Hello
is it possible to immediately send bounce to a sender in case
of problem on my server instead of delaying it ?
thanks
Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt :
* Robert Schetterer :
>> [snip]
yes it changed again, so there should be no problem anymore
Frankly I didn't see a problem before. Less idiots on the internet,
where's the problem?
Na,na...
Sowas kurz vor Weihnachten
Gruß & fröhliches Fest
Andreas
smime
On Tuesday 21 December 2010 17:56:29 Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/21/2010 11:46 AM, Stuart Bailey wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a postfix server accepting emails on port 25 from the
> > Internet, and
> >
> > delivering to cyrus.
> >
> > There is another sever running Mail Marshall on Windows, that
On 12/22/10 10:07 AM, Frank Bonnet wrote:
Hello
is it possible to immediately send bounce to a sender in case
of problem on my server instead of delaying it ?
What kind of a problem ?
You should not arbitrarily alter the default status codes postfix sends
to clients; even though you can, it
Le 22/12/2010 10:07, Frank Bonnet a écrit :
Hello
is it possible to immediately send bounce to a sender in case
of problem on my server instead of delaying it ?
what kind of problem? "problem on my server" is too wide/general.
From a philosophical/meta-physical viewpoint, if there is a "pr
Le 20/12/2010 20:22, Jeff Morris a écrit :
[snip]
Interestingly, I also received one other off-list response to my email
from someone else who is experiencing the exact smae problem. Despite
*hours* of Googling, he is the only other person I've managed to come
across with this same issue, and he
hai
can i define multiple lookup tables in header_checks?.ie:
header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header.regexp,
pcre:/etc/postfix/header.pcre
thanks
Hello
we are trying to improve the DSN support of our environment and have
set "lmtp_assume_final=yes" at our final mailstore using Cyrus and
LMTP over socket.
The resulting DSN still set
Final-Recipient: rfc822; x...@kwsoft.de
Original-Recipient: rfc822;x...@kwsoft.de
Action: expanded
Stat
On 12/22/10 1:10 PM, Hari Hendaryanto wrote:
hai
can i define multiple lookup tables in header_checks?.ie:
header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header.regexp,
pcre:/etc/postfix/header.pcre
thanks
As documented:
header_checks (default: empty)
Optional lookup tables for content inspecti
On 12/22/2010 7:25 PM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 12/22/10 1:10 PM, Hari Hendaryanto wrote:
hai
can i define multiple lookup tables in header_checks?.ie:
header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header.regexp,
pcre:/etc/postfix/header.pcre
thanks
As documented:
header_checks (default: empty)
Yes, in fact, I ended up using it.
Thanks
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Robert Schetterer
wrote:
> Am 21.12.2010 23:11, schrieb Roman Gelfand:
>> Actually, I am using dspam for content filter. I was looking to add
>> sender reputation query results to message header. As it turns out
>> open
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Hello
>
> we are trying to improve the DSN support of our environment and have
> set "lmtp_assume_final=yes" at our final mailstore using Cyrus and
> LMTP over socket.
> The resulting DSN still set
>
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; x...@kwsoft.de
> Original-Recipient: rfc822
Dear Postfix Masters
Some users have made mistake in the recipient email address.
So the message turn into bounce queue that is normal.
I would like to know :
How to modify mails stored in the bounce queue to change the recipient
addresses and put them into the working queue to resend them ?
Be
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 10:28:01AM +, Stuart Bailey wrote:
> > You may be able to use mail marshall as a postfix
> > smtpd_proxy_filter, but that has performance implications you
> > will need to investigate.
> > http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_PROXY_README.html
>
> Thanks Noel,
> I'll try this
On 12/22/10 2:41 PM, David Touzeau wrote:
Dear Postfix Masters
Some users have made mistake in the recipient email address.
So the message turn into bounce queue that is normal.
I would like to know :
How to modify mails stored in the bounce queue to change the recipient
addresses and put them
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 02:41:04PM +0100, David Touzeau wrote:
> Dear Postfix Masters
>
> Some users have made mistake in the recipient email address.
> So the message turn into bounce queue that is normal.
>
> I would like to know :
>
> How to modify mails stored in the bounce queue to change
Zitat von Wietse Venema :
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Hello
we are trying to improve the DSN support of our environment and have
set "lmtp_assume_final=yes" at our final mailstore using Cyrus and
LMTP over socket.
