Noel, Thanks again so much for all the great advice. I have since worked in
your changes (I have omitted the relay_recipients_maps for now, as I have to
device a scheme to synchronize my alias table between various domains).
Here is my currenet postconf -n, any other pointers would be great. I w
The Doctor:
> In: DATA
> Out: 354 End data with .
> Out: 451 4.3.0 Error: queue file write error
>
> Session aborted, reason: lost connection
>
> For other details, see the local mail logfile
>
> - End forwarded message -
>
>
> And from a heavily debugged log
>
> Apr 23 07:36:59 d
Hello all,
I'm setting up Postfix 2.6, speculatively, reading through the documentation
and building my configuration. It appears that the scenario I want is
somewhere between virtual and local deliveries.
What I want to do: .forward support, /etc/aliases support, detail address
(user-foo) su
Sabahattin Gucukoglu:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm setting up Postfix 2.6, speculatively, reading through the
> documentation and building my configuration. It appears that the
> scenario I want is somewhere between virtual and local deliveries.
>
> What I want to do: .forward support, /etc/aliases suppo
Hello!
Received about a dozen of the following 'delivery status reports' for
messages with the subject 'probe', all 'returned' to 'r...@hwcn.org'
all within a 10 minute period. Some report 'user unknown', others
like this one say 'deliverable'.
What is this? Symptom of hack?
- Charles
On Sa
Additional info:
All that shows in the logs is,
Apr 24 08:26:59 barton postfix/pickup[14103]: 849CFF4569: uid=0
from=
Apr 24 08:26:59 barton postfix/cleanup[2161]: 849CFF4569:
message-id=<20100424122659.849cff4...@barton.hwcn.org>
Apr 24 08:27:09 barton postfix/qmgr[6233]: 849CFF4569:
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 01:24:37PM +0100, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
> I'm setting up Postfix 2.6, speculatively, reading through the
> documentation and building my configuration. It appears that the
> scenario I want is somewhere between virtual and local deliveries.
>
> What I want to do: .
Charles Gregory:
>
> Additional info:
>
> All that shows in the logs is,
>
> Apr 24 08:26:59 barton postfix/pickup[14103]: 849CFF4569: uid=0
> from=
> Apr 24 08:26:59 barton postfix/cleanup[2161]: 849CFF4569:
> message-id=<20100424122659.849cff4...@barton.hwcn.org>
> Apr 24 08:27:09 bart
On 24 Apr 2010, at 13:57, Wietse Venema wrote:
Sabahattin Gucukoglu:
>> I'm setting up Postfix 2.6, speculatively, reading through the
>> documentation and building my configuration. It appears that the
>> scenario I want is somewhere between virtual and local deliveries.
>>
>> What I want to do:
Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 7:02 AM:
> Perhaps you missed this in prior email:
>
> - Send non-verbose logging.
>
> - Send logging that covers an entire message life cycle from the
> SMTP port to final delivery.
>
> Wietse
Wietse, check the listserv logs and your MUA. He sent th
Sabahattin Gucukoglu:
> On 24 Apr 2010, at 13:57, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sabahattin Gucukoglu:
> >> I'm setting up Postfix 2.6, speculatively, reading through the
> >> documentation and building my configuration. It appears that the
> >> scenario I want is somewhere between virtual and local deliv
Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 8:39 AM:
> - Your mail server is suffering from 100x red-shift due to the
> rapid expansion of the universe.
>
> Sending Postfix off into space to study time dilation effects, that
> is an option that I haven't considered before.
I deleted a very similar co
On 4/24/2010 4:28 AM, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
Noel, Thanks again so much for all the great advice. I have since worked in
your changes (I have omitted the relay_recipients_maps for now, as I have to
device a scheme to synchronize my alias table between various domains).
Here is my currenet post
Stan Hoeppner:
> Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 8:39 AM:
>
> > - Your mail server is suffering from 100x red-shift due to the
> > rapid expansion of the universe.
> >
> > Sending Postfix off into space to study time dilation effects, that
> > is an option that I haven't considered before.
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 11:48:16AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner:
> > Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 8:39 AM:
> >
> > > - Your mail server is suffering from 100x red-shift due to the
> > > rapid expansion of the universe.
