Deeztek.com Support:
> On 2/24/2013 10:19 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Deeztek.com Support:
> Most of the e-mail for that domain is of course relaying to the 1.1.1.1
> server. However, there are some e-mail addresses on that domain that I
> want to make an exception for and I need t
On 2/24/2013 10:19 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Deeztek.com Support:
Most of the e-mail for that domain is of course relaying to the 1.1.1.1
server. However, there are some e-mail addresses on that domain that I
want to make an exception for and I need to relay the e-mail to 2.2.2.2
instead of 1.1.
Deeztek.com Support:
> >> Most of the e-mail for that domain is of course relaying to the 1.1.1.1
> >> server. However, there are some e-mail addresses on that domain that I
> >> want to make an exception for and I need to relay the e-mail to 2.2.2.2
> >> instead of 1.1.1.1. So, if we had a user c
On 2/24/2013 9:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Deeztek.com Support:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
On 2/24/2013 8:19 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Someone:
You can, but the bob entry is redundant. I don't recommend per-mailbox
transport entries at all, it is best to stick to per-doma
Deeztek.com Support:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On 2/24/2013 8:19 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Someone:
> >> You can, but the bob entry is redundant. I don't recommend per-mailbox
> >> transport entries at all, it is best to stick to per-domain transport
> >> entries only,
On 2/24/2013 8:19 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Someone:
You can, but the bob entry is redundant. I don't recommend per-mailbox
transport entries at all, it is best to stick to per-domain transport
entries only, and handle per-user routing via virtual(5) alias rewriting.
Wietse:
Typically this woul
Someone:
> You can, but the bob entry is redundant. I don't recommend per-mailbox
> transport entries at all, it is best to stick to per-domain transport
> entries only, and handle per-user routing via virtual(5) alias rewriting.
Wietse:
> Typically this would be done with virtual aliases that sen
On 2/24/2013 6:39 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.02.2013 12:28, schrieb Deeztek.com Support:
On 2/22/2013 4:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Deeztek.com Support:
On February 22, 2013 3:40:22 PM Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:13:27PM -0500, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
b...
Am 24.02.2013 12:28, schrieb Deeztek.com Support:
> On 2/22/2013 4:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Deeztek.com Support:
>>> On February 22, 2013 3:40:22 PM Viktor Dukhovni
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:13:27PM -0500, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
>> b...@example.com smtp:[1.1.1
On 2/22/2013 4:13 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Deeztek.com Support:
On February 22, 2013 3:40:22 PM Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:13:27PM -0500, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
b...@example.com smtp:[1.1.1.1]
m...@example.com smtp:[2.2.2.2]
example.com smtp:somewhere.else
Deeztek.com Support:
> On February 22, 2013 3:40:22 PM Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:13:27PM -0500, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
> >
> > > >b...@example.com smtp:[1.1.1.1]
> > > >m...@example.com smtp:[2.2.2.2]
> > > >example.com smtp:somewhere.else
> > >
> > > So
On February 22, 2013 3:40:22 PM Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:13:27PM -0500, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
> >b...@example.com smtp:[1.1.1.1]
> >m...@example.com smtp:[2.2.2.2]
> >example.com smtp:somewhere.else
>
> Sorry about the top-posting. Okay this is a little bi
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:13:27PM -0500, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
> >b...@example.com smtp:[1.1.1.1]
> >m...@example.com smtp:[2.2.2.2]
> >example.com smtp:somewhere.else
>
> Sorry about the top-posting. Okay this is a little bit closer. So,
> I'm assuming if I use the domain in conjuc
On 2/22/2013 2:13 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
On 2/22/2013 1:07 PM, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
Sorry I guess I wasn't very clear. This is what i want to do:
I want to be able to route e-mail send to b...@somedomain.com to
1.1.1.1 however, I also want to be able to route e-mail send to
m...@somedomain
On 2/22/2013 1:07 PM, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
> Sorry I guess I wasn't very clear. This is what i want to do:
>
> I want to be able to route e-mail send to b...@somedomain.com to
> 1.1.1.1 however, I also want to be able to route e-mail send to
> m...@somedomain.com to 2.2.2.2. I do normally us
Sorry I guess I wasn't very clear. This is what i want to do:
I want to be able to route e-mail send to b...@somedomain.com to 1.1.1.1
however, I also want to be able to route e-mail send to
m...@somedomain.com to 2.2.2.2. I do normally use transports but in this
case, I need to be able to fil
On 2/22/2013 12:39 PM, Deeztek.com Support wrote:
> I'm trying to accomplish the following:
>
> I'm trying to filter e-mail based on the to: field using a regexp
> header_checks file as follows:
>
> /^To: some...@somedomain.com/ FILTER smtp:192.xxx.xxx.xxx
>
> I thought with the above expression
I'm trying to accomplish the following:
I'm trying to filter e-mail based on the to: field using a regexp
header_checks file as follows:
/^To: some...@somedomain.com/ FILTER smtp:192.xxx.xxx.xxx
I thought with the above expression it would take the e-mail and deliver
to the 192.xxx.xxx.xxx a
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:05:09PM +0100, S?bastien WENSKE wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I have added on the bottom of my "header_check" file:
>
> /^(cc|to): undisclosed-recipients:;/REJECT
>
This is a very poorly thought out anti-spam measure. Deploy a real
spam filter. Don't get creative
Hi list,
I have added on the bottom of my "header_check" file:
/^(cc|to): undisclosed-recipients:;/REJECT
to prevent many SPAM from hotmail and yahoo, this works fine.
Now I need to allow some senders (like WSUS) to override this rule.
I have tried some combinaison without success,
20 matches
Mail list logo
