On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 11:40:39AM +0200, Marc SCHAEFER via Postfix-users wrote:
- except for a single case where I want to bypass milters
Any idea except running a completely different Postfix daemons set
on different spool directories?
On 04.04.25 12:00, Marc SCHAEFER via Postfix-users wrote
> another postfix instance, but I'm not sure it's a good idea.
>
> On this topic, I was trying to make so sendmail uses a different
> config file. I configured the appropriate alternate_config_directories
> in main.cf, then symlinked all configs, excepts main.cf fr
ILTER_README_002.html
> >
> > However, on resending the mail to the postfix instance (sendmail -G -i
> > ), how to make sure it is using the right instance ? (right =
> > originating instance)
>
> sendmail should use the default instance.
>
> Perhaps you could use &
On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 11:40:39AM +0200, Marc SCHAEFER via Postfix-users wrote:
> - except for a single case where I want to bypass milters
>
> Any idea except running a completely different Postfix daemons set
> on different spool directories?
Replying to myself: would [1] and specifically add
On 04.04.25 15:59, Joan Moreau via Postfix-users wrote:
I am follwoing the doc here
https://www.linuxtopia.org/online_books/mail_systems/postfix_documentation/FILTER_README_002.html
However, on resending the mail to the postfix instance (sendmail -G -i
), how to make sure it is using the
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 11:25:41AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via
Postfix-users wrote:
> Perhaps you could use "-C config_dir" option to specify config path of
> another postfix instance, but I'm not sure it's a good idea.
On this topic, I was trying
Hi
I am follwoing the doc here
https://www.linuxtopia.org/online_books/mail_systems/postfix_documentation/FILTER_README_002.html
However, on resending the mail to the postfix instance (sendmail -G -i
), how to make sure it is using the right instance ? (right =
originating instance)
Thank
A. Schulze via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-03-24 09:06:
Sean McBride via Postfix-users:
It can. It's probably a better idea than using OpenDKIM, because
that project seems dead as best as I can tell, it has had no commits
for 7 years:
https://github.com/trusteddomainproject/OpenDKIM/comm
Sean McBride via Postfix-users wrote in
:
|On 24 Mar 2025, at 4:06, A. Schulze via Postfix-users wrote:
|
|> Sean McBride via Postfix-users:
|>
|>> It can. It's probably a better idea than using OpenDKIM, because \
|>> that project seems dead as best as I can tell, it has had no commits \
On 24 Mar 2025, at 4:06, A. Schulze via Postfix-users wrote:
> Sean McBride via Postfix-users:
>
>> It can. It's probably a better idea than using OpenDKIM, because that
>> project seems dead as best as I can tell, it has had no commits for 7 years:
>>
>> https://github.com/trusteddomainproject/
Sean McBride via Postfix-users:
It can. It's probably a better idea than using OpenDKIM, because
that project seems dead as best as I can tell, it has had no commits
for 7 years:
https://github.com/trusteddomainproject/OpenDKIM/commits/master/
there is a develop branch. It's usable and
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:40:11 +0100
Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote:
> Dnia 17.03.2025 o godz. 07:21:20 Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users
> pisze:
> > Don't know enough about the storage mechanism. I have ~/mail
> > directories, but all mails of a folder seem to be in one file.
>
> So it's
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:08:37 +0100
Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:41:47 +0100
> Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-03-17 09:16:
> >
> > > thank you for the suggestion.
> > > I found this thread in a fo
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:41:47 +0100
Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote:
> Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-03-17 09:16:
>
> > thank you for the suggestion.
> > I found this thread in a forum, which seems to be exactly my
> > use-case: https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-829416
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 17:29:00 +0100
Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote:
> Dnia 16.03.2025 o godz. 15:51:42 Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users
> pisze:
> > Yes that's the problem. It should work like that (and does now - see
> > further below): I manually identify false-spam and move the mail to
>
Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-03-17 09:16:
thank you for the suggestion.
I found this thread in a forum, which seems to be exactly my use-case:
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-829416-start-0.html
https://dovecot.dovecot.narkive.com/BcwsH9DF/getmail-and-lda-deliver
then
Dnia 17.03.2025 o godz. 07:21:20 Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users pisze:
> Don't know enough about the storage mechanism. I have ~/mail
> directories, but all mails of a folder seem to be in one file.
