On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 09:51:30AM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> relayhost = [smtp.att.yahoo.com]:587
> smtp_tls_policy_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/tls_policy
>
> In case it is needed here is the content of tls_policy:
>
> in.mailjet.com may
> smtp.att.yahoo.com:587 encrypt
It is rather sad that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/30/2014 8:51 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/30/2014 9:34 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
>>
>>> I changed the level to 2. I am not seeing what you suggest
>>> but there is one additional line initializing TLS engine.
>>> Here is the output:
>>
>>
>> ...
On 1/30/2014 9:59 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>
> Am 30.01.2014 15:51, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>> Thanks for your patience but why wouldn't the working server also be failing
>> if TLS was indeed screwed up?
> because he does not force TLS
>
>> Here is the postconf -n output:
> snipped
>
>> In case
Am 30.01.2014 15:59, schrieb li...@rhsoft.net:
> Am 30.01.2014 15:51, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>> Thanks for your patience but why wouldn't the working server also be failing
>> if TLS was indeed screwed up?
>
> because he does not force TLS
>
>> Here is the postconf -n output:
>
> snipped
>
>
On 1/30/2014 8:59 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>
>
> Am 30.01.2014 15:51, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>> Thanks for your patience but why wouldn't the working server also be failing
>> if TLS was indeed screwed up?
>
> because he does not force TLS
>
>> Here is the postconf -n output:
>
> snipped
>
Am 30.01.2014 15:51, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
> Thanks for your patience but why wouldn't the working server also be failing
> if TLS was indeed screwed up?
because he does not force TLS
> Here is the postconf -n output:
snipped
> In case it is needed here is the content of tls_policy:
>
> in
On 1/30/2014 9:34 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
>
> > I changed the level to 2. I am not seeing what you suggest but
> > there is one additional line initializing TLS engine. Here is
> > the output:
>
>
> ... useless debug output deleted
>
>
> > To repeat my previous question, is there no way to force a
>
smtp.att.yahoo.com[98.139.221.42]:587: 220 smtp.att.yahoo.com ESMTP ready
smtp.att.yahoo.com[98.139.221.42]:587: EHLO home.bellsouth.net
smtp.att.yahoo.com[98.139.221.42]:587: 250-smtp.att.yahoo.com
smtp.att.yahoo.com[98.139.221.42]:587: 250-PIPELINING
smtp.att.yahoo.com[98.139.221.42]:587: 25
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/30/2014 8:18 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/30/2014 9:10 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>>
>> Am 30.01.2014 15:00, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>>> I changed the loglevel to 1. I am not sure where or what I
>>> am supposed to see but the normal maillog c
On 1/30/2014 9:10 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>
> Am 30.01.2014 15:00, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>> I changed the loglevel to 1. I am not sure where or what I am supposed
>> to see but the normal maillog contained nothing different.
> lines like while connect to the destination
>
> Jan 27 19:16:17 mai
Am 30.01.2014 15:00, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
> On 1/30/2014 8:49 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>> Am 30.01.2014 14:30, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>>> On 1/29/2014 9:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> The only other thing that com
On 1/30/2014 8:49 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
> Am 30.01.2014 14:30, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>> On 1/29/2014 9:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>>
> The only other thing that comes to mind is that your "upgrade" may
> have inst
Am 30.01.2014 14:30, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
> On 1/29/2014 9:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>
The only other thing that comes to mind is that your "upgrade" may
have installed a version of Postfix with no TLS support. Then
On 1/29/2014 10:32 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 09:42:00PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>>> If postconf(1) is the same version of Postfix as smtp(8), then you
>>> check with "postconf smtp_tls_loglevel". This parameter is not
>>> defined when TLS support is not available.
On 1/29/2014 9:42 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Viktor Dukhovni:
>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>
The only other thing that comes to mind is that your "upgrade" may
have installed a version of Postfix with no TLS support. Then none
of these settings
On 1/29/2014 9:17 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
>>> The only other thing that comes to mind is that your "upgrade" may
>>> have installed a version of Postfix with no TLS support. Then none
>>> of these settings matter.
>> Hmmm. I had
On 29 Jan 2014, at 15:57 , li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
> in mordern setups only port 587 (submission) should be used for
> send authenticated mails and if someone can do that (we can't
> because too many client configurations out of control) someone
> could disable authentication on port 25 completly
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 09:42:00PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > > If postconf(1) is the same version of Postfix as smtp(8), then you
> > > check with "postconf smtp_tls_loglevel". This parameter is not
> > > defined when TLS support is not available.
> >
> > All TLS (and
> On 2014-01-30 00:08, Noel Jones wrote:
>> 250-8 BITMIME
>
> should it not be 8BITMIME?
ask yahoo, it's their server
On 2014-01-30 00:08, Noel Jones wrote:
250-8 BITMIME
should it not be 8BITMIME ?
