Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

> On Mar 22, 2021, at 12:53 AM, Phil Biggs wrote: > > Yes, I do have it configured as you say. I suspect that's a carry-over from > an > old pfSense package config I used as the basis for my first postfix server. > > As I don't have any known email problems at present, I'll wait > for 3.6

Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

Monday, March 22, 2021, 2:56:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: Viktor Dukhovni> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 01:35:12PM +1100, Phil Biggs wrote: >> Mar 21 14:50:35 postfix/postscreen[3804]: CONNECT from [18.205.72.90]:43471 >> to [192.168.11.2]:25 >> Mar 21 14:50:41 postfix/postscreen[3804]: PASS NEW [1

Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 01:35:12PM +1100, Phil Biggs wrote: > Mar 21 14:50:35 postfix/postscreen[3804]: CONNECT from [18.205.72.90]:43471 > to [192.168.11.2]:25 > Mar 21 14:50:41 postfix/postscreen[3804]: PASS NEW [18.205.72.90]:43471 > Mar 21 14:50:43 postfix/smtpd[3806]: connect from > keeper-

Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

- Message from Phil Biggs - Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 14:34:44 +1100 From: Phil Biggs Subject: Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server To: postfix-users@postfix.org Monday, March 22, 2021, 1:49:53 PM, Simon Wilson wrote: Your IP address resolves back to aussiebb: You

Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

Monday, March 22, 2021, 1:49:53 PM, Simon Wilson wrote: > Your IP address resolves back to aussiebb: > You need Aussie BB to setup your reverse DNS. I am with Aussie BB too: Thanks, Simon. Now I see it! I'm using Namecheap's name servers for my domain, with dynamic DNS updates managed by p

Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

- Message from Simon Wilson - Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:49:53 +1000 From: Simon Wilson Reply-To: si...@simonandkate.net Subject: Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server To: postfix-users@postfix.org - Message from Phil Biggs - Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021

Re: Double-bounce to ISP's server

- Message from Phil Biggs - Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:35:12 +1100 From: Phil Biggs Subject: Double-bounce to ISP's server To: postfix-users@postfix.org Hello all, I'm running the postfix-sasl-3.5.8,1 pkg on FreeBSD 12.2-RELEASE-p4 GENERIC Yesterday I

Double-bounce to ISP's server

Hello all, I'm running the postfix-sasl-3.5.8,1 pkg on FreeBSD 12.2-RELEASE-p4 GENERIC Yesterday I plugged my public IP into the mxtoolbox diags page and my logs recorded this: Mar 21 14:50:35 postfix/postscreen[3804]: CONNECT from [18.205.72.90]:43471 to [192.168.11.2]:25 Mar 21 14:50:41 post

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Viktor Dukhovni: > > On Feb 12, 2021, at 12:29 PM, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > > > Another somewhat related question is: in order to probe the smtpd needs to > > resolve all virtual etc. mappings which is also done by the cleanup. Is > > this resolution done twice in this case? > > The smtpd

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

> On Feb 12, 2021, at 12:29 PM, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > Another somewhat related question is: in order to probe the smtpd needs to > resolve all virtual etc. mappings which is also done by the cleanup. Is this > resolution done twice in this case? The smtpd(8) process does not perform an

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > > > > Wietse: > > smtpd does not resolve any mappings. > > If a sender address is mapped to some other virtual alias, how does it know > which address to probe then? The Postfix SMTP daemon generates a probe message for the address in the RCPT TO command. Inside Postfix, tha

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Judging by the above log example the double-bounce message is processed by the cleanup as well. I guess that's the point where the resolving happens for the prob. <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

> > Wietse: > smtpd does not resolve any mappings. If a sender address is mapped to some other virtual alias, how does it know which address to probe then? Без вирусов. www.avast.ru

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > Another somewhat related question is: in order to probe the smtpd needs to > resolve all virtual etc. mappings which is also done by the cleanup. Is > this resolution done twice in this case? smtpd does not resolve any mappings. Instead it makes a safe guess to reject most

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Have read through the pickup(8) and cleanup(8) docs and understood the workflow as follows. When a local message is sent by sendmail it lands into the maildrop directory. The pickup daemon then feeds it into the cleanup one. The latter is responsible for all sorts of envelope and header transformat

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > > > > Wietse: > > The address can be transformed > > with canonical_maps, virtual_alias_maps, it may be routed to a > > different system with transport_maps, and it may be aliased with > > /etc/aliases to some other local or remote address > > All these things apply to local

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

> > Wietse: The address can be transformed > with canonical_maps, virtual_alias_maps, it may be routed to a > different system with transport_maps, and it may be aliased with > /etc/aliases to some other local or remote address All these things apply to locally sent messages as well, don't they?