So it's a mailbox type storage. It's harder in that case to extract a single
message and move it t
On 17/3/25 18:13, Robert Schetterer via Postfix-users wrote:
Am 17.03.25 um 07:21 schrieb Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 17:29:00 +0100
Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote:
Dnia 16.03.2025 o godz. 15:51:42 Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users
pisze:
Yes that's the problem.
ation]
> type = MDA_external
> path = /usr/lib/dovecot/deliver
> arguments = ("-d", "u...@server.com")
> user = vmail
> group = vmail
>
> /etc/spamassassin/local.cf
>
> ...
> bayes_ignore_header X-Bogosity
> bayes_ignore_header X-Spam-Flag
> ba
Am 17.03.25 um 07:21 schrieb Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users:
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 17:29:00 +0100
Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote:
Dnia 16.03.2025 o godz. 15:51:42 Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users
pisze:
Yes that's the problem. It should work like that (and does now - see
further below):
-s -n
--folder LearnAsHam -m '/bin/bash -c \"/usr/bin/tee
>(/usr/bin/sa-learn --ham --single)|/usr/bin/spamc|/usr/sbin/sendmail
-i -f %F -t -- %T" '"
if fetchmail had more complete support for imap protocol it would be
perfect without new sendmail send again
google isbg
Dnia 16.03.2025 o godz. 15:51:42 Paul Neuwirth via Postfix-users pisze:
> Yes that's the problem. It should work like that (and does now - see
> further below): I manually identify false-spam and move the mail to
> LearnAsHam folder. The cron should make spamassassin learn it as ham
> and (after re
on later): (user
> > vscan) "/usr/bin/fetchmail -f /etc/mail/.fetchmailrc -p IMAP -a -s
> > -n --folder LearnAsHam -m '/bin/bash -c \"/usr/bin/tee
> > >(/usr/bin/sa-learn --ham
> > >--single)|/usr/bin/spamc|/usr/sbin/sendmail
> > -i -f %F
older LearnAsHam -m '/bin/bash -c \"/usr/bin/tee
> >(/usr/bin/sa-learn --ham --single)|/usr/bin/spamc|/usr/sbin/sendmail
> -i -f %F -t -- %T" '"
>
> which works as far as it gets to sendmail - which itself succeeds, but
> the mail is not being processed:
>(/usr/bin/sa-learn --ham --single)|/usr/bin/spamc|/usr/sbin/sendmail
-i -f %F -t -- %T" '"
which works as far as it gets to sendmail - which itself succeeds, but
the mail is not being processed:
(/var/log/mail:
[...] 8EF10241E0: to=,
orig_to=, relay=local, delay=35, delays=
(of course others may differ), you should
avoid after queue content filtering - especially the type that re-injects
mail using /usr/sbin/sendmail (when re-injecting mail using a separate
Postfix smtpd instance listening on a dedicated port, you can turn off some
double processing using options like
esults, all depending on configuration.
Because of this, in my opinion (of course others may differ), you should
avoid after queue content filtering - especially the type that re-injects
mail using /usr/sbin/sendmail (when re-injecting mail using a separate
Postfix smtpd instance listening on a dedicate
Oh, thank you! I will have a look into it!
Am 07.03.2025 um 23:34 schrieb pgnd via Postfix-users:
a single-tasker that takes care of outbound signing & is currently
maintained (tho not terribly active; ime, doesn't need to be) is
dkimpy-milter.
this is a helpful start:
https://pypi.org/pro
Thanks for the hint, Sean!
Am 07.03.2025 um 23:04 schrieb Sean McBride via Postfix-users:
On 7 Mar 2025, at 16:27, Andreas Kuhlen via Postfix-users wrote:
Can the rspamd milter do the dkim signing
It can. It's probably a better idea than using OpenDKIM, because that project
seems dead as be
That's how I implemented it. It also works for mails that are sent to
external recipients. However, my mails sent internally were still
double-signed. As DKIM signing makes no sense in this case in my eyes, I
quickly set it up so that mails to certain addresses are not signed. To
do this, I cre
On 7 Mar 2025, at 16:27, Andreas Kuhlen via Postfix-users wrote:
> Can the rspamd milter do the dkim signing
It can. It's probably a better idea than using OpenDKIM, because that project
seems dead as best as I can tell, it has had no commits for 7 years:
https://github.com/trusteddomainprojec
Il 07/03/2025 22:13, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users ha scritto:
By far the easiest is to stop using content_filter and to use an
rspamd milter or the like do the signing.