> > >
> > > Sending Postfix off into space to study t
Hey all,
So I have tweaked my main.cf and enabled noplainpassword my sasl craps out.
smtpd_sasl_security_options = noanonymous
smtpd_sasl_tls_security_options = noanonymous
works,
smtpd_sasl_security_options = noplainpassword, noanonymous
smtpd_sasl_tls_security_options = noanonymous
gives me
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
> smtpd_sasl_security_options = noplainpassword, noanonymous
^^^
Did you mean noplaintext?
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_sasl_security_options
--
Sahil Tandon
On 4/24/2010 1:09 PM, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
Hey all,
So I have tweaked my main.cf and enabled noplainpassword my sasl craps out.
smtpd_sasl_security_options = noanonymous
smtpd_sasl_tls_security_options = noanonymous
works,
smtpd_sasl_security_options = noplainpassword, noanonymous
smtpd_sas
Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
>
>> smtpd_sasl_security_options = noplainpassword, noanonymous
> ^^^
> Did you mean noplaintext?
>
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_sasl_security_options
>
I'm such a tar
Wietse Venema put forth on 4/24/2010 10:48 AM:
> Humor is OK provided that the receiving end does not feel ridiculed.
That's pretty much the reason I removed the humor before sending.
> In this case, I made my joke the end of a list of more serious
> explanations for the observed delays. That sh
On 4/24/2010 1:31 PM, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
smtpd_sasl_security_options = noplainpassword, noanonymous
^^^
Did you mean noplaintext?
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_sasl
The Doctor:
> Speaking of humour, how can you support someone via e-mail
> when the e-mail system seens shot?
People with an inoperable mail system can join the mailing list
through some other email account.
Wietse
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 12:01:05AM -0400, Jeff Mitchell wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 6:44 PM, The Doctor wrote:
>> >> > ??Out: 220 doctor.nl2k.ab.ca ESMTP Postfix (2.8-20100323)
>>
>> I know this (probably) has little bearing on th
On 4/24/2010 3:06 PM, Jeff Mitchell wrote:
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 12:01:05AM -0400, Jeff Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 6:44 PM, The Doctor wrote:
??Out: 220 doctor.nl2k.ab.ca ESMTP Postfix (2.8-20100323)
I know this (pro
You were saying about complete life cycle and non-verbose logs
- Forwarded message from Mail Delivery System
-
Return-Path: double-bou...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5
On 4/24/2010 2:41 PM, The Doctor wrote:
You were saying about complete life cycle and non-verbose logs
- Forwarded message from Mail Delivery
System -
Return-Path: double-bou...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
X-Spam-Level
The Doctor:
>
> Apr 24 13:20:10 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/smtpd[17053]: 0762D12CFB0D:
> client=defout.telus.net[204.209.205.55]
> Apr 24 13:20:41 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/cleanup[17311]: 0762D12CFB0D:
> message-id=<6ef179d262924e5a8c03336971544...@taskercomp>
> Apr 24 13:22:04 doctor doctor[3
Here is my reconstruction from this inadequate logging sample.
> Apr 24 13:20:10 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/smtpd[17053]: 0762D12CFB0D:
> client=defout.telus.net[204.209.205.55]
> Apr 24 13:20:41 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/cleanup[17311]: 0762D12CFB0D:
> message-id=<6ef179d262924e5a8c03336971544
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 06:36:48PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Here is my reconstruction from this inadequate logging sample.
>
> > Apr 24 13:20:10 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/smtpd[17053]: 0762D12CFB0D:
> > client=defout.telus.net[204.209.205.55]
> > Apr 24 13:20:41 doctor doctor[31]: postfix/c
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Subject: [pfx] Re: WHAT IS "probe" Mail Delivery Status Report
(sigh) Mea Culpa... I try to remember to remove my list sorting tags
when I reply...
But this time, honestly, I was a bit focussed on the appearance
that my system had suddenly and inexplic
> Perhaps you missed this in prior email:
>
> - Send non-verbose logging.
>
> - Send logging that covers an entire message life cycle from the
> SMTP port to final delivery.
>
> Wietse
It never ceases to amaze me, how really bright people (and I'm assuming
everyone on this list has an IQ
Hi,
I am running a smtp relay for different domains, and I want to separate
all traffic.
I would like to bind for each domain the same IP address to receive and
send messages, and it should be for each domain its own public IP address.
I understand that with postfix 2.7.0 multi-instances f
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 09:08:22 +0300
Patrick Chemla wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am running a smtp relay for different domains, and I want to
> separate all traffic.
>
> I would like to bind for each domain the same IP address to receive
> and send messages, and it should be for each domain its own public
33 matches
Mail list logo