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > Assume reject_unverified_sender is set and an email is sent > From:u...@mydomain.com. > When the email is sent directly from mail.mydomain.com there is no probe, > right? reject_unverified_recipient etc. do not care where mail comes from, or where it is being sent to. > But

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

> On Feb 11, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > Assume reject_unverified_sender is set and an email is sent > From:u...@mydomain.com. This is an smtpd(8)/access(5) feature, and so only applies when email is received via SMTP and the restriction in question is applied to the messag

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Assume reject_unverified_sender is set and an email is sent From:u...@mydomain.com. When the email is sent directly from mail.mydomain.com there is no probe, right? But when the message is sent from another server that uses mydomain.com as relay then the probe is done, in which case Postfix probes

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > Let me put it this way: does Postfix do probe for outgoing mail? reject_unverified_recipient and reject_unverified_sender make no such distinction. That is a feature, not a bug. reject_unverified_recipient has been used on internet gateways that have no complete table of all

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Let me put it this way: does Postfix do probe for outgoing mail? чт, 11 февр. 2021 г. в 21:35, Wietse Venema : > Eugene Podshivalov: > > I meant Postfix probes use a sender address even when it is a local one. > > Example from logs: > > > > > postfix/qmgr[20192]: 9AE7A3F56E: from=, > > > size=269

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > I meant Postfix probes use a sender address even when it is a local one. > Example from logs: > > > postfix/qmgr[20192]: 9AE7A3F56E: from=, > > size=269, nrcpt=1 (queue active) > > postfix/local[20230]: 9AE7A3F56E: to=, *relay=local*, > > delay=0.02, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0, dsn

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

=deliverable (delivers > to mailbox) чт, 11 февр. 2021 г. в 20:58, Wietse Venema : > Eugene Podshivalov: > > When reject_unverified_sender param is set and an email is sent on behalf > > of the server the double-bounce check is still performed (i.e. sent to > > itself).

Re: double-bounce check applied to itself

Eugene Podshivalov: > When reject_unverified_sender param is set and an email is sent on behalf > of the server the double-bounce check is still performed (i.e. sent to > itself). What is 'the double-bounce check'? Postfix probes use a sender address that does not receive ema

double-bounce check applied to itself

When reject_unverified_sender param is set and an email is sent on behalf of the server the double-bounce check is still performed (i.e. sent to itself). Is this all right? Eugene

Re: MAILER-DAEMON and double-bounce sender domain

mple.com" envelope sender and > "mailer-dae...@mx.example.com" in the "From" header, which leads to > SPF failure and spam filter triggering, because mx.example.com is not > intended for using as ordinary mail domain. That description is incorrect. A double-bounce means means

MAILER-DAEMON and double-bounce sender domain

Hello. I have mail server named "mx.example.com" that handles mail in "example.com" (virtual) domain. I use postfix 3.4.6 for this server. When something wrong happens, mail is dropped to postmaster with "double-bou...@mx.example.com" envelope sender and "mailer-dae...@mx.example.com" in the "From

Re: about single bounce and double bounce.

k you for your reply despite difficulty reading. the double bounce did not occur, at least not in the logs above. I would like to generate double bounce in the verification environment, but how do I do it? (I thought that double bounce would occur if sending mail with a mail address that doe

Re: about single bounce and double bounce.

our reply despite difficulty reading. > the double bounce did not occur, at least not in the logs above. I would like to generate double bounce in the verification environment, but how do I do it? (I thought that double bounce would occur if sending mail with a mail address that does not exi

Re: about single bounce and double bounce.

On 20.02.19 16:49, natsu wrote: I am using postfix-2.10.1-6.el7 and set "double_bounce_sender = double - bounce". your mail is quite hard to read. it would be great to use mail client that does not random spaces around dashes, slashes, equal signs etc. and even to queue IDs. ... an

about single bounce and double bounce.

