On 7/2/2019 4:25 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 7/2/2019 2:36 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Wietse,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply. The problem is not with the VM connection
>> (actually there is no VM active at this point) but rather with the VPN
>> tunnel (tun0). I don't understand why the routing table
Dennis Putnam:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> Hi Wietse,
>
> Thanks for the reply. The problem is not with the VM connection
> (actually there is no VM active at this point) but rather with the VPN
> tunnel (tun0). I don't understand why the routing
On 7/2/2019 2:36 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
Hi Wietse,
Thanks for the reply. The problem is not with the VM connection
(actually there is no VM active at this point) but rather with the VPN
tunnel (tun0). I don't understand why the routing table would cause
postfix to use virb0, rather than tun0 o
Hi Wietse,
Thanks for the reply. The problem is not with the VM connection
(actually there is no VM active at this point) but rather with the VPN
tunnel (tun0). I don't understand why the routing table would cause
postfix to use virb0, rather than tun0 or enp0s25, but not other
internet apps (i.e.
Dennis Putnam:
> I am occasionally using a VPN connection and while that connection is
> up, postfix uses the wrong NIC to try to send email. When there is no
> VPN connection, postfix uses the primary NIC named enp0s25. At the same
> time there is another NIC named virbr0 created an used for Virtu
