header, and it doesn't
> describe Postfix's logic for producing "mail forwarding loop", e.g. does
> it only check on final delivery so if it's a relay then it doesn't care?
The Postfix code that ADDS the delivered-to header will
report a loop if that header alr
Hi Bill,
> > If not, what's the closest to a specification?
>
> The documentation in the software that adds it. In this case
> specifically the man page for postconf(5)
I'd already read that, e.g. prepend_delivered_header, and it doesn't
describe Postfix's l
On 16 Nov 2016, at 7:43, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
Does an RFC cover Delivered-To?
No.
If not, what's the closest to a
specification?
The documentation in the software that adds it. In this case
specifically the man page for postconf(5)
e"
command.)
Postfix complains of a "mail forwarding loop" by return.
Return-Path: <>
X-Original-To: ra...@inputplus.co.uk
Delivered-To: ra...@inputplus.co.uk
Received: by orac.inputplus.co.uk (Postfix)
id 2DF9D27E4C; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:29:55 +
Wietse Venema wrote:
> Bob Proulx:
> > Nov 18 12:08:16 havoc postfix/cleanup[27515]: 910CE4A0: reject: header
> > X-X-Delivered-To: b...@proulx.com from localhost[127.0.0.1];
> > from= to= proto=ESMTP
> > helo=: 5.7.1 mail forwarding loop detected
>
> This
Bob Proulx:
> Nov 18 12:08:16 havoc postfix/cleanup[27515]: 910CE4A0: reject: header
> X-X-Delivered-To: b...@proulx.com from localhost[127.0.0.1];
> from= to= proto=ESMTP
> helo=: 5.7.1 mail forwarding loop detected
This message is logged by the CLEANUP daemon while doing header
m the wisdom of the list.
If I re-mail a message by any of several methods I run into a
rejection on the new outbound server "mail forwarding loop detected"
due to Delivered-To header detection. Of course the new server havoc
has never seen this message before. I am running into Delivered-To
On 12 Feb 2015, at 08:25 , Noel Jones wrote:
> On 2/12/2015 12:43 AM, LuKreme wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>>
>>> LuKreme:
Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
>>
On 2/12/2015 12:43 AM, LuKreme wrote:
>
>> On Feb 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>
>> LuKreme:
>>> Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
>>>by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
>>>for <*bob*@covisp.net>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:5
> On Feb 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> LuKreme:
>> Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
>>by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
>>for <*bob*@covisp.net>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:53:22 -0700 (MST)
>> Delivered-To: *bob*@covis
LuKreme:
> Received: from thenewestsecret.net (unknown [170.130.246.215])
> by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E42212DC0
> for <*bob*@covisp.net>; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:53:22 -0700 (MST)
> Delivered-To: *bob*@covisp.net
> Received: by 170.130.246.215 with SMTP id
> 998S7h4.
On Feb 6, 2015, at 3:43 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 06 Feb 2015, at 15:05 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>> NORMALLY, that header is present AFTER mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net.
>>
>> If it is present BEFORE mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net, then you have
>> a loop (or the sender has added this h
On 06 Feb 2015, at 15:05 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> NORMALLY, that header is present AFTER mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net.
>
> If it is present BEFORE mail is delivered to b...@covisp.net, then you have
> a loop (or the sender has added this header to trigger an error).
Ah, right. I’ve added
LuKreme:
>
> > On 05 Feb 2015, at 15:53 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > LuKreme:
> >> On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> >>> Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
> >>> bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
> >>> added by Postf
Only other thing I can think of is that this is somehow related to always_bcc?
--
A dyslexic walks into a bra...
> On 05 Feb 2015, at 15:53 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> LuKreme:
>> On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>>> Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
>>> bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
>>> added by Postfix).
>>
>> Yes, but I'm
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
LuKreme:
On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
added by Postfix).
Yes, but I'm unsure how to diagnose that.
LuKreme:
> On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
> > bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
> > added by Postfix).
>
> Yes, but I'm unsure how to diagnose that.
header_checks:
/^Delivered-To:
On 05 Feb 2015, at 05:07 , Wietse Venema wrote:
> Have you considered the possibility that the mail was sent with a
> bogus Delivered-To: header (i.e. the header is present, but not
> added by Postfix).
Yes, but I’m unsure how to diagnose that.
Here is a full dump of one of these files (with onl
LuKreme:
>
> > On Feb 4, 2015, at 9:20 AM, Miles Fidelman
> > wrote:
> >
> > LuKreme wrote:
> >> I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop
> >> errors, which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
LuKreme wrote:
I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop errors,
which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[44147]: 7020950D4D4: to=<*bob*@covisp.net>,
relay=local, delay=0.65, delays=0.59/0/0/0.06, dsn
On 04 Feb 2015, at 07:38 , Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> LuKreme:
>> I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop
>> errors, which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
>>
>> Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[441
LuKreme:
> I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop errors,
> which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
>
> Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[44147]: 7020950D4D4:
> to=<*bob*@covisp.net>, relay=local, delay=0.65, delays=
I have a local user who is generating occasional mail forwarding loop errors,
which are causing forged emails to cause NDNs and fill up mailq.