Thanks, but I don't want to "overturn" everything; yes I'm running
spamassassin.
ATM I just found out about:
-o receive
=
milter_protocol = 6
milter_default_action = accept
DKIM is correct for email sent by my clients, but if I send a message
from the server's shell, with /usr/sbin/sendmail, I get no signing at
all (dkim none)
So if I change:
non_smtpd_milters =
with:
non_smtpd_milters = $smtpd_milters
I get dki
t_action = accept
>
> DKIM is correct for email sent by my clients, but if I send a message
> from the server's shell, with /usr/sbin/sendmail, I get no signing at
> all (dkim none)
>
> So if I change:
>
> non_smtpd_milters =
>
> with:
>
> non_smtpd_milte
message
from the server's shell, with /usr/sbin/sendmail, I get no signing at
all (dkim none)
So if I change:
non_smtpd_milters =
with:
non_smtpd_milters = $smtpd_milters
I get dkim for sendmail sent messages, but all the other mail gets *2*
signatures (this still looks "acceptable&qu
ord file.
The issue I am trying to overcome is not the lack of a From: header;
that one can be expected to always exist in my particular use case.
For me, the relevant issue is that when using the sendmail binary, the
envelope sender address defaults to no
matter the From: header's value. As
t
> which runs Postfix, and Bob sends the message like so:
>
> $ /usr/sbin/sendmail -t < ~/sample.eml
>
> This would typically result in an envelope sender address like
> , which may not be reachable from the outside.
> To force a different envelope sender address, Bob cou
Consider a pre-generated text file sample.eml like this one:
From: Bob
To: al...@example.org
Subject: foobar
The message body goes here...
Imagine further that Bob is logged in as user123 on host.example.net
which runs Postfix, and Bob sends the message like so:
$ /usr/sbin/sendmail
You don't say where the error message is reported or by what. Something
else is invoking Postfix's sendmail incorrectly.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Jason Hirsh via Postfix-users:
> I assume that this error wont interfere with with postfix other operations?
You are invoking a non-Postfix sendmail command.
That is where my support ends.
Wietse
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-us
d FreeBSD 14.1. When I first installed Postfix
>> I added the following to rc.conf
>>
>> sendmail_enable="NO"
>> sendmail_submit_enable="NO"
>> sendmail_outbound_enable="NO"
>> sendmail_msp_queue_enable="NO"
>> po
; sendmail_submit_enable="NO"
> sendmail_outbound_enable="NO"
> sendmail_msp_queue_enable="NO"
> postfix_enable="YES"
>
> This use to disable sendmail
>
> System seems to work fine accept for the error message. Why would postfix
> be calli
sendmail_msp_queue_enable="NO"
postfix_enable="YES"
This use to disable sendmail
System seems to work fine accept for the error message. Why would postfix be
calling sendmail??___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@p
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 06:06:40PM +, Дилян Палаузов wrote:
> «sendmail -v myself@domain» however hangs.
Of course it does, it is waiting to read the message headers and body
from standard input as expected.
> until I press Ctrl+C. This is Postfix 3.4.13. On Postfix 2.11 the
l_recipient_maps, virtual_mailbox_maps,
relay_recipient_maps).
Which is why just cargo-cult is difficult to specify without the full
picture of your entire setup, but that's too much work to take in unless
you hire a paid consultant. In your place, I'd have stuck with Sendmail
on FreeBSD,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 12:50:18AM -0700, Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users wrote:
> On Monday, March 18, 2024, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users <
>
> > Victor gave a vierd config :)
> >
> > postfix must not return any result on non existsing users, so if this
> > gives no result user is unknown, with
On Monday, March 18, 2024, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> catch all is badly advised, it makes recipient validation impososibe,
> don't do it
>
> define maps with what is wanted, not with what is not wanted, catch-all is
> unwanted
>
I know, but a couple of
Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users skrev den 2024-03-18 08:50:
Thanks. I’m hosting several domains: a couple need to accept any
user@ except some that specifically need to be rejected delivering
locally; some domains are more normal, just accept specific users &
deliver to some local user (sometimes
On Monday, March 18, 2024, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users skrev den 2024-03-18 03:52:
>
> My question in one, hopefully simple sentence, is:
>>
>> In Postfix, how do I configure Postfix such that all email to
>> "user@some.doma
Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users skrev den 2024-03-18 03:52:
My question in one, hopefully simple sentence, is:
In Postfix, how do I configure Postfix such that all email to
"user@some.domain" will return an error code (e.g. 550 user unknown)
to bounce that email
Victor gave a vierd config
On Sunday, March 17, 2024, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> > > - You can reject SMTP recipients via various restriction checks
> > > that perform access(5) lookups against tables of your choice.