Hello, I am using postfix-2.10.1-6.el7 and set "double_bounce_sender = double - bounce". Let me question about single bounce and double bounce. · About single bounce Sending to a mail address that does not exist results in a single bounce. The single bounce was recorded in the m

Re: about double bounce

gt; > character strings stored as a sequence of octets. > > string contains "double-bounce" and the other contains informatiom > > from an email address that resolves to the local domain (matches > > mydestination or inet_interfaces). > > What is "two chara

Re: about double bounce

octets. > string contains "double-bounce" and the other contains informatiom > from an email address that resolves to the local domain (matches > mydestination or inet_interfaces). What is "two character strings"? Does Postfix usually store "two character strings"

Re: about double bounce

natsu: > Hello > > Let me question about double bounce. > > I am using postfix 2.10. > > For double bounce, the document is too few to understand the behavior of > double bounce. > I confirmed the following documents. There is a point I do not understand, >

about double bounce

Hello Let me question about double bounce. I am using postfix 2.10. For double bounce, the document is too few to understand the behavior of double bounce. I confirmed the following documents. There is a point I do not understand, please let me ask a question. Postfix Address Verification

FW: RE: Double-Bounce

In order of messages.  ( i got 11 message for 1 postfix list mail ).  I only see this these when . 1) someone tries to mail out of my domainname. 2) when i mail the postfix list.   I never figured this out, why this happens at the postfix list.     This is an authentication failure report for an

Re: Double-Bounce

On 2018-09-14 11:11, Benny Pedersen wrote: B. Reino skrev den 2018-09-14 10:52: So in a way this message is just a test, but hopefully also a clarification :) Authentication-Results: linode.junc.eu; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=bbmk.org head

Re: Double-Bounce

B. Reino skrev den 2018-09-14 11:02: Well I guess the above test failed :( Authentication-Results: linode.junc.eu; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=bbmk.org Authentication-Results: linode.junc.eu; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=bbmk.org header.i=@bbmk.org header.b=sOJs04Hw;

Re: Double-Bounce

B. Reino skrev den 2018-09-14 10:52: So in a way this message is just a test, but hopefully also a clarification :) Authentication-Results: linode.junc.eu; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=bbmk.org header.i=@bbmk.org header.b=I6ED3eZq; do not sign al

RE: Double-Bounce

I had a simular things. .. Waiting for the bounce... Greetz, Louis > -Oorspronkelijk bericht- > Van: rei...@bbmk.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] > Namens B. Reino > Verzonden: vrijdag 14 september 2018 10:52 > Aan: postfix-users@postfix.org > Ond

Re: Double-Bounce

On 2018-09-14 10:52, B. Reino wrote: I think the postfix ML is not so "DKIM safe". In my case, it causes my DKIM signature to fail. I have now compared a message sent by me against other messages sent e.g. by Benny Pedersen, and concluded that my configuration (using rspamd) was signing way to

Re: Double-Bounce

On 2018-09-14 10:36, Dominic Raferd wrote: On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 07:14, Benny Pedersen wrote: Benny Pedersen skrev den 2018-09-14 08:08: Dominic Raferd skrev den 2018-09-14 07:33: On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 00:29, Julian Opificius wrote: Why is it that my system marks everything from you a

Re: Double-Bounce

On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 07:14, Benny Pedersen wrote: > Benny Pedersen skrev den 2018-09-14 08:08: > > Dominic Raferd skrev den 2018-09-14 07:33: > >> On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 00:29, Julian Opificius > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Why is it that my system marks everything from you as spam, Benny? Is > >>>

Re: Double-Bounce

Benny Pedersen skrev den 2018-09-14 08:08: Dominic Raferd skrev den 2018-09-14 07:33: On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 00:29, Julian Opificius wrote: Why is it that my system marks everything from you as spam, Benny? Is it your tld? I've added you to my address book, but my server keeps spitting you

Re: Double-Bounce

Dominic Raferd skrev den 2018-09-14 07:33: On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 00:29, Julian Opificius wrote: Why is it that my system marks everything from you as spam, Benny? Is it your tld? I've added you to my address book, but my server keeps spitting you out. Because the domain that he uses to se

Re: Double-Bounce

On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 00:29, Julian Opificius wrote: > > Why is it that my system marks everything from you as spam, Benny? Is it > your tld? I've added you to my address book, but my server keeps > spitting you out. Because the domain that he uses to send emails through this mailing list has DM

