On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:25 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Andrea Gozzi:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:03 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It works, thanks.
> > > > I have one further question: how do I restrict access to postfix for any
> > > > user with @myfreemail.com account
Karl O. Pinc:
>
> On 09/10/2008 06:14:44 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Karl O. Pinc:
> > > When there's more than one subscriber the same thing
> > > happens for mail sent to the first subscriber, but
> > > then the same message is sent to the second subscriber.
> > > Again, smtp sends a DATA comma
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:35 +0200, mouss wrote:
> Jorey Bump wrote:
> > Jason Noble wrote, at 09/10/2008 08:51 AM:
> >> It was my DNS.
> >> I am using a black list from here:
> >> http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/
> >> to block ad-servers at the dns level.
> >>
> >> I'll have to remember this next tim
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 09:00 +0200, Andrea Gozzi wrote:
>
> The REDIRECT check can easily be bypassed by changing the MAIL FROM: ,
> so I configured the webmail to allow mail originating from the real
> address only.
> Unfortunately, someone might still try to connect directly to postfix
> and fake
Hi all,
I have a little problem with Postfix. I have a Postfix server acting as
fallback_relay. This box have a big queue (between 1 and 10
mails). The box is under FreeBSD and all is ok except this message I see
in syslog:
postfix/qmgr[52291]: fatal: socket: Too many open files
I try to
Andrea Gozzi:
> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:25 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Andrea Gozzi:
> > > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:03 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It works, thanks.
> > > > > I have one further question: how do I restrict access to postfix for
> > > > > any
> >
Nicolas Haller:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a little problem with Postfix. I have a Postfix server acting as
> fallback_relay. This box have a big queue (between 1 and 10
> mails). The box is under FreeBSD and all is ok except this message I see
> in syslog:
>
> postfix/qmgr[52291]: fatal: socke
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 08:25:48AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > I try to change some sysctl values like kern.maxfiles,
> > kern.maxfilesperproc, kern.ipc.maxsockets and kern.ipc.somaxconn but I
> > still receive too many open file message.
> See: http://www.postfix.org/TUNING_README.html#file_
I changed it to one of our unused real-world IP address, and made a
firewall rule to reject all packets destine for that IP.
This seems to have the desired effect and I dont think there are any
security issues.
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:35 +0200, mouss wrote:
> Jorey Bump wrote:
> > Jason Noble wr
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Nicolas Haller wrote:
Hi all,
I have a little problem with Postfix. I have a Postfix server acting as
fallback_relay. This box have a big queue (between 1 and 10
mails). The box is under FreeBSD and all is ok except this message I see
in syslog:
postfix/qmgr[52291]
Jason Noble wrote, at 09/11/2008 08:08 AM:
> On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 16:35 +0200, mouss wrote:
>> Jorey Bump wrote:
>>>
>>> Set up a separate DNS server if you want to block ad sites for your your
>>> LAN users. I do this, but I simply make the local DNS server
>>> authoritative for the offensive dom
I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
the file and did postfix reload. But still piling up in the logs with
address verification
On Thursday 11 September 2008 13:49:44 Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
> longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
> domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
> the file and did
Hi,
>
>
>
> The problem was in the configs of postgrey.
> So, the delivery of the messages delayed.
>
> Read about postgrey + postfix in the postfix´s documentation and ajusted
> the problem.
>
> thanks.
>
Actually, the warning of the postsuper was not caused by postgrey. But by:
1 - mailq |
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote, at 09/11/2008 08:49 AM:
> I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
> longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain. I put the
> domain in my recipient_checks file as 'example.com REJECT', postmap'd
> the file and did postfix reload.
Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 09/09/2008 04:48:47 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Instead of guessing, run a network sniffer that captures the
packet content.
Thank you. I knew someone would send a good idea my way.
Here's what I found:
Nc seems to be left hanging when there's more than
one subscriber
Jason Noble wrote:
I changed it to one of our unused real-world IP address, and made a
firewall rule to reject all packets destine for that IP.
This seems to have the desired effect and I dont think there are any
security issues.
It first seems. then it breaks.
to prevent application from goi
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 08:20 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Andrea Gozzi:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:25 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > Andrea Gozzi:
> > > > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:03 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It works, thanks.
> > > > > > I have one furt
Hello.
I'm running Ubuntu 7.04 (Feisty Fawn) Server Edition as a mail server
with Postifix 2.3.8 and i'm trying to setup SASL in Postifx for smtp
authentication (authenticate system users, using pam mechanism in
sasl).
After a while i could find some decent howtos about configuring sasl.
I followed
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
I have a domain getting hit this morning that is not being used any
longer, so I decided to just reject all mail to that domain.
what do you exactly mean by "not used"? if you think it can be
"recycled", contact me offlist.
I put the
domain in my recipient_checks f
Try:
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#no_chroot
If this fixes the problem PLEASE COMPLAIN TO THE UBUNTU POSTFIX MAINTAINER.
Wietse
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
> testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
> /var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
> 0: OK "Success."
>
> AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
> 535 5.7.0 Error: authentication failed: bad protocol
Wrong base64 string:
echo AHByd
> Hello.
> I'm running Ubuntu 7.04 (Feisty Fawn) Server Edition as a mail server
> with Postifix 2.3.8 and i'm trying to setup SASL in Postifx for smtp
> authentication (authenticate system users, using pam mechanism in
> sasl).
> After a while i could find some decent howtos about configuring sasl
Hi,
on my postfix 2.5.5 relay
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain ( guess the smtp content
inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if they are
dkim signed, but that speculate )
does anyone has an idea
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
>
> > testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
> > /var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
> > 0: OK "Success."