> >
> > How can I do it not based on the network or d
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 09:52:10PM -0700, Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users wrote:
> > It is a reserved domain name, (one of many) that you can use internally,
> > without clashing with *real domains*.
>
> Wow. Once you KNOW it's there, you can find out about "local.invalid".
> BUT if you didn't kno
Monday, March 18, 2024, 3:01:11 PM, Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 8:05 PM Phil Biggs via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>> Not sure about the rest of your requirements but perhaps
>>
>> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_unverified_recipient
>> https://www.postfix.or
it automatic that every other email address
> > (not listed there) will be rejected?
>
> Only for virtual alias domains, for other domains, you may need
> a separate valid recipient table, see:
>
> https://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
> Because you're loo
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 8:05 PM Phil Biggs via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Not sure about the rest of your requirements but perhaps
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_unverified_recipient
> https://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html
I don't think I can do that because I host a cou
mail addresses for a
> hosted domain, then is it automatic that every other email address
> (not listed there) will be rejected?
Only for virtual alias domains, for other domains, you may need
a separate valid recipient table, see:
https://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 02:04:55PM +1100, Phil Biggs via Postfix-users wrote:
> Monday, March 18, 2024, 1:52:46 PM, Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users wrote:
> Not sure about the rest of your requirements but perhaps
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_unverified_recipient
>
> https://www.pos
Monday, March 18, 2024, 1:52:46 PM, Glenn Tenney via Postfix-users wrote:
> My question in one, hopefully simple sentence, is:
> In Postfix, how do I configure Postfix such that all email to
> "user@some.domain" will return an error code (e.g. 550 user unknown)
> to bounce that email
> Gl
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 3:40 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> My general advice is to use aliases(5) very sparingly, just for lists
> that require an "owner-" or ":include:" lists. All other rewrites
> should be via virtual(5), and perhaps even keep $mydestination empty!
>
> Add "loc
o be specific, it's been some decades since
> many of us have looked at Sendmail. Much depends on what sort of
> mappings you're looking to emulate.
"most of what" is in the text I included below my questions. I thought
that would have been very clear. That's why I i
be specific, it's been some decades since
many of us have looked at Sendmail. Much depends on what sort of
mappings you're looking to emulate.
For 1-to-many recipient rewrites, the best vehicle is indeed virtual(5),
but if you also use local aliases(5), and $myorigin is listed in
$mydestinati
Now that I seem to have postfix running ok on my replacement server
(going from Linux/Sendmail to Freebsd/Postfix), I have to convert all
of my "virtusertable" entries over to postfix. I've read through
https://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html &
https://www.postfix.org/post
hawky--- via Postfix-users:
> Is there a way to stop resolving a second time the alias table with the
> after-queue approach?
With "pickup -o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings...",
but that disables virtual_alias_maps lookup for all submissions
through the Postfix
Hi,
We've a SpamAssassin setup with the after-queue approach.
When re-submission a mail, that has been content filtered by
SpamAssassin, with sendmail we see that the mail is delivered twice to
the recipient, if the user has a forwarding email set.
From our understanding that is a resu
there is no $sendmail_relay_restrictions configuration
like what $smtpd_relay_restrictions does, so the $relay_domains is
useless for sendmail.
Relaying, by definition, occurs only when mail is coming in via SMTP and is
not delivered locally, but re-sent to another server.
When mail is generated
relay_restrictions configuration
> like what $smtpd_relay_restrictions does, so the $relay_domains is
> useless for sendmail.
Relaying, by definition, occurs only when mail is coming in via SMTP and is
not delivered locally, but re-sent to another server.
When mail is generated locally via sendmail a
what $smtpd_relay_restrictions does, so the $relay_domains is useless
for sendmail.
And there is no filter available for sendmail either
(https://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html).
How to reject the unwanted destination domains when users use the
sendmail command
Am Montag, dem 10.07.2023 um 09:39 -0400 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni via
Postfix-users:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 03:24:54PM +0200, Robert Senger wrote:
>
> > Hey, that was me! My full given name *is* Robert'); DROP ...
