It appears that Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
said:
>Only for DNS lookups. Otherwise, IIRC U-label domain names are left
>as-is, something else in your processing pipeline (a milter or
>content_filter) might replace U-labels with A-labels, but I believe
>Postfix does not.
Indeed it does not.
On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 12:17:13AM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
wrote:
> |Postfix would forward SMTPUTF8 mail to an LMTP server only if the
> |server announces SMTPUTF8 (in LHLO).
>
> Only to make this clear: postfix simply does not deal with any message
> nor header reencoding at
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4bvwvk4lfszj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|H?kon Alstadheim via Postfix-users:
|> Den 29.06.2025 15:40, skrev Dmytro Alieksieiev via Postfix-users:
|>>
|>> To have SMTPUTF8 enabled in system it should be supported by all
|>> components of mail system.
|
H?kon Alstadheim via Postfix-users:
>
> Den 29.06.2025 15:40, skrev Dmytro Alieksieiev via Postfix-users:
> >
> > Hi Jorge,
> >
> > To have SMTPUTF8 enabled in system it should be supported by all
> > components of mail system.
> >
> > If you have LMTP as f.e. Dovecot which not yet production rea
Hi Wietse, thanks, will test 👍🙏
--
*Best Regards,*
Dmitriy Alekseev
DevOps Engineer
On Sun, 29 Jun 2025, 15:57 Wietse Venema via Postfix-users, <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Dmytro Alieksieiev via Postfix-users:
> > off SMTPUTF8 due to issues in postfix-postres client that with disabled
Den 29.06.2025 15:40, skrev Dmytro Alieksieiev via Postfix-users:
Hi Jorge,
To have SMTPUTF8 enabled in system it should be supported by all
components of mail system.
If you have LMTP as f.e. Dovecot which not yet production ready for
SMTPUTF8 (at least from my view, as it only got suppor
Dmytro Alieksieiev via Postfix-users:
> off SMTPUTF8 due to issues in postfix-postres client that with disabled
> SMTPUTF8 due to unclear reason start to speak with PostgresSQL in ASCII
> encoding and at same time tried to pass LATIN1 payload (aka ??) which
> leading to breaking DB connection fo
Hi Jorge,
To have SMTPUTF8 enabled in system it should be supported by all
components of mail system.
If you have LMTP as f.e. Dovecot which not yet production ready for
SMTPUTF8 (at least from my view, as it only got support of it couple of
months ago and I would not rush deploying it on Pr
Jorge Bastos via Postfix-users:
> Howdy,
>
> Sometimes i have users that write the emails wrong, and the email client
> stops sending with the default message from postfix "555 5.5.4
> Unsupported option: SMTPUTF8".
Those clients are buggy. A client can request SMTPUTF8 only
if the server has a
On 2021-12-09 14:25, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:
This error came up: "SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by
host..."
I've already tweaked this options:
smtputf8_enable = no
compatibility_level = 2
Error appeared again, so. What else can I do?
Running Postfix 3.4.14 with Dovecot 2
On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 10:25:40AM -0300, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:
> This error came up: "SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host..."
> Error appeared again, so. What else can I do?
Please follow the documentation:
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
Bastian
--
You're
Daniel Armando Rodriguez:
> Hi there
>
> This error came up: "SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by
> host..."
>
> I've already tweaked this options:
>
> smtputf8_enable = no
> compatibility_level = 2
>
> Error appeared again, so. What else can I do?
1) Edit the right file(s). Paramete
Wietse Venema schrieb am 23.08.20 um 14:14:05 Uhr:
> > > >> with postfix version 2.11.11?
> > > >
> > > > You are running some Frankenstein Postfix, perhaps with features
> > > > backported by RHEL. Such backports are NOT part of the official
> > > > Postfix release, and are NOT SUPPORTED.
ratatouille:
> Peter schrieb am 23.08.20 um 16:10:19 Uhr:
>
> > On 23/08/20 2:16 am, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > >>
> > >> with postfix version 2.11.11?
> > >
> > > You are running some Frankenstein Postfix, perhaps with features
> > > backported by RHEL. Such backports are NOT part of the offici
On 23/08/20 8:18 pm, ratatouille wrote:
Peter schrieb am 23.08.20 um 16:10:19 Uhr:
On 23/08/20 2:16 am, Wietse Venema wrote:
with postfix version 2.11.11?
You are running some Frankenstein Postfix, perhaps with features
backported by RHEL. Such backports are NOT part of the official
Postfi
Peter schrieb am 23.08.20 um 16:10:19 Uhr:
> On 23/08/20 2:16 am, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >>
> >> with postfix version 2.11.11?
> >
> > You are running some Frankenstein Postfix, perhaps with features
> > backported by RHEL. Such backports are NOT part of the official
> > Postfix release, and a
On 23/08/20 2:16 am, Wietse Venema wrote:
with postfix version 2.11.11?
You are running some Frankenstein Postfix, perhaps with features
backported by RHEL. Such backports are NOT part of the official
Postfix release, and are NOT SUPPORTED.
