Re: /etc/mailname

Sébastien WENSKE wrote: What should contain this file, local or external fqdn ? Usually the external FQDN that you see when executing: host -t mx example.com (where example.com is your own domain) See "10.3.2 Mailname" at

Re: How to whilelist a host, for which name check fails?

Thank You for Your time and precious to me answer, Sahil: > Next time, paste the output of 'postconf -n' instead. But the above Here it is: # postconf -n alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases append_dot_mydomain = no biff = no broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes config_di

Re: Impossible to send mail using SSL for SMTP connection.

Nice to see You here, Mouss! Thank You for Your time and answer, again: > Instead of this, use the 3d option: "Use the STARTTLS command ..." > > STARTTLS is the standard method for doing SSL/TLS in ESMTP. Ok. So I've done and here what I see: . Client's part: [14:59:19] SMTP< 220 The eMail Ser

Re: how to bypass milters, whitelist hosts

also sprach Sahil Tandon [2009.05.23.0037 +0200]: > > Why are *_checks and *_milters not end-of-data restrictions, or > > better yet, policy services? > > One example: 1.2.3.4 is rejected in an access(5) table referenced > in smtpd_client_restrictions. Why wait for END-OF-DATA when you > know, i

Re: how to bypass milters, whitelist hosts

martin f krafft a écrit : also sprach Sahil Tandon [2009.05.23.0037 +0200]: Why are *_checks and *_milters not end-of-data restrictions, or better yet, policy services? One example: 1.2.3.4 is rejected in an access(5) table referenced in smtpd_client_restrictions. Why wait for END-OF-DATA whe

Re: how to bypass milters, whitelist hosts

martin f krafft: > also sprach Sahil Tandon [2009.05.23.0037 +0200]: > > > Why are *_checks and *_milters not end-of-data restrictions, or > > > better yet, policy services? > > > > One example: 1.2.3.4 is rejected in an access(5) table referenced > > in smtpd_client_restrictions. Why wait for E

RE: /etc/mailname

Thanks all. Sebastien -Message d'origine- De : owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] De la part de . Envoyé : samedi 23 mai 2009 09:58 À : Sébastien WENSKE Cc : postfix-users@postfix.org Objet : Re: /etc/mailname Sébastien WENSKE wrote: > > What should

Re: Impossible to send mail using SSL for SMTP connection.

Sthu Pous: > [14:59:19] ESMTP> EHLO localhost > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-myhost.org > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-PIPELINING > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-SIZE 3072 > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-VRFY > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-ETRN > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-AUTH=PLAIN LOGIN > [14

Re: How to whilelist a host, for which name check fails?

On Sat, 23 May 2009, Sthu Pous wrote: > > are successfully traversed, the "OK" does not prevent messages from > > 1.2.3.4 going to amavisd-new, which is where it seems your problem > > Well. Is there a mechanism that allows me to whitelist a domain so that > all farther actions are not taken? De

delivery temporarily suspended: connect to 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024: Connection refused

hi today i get alot message like this delivery temporarily suspended: connect to 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024: Connection refused when the user try to send or get mail messages, this ist mi master.cf ( http://pastie.org/487545 ) and the main.cf ( http://pastie.org/487548 ) any idea what ist

Re: delivery temporarily suspended: connect to 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024: Connection refused

On Sat, 23 May 2009, Alfredo Andaluz Prado wrote: > delivery temporarily suspended: connect to 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024: > Connection refused > > when the user try to send or get mail messages, > > and the main.cf ( http://pastie.org/487548 ) Your main.cf contains: content_filter = amavis:[

Re: how to bypass milters, whitelist hosts

Wietse Venema schrieb: > martin f krafft: >> also sprach Sahil Tandon [2009.05.23.0037 +0200]: Why are *_checks and *_milters not end-of-data restrictions, or better yet, policy services? >>> One example: 1.2.3.4 is rejected in an access(5) table referenced >>> in smtpd_client_restrictio

Re: Postfix-2.6.0 RPM

victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com (Victor Duchovni) writes: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 08:38:54PM +0200, Simon J Mudd wrote: > > > Others ask why not build from source. The simplicity of a single upgrade > > procedure and reproducibility make this more favourable the more boxes > > you have to man

Re: Impossible to send mail using SSL for SMTP connection.

Wietse Venema: > Sthu Pous: > > [14:59:19] ESMTP> EHLO localhost > > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-myhost.org > > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-PIPELINING > > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-SIZE 3072 > > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-VRFY > > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-ETRN > > [14:59:20] ESMTP< 250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN > > [14:59:20]

Re: Postfix-2.6.0 RPM

sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes: > I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am likely > to respond more if there are people who show an interest in these > rpms I build. For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able to find: postfix-2.6.0

Version 2.5.5

I have a test server about ready to become a live server, version 2.5.5. Is it correct that prior to the 2.6 release, that 2.5.7 would be the latest I want to run? I see http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-2.5.7.html shows what I would call minor issues for the 2.5.7 release set.

Re: Version 2.5.5

Scott Haneda: > I have a test server about ready to become a live server, version > 2.5.5. Is it correct that prior to the 2.6 release, that 2.5.7 would > be the latest I want to run? Unlike other products, you are not expected to stop using Postfix version X when Postfix version X+1 is relea

Re: Version 2.5.5

On May 23, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: Scott Haneda: I have a test server about ready to become a live server, version 2.5.5. Is it correct that prior to the 2.6 release, that 2.5.7 would be the latest I want to run? Unlike other products, you are not expected to stop using Postfi

Re: Version 2.5.5

Scott Haneda wrote: > Thank you Wietse. One point of clarification please. If 2.5.7 has > defect back ports from 2.6, then that equates to new features brought > into 2.5.7? Wietse said: "Postfix 2.5.7 has 'defect fixes' back-ported from Postfix 2.6.0." [Emphasis added] Note that he says "de

Re: Version 2.5.5

Scott Haneda: > On May 23, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > Scott Haneda: > >> I have a test server about ready to become a live server, version > >> 2.5.5. Is it correct that prior to the 2.6 release, that 2.5.7 would > >> be the latest I want to run? > > > > Unlike other products, y

Updating to 2.6.1 on Suse 11.1

Refering to the earlier subjects on RPMs and 2.6: I have Suse 11.1 which includes Postfix 2.5.5. It is not easy to uninstall that (YAST wants to replace it with EXIM or SENDMAIL) due to dependencies. Is it possible to just upgrade it if I manually compile 2.6.1 and replace the old one? Or do