> >
> > CONFDIR=/etc/postfix
> > POSTMAP=/usr/sbin/postmap
> > LOCAL_VIRTUAL_USER
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 03:24:54PM +0200, Robert Senger wrote:
> Hey, that was me! My full given name *is* Robert'); DROP ...
>
> CONFDIR=/etc/postfix
> POSTMAP=/usr/sbin/postmap
> LOCAL_VIRTUAL_USERS=mysql:${CONFDIR}/virtual_mailboxes.mysql.cf
>
> recipient=$(printf '%s' "$2" | sed 's/[<>]//g')
Am Montag, dem 10.07.2023 um 08:52 -0400 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni via
Postfix-users:
> > On 10 Jul 2023, at 5:50 am, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-
> > users wrote:
> >
> > > > #!/bin/bash
> > > > user=`echo "$2" | sed 's/[<>]//g'`
> > > > ret=`echo "select destination from virtual_aliases wh
> On 10 Jul 2023, at 5:50 am, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
>>> #!/bin/bash
>>> user=`echo "$2" | sed 's/[<>]//g'`
>>> ret=`echo "select destination from virtual_aliases where
>>> source=\"$user\";" | /usr/bin/mysql -upostfix -psecretpassword
>>> mailserver | tail -n 1`
>>>
onnerstag, dem 29.06.2023 um 17:21 +0200 schrieb Robert Senger via
Postfix-users:
I am running Postfix 3.4.23 on Debian 10.13 Buster, with SpamAssassin
4.0.0 and spamass-milter 0.4.0-2 for spam detection.
This is my "sendmail -bv" substitute:
#!/bin/bash
user=`echo "$2" | sed &#x
tabases for every alias or evan wildcard address, which is not
> desired.
>
> Now, I've figured out that spamass-milter has an option to run
> "sendmail -bv" command, to expands aliases to the real username, and
> extract the expanded username from the output of that
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 05:21:32PM +0200, Robert Senger via Postfix-users wrote:
Of course, I could write my own "sendmail" script which takes the
virtual_alias,
I was thinking about the same, just utilising postconf and postmap...
On 29.06.23 12:02, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-u
Robert Senger via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-06-29 17:21:
...
The point is that spamassassin needs to know the username when
processing an email, to update the correct bayes database. The username
given to spamassassin by spamass-milter is the email address of the
recipient. This is fine, as
name, and creates bayes
> databases for every alias or evan wildcard address, which is not
> desired.
>
> Now, I've figured out that spamass-milter has an option to run
> "sendmail -bv" command, to expands aliases to the real username, and
> extract the expanded user
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 05:21:32PM +0200, Robert Senger via Postfix-users wrote:
> Of course, I could write my own "sendmail" script which takes the
> virtual_alias,
This is possible with care, but not ideal, better would be to find
some way to get the milter to make the
as an option to run
"sendmail -bv" command, to expands aliases to the real username, and
extract the expanded username from the output of that command. Cool ;)
But postfix' "sendmail -bv" command behaves different from the
original. It does not write its results to stdout
As always, very grateful for your clarifications.
El 8/6/23 a las 18:12, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users escribió:
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
Victor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users:
Hi,
I want to prevent that sendmail milter rejections generates bounces
messages. Reading sendmail
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Victor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to prevent that sendmail milter rejections generates bounces
> > messages. Reading sendmail documentation I see "-N" option:
> >
> > echo
Victor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users:
> Hi,
>
> I want to prevent that sendmail milter rejections generates bounces
> messages. Reading sendmail documentation I see "-N" option:
>
> echo "HELLO" | sendmail -N 'never' t...@test.es; echo $?
Víctor Rubiella Monfort via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-06-08 14:06:
echo "HELLO" | sendmail -N 'never' t...@test.es; echo $?
-N parameter only controls DSN, it does not do REJECT or BOUNCES
sendmail -f t...@test.es -bv t...@test.es -N never
more funny results
hopef
Hi,
I want to prevent that sendmail milter rejections generates bounces
messages. Reading sendmail documentation I see "-N" option:
echo "HELLO" | sendmail -N 'never' t...@test.es; echo $?
0
Jun 8 13:51:30 server.test postfix/cleanup[597560]: 077616620F:
On 2023-01-01 19:54, Wietse Venema wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni:
On Sun, Jan 01, 2023 at 05:03:27PM +0100, Jesper Dybdal wrote:
...