Re: Double-Bounce

Julian Opificius skrev den 2018-09-14 01:28: I'm not using Postfix, I'm running SME9. ask on another maillist then

Re: Double-Bounce

Robert Wolfe (Ubuntu): > Hi all!? I am getting messages in my logs where postfix is doing its > double-bounce email thing. Are there any telepathic people on the list? Wietse > ? I am trying to send email to an email server > sitting behind my mail filter appliance (eFA)

Re: Double-Bounce

skrev den 2018-09-14 00:43: It seems messages get through to one of the users on my mail server, just not to me, which generates the double-bounce@ email which is totally annoying. more info is needed to help more

Re: Double-Bounce

Robert Wolfe (Ubuntu) skrev den 2018-09-14 00:43: It seems messages get through to one of the users on my mail server, just not to me, which generates the double-bounce@ email which is totally annoying. more info is needed to help more

Double-Bounce

Hi all!  I am getting messages in my logs where postfix is doing its double-bounce email thing.  I am trying to send email to an email server sitting behind my mail filter appliance (eFA) which routes emails to my main mail server on my network after scanning inbound messages. It seems

Re: See a double-bounce mail generated by my postfix

field in the DKIM signature. (A missing DKIM signature is also reported as failed DKIM alignment - at least by my reporter.) A very few emails from this server, although passing SPF (and hence DMARC), fail DKIM aligment (I am not told which ones, only the weekly count). This will not prevent their

Re: See a double-bounce mail generated by my postfix

Dominic Raferd: > On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 11:50, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > Dominic Raferd: > > > canonical: > > > <> root > > > > I don't know of any promise that canonical_maps will use <> as the > > lookup key for the null address. > > > > I will remove that, I put it there a long time ago when

Re: See a double-bounce mail generated by my postfix

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 11:50, Wietse Venema wrote: > Dominic Raferd: > > canonical: > > <> root > > I don't know of any promise that canonical_maps will use <> as the > lookup key for the null address. > I will remove that, I put it there a long time ago when I knew (even) less about postfix. But

Re: See a double-bounce mail generated by my postfix

Dominic Raferd: > canonical: > <> root I don't know of any promise that canonical_maps will use <> as the lookup key for the null address. Wietse

Re: See a double-bounce mail generated by my postfix

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 07:39, Dominic Raferd wrote: > I would like to be able to see an example of a double-bounce message > generated by my postfix (3.3.0) server. Can I get my postfix to send me > (say to an unrelated external mailbox) a double-bounce message? > Alternatively is t

See a double-bounce mail generated by my postfix

I would like to be able to see an example of a double-bounce message generated by my postfix (3.3.0) server. Can I get my postfix to send me (say to an unrelated external mailbox) a double-bounce message? Alternatively is there a way I can save, on the server, the double-bounce message as and when

Re: double bounce messages 'from'

On 19 January 2017 at 14:30, Wietse Venema wrote: > > Wietse Venema: > > Dominic Raferd: > > > On 16 January 2017 at 15:11, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > > > > > > Dominic Raferd: > > > > > One of the few remaining issues on my postfix ser

Re: double bounce messages 'from'

Wietse Venema: > Dominic Raferd: > > On 16 January 2017 at 15:11, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > > > > Dominic Raferd: > > > > One of the few remaining issues on my postfix server is that > > > > double-bounce messages don't come from the &#

Re: double bounce messages 'from'

Dominic Raferd: > On 16 January 2017 at 15:11, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > > Dominic Raferd: > > > One of the few remaining issues on my postfix server is that > > > double-bounce messages don't come from the 'right' envelope sender. > &

Re: double bounce messages 'from'

On 16 January 2017 at 15:11, Wietse Venema wrote: > > Dominic Raferd: > > One of the few remaining issues on my postfix server is that > > double-bounce messages don't come from the 'right' envelope sender. > > man 5 postconf | less '+/^double_bou

double bounce messages 'from'

One of the few remaining issues on my postfix server is that double-bounce messages don't come from the 'right' envelope sender. I would like it to be double_bou...@mydomain.tld, or (better) double_bounce+vps3456...@mydomain.tld. Instead it is double_bou...@vps3456789.mydomain.tld.

