also sprach Robert Schetterer [2009.05.23.2244 +0200]:
> Hi Martin, after all most milters have option to whitelist hosts
> itself why dont use it
Because it means I have to maintain redunant list of exempt hosts.
--
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
"die zeit für kleine p
also sprach Wietse Venema [2009.05.23.1442 +0200]:
> Before making architectural recommendations, it would help to step
> back into the reality of how policy servers and milters work. For
> one thing, policy servers don't handle message content, and for
> another, Milters must be able to see ever
also sprach Wietse Venema [2009.05.23.1442 +0200]:
> Before making architectural recommendations, it would help to step
> back into the reality of how policy servers and milters work. For
> one thing, policy servers don't handle message content, and for
> another, Milters must be able to see ever
also sprach Kouhei Sutou [2009.05.25.0148 +0200]:
> milter manager is placed at between Postfix and milters:
>
> Postfix <-milter protocol-> milter manager <-milter protocol->
> milters
>
> milter manager can bypass your milter if connected host is
> whitelisted host.
While this is definite
Hi,
In <20090525095136.gb24...@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net>
"Re: how to bypass milters, whitelist hosts" on Mon, 25 May 2009 11:51:36
+0200,
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Kouhei Sutou [2009.05.25.0148 +0200]:
>> milter manager is placed at between Postfix and milters:
>>
>> Postfi
also sprach Kouhei Sutou [2009.05.25.1254 +0200]:
> What format are you using for whitelist?
[...]
> It seems that access(5) format support is useful.
> I'll add access(5) support to milter manager in the next
> stable release.
cidr_table(5) would make more sense.
--
martin | http://madduck.net
martin f krafft:
> also sprach Wietse Venema [2009.05.23.1442 +0200]:
> > Before making architectural recommendations, it would help to step
> > back into the reality of how policy servers and milters work. For
> > one thing, policy servers don't handle message content, and for
> > another, Milte
Thank You for Your time and answer, Sahil:
> > Well. Is there a mechanism that allows me to whitelist a domain so
> > that all farther actions are not taken?
>
> Depends on which action you want to prevent.
I do not know which action I want to prevent. :)
I just want that a letter that comes f
On Mon, 25 May 2009, Sthu Pous wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Sahil:
>
> > > Well. Is there a mechanism that allows me to whitelist a domain so
> > > that all farther actions are not taken?
> >
> > Depends on which action you want to prevent.
>
> I do not know which action I wan
Thank You for Your time and answer, Sahil:
> Show relevant logging. If it is indeed amavisd-new where the mail is
> rejected (or quarantined for having spammy qualities)
I will bring here the logging for the site but from another server,
just to show who and which error detected in case if it ma
On Mon, 25 May 2009, Sthu Pous wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Sahil:
>
> > Show relevant logging. If it is indeed amavisd-new where the mail is
> > rejected (or quarantined for having spammy qualities)
>
> I will bring here the logging for the site but from another server,
> just
Hi,
I'm using getmail (using cron) for fetching the mails (from the ISP server) and
then letting postfix to manage them. In postfix I have set "message_size_limit"
to 10 MB. So when getmail retrieve the message (that is bigger than 10 MB) and
send it to postfix (thought sendmail), sendmail return
Hi,
I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
is temporarily unavailable?
If not I guess we could use a script and a temporary bounce.cf.
Ideas welcome.
Thanks,
--
per
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 21:49 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
> codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
> is temporarily unavailable?
No. To what should the rejection code change?
> If
Trigve a écrit :
> Hi,
> I'm using getmail (using cron) for fetching the mails (from the ISP server)
> and
> then letting postfix to manage them. In postfix I have set
> "message_size_limit"
> to 10 MB. So when getmail retrieve the message (that is bigger than 10 MB)
> and
> send it to postfix
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 21:49 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
is temporarily unavailable?
No. To what should the rejection co
Per olof Ljungmark a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
> codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
> is temporarily unavailable?
>
if it is temporarily unavailable, then the answer is a temporary error.
what else?
Per olof Ljungmark a écrit :
> Magnus Bäck wrote:
>> On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 21:49 CEST,
>> Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
>>> codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
>>> is temporarily un
Trigve:
> May 23 00:00:52 mailwork postfix/sendmail[73012]: fatal: [MAIL OMITTED](5003):
> message file too big
No MTA, including Postfix, sends bounce messages for mail that it
does not accept.
Wietse
Per olof Ljungmark:
> Our MX's use a LDAP directory to lookup valid addresses. Now, if this
> directory for some reason becomes temporarily unavailable, postfix will
> return a 5xx error for ALL incoming messages.
Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
Postfix uses the SYSTEM L
Wietse Venema wrote:
Per olof Ljungmark:
Our MX's use a LDAP directory to lookup valid addresses. Now, if this
directory for some reason becomes temporarily unavailable, postfix will
return a 5xx error for ALL incoming messages.
Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
Postfix
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 22:35 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
> >
> > Postfix uses the SYSTEM LIBRARY function getpwnam() to look up the
> > user name, and when LDAP is busted, YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY getpwna
Per olof Ljungmark:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Per olof Ljungmark:
> >> Our MX's use a LDAP directory to lookup valid addresses. Now, if this
> >> directory for some reason becomes temporarily unavailable, postfix will
> >> return a 5xx error for
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 22:35 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
Postfix uses the SYSTEM LIBRARY function getpwnam() to look up the
user name, and when LDAP is busted, YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY ge
Hi.
I have a smtp server and it need to authorized by the id and psw before send
mail.
But I found I can send a fake mail.
For example,I use id1 to authorize and send a email which is mail from
i...@domain.com.
Is there some methord to check it and prevent from it?
Jeff
EMail:jbhu...@s
reject_authenticated_sender_login_mismatch as a smtpd_sender_restrictions
Daniel
Wietse Venema wrote:
No MTA, including Postfix, sends bounce messages for mail that it
does not accept.
Wietse
I'm pretty sure I've seen qmail do exactly this... :-p Some variation
of its default "accept, then bounce" methodology...
--
Corey Chandler / KB1JWQ
Living Legend / Syst
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 23:13 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> Magnus Bäck wrote:
>
> > > May 20 09:59:24 postfix/smtpd[77250]: NOQUEUE: reject:
> > > RCPT from [IP.HERE]: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient
> > > address rejected: User unknown; from= to=
> > > proto=ESMTP helo=
> >
> > "postconf -n"
* Corey Chandler :
> Wietse Venema wrote:
>>
>> No MTA, including Postfix, sends bounce messages for mail that it
>> does not accept.
>>
>> Wietse
>>
> I'm pretty sure I've seen qmail do exactly this... :-p Some variation of
> its default "accept, then bounce" methodology...
In that case
Good day.
Is it abnormal/harmful if I delete a message from
vmail/hostname/boxname/cur ?
Thank You for Your time.
On Tue, May 26, 2009 8:01 am, Sthu Pous said:
> Is it abnormal/harmful if I delete a message from
> vmail/hostname/boxname/cur ?
No. That's exactly what happens when you choose to delete a message
from your MUA.
--
Magnus Bäck
mag...@dsek.lth.se
31 matches
Mail list logo