(I seem to remember that there was a thread here about a similar subject
some time ago, but I can't find it now.)
Did you mean https://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.ht
On Sun, Jan 01, 2023 at 01:54:12PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > (I seem to remember that there was a thread here about a similar subject
> > > some time ago, but I can't find it now.)
>
> Did you mean https://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#local_login_sender_maps
> This is available in Pos
control which envelope sender addresses can be
> > used by which system user by calling sendmail(1)?
>
> No. Unlike the smtpd(8) service with its restriction classes and
> access(5) tables, the postdrop(1) local submission handler has very
> limited access control capabiliti
e
> used by which system user by calling sendmail(1)?
No. Unlike the smtpd(8) service with its restriction classes and
access(5) tables, the postdrop(1) local submission handler has very
limited access control capabilities (just authorized_submit_users, which
you're already using).
Note tha
I use reject_authenticated_sender_login_mismatch to control which
envelope sender addresses SASL clients can use. That works just fine.
Is there a similar way to control which envelope sender addresses can be
used by which system user by calling sendmail(1)?
(I seem to remember that there
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 11:01:52AM +0200, witcher wrote:
> >As to popularity, I use "mutt", which already supports setting the
> >envelope sender based on the "From:" header, passing the desired
> >envelope sender to sendmail(1).
>
> Huh, I didn
There isn't.
Good to know.
As to popularity, I use "mutt", which already supports setting the
envelope sender based on the "From:" header, passing the desired
envelope sender to sendmail(1).
Huh, I didn't know it does that. I've only tried sending wi
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 07:51:52PM +0200, witcher wrote:
> I'm wondering whether there is an option for sendmail to read the
> "From:" field from a mbox file to fill the envelope sender address
> (like you otherwise would with the `-f` command line flag).
There isn
I'm wondering whether there is an option for sendmail to read the
"From:" field from a mbox file to fill the envelope sender address (like
you otherwise would with the `-f` command line flag).
It doesn't seem to be documented (and thus probably not available) in
the man page
James Feeney:
> As described in the original post, setting the inet_interfaces
> parameter to "" results
> in postfix sendmail failing with "fatal: parameter inet_interfaces:
> no local interface found for "
> when postfix is running "inside" a network
James Feeney:
> inet_interfaces - "The network interface addresses that this mail system
> receives mail on."
> proxy_interfaces - "The network interface addresses that this mail system
> receives mail on by way of a proxy or network address translation unit."
It means to say:
inet_interfaces -
On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 06:44:55PM -0600, James Feeney wrote:
> Running postfix on Linux in a Network Namespace, and then running
> postfix sendmail from "outside" that Network Namespace, gives an
> error:
>
> postfix/sendmail[606899]: fatal: parameter inet_interfaces: n
On 17/05/21 10:37 pm, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
I would disagree that port 465 with TLS-wrapper around SMTP is better than
port 587 with STARTTLS. It's only your personal opinion. Port 587 with
mandatory STARTTLS is in no way less secure than TLS-wrapped port 465.
I used to make that argument (see b
Dnia 17.05.2021 o godz. 21:55:22 Peter pisze:
>
> Port 465 = submissions = best
> Port 587 with mandatory starttls = submission = acceptable
I would disagree that port 465 with TLS-wrapper around SMTP is better than
port 587 with STARTTLS. It's only your personal opinion. Port 587 with
mandatory
On 17/05/21 9:12 pm, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
Dnia 17.05.2021 o godz. 08:52:33 Chris Green pisze:
Most mail clients will use sendmail rather than SMTP on port 25 (or
another port) won't they? As I said my postfix works fine for sending
E-Mails from my MUA (mutt) which uses sendmail.
Dnia 17.05.2021 o godz. 08:52:33 Chris Green pisze:
> >
> > Ubuntu desktop should have Thunderbird preinstalled. Why not just try to
> > send mail using a regular mail client?
>
> Most mail clients will use sendmail rather than SMTP on port 25 (or
> another port
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 09:03:25AM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>It was not rejected by mail.gandi.net.
>
>If it was rejected by something beyond that, [1]ch...@zmbc.eu would get
>a bounce notification (DSN).
>
>Postfix is not involved in any way.
>
OK, thanks.
--
Chris Green
1 - 100 of 550 matches
Mail list logo
