching one of my boxes to a Let's Encrypt certificate. A Gmail
test account using TLS on port 587 works fine, but the iOS mail client
complains about the certificate being untrusted. Further digging shows it
doesn't
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 12:38 PM, André Rodier wrote:
> Hello all!
>
> I have set up my postfix server, and my DNS entries to support DKIM, SPF
> and DMARC. However, I think I may have an error somewhere, because the
> "Authentication-Results:" header for DMARC -s "fail":
>
> Does anyone knows why
ery few reputation lists I'd be comfortable using to reject mail
based purely on peer IP rather than as part of a scoring or content-based
approach. I could count them on the fingers of one hand, and that's including
three spamhaus lists).
Cheers,
Steve
other than when it scp's the new
key and certificate into place. To be a little on-topic that includes a couple
of postfix servers that don't do anything over http at all.
Cheers,
Steve
> About the only outside control of my server I accept is spam RBLs, because
> really I hav
> On Aug 21, 2016, at 5:13 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Robert Schetterer:
>> Am 21.08.2016 um 05:10 schrieb Steve Atkins:
>>> I find I need to extract a list of deliveries, and delivery attempts, from
>>> postfix logs. Ideally I'd like to feed /var/log/
lyzer or some other script that'll do that?
Cheers,
Steve
filtering, but I
think it would block too many false positives from legitimate domains such
as kissimmee.org, blackgirlsvote.com, savethedate.com, and cuteoverload.com
(based on your examples).
Maybe some other form(s) of content filtering?
Steve Jenkins
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On 2016-07-21 20:27, Steve Jenkins wrote:
>
> whitelists and blacklists for Postscreen based on hostnames:
>> https://github.com/stevejenkins/postwhite
>>
>
> can blacklist be saved to seperate cidr file
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Lefteris Tsintjelis wrote:
>
> I am already doing this but I would personally much rather have the
> choice of a domain white/black listing as it is a much cleaner solution
> even for smaller and unlisted domains with the extra delay cost of a
> single reverse lo
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Lefteris Tsintjelis wrote:
> This is a CIDR based access list and you have to know the IP
>
Also... you don't need to know the IP. Postwhite looks it (them) up for you
based on domain name and stuffs them into a Postscreen-friendly whitelist.
It's literally the
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Lefteris Tsintjelis wrote:
> On 21 Jul 2016, at 18:58, Steve Jenkins wrote:
>
>
> If you're looking into Postscreen whitelisting, you might consider
> including Postwhite in your solution:
>
>
> http://www.stevejenkins.com/blog/20
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Lefteris Tsintjelis wrote:
> Would it be too much to ask for a single reverse DNS lookup client based
> black/white listing in postscreen?
>
> ...
> .gmail.com reject
> .live.com reject
> .postfix.org accept
> ...
>
If you're looking into Postscreen whitelisting,
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:29 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
> On May 31, 2016, at 8:30 PM, Steve Jenkins wrote:
> > A quick way to do this is to download postwhite and add web.com to the
> list of queried hosts. All their known (published) IPs and CIDRs wlll be
> added to your Postscreen whit
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Michael Orlitzky
wrote:
> On 05/31/2016 08:16 PM, Terry Barnum wrote:
> >
> > Since web.com probably has a fleet of mail servers, do I need to find
> and enter all their IPs into my postscreen_access.cidr? Is there an easier
> way?
> >
>
> That's generally what yo
I can’t see anything in the docs.
>
> Thanks
> Robert
Hi Robert,
http://ipv6-test.com for the basics.
dig chalmers.com.au doesn’t give any IPv6 addresses from here.
The IPv6 address in your TXT SPF record doesn’t have a reverse DNS record and
it doesn’t answer pings.
Steve
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:30 AM, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> > On Apr 10, 2016, at 5:37 PM, Curtis Villamizar
> wrote:
> >
> > In message
> > "@lbutlr" writes:
> >>
> >> On Apr 10, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Curtis Villamizar =
> >> wrote:
> >>> postscreen_dnsbl_sites =3D
> >>> list.dnswl.org*-5
> >>>
On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Tom Browder wrote:
> I am considering using Webmin on my servers and see that it has a Postfix
> module. Does anyone have any experience with it or have an opinion to offer
> ref its ability to manage Postfix?
Hi, Tom. I use Webmin for a few different tasks, and
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 5:04 AM, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to ask whether someone has worked on J. Mudd's RPMs (
> http://postfix.wl0.org/) to produce RHEL / CentOS 7 versions.
>
> The above site includes code for RHEL / CentOS versions 5 and 6 (not for
> all Postfix version
On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Ron Garret wrote:
> OK, but is there any way to get Postfix to restart a milter if it goes
> down? By default, if a milter goes down, it takes postfix down with it.
The usual way to start a milter service is to have it autostart when the
server boots, just as y
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:07 PM, btb wrote:
> On 2016.01.26 10.54, Matt Bayliss wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to find the correct/best practice method for setting up a
>> black hole email address for such items as "noreply" addresses when
>> sending alerts from monitoring devices etc.
>>
>
> if you int
> On 16 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Nick Howitt wrote:
>
> Only since 2.10 or 2.11. It was added because of a discussion with me on
> these lists. My distro (RHEL6 related) is stuck on 2.6.6. At some point, when
> it is more stable I'll update to my distro's RHEL7 derivative. I can't help
> the ISP
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Dennis Steinkamp
wrote:
> my approach therefor would be to use postscreen in conjunction with
> policyd-weight and amavisd-new for after queue content filtering.
> Does this sound reasonable to you?
>
Extremely reasonable. Postscreen blocks a huge chunk of the zo
1 - 100 of 578 matches
Mail list logo