RHEL 7 has 2.10.1, RHEL 8 has 3.3.1. There is no r
Jaroslaw Rafa schrieb am 22.08.20 um 17:38:18 Uhr:
> Dnia 22.08.2020 o godz. 16:54:58 ratatouille pisze:
> >
> > What I don't understand at the moment is that when I send a mail
> > that contains german umlauts in the subjectline to the server in question,
> > it is delivered flawlessly.
> >
>
On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 14:58:46 +0200
ratatouille wrote:
> Souji Thenria schrieb am 22.08.20 um 14:46:20 Uhr:
>
> > On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 14:34:36 +0200
> > ratatouille wrote:
>
> > > Any chance to circumvent a
> > >
> > > status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host
> > > s
On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 14:34:36 +0200
ratatouille wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Any chance to circumvent a
>
> status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host
> smtp.bitclusive.de[92.60.38.182])
>
> with postfix version 2.11.11?
>
> I'm setting up an onlinestore and find this in the log
Dnia 22.08.2020 o godz. 16:54:58 ratatouille pisze:
>
> What I don't understand at the moment is that when I send a mail
> that contains german umlauts in the subjectline to the server in question,
> it is delivered flawlessly.
>
> Not so when the store (running on another server with mail_versio
ratatouille:
> > You are running some Frankenstein Postfix, perhaps with features
> > backported by RHEL. Such backports are NOT part of the official
> > Postfix release, and are NOT SUPPORTED.
>
> I'll migrate to a newer server when I find the time.
>
> What I don't understand at the moment is t
Wietse Venema schrieb am 22.08.20 um 10:16:36 Uhr:
> > Any chance to circumvent a
> >
> > status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host
> > smtp.bitclusive.de[92.60.38.182])
> >
> > with postfix version 2.11.11?
>
> Postfix 2.11 has no SMTPUTF8 support.
>
> % grep -ri s
ratatouille:
> Hello!
>
> Any chance to circumvent a
>
> status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host
> smtp.bitclusive.de[92.60.38.182])
>
> with postfix version 2.11.11?
Postfix 2.11 has no SMTPUTF8 support.
% grep -ri smtputf8 postfix-2.11.0 |wc -l
0
SMTPUTF8 s
ratatouille schrieb am 22.08.20 um 14:58:46 Uhr:
> Souji Thenria schrieb am 22.08.20 um 14:46:20 Uhr:
> > have you already looked into this?
> > http://www.postfix.org/SMTPUTF8_README.html
>
> Yes and I found it is not possible to set smtputf8_enable = yes with this
> postfix version.
I ch
Souji Thenria schrieb am 22.08.20 um 14:46:20 Uhr:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 14:34:36 +0200
> ratatouille wrote:
> > Any chance to circumvent a
> >
> > status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host
> > smtp.bitclusive.de[92.60.38.182])
> >
> > with postfix version 2.11.11?
>
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:20:48 +0200, Patrick Proniewski stated:
>On 17 juin 2020, at 22:05, Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:00:32PM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
>>
- disable SMTPUTF8 in Postfix.
>>>
>>> That means disabling it everywhere and let messages bou
On 17 juin 2020, at 22:05, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:00:32PM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
>
>>> - disable SMTPUTF8 in Postfix.
>>
>> That means disabling it everywhere and let messages bounce on MX servers.
>> Would not really change anything in the end.
>
> Ye
Hello,
> On 17 juin 2020, at 16:28, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Patrick Proniewski:
>> Jun 17 12:34:20 postfix-mailgw/smtp[77347]: 57F56EB256:
>> to=, orig_to=,
>> relay=Exchange-VIP[Exchange-VIP]:25, delay=0.01, delays=0.01/0/0/0,
>> dsn=5.6.7, status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not
Hello,
> On 17 juin 2020, at 22:48, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> On 17 Jun 2020, at 14:00, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
>> Not possible yet. A flag exists for Exchange 2019 but we are running 2016
>> now and upgrade is not scheduled for now.
>
> Perhaps showing the bouncing emails to whomever is in charge
On 17 Jun 2020, at 14:00, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
> Not possible yet. A flag exists for Exchange 2019 but we are running 2016 now
> and upgrade is not scheduled for now.
Perhaps showing the bouncing emails to whomever is in charge of this schedule
will change it, especially if any of the boun
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:00:32PM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
> > - disable SMTPUTF8 in Postfix.
>
> That means disabling it everywhere and let messages bounce on MX servers.
> Would not really change anything in the end.
Yes, but it is the right thing to do. Better than generating
backs
Hi,
> On 17 juin 2020, at 15:42, Bastian Blank
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:37:23PM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
>> For some time now I notice that some messages, either originating from
>> Internet or from internal servers are bounced when they arrive on the last
>> hop: Excha
Patrick Proniewski:
> Jun 17 12:34:20 postfix-mailgw/smtp[77347]: 57F56EB256:
> to=, orig_to=,
> relay=Exchange-VIP[Exchange-VIP]:25, delay=0.01, delays=0.01/0/0/0,
> dsn=5.6.7, status=bounced (SMTPUTF8 is required, but was not offered by host
> Exchange-VIP[Exchange-VIP])
>
It is required (i
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:37:23PM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
> For some time now I notice that some messages, either originating from
> Internet or from internal servers are bounced when they arrive on the last
> hop: Exchange.
