On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> I think your system is in a state of serious overload. There are
> tons of "connection refused" for internal services, and watchdog timeout
> and other timeouts that should NEVER EVER happen.
>
> Reduce default_process_limit to 50, do "postfi
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:37 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> Nothing useful here. Everything you show looks quite normal, although the
> lack of qmgr logging is probably significant. Probably more interesting
> stuff is logged earlier.
Yes, I missed the watchdog timeout earlier. It's been corrected now
And a side note: It doesn't matter how well (or not) clamav-milter
performs if you can't get it running...
But you'll probably get it running, fear not.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgda
Hello.
I have designed my own scripts for curiosity, for test saslauthd and
Postfix AUTH plain and login in both ports, and also test the ciphers in
Postfix.
I have some doubts about ciphers in Postfix, I will explain, all ciphers
available with "openssl ciphers -v" there is three that always fai
> -Original Message-
>
> JORGE CARMINATI:
> > Hi Wietse!, here's the information you're asking:
> >
> > mail_version = 2.6.5 (package from Simon J Mudd)
> > Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.4 (Tikanga)
> > Kernel: 2.6.18-164.9.1.el5 #1 SMP Wed Dec 9 03:27:37 EST 2009
> x86_64 x86_6
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:53:41AM +0100, Josep M. wrote:
> I have designed my own scripts for curiosity, for test saslauthd and
> Postfix AUTH plain and login in both ports, and also test the ciphers in
> Postfix.
Your curiousity exceeds your skill to interpret the results.
> Always fail, in bo
Mehul Ved put forth on 12/23/2009 2:02 AM:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> I think your system is in a state of serious overload. There are
>> tons of "connection refused" for internal services, and watchdog timeout
>> and other timeouts that should NEVER EVER happen.
>>
Hello Victor.
I tried before post here with "-ssl2" on the command line, got bad
result too:(
./101-mail-smtp-test-starttls-p25-login.sh CIPHER..: RC2-CBC-MD5 TEST
FAILED
command: openssl s_client -cipher RC2-CBC-MD5 -ssl2 -starttls smtp
-crlf -connect localhost:25 2>&1
3263:error:14079
El mié, 23-12-2009 a las 07:47 -0500, Victor Duchovni escribió:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:53:41AM +0100, Josep M. wrote:
>
> > I have designed my own scripts for curiosity, for test saslauthd and
> > Postfix AUTH plain and login in both ports, and also test the ciphers in
> > Postfix.
>
> Your
Hi.
As far as I understood the documentation, if those two are at their default:
local_header_rewrite_clients = permit_inet_interfaces
remote_header_rewrite_domain =
local clients are subject to address rewriting, but remote ones are not.
Unfortunately it seems that my postfix (2.6.5 from Debian
Hi.
Regarding TLS ciphers for SMTP client and server and this aNULL thingy.
I was not really able to find some more information about this on the web.
What does it mean exactly? What is the issue with anonymous ciphers?
Is it "just" that client certificate authentication does not work with the
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
> Hi.
>
> As far as I understood the documentation, if those two are at their default:
> local_header_rewrite_clients = permit_inet_interfaces
> remote_header_rewrite_domain =
> local clients are subject to address rewriting, but remote ones are not.
Please pay attention
Question re: postscreen.
The release notes for enabling postscreen, in step 3, indicate:
---
3 - Uncomment the the new "smtp inet ... postscreen" service in
master.cf, and duplicate any "-o parameter=value" entries from
the smtpd service that was commented out in step 1.
---
Step 3 says
Mike Cappella:
> Question re: postscreen.
>
> The release notes for enabling postscreen, in step 3, indicate:
>
> ---
> 3 - Uncomment the the new "smtp inet ... postscreen" service in
> master.cf, and duplicate any "-o parameter=value" entries from
> the smtpd service that was commented
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 03:58:32PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Regarding TLS ciphers for SMTP client and server and this aNULL thingy.
>
> I was not really able to find some more information about this on the web.
>
> What does it mean exactly? What is the issue with anonymous ciphers
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
> Hi Wietse.
>
>
> > Virtual alias maps apply to all domains.
> Uhm... ok,.. but for what is virtual_alias_domains then good for?
See: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
> As each address is aliased to another local or remote address there
> should be n
Quoting Wietse Venema :
> Virtual alias maps apply to all domains.
Uhm... ok,.. but for what is virtual_alias_domains then good for?
See: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
I've had read this before,.. but still did not understand the need for
virtual_alias_domains.
Now I think
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:13:28PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Quoting Wietse Venema :
> >>> Virtual alias maps apply to all domains.
> >>Uhm... ok,.. but for what is virtual_alias_domains then good for?
> >See: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
> I've had read this befo
Wietse:
> Virtual alias maps apply to all domains.
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
> Uhm... ok,.. but for what is virtual_alias_domains then good for?
Wietse:
> See: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
> I've had read this before,.. but still did not understand t
On 12/23/2009 12:14 AM, Venkatachala Upadhya wrote:
Hello Noel, users,
The subdomain part of the solution looks promising for my situation.
I would like to read more on this and understand the possible solution.
Any example based documentation or the pointers will help me.
http://www.postfix.
Christoph Anton Mitterer a écrit :
> Quoting Wietse Venema :
>>> > Virtual alias maps apply to all domains.
>>> Uhm... ok,.. but for what is virtual_alias_domains then good for?
>> See: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html
> I've had read this before,.. but still did not understand the
Hi list.
Sorry for asking questions again ;)
Quoting Wietse Venema :
As far as I understood the documentation, if those two are at their default:
local_header_rewrite_clients = permit_inet_interfaces
remote_header_rewrite_domain =
local clients are subject to address rewriting, but remote ones
Christoph Anton Mitterer:
> - Header sender and recipient addresses are always rewritten for local
> clients (depending on local_header_rewrite_clients) and for remote
> clients only if remote_header_rewrite_domain is not empty.
Indeed. The feature is called HEADER rewriting. This is called
tr
Hi.
btw: Thanks for your efforts in answering my questions, and sorry for
posting to -devel before (did not notice in the beginning, that this
is not meant for bug/feature reports).
Quoting Wietse Venema :
clients (depending on local_header_rewrite_clients) and for remote
clients only if r
I am moving our email system to Postfix, but I'm not quite able to get
it to do what I want.
I would like to "collapse" (alias?) all our domains and subdomains down
to one, so email to a name @ any of our domains ends up in one mailbox.
I have this working (as best as I can tell) using virtual
On 12/23/2009 7:30 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Hi.
btw: Thanks for your efforts in answering my questions, and sorry for
posting to -devel before (did not notice in the beginning, that this is
not meant for bug/feature reports).
Quoting Wietse Venema :
clients (depending on local_heade
If it helps, here is what I've tried. With this configuration, it
creates new mailboxes, even for invalid users. I tried adding a line to
the end of the virtual file (@abc.local j...@abc.local) as a catch-all,
and it catches *all* the mail, even if sent to a valid user.
/etc/postfix/virtual
--
27 matches
Mail list logo