Re: double bounce messages 'from'

Dominic Raferd: > One of the few remaining issues on my postfix server is that > double-bounce messages don't come from the 'right' envelope sender. man 5 postconf | less '+/^double_bounce_sender' This also is the default for address_verify_sender. Wietse

Re: 'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

On 4/19/2016 6:49 PM, jaso...@mail-central.com wrote: >> Now to wait for something to trigger one of those double-bounce messages. > > Ugh. Still undeliverable. > > Well, I actually GET the email. Something 'internal' seems to be > undeliverable. > > No

Re: 'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

> Now to wait for something to trigger one of those double-bounce messages. Ugh. Still undeliverable. Well, I actually GET the email. Something 'internal' seems to be undeliverable. Now 'mail for example.com loops back to myself' (not sure what I've done to myself

Re: 'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

. And no errors I can see. Yet. Now to wait for something to trigger one of those double-bounce messages. Jason

Re: 'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

I keep staring at this Apr 19 14:48:31 mail01 postfix/vpn/smtp[21044]: connect to back.mail01.example.com[10.1.1.16]:25: Connection refused Apr 19 14:48:31 mail01 postfix/vpn/smtp[21044]: 3qqJYC3wYbz31Vm: to=, relay=none, delay=0.1, delays=0/0.01/0.09/0, dsn=4.4.1, status=undel

Re: 'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

> The "connection refused" is the part that needs to be fixed. VPN (temporarily?) down? firewall issue? "wrong" destination? something else? Starting with those^ to narrow down, looking backwards through my logs - for cases of 'double-bounce' & 'conn

Re: 'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

to read & understand this particular log snip. Of > course well enough to finally to find/fix the problem. > > I *think* it's a notification of some sort. > It's from the 'double-bounce' address, which I've not gotten a good handle on > yet. > I don&#

'connection refused' for the "double-bounce" address, but mail's delivered?

s a notification of some sort. It's from the 'double-bounce' address, which I've not gotten a good handle on yet. I don't exactly follow what the logs are telling me. Looking at my logs at one transaction I see this Apr 17 06:15:46 mail01 postfix/psint/s

Re: outside mail from double-bounce@ ?

en, you can do address_verify_sender = double-bounce-11650afb115ca6acb8e8d985f9c8946c And change it occasionally. Wietse

outside mail from double-bounce@ ?

Hi, Why is this accepted e-mail "from= May 9 10:38:04 zenon postfix/qmgr[28377]: 3653D424A600C: from=, size=245, nrcpt=1 (queue active) May 9 10:38:04 zenon postfix/local[26499]: 3653D424A600C: to=, relay=local, delay=0.16, delays=0.14/0/0/0.02, dsn=2.0.0, status=deliverable (

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

Wietse Venema: > Patric Falinder: > > > as a result, so I guess it doesn't have to do with the timer thing!? > > No you cannot prove the absence of this bug. Perhaps it triggers Forget it, according to your other message you are sending mail with Postfix into an MTA that rejects your address prob

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

we have no idea how VMware tools futzes with the guest system clock. > > I also upgraded to Postfix 2.7, without VDA cause this time because this > > server wasn't meant to have that patch in the first place, and I've been > > watching the queue for a couple of min

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

letion after 100 iterations as a result, so I guess it doesn't have to do with the timer thing!? I also upgraded to Postfix 2.7, without VDA cause this time because this server wasn't meant to have that patch in the first place, and I've been watching the queue for a couple of min

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

000 iterations as a result, so I guess it doesn't have to do with the timer thing!? I also upgraded to Postfix 2.7, without VDA cause this time because this server wasn't meant to have that patch in the first place, and I've been watching the queue for a couple of minutes and the doubl

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

Patric Falinder: > >> > >> then you have found the timer bug that causes Postfix to deliver > >> only one message probe per 300 seconds, and we can start looking > >> for workarounds (such as changing the src/util/events.c module and > >> replacing zero delay requests by 1 millisecond delay request

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

On 10/11/10 8:40 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: Small correction in-line. Wietse Wietse Venema: Wietse Venema: How do I fix the system's ZERO-DELAY timer? I can write a small test program. If it reproduces the problem, then there are two things that need to be done. 1) The program needs

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

Small correction in-line. Wietse Wietse Venema: > Wietse Venema: > > > How do I fix the system's ZERO-DELAY timer? > > > > I can write a small test program. If it reproduces the problem, > > then there are two things that need to be done. > > > > 1) The program needs to be sent to VMwar