> Jun 17 12:34:20 postfix-mailgw/smtp[77347]: 57F56EB256:
> t
Hi,
> On 17 juin 2020, at 15:08, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> On 17.06.20 14:37, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
>> I have at work a Postfix infrastructure that sits between Internet and our
>> Exchange servers. Postfix is used for MX and SMTP roles, ensure filtering
>> with Amavisd/Clamav/etc
On 17.06.20 14:37, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
I have at work a Postfix infrastructure that sits between Internet and our
Exchange servers. Postfix is used for MX and SMTP roles, ensure filtering with
Amavisd/Clamav/etc.
For some time now I notice that some messages, either originating from Inter
Esteban L:
> Which leads to my next question, why is smtputf8 even enabled at all,
> by default?
Because Dovecot is not the only mail delivery system.
> What are the advantages if it only will prevent some email from
> being received? Surely, there must be some advantages? I am not
> being facet
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 19:01:48 +0200, Mark Martinec stated:
> Michael Ströder wrote:
> > Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
> > I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
>
> Google does support SMTPUTF8 :
>
>
> $ host -t mx gmail.com
> gmai
Michael Ströder wrote:
Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
Google does support SMTPUTF8 :
$ host -t mx gmail.com
gmail.com mail is handled by 20 alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com.
gmail.com mail is
Zitat von Mike Cardwell :
* on the Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:36:38PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
What mail products are SMTPUTF8-compliant at this time?
will it ever be needed ?, with idn domains it allready encoded into 7bit,
is postfix translate this to utf8 ?, dont know here since thunde
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> Michael Str?der:
>> So I interpret your question it as an answer:
>> SMTPUTF8 is currently not widely used. ;-)
>
> 10 years ago, IPv6 implementation was driven by the concern that
> everyone was going to suffer from unavailable IP addresses.
>
> SMTP
* on the Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:36:38PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> What mail products are SMTPUTF8-compliant at this time?
> will it ever be needed ?, with idn domains it allready encoded into 7bit,
> is postfix translate this to utf8 ?, dont know here since thunderbird works
> with idn dom
Michael Str?der:
> wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> > Michael Str?der:
> >> Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
> >> I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
> >>
> >> Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently no
On August 20, 2015 2:48:33 PM wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
libicu I assu
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> Michael Str?der:
>> Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
>> I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
>>
>> Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
>> libicu I assum
Michael Str?der:
> HI!
>
> Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
> I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
>
> Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
> libicu I assume that SMTPUTF8 is currently not widely u
I made a mistake, when I change meta_directory= /etc/postfix, I hadn’t changed
make make -f Makefile.init meta_directory=/usr/libexec/postfix
to
make make -f Makefile.init meta_directory=/etc/postfix
That’s why I got the errors.
I fix it now.
Thanks,
Andrew
—
> On Feb 22, 2015, at
Andrew Ho:
> The meta_directory was configured to 'etc/postfix' for testing,
> Maybe this is the problem.
I wrote Postfix and I am ytelling you that you are wasting your time.
The protocol has changed. The 3.0 queue manager uses the new protocol
that sends the smtputf8 attribute before the sende
The meta_directory was configured to “/etc/postfix” for testing, Maybe this is
the problem.
On my other computer, meta_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix, and it is working
alright.
I will compile postfix-3.0.0 again for testing.
Thanks,
Andrew Ho
—
> On Feb 22, 2015, at 3:23 PM, Wietse
Andrew Ho:
> I test postfix-3.0.0 with postscreen, and I have these error messages.
>
> Feb 22 13:23:04 mail postfix/qmgr[13406]: A47F7602BE8E8:
> from=, size=6197, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> Feb 22 13:23:04 mail postfix/smtp[13504]: warning: unexpected attribute
> smtputf8 from amavis socket (ex
Mark Martinec:
> > As a final data point, Postfix currently does not log the "extended
> > with" protocol name. This information does show up in the Received:
> > header.
>
> The coming postfix-2.12 may be a good opportunity to enhance the
> information value of this attribute by switching to "WI
me said:
The XFORWARD_README / "XFORWARD Command syntax" currently tersely
states:
- The PROTO attribute specifies the mail protocol for receiving mail
from the up-stream host. This may be an SMTP or non-SMTP protocol
name of up to 64 characters, or [UNAVAILABLE] when the information
is
Mark Martinec:
> The XFORWARD_README / "XFORWARD Command syntax" currently tersely
> states:
>
> - The PROTO attribute specifies the mail protocol for receiving mail
>from the up-stream host. This may be an SMTP or non-SMTP protocol
>name of up to 64 characters, or [UNAVAILABLE] when the
54 matches
Mail list logo