Jan 30 13:46:08 mail postfix/local[44147]: 7020950D4D4: to=<*bob*@covisp.net>,
relay=local, delay=0.65, delays=0.59/0/0/0.06, dsn=5.4.6, status=b
Hello,
I have a working setup with a dedicated MX inbound which deliver via transport
to a postfix / dovecot backend server.
I found some mail, probably with forged "Delivered-To" header that make the
backend bounce with "mail forwarding loop"
Here is the log of the backend
sendu:
> On 18 Oct 2013, at 18:29, "Wietse Venema [via Postfix] [Masked]"
> wrote:
> >
> > > At this point I don't care about absolute correctness. I just want
> > > to receive my email.
> > >
> > > How do I disable the D flag?
> >
> > The D flag exists only in the pipe(8) daemon and ADDS d
nt domain names in them? Can I just lie to Postfix about what my
domain is, but still have it deliver mail correctly?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62354.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
//postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62353.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ecd60...@opayq.com:
Sendu:
> But in any case, the messages in Google's quarantine do indeed
> already have the Delivered-To header prior to delivery.
Wietse:
> And what put that header in there?
Sendu:
> Google's spam system is adding the header. It is outside of my
> control.
If you are passing
pient.
> > > >
> > > > Postfix adds this header upon delivery. The above error
> > > > normally means that you have an email fordwading loop.
> > >
> > > Yes, I already understood that I have a mail forwarding loop
> > > according
Wietse:
> Does the Delivered-To: header already exist in the message? If that
> is the case, you have been forwarding mail back and forth between
> Postfix and some other server. That is a mail delivery loop.
Sendu:
> Well not back and forth between my Postfix server. But in any case,
> the mess
On 18 Oct 2013, at 17:45, "Wietse Venema [Masked]" wrote:
> Wietse:
>> Does the Delivered-To: header already exist in the message? If that
>> is the case, you have been forwarding mail back and forth between
>> Postfix and some other server. That is a mail delivery loop.
>
> Sendu:
>> Well not b
messages in Google's quarantine do indeed already have the Delivered-To header
prior to delivery. Their suggestion to me was that I turn off the D flag to
avoid this problem.
How do I turn off the D flag?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62342.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Wietse
>
> Yes, I already understood that I have a mail forwarding loop
> according to the error - see the subject line. My question is what
> is causing it, and how do I solve it? Why didn't the other email
> suffer the same problem?
Does the Delivered-To: header al
sage in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-loop-bounce-tp62199p62231.html
Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
FE: to=,
relay=local, delay=0.6, delays=0.56/0.02/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced
(mail forwarding loop for se...@x.me.uk)
(with X instead of sendu to make life harder for scrapers).
You mail is bounced because it contains a Delivered-To: header
with the address of the recipient.
P
On 2013-10-15 10:01 AM, sendu wrote:
Here's another delivery attempt, this time with all verbose logging turned
off:
http://pastebin.com/TtyDXKBX
Please post such things inline in the email body, many people will not
click on links to unknown destinations...
It bounces; I don't know why.
Here's another delivery attempt, this time with all verbose logging turned
off:
http://pastebin.com/TtyDXKBX
It bounces; I don't know why. Is there any way to find out?
--
View this message in context:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/What-is-causing-this-mail-forwarding-l
On 2013-10-14 sendu wrote:
> I'm using Google's Postini replacement as a spam filter before mail
> gets to my smtp server. I currently have a problem where most emails
> that get spam trapped by Google disappear when I attempt to have them
> delivered. Google gives me the ability to reattempt deliv
empt to deliver the same problematic email, this time with
-v verbosity added to just about everything in /etc/postfix/master.cf:
http://pastebin.com/ENkgTXz6
AFAICT, everything seems to go normally but then I get:
send attr reason = mail forwarding loop for se...@sendu.me.uk
and it eventual
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 04:02:57PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 11/28/2012 1:17 PM, Will Yardley wrote:
> > I'm having a problem where messages are accepted but then seem to
> > generate a mail forwarding loop. It seems to happen a lot with mail
> > from a particular
but then seem to
> > generate a mail forwarding loop. It seems to happen a lot with mail from
> > a particular spammer.
>
> There was a discussion earlier this month about some spammer
> including a Delivered-To: header in their spam. Postfix local(8)
> uses this header to detect
On 11/28/2012 1:17 PM, Will Yardley wrote:
> [Apologies in advance for the less than complete information below;
> hoping someone may have an idea of what's happening anyway]
>
> I'm having a problem where messages are accepted but then seem to
> generate a mail for
[Apologies in advance for the less than complete information below;
hoping someone may have an idea of what's happening anyway]
I'm having a problem where messages are accepted but then seem to
generate a mail forwarding loop. It seems to happen a lot with mail from
a particular spamme
On 10/11/2012 17:52, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 16:09:24 +0100, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>> ...
>> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a
>> forged Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a
>> mail forwardin
On 10/11/2012 23:58, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 9:09 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>>
>> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a forged
>> Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a mail
>> forwarding loop. The local(8)
On 11/10/2012 9:09 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>
> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a forged
> Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a mail
> forwarding loop. The local(8) daemon bounces the messages, but
> those messages are sp
On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 16:09:24 +0100, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> ...
> What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a
> forged Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a
> mail forwarding loop. The local(8) daemon bounces the messages, but
> tho
y
unrelated to spamassassin.
What I observe is that postfix is receiving messages containing a forged
Delivered-To header that makes postfix think it is seeing a mail
forwarding loop. The local(8) daemon bounces the messages, but
those messages are spam and the from addresses are invalid, therefo
/ Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 11:01:54 +0100 /
> On 09/11/2012 10:35, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > / Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 10:06:14 +0100 /
> >
> >> On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If you want to use content filtering with postfix, y
On 09/11/2012 10:35, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> / Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 10:06:14 +0100 /
>
>> On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
>>>
>>> If you want to use content filtering with postfix, you might have
>>> better results if you use amavisd-new + spamassassin + cl
/ Daniele Nicolodi wrote on Fri 9.Nov'12 at 10:06:14 +0100 /
> On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> > / David Rees wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 14:59:01 -0800 /
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi
> >> wrote:
> >>> I think I have a problem with my simple mail ser
On 09/11/2012 08:40, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote:
> / David Rees wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 14:59:01 -0800 /
>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
>>> I think I have a problem with my simple mail server. I noticed several
>>> bounce mails in the queue, which postfix in unable t
/ David Rees wrote on Thu 8.Nov'12 at 14:59:01 -0800 /
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> > I think I have a problem with my simple mail server. I noticed several
> > bounce mails in the queue, which postfix in unable to deliver.
>
> You're seeing the same issue as was
you for your reply, but I do not follow you. My problem is that a
mail forwarding loop is detected where I suppose there should be none,
not the opposite. The same log you quite, imho shows that a proper FROM
was indeed provided by sendmail, as I believe that Postfix reports the
envelope sendere and
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> I think I have a problem with my simple mail server. I noticed several
> bounce mails in the queue, which postfix in unable to deliver.
You're seeing the same issue as was posted the other day in the thread
"Best way to handle a Delivered-
m@work.
>
> Note the "nobody" above.
Hello Jeroen,
thank you for your reply, but I do not follow you. My problem is that a
mail forwarding loop is detected where I suppose there should be none,
not the opposite. The same log you quite, imho shows that a proper FROM
was indeed prov
spamassassin as content filter, which re-injects
the mail into postfix after scanning it via local delivery. Spam is then
discarded via a sieve rule (not bounced).
It looks like postfix detects a mail forwarding loop when the mail is
re-injected by spamassassin via local delivery. Why isn't the
spamassassin as content filter, which re-injects
the mail into postfix after scanning it via local delivery. Spam is then
discarded via a sieve rule (not bounced).
It looks like postfix detects a mail forwarding loop when the mail is
re-injected by spamassassin via local delivery. Why isn't the loop
det
re-injects
the mail into postfix after scanning it via local delivery. Spam is then
discarded via a sieve rule (not bounced).
It looks like postfix detects a mail forwarding loop when the mail is
re-injected by spamassassin via local delivery. Why isn't the loop
detected when the mail is rece
4.6
> Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; mail forwarding loop for
> sample.em...@firstdomain.com
>
>
>
> r...@firstdomain.com:/etc/postfix# cat /etc/hosts
> 127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain
> 174.143.253.66 firstdomain.com
>
> # cat /etc/mailname
> firs
Hi there,
I am getting error messages for mail sent to
sample.em...@firstdomain.com but in the /etc/postfix/aliases file I have
an entry for sample.email to send to sample.em...@anotherdomain.com .
why am I getting a forwarding loop.
Status: 5.4.6
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; mail forwarding
neral idea of what
a mail forwarding loop is, but I just need to be clear with the
customer about it. This is what the sender received back:
Diagnostic information for administrators:
Generating server: myserver.domain.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#< #5.4.6 X-Postfix; mail forwarding loop for [EM
forwarding loop is, but I just need to be clear with the
customer about it. This is what the sender received back:
Diagnostic information for administrators:
Generating server: myserver.domain.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#< #5.4.6 X-Postfix; mail forwarding loop for [EMAIL PROTECTED]> #SMTP#
64 matches
Mail list logo
