Wietse:
> Again. if something can already be done with smtpd plus milter or
> policy plugin or content filter then I urge you to keep using that
> already existing functionality.
and also said,
> Postscreen's purpose is to keep zombies away so that you can keep
> using the existing smtpd feature
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 11:43:30PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
The lookup is always a cache miss. Then an SMTP probe is sent. Dictionary
attacks always yield cache misses.
You are forgetting that dictionary attacks are almost exclusively queries
for non-existent users
"Sahil Tandon" wrote:
> Your syntax is bad. And this question was answered on the amavisd-new
> mailing list, though it probably should have been asked on the
> spamassassin list. Please do not cross-post.
I am sorry but I do not wanted to do cross-post but also on the SpamAssassin
ml have to
Thanks for the config hint.
It works fine if I add an email address like this to generic
laserjetscan...@domain.local notificati...@domain.com
It does not work if I want to do the following:
@domain.com notificati...@domain.com
It then appears to rewrite the recipients address as well and not
Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz put forth on 12/2/2010 2:40 AM:
> Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 11:43:30PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> The lookup is always a cache miss. Then an SMTP probe is sent. Dictionary
>> attacks always yield cache misses.
>
>> You are forgetting that
Hi!
I'm using postfix 2.5 and configured LDAP as lookup table for my virtual map
like this:
ldapvirtualfoobar_server_host = ldap://myserver:389
ldapvirtualfoobar_search_base = dc=my,dc=ldap,dc=base
ldapvirtualfoobar_query_filter = (&(objectClass=someClass)(someAttribute=%s))
ldapvirtualfoobar_re
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz put forth on 12/2/2010 2:40 AM:
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 11:43:30PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
The lookup is always a cache miss. Then an SMTP probe is sent. Dictionary
attacks always yield cache misses.
You are forgetting
On 02/12/2010, at 06:25, DTNX/NGMX Postmaster wrote:
On 01/12/2010, at 23:18, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Martin Kellermann put forth on 12/1/2010 9:19 AM:
so, is it still (seven years later) "The right thing™ to do" ?
will it work proper with exchange 2007/2010 ?
since the usage of "script-generate
> but i see a strange "double-bounce" in mail.log which i don't understand:
double-bounce is account used for validation of user account.
--
Eero
Am 02.12.2010 13:11, schrieb Eero Volotinen:
but i see a strange "double-bounce" in mail.log which i don't understand:
double-bounce is account used for validation of user account.
thank you for explaining this... so everything seems to be fine so far...
is this user name configurable?
Hi Sönke
to check for aliases we use the following ldap-config-file for postfix
2.5.6:
# virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-aliases.cf
server_host = ldaphost.mydomain.com
server_port = 389
search_base = ou=postfix,dc=mydomain,dc=com
query_filter = (&(mail=%s)(objectclass=qmailuser))
On Thu, December 2, 2010 7:20 am, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
> They have corrected it, the "infected" source for download is
> replaced, but no warning at all for the ones who already downloaded and now
> using the trojaned version...
>
> Not very encouraging to use Proftpd.
Andreas,
fwiw, I go
Victor Duchovni:
> Because I am not thinking about normal loads that don't matter. One
> needs to survive hostile loads.
>
> > > LDAP tables are supported and not discouraged, but high volume sites
> > > may want to dedicate some LDAP replicas to MTA queries.
> >
> > I'm not discouraging anyone f
Wietse Venema:
> Victor Duchovni:
> > Because I am not thinking about normal loads that don't matter. One
> > needs to survive hostile loads.
> >
> > > > LDAP tables are supported and not discouraged, but high volume sites
> > > > may want to dedicate some LDAP replicas to MTA queries.
> > >
> >
"Sönke Schwardt-Krummrich" writes:
> Hi!
>
> I'm using postfix 2.5 and configured LDAP as lookup table for my virtual map
> like this:
>
> ldapvirtualfoobar_server_host = ldap://myserver:389
> ldapvirtualfoobar_search_base = dc=my,dc=ldap,dc=base
> ldapvirtualfoobar_query_filter = (&(objectClass
Hi:
I'm running Postfix 2.3.3 for a domain 'mydomain.com' with some users
hosted locally (with Cyrus IMAP) and some others are hosted by a MS
Exchange server.