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 09:42:00PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > If postconf(1) is the same version of Postfix as smtp(8), then you
> > check with "postconf smtp_tls_loglevel". This parameter is not
> > defined when TLS support is not available.
>
> All TLS (and SASL) parameters are defined wh
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
> > > The only other thing that comes to mind is that your "upgrade" may
> > > have installed a version of Postfix with no TLS support. Then none
> > > of these settings matter.
> >
> > Hmmm. I hadn't thought of t
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:20:44PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> > The only other thing that comes to mind is that your "upgrade" may
> > have installed a version of Postfix with no TLS support. Then none
> > of these settings matter.
>
> Hmmm. I hadn't thought of that. How do I check?
If postco
On 1/29/2014 7:41 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 07:14:34PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
>> Thanks again for the reply but no joy. I have been using port 587 for a
>> couple of years until this recent problem. The only difference is I had
>> my tls_policy set like this:
> Not
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 07:14:34PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Thanks again for the reply but no joy. I have been using port 587 for a
> couple of years until this recent problem. The only difference is I had
> my tls_policy set like this:
Not "no joy", rather failure to execute correctly. Wha
On 1/29/2014 6:22 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 05:58:15PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
>> TLS is indeed set via
>>
>> $ postconf -n smtp_tls_policy_maps
>> smtp_tls_policy_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/tls_policy
>>
>> The entry in that file is set to:
>>
>> smtp.att.yahoo.com
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 05:58:15PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> TLS is indeed set via
>
> $ postconf -n smtp_tls_policy_maps
> smtp_tls_policy_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/tls_policy
>
> The entry in that file is set to:
>
> smtp.att.yahoo.com may
Your original message reports problems with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/29/2014 4:44 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/29/2014 4:22 PM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>>
>> Am 29.01.2014 22:14, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>>> I have made yet another discovery. Perhaps this is the
>>> problem. When the EHLO command is send, should
Am 29.01.2014 23:58, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
> Thanks for the reply. Keep in mind this is not a new installation. This
> has been working until recently and still works for servers requiring
> authentication other then smtp.att.yahoo.com. Clearly something must
> have changed for that particular s
On 1/29/2014 4:55 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 04:14:16PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
>> I have made yet another discovery. Perhaps this is the problem. When the
>> EHLO command is send, should there not be the line:
>>
>> 250-AUTH LOGIN DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5 PLAIN
> To repe
Am 29.01.2014 23:44, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
> On 1/29/2014 4:22 PM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>>
>> Am 29.01.2014 22:14, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>>> I have made yet another discovery. Perhaps this is the problem. When the
>>> EHLO command is send, should there not be the line:
>> to the destination s
On 1/29/2014 4:22 PM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>
> Am 29.01.2014 22:14, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
>> I have made yet another discovery. Perhaps this is the problem. When the
>> EHLO command is send, should there not be the line:
> to the destination server i assume
>
>> 250-AUTH LOGIN DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-M
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 04:14:16PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> I have made yet another discovery. Perhaps this is the problem. When the
> EHLO command is send, should there not be the line:
>
> 250-AUTH LOGIN DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5 PLAIN
To repeat what I posted previously:
Save everyone some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 1/29/2014 3:14 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/29/2014 9:35 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> On 1/29/2014 8:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>> On 1/28/2014 9:44 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:15:02PM -0500, Dennis Putnam
wr
Am 29.01.2014 22:14, schrieb Dennis Putnam:
> I have made yet another discovery. Perhaps this is the problem. When the
> EHLO command is send, should there not be the line:
to the destination server i assume
> 250-AUTH LOGIN DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5 PLAIN
>
> Is that not what triggers the sasl auth
On 1/29/2014 9:35 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/29/2014 8:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> On 1/28/2014 9:44 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:15:02PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>>
The following is in my main.cf.
smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes
smtp_sasl_pa
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 08:49:25AM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> > You have not set "smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes", and perhaps other
> > required settings are not in fact set as intended.
>
> Thanks for the reply. I did not thing to use -n as normally I use -d.
That's rather useless in this cont
On 1/29/2014 8:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/28/2014 9:44 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:15:02PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>
>>> The following is in my main.cf.
>>>
>>> smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes
>>> smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
>>> smtp
On 1/28/2014 9:44 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:15:02PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
>> The following is in my main.cf.
>>
>> smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes
>> smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
>> smtp_sasl_security_options =
> You might think so, but t
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:15:02PM -0500, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> The following is in my main.cf.
>
> smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes
> smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
> smtp_sasl_security_options =
You might think so, but that does not make it so.
> However, when I run postc
My authentication has recently stopped working (at least it appears to
me there is no attempt to authenticate). The problem appears to be that
the sasl parameters are being ignored. The following is in my main.cf.
smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes
smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
41 matches
Mail list logo