> >
> > AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
> > 535 5.7.0 Error: authentication failed: bad protocol
>
> Wrong base64 str
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
/var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
0: OK "Success."
AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
535 5.7.0 Error: authentication failed: bad protocol
Wrong base64 string:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Hi,
on my postfix 2.5.5 relay
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain ( guess the smtp content
inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if they are
dkim signed, but that speculate )
2008/9/11 Алексей Доморадов <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:00:33PM -0300, Diego Ledesma wrote:
>>
>> > testsaslauthd -u pruebarelay -p 1234 -f
>> > /var/spool/postfix/var/run/saslauthd/mux
>> > 0: OK "Success."
>> >
>> > AUTH PLAIN AHBydWViYXJlbGF5CjM0
>> > 535 5.7.0 Error: au
mouss schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Hi,
on my postfix 2.5.5 relay
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain ( guess the smtp
content inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if
they are dkim signed, but t
Robert Schetterer wrote:
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
> exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain
( guess the smtp content
inspector there has a problem only with this type of mails if they are
dkim signed, but that speculate )
If you can verify DKIM
Diego Ledesma wrote:
Oh. I guess i shouldn't have set that password in the first place...
Thanks for the hint. I could authenticate succesfuly via telnet
I got the command for base64 enconde from
http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html#server_test but didn't know
the octal digit thing.
The prob
Noel Jones:
> Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
> send mail to you.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
> The table entry would look like this, note the key must be an
> IP, not a hostname:
> ip.of.bad.client dsn, silent-dis
> I just couldn't avoid reading this post.
> I actually make a live out of replacing MS solutions with Open
> Source-based solutions. I know, it is not perfect, and there are some
> features that you will not get, but in my experience these features
> are not used very often.
> Anyway, I would giv
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
i cant deliver out disposition-notification mails produced by
> exchange/outlook to a special recipient domain
( guess the smtp content inspector there has a problem only with this
type of mails if they are dkim signed, but that speculate )
If
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
send mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key must be an
IP, not a hostname:
ip.of.bad.client
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they send
mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key must be an IP, not
a ho
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they send
mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key mus
Robert Schetterer:
> Wietse Venema schrieb:
> > Noel Jones:
> >> Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
> >> send mail to you.
> >> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
> >> The table entry would look like this, note the key must be a
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Robert Schetterer:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Noel Jones:
Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they
send mail to you.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
The table entry would look like this, note the key must be
Finally it's working!.
You where right. There was something interfering.
Turns out that our cisco firewall had some smtp fix-up feature
enabled. After disabling it i could telnet smtp from the outside as i
did from the inside.
E-mail clients also working fine.
Thanks all for the help!.
Diego.
On
* Robert Schetterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi mouss, in this case its not up to me
> decide here, its a customers mailservers
Ja und? Lass doch die Mails in der Queue verschimmeln :)
Nach 3-5 Tagen sind die eh weg. Delivered werden die EH nicht.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Noel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Maybe you can simply not offer DSN support to them when they send mail to
> you.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_maps
No, it the Outlook internal read receipt.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAI
Robert Schetterer wrote:
You add the IP of the ORIGINATING server; where the original message
comes from that triggers the DSN. This should prevent the DSN from
being generated in the first place.
Hi Noel, cant do that its a dyn ip
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinational company arrives v
* Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Robert Schetterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Hi mouss, in this case its not up to me
> > decide here, its a customers mailservers
>
> Ja und? Lass doch die Mails in der Queue verschimmeln :)
> Nach 3-5 Tagen sind die eh weg. Delivered werden die EH nich
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
You add the IP of the ORIGINATING server; where the original message
comes from that triggers the DSN. This should prevent the DSN from
being generated in the first place.
Hi Noel, cant do that its a dyn ip
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinatio
Noel Jones:
> Seems more likely they are choking on the null sender address.
> You can use the setup described above with smtp_generic_maps
> to replace the null sender with something else. This breaks
> RFCs - DSNs MUST be sent with the null sender.
>-o smtp_generic_maps=regexp:/etc/postfi
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
* Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
* Robert Schetterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi mouss, in this case its not up to me
decide here, its a customers mailservers
Ja und? Lass doch die Mails in der Queue verschimmeln :)
Nach 3-5 Tagen sind die eh weg. Delivered werden
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinational company arrives via a dyn ip?
no the orginal mail is comming from there ( bigcompany) and wishes a
notify being delivered after recieve,
the bigcompany IP address is the one you put in the
smtpd_discard_ehlo_keyword_address_m
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 02:52:11PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
> Robert Schetterer wrote:
> >>Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinational company arrives via a dyn ip?
> >
> >no the orginal mail is comming from there ( bigcompany) and wishes a
> >notify being delivered after recieve,
>
> the bigcompan
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:03:26AM -0700, Chris St Denis wrote:
I have been recently seeing in my logs a fair amount of
postfix/master[64122]: warning: inet_trigger_event: read timeout for
service [x.x.x.x]:465
mistake in your master.cf file. Don't set a wakeu
Noel Jones schrieb:
Robert Schetterer wrote:
You add the IP of the ORIGINATING server; where the original message
comes from that triggers the DSN. This should prevent the DSN from
being generated in the first place.
Hi Noel, cant do that its a dyn ip
Eh?? Mail _from_ a large multinatio
No, Don, Thank _you_!
Mine:
1) Elect Libertarians.
2) Support libertarian candidates. I'll accept moving in the direction
of #1, i.e., setting the stage for electing Libertarians.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:24 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 11 September 2008
>
> Gentlemen:
>
> I seem to
52 matches
Mail list logo