I configured a transport map for all users that need to be relayed to
the MS exchange like this:
exchangeus...@mydomain.com smtp:[A.B.C.D
On 12/2/2010 9:32 AM, Jason Voorhees wrote:
Hi:
I'm running Postfix 2.3.3 for a domain 'mydomain.com' with some users
hosted locally (with Cyrus IMAP) and some others are hosted by a MS
Exchange server.
I configured a transport map for all users that need to be relayed to
the MS exchange like th
On 12/02/2010 09:40 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
In order for this to work, you should add non-local user aliases to
virtual_alias_maps using the fully qualified addresses on both the
left and right sides.
virtual_alias_maps are global and you *should not* add anything to
virtual_ali
On 12/2/2010 10:08 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
On 12/02/2010 09:40 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
In order for this to work, you should add non-local user aliases to
virtual_alias_maps using the fully qualified addresses on both the
left and right sides.
virtual_alias_maps are global a
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List
wrote:
> On 12/2/2010 9:32 AM, Jason Voorhees wrote:
>>
>> Hi:
>>
>> I'm running Postfix 2.3.3 for a domain 'mydomain.com' with some users
>> hosted locally (with Cyrus IMAP) and some others are hosted by a MS
>> Exchange server.
>> I conf
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:28:47AM +0100, S??nke Schwardt-Krummrich wrote:
> I'm using postfix 2.5 and configured LDAP as lookup table for my virtual map
> like this:
>
> ldapvirtualfoobar_server_host = ldap://myserver:389
> ldapvirtualfoobar_search_base = dc=my,dc=ldap,dc=base
> ldapvirtualfoob
On 12/02/2010 10:10 AM, michael.h.gr...@googlemail.com wrote:
Thanks for the config hint.
It works fine if I add an email address like this to generic
laserjetscan...@domain.local notificati...@domain.com
It does not work if I want to do the following:
@domain.com notificati...@domain.com
It
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 05:23:33PM +0100, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 12/02/2010 10:10 AM, michael.h.gr...@googlemail.com wrote:
>> Thanks for the config hint.
>>
>> It works fine if I add an email address like this to generic
>>
>> laserjetscan...@domain.local notificati...@domain.com
>>
>> It doe
Hello All,
I have a mail server (postfix 2.2.10, Devecot, IMSS/SPS 7.0).
I noticed recently that some emails are delivered with very late (some
hours, one or 2 days) even if the emails are sent from a local domain user
to a local domain user.
In the mailq, i can see the bounced emails with
hiii
Check the main.cf conf file and open the postfix sending socket connection.
Try this below commands
postqueue -f
postsuper -r ALL
Thanks & Regards,
Ravindra Gupta
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Rachid Abdelkhalak wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I have a mail server (postfix 2.2.10, Deveco
On 12/2/2010 1:14 PM, Rachid Abdelkhalak wrote:
Hello All,
I have a mail server (postfix 2.2.10, Devecot, IMSS/SPS 7.0).
Note: this is quite old. While considered stable, it will be no longer
updated.
I noticed recently that some emails are delivered with very late (some
hours, one or 2
Rachid Abdelkhalak:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I have a mail server (postfix 2.2.10, Devecot, IMSS/SPS 7.0).
>
> I noticed recently that some emails are delivered with very late (some
> hours, one or 2 days) even if the emails are sent from a local domain user
> to a local domain user.
>
> In the mai
Thank you Ravindra
What do you meen by 'Check the main.cf conf file and open the postfix
sending socket connection.' ?
Thank you
On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Ravindra Gupta // Viva wrote:
hiii
Check the main.cf conf file and open the postfix sending socket connection.
Try this below commands
po
On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Rachid Abdelkhalak wrote:
Thank you Ravindra
What do you meen by 'Check the main.cf conf file and open the postfix sending
socket connection.' ?