The resulting DSN still set
Final-Recipient: rfc822; x...@kwsoft.de
Original-Recipient
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 02:54:02PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
>> This really means what it says: some alias was expanded *before*
>> LMTP got involved (this includes virtual aliasing. local
>> aliasing, and ~/.forward file expansion).
>>
>> Wietse
>
> Ok, this means i can't get a "fina
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> we are trying to improve the DSN support of our environment and have
> set "lmtp_assume_final=yes" at our final mailstore using Cyrus and
> LMTP over socket.
> The resulting DSN still set
>
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; x...@kwsoft.de
> Original-Recipient: rfc822;x...@kwsoft.de
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 09:35:59AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> 3 - Propagate ENVID, NOTIFY, RET, and ORCPT to one result from
> alias expansion only, and send no DSN. Postfix does this with
> one-to-one virtual aliases that translate one address into
> itself.
>
> The only thing I c
* Victor Duchovni :
> I am curious why the OP is eager to so faithfully support DSN. In my
> case I explicitly disable "DSN" in the ESMTP response at the incoming
> perimeter gateway.
Yes, it causes nothing but grief.
We had some sender who would ask for DSN, but then not accept it
--
Ralf
Zitat von Victor Duchovni :
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 09:35:59AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
3 - Propagate ENVID, NOTIFY, RET, and ORCPT to one result from
alias expansion only, and send no DSN. Postfix does this with
one-to-one virtual aliases that translate one address into
itself.
Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt :
* Victor Duchovni :
I am curious why the OP is eager to so faithfully support DSN. In my
case I explicitly disable "DSN" in the ESMTP response at the incoming
perimeter gateway.
Yes, it causes nothing but grief.
We had some sender who would ask for DSN, but then
On 12/22/2010 4:28 AM, Stuart Bailey wrote:
On Tuesday 21 December 2010 17:56:29 Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/21/2010 11:46 AM, Stuart Bailey wrote:
> You may be able to use mail marshall as a postfix
> smtpd_proxy_filter, but that has performance implications you
> will need to investiga
Zitat von Wietse Venema :
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
we are trying to improve the DSN support of our environment and have
set "lmtp_assume_final=yes" at our final mailstore using Cyrus and
LMTP over socket.
The resulting DSN still set
Final-Recipient: rfc822; x...@kwsoft.de
Original-Recipient: rfc82
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:06:03PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
> For a long time i also prayed "if you don't get a error all is fine".
> Unfortunately this is more and more not the case. After repeatedly
> disapearing mail in some content filters it was decided to try some more
> "modern"
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Wietse:
> 3 - Propagate ENVID, NOTIFY, RET, and ORCPT to one result from
> alias expansion only, and send no DSN. Postfix does this with
> one-to-one virtual aliases that translate one address into
> itself.
...
> The only thing I can change without breaking RFC com
Wietse Venema:
> lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Wietse:
> > 3 - Propagate ENVID, NOTIFY, RET, and ORCPT to one result from
> > alias expansion only, and send no DSN. Postfix does this with
> > one-to-one virtual aliases that translate one address into
> > itself.
> ...
> > The only thing I can
Hello again,
This time the question is simple: my server is being maliciously
used to send spam, and this has to stop. Here are the log entries in
question (latest ones):
Dec 22 19:03:17 raptor postfix/smtpd[25021]: lost connection after RCPT
from dan75-7-88-166-185-164.fbx.proxad.net[88.
On 12/22/2010 12:52 PM, Razvan Chitu wrote:
> Hello again,
> This time the question is simple: my server is being maliciously
> used to send spam, and this has to stop. Here are the log entries in
> question (latest ones):
>
> Dec 22 19:03:17 raptor postfix/smtpd[25021]: lost connection after
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:52:03 +0200
Razvan Chitu wrote:
> Hello again,
> This time the question is simple: my server is being maliciously
> used to send spam, and this has to stop. Here are the log entries in
> question (latest ones):
[snip]
> Also, I'm having a lot of these kind of entries
Hello!
Could someone please tell me if and how I can control the grouping of
recipients in one delivery via pipe?
If I have a content filter and I want it to receive each recipient in
a seperate message I can have them split up with this:
default_destination_recipient_limit = 1
That works fine.
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 07:03:