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

Wietse Venema: > > How do I fix the system's ZERO-DELAY timer? > > I can write a small test program. If it reproduces the problem, > then there are two things that need to be done. > > 1) The program needs to be sent to VMware as part of a bug report. > > 2) We can try to program around this bug

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

Bastian Blank: [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 04:27:13PM +0200, Patric Falinder wrote: > > I'm running Debian Lenny x64 with Postfix 2.5.5 with VDA patch. > > VDA is supported where? > > > It's virtualized on a VMWare ESX server. > > Don't really know what

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

Wietse: > Apparently the low-frequency $queue_run_delay (300s) timer still > works, so the queue manager picks up one message every 300s, but > your system's ZERO-DELAY timer support is broken, so the queue > manager does not pick up the next message immediately as it does > everywhere else. > > Th

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 04:27:13PM +0200, Patric Falinder wrote: > I'm running Debian Lenny x64 with Postfix 2.5.5 with VDA patch. VDA is supported where? > It's virtualized on a VMWare ESX server. > Don't really know what tick-less timer support is so I guess I don't use > it unless it's stand

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

ight now I have 193 messages in the queue and they're all from double-bounce. They are only in the queue for the time specified in maximal_queue_lifetime that I have set to 3 days. Before it was 5 days and then I had over 1000 messages in the queue.. If I do a postcat on a message I get this:

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

it a couple of days ago. > > > > Right now I have 193 messages in the queue and they're all from > > double-bounce. > > They are only in the queue for the time specified in > > maximal_queue_lifetime that I have set to 3 days. > > Before it was 5 days and

Re: Queue full of double-bounce

3 messages in the queue and they're all from > double-bounce. > They are only in the queue for the time specified in > maximal_queue_lifetime that I have set to 3 days. > Before it was 5 days and then I had over 1000 messages in the queue.. > > If I do a postcat on a me

Queue full of double-bounce

Hi, Recently I've noticed that my mailqueue is filled up with doube-bounce messages that won't go away. I can't remember it being this way since the beginning and I just noticed it a couple of days ago. Right now I have 193 messages in the queue and they're all from dou

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Thomas Glanzmann: > so what happened. erld671x is out of resources, it send an e-mail to > postmas...@erld671x.erlf.siemens.de but because it is horrible > misconfigured it sends that e-mail over its smart host which delivers it > back, which results in a tempfailure which again triggers an out of

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Hello Wietse, * Wietse Venema [090210 15:11]: > > I still don't get why postfix sends me a soft bounce to notify me > > that I'm running out of diskspace. > Have you looked at the LOGFILE? Not yet, but now I have and I don't like what I see: Feb 10 01:16:14 erld603x postfix/smtpd[4269]: conne

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Thomas Glanzmann: > I still don't get why postfix sends me a soft bounce to notify me that > I'm running out of diskspace. Have you looked at the LOGFILE? > that softbounce and so on until I'm out of resources. Shouldn't postfix > detect that this is a tempfailure and do exactly nothing and retr

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Hello Wietse, * Wietse Venema [090210 14:55]: > Thomas Glanzmann: > > Out: 220 erld671x.erlf.siemens.de ESMTP Postfix > > In: EHLO erld603x.erlf.siemens.de > > Out: 250-erld671x.erlf.siemens.de > > Out: 250-PIPELINING > > Out: 250-SIZE 104857600 > > Out: 250-VRFY > > Out: 250-ETRN > > Ou

Re: Massive Double Bounce problems

Thomas Glanzmann: > Out: 220 erld671x.erlf.siemens.de ESMTP Postfix > In: EHLO erld603x.erlf.siemens.de > Out: 250-erld671x.erlf.siemens.de > Out: 250-PIPELINING > Out: 250-SIZE 104857600 > Out: 250-VRFY > Out: 250-ETRN > Out: 250 8BITMIME > In: MAIL FROM: SIZE=1191 > Out: 452 Insuffici

Massive Double Bounce problems

ere is that the postfix version on erld604x does seem to ignore the tempfailure on erld671x (452 Insufficient system storage) and tries to continue with the SMTP dialog. Now it gets an error (503 Error: need MAIL command) but only because it ignores the tempfailure in the first case and generat