Thank you
On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Ravindra Gupta // Viva wrote:
hiii
Check the main.cf conf file and open the postfix sending
--On December 2, 2010 11:11:40 AM -0500 Victor Duchovni
wrote:
In the LDAP email schemas I am familiar with, "mail" is the *primary*
email address, and is not multi-valued. It is unfortunate that it is
multi-valued in your particular schema. We have:
mail: primary
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:01:45AM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>> In the LDAP email schemas I am familiar with, "mail" is the *primary*
>> email address, and is not multi-valued. It is unfortunate that it is
>> multi-valued in your particular schema. We have:
>>
>> mail:
--On Thursday, December 02, 2010 2:31 PM -0500 Victor Duchovni
wrote:
It is sensible to have a designated attribute for the primary (canonical
if you like) email address. If the RFC LDAP schemas don't support this,
that's too bad for the RFC schemas.
Part of the point of LDAP is the ability
Hi good people
It's a special case I know but I would like in postfix to restrict
incoming emails from outside world by the senders from domain?
(not by senders mailserver ip - we already do spf to insure that)
Cheers Martin
* Martin Schiøtz :
> Hi good people
>
> It's a special case I know but I would like in postfix to restrict
> incoming emails from outside world by the senders from domain?
Like what for example? Anything check_sender_access can'T do?
> (not by senders mailserver ip - we already do spf to insure
Wietse Venema put forth on 12/2/2010 7:35 AM:
> Victor Duchovni:
>> Because I am not thinking about normal loads that don't matter. One
>> needs to survive hostile loads.
>>
LDAP tables are supported and not discouraged, but high volume sites
may want to dedicate some LDAP replicas to MTA
Martin Kellermann put forth on 12/2/2010 6:08 AM:
> and there's a 5 sec. delay ... seems way too long to me for just
> checking the recipient...!?
That delay should be no longer than what a typical delivery to the
Exchange server would be. Since no message is sent, it should be
shorter by quite
Stan Hoeppner:
> Yes, as always. I've simply been looking at this from the premise that
> our countermeasures which stop spam connections before the RCPT TO stage
> will also stop dictionary attacks before the RCPT TO stage since such
> attacks typically come from the same types of sources. ...
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 04:08:09PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Martin Kellermann put forth on 12/2/2010 6:08 AM:
>
> > and there's a 5 sec. delay ... seems way too long to me for just
> > checking the recipient...!?
>
> That delay should be no longer than what a typical delivery to the
> Excha
On 12/02/2010 10:29 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
On 12/2/2010 10:08 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
On 12/02/2010 09:40 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
In order for this to work, you should add non-local user aliases to
virtual_alias_maps using the fully qualified addresses on both t
Martin Kellermann put forth on 12/2/2010 6:08 AM:
> relay=IP[IP]:PORT, delay=5.7, delays=0.6/0/0.03/5.1, dsn=5.1.1,
> --
> and there's a 5 sec. delay ... seems way too long to me for just
> checking the recipient...!?
Completion of support for time stamps from different stage
Victor Duchovni put forth on 12/2/2010 4:27 PM:
> The OP is really far better off querying the LDAP server:
That may be Viktor. I think he should test both and pick the solution
that works best in his environment, both from a performance and
management perspective. Choice is usually a good thin
OT, sorry, just to finish up this thread:
myself:
> I'm working on a SpamAssassin plugin to implement Spamhaus DWL
> (and other 'SA tag'- based DNS lookups).
Done.
Available in the SpamAssassin SVN trunk (on its way to become 3.4.0):
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6518
Hi All,
I have configured backup server, which is working as expected when ever primary
not reachable mail are queued in back Mail server, later pushes to primary mail
server.
I would like to know, how to make backup to primary mail server, in case
primary is down due to major issues. so that
On 12/02/2010 11:15 PM, Ramesh wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have configured backup server, which is working as expected when
> ever primary not reachable mail are queued in back Mail server, later
> pushes to primary mail server.
>
> I would like to know, how to make backup to primary mail server, i
44 matches
Mail list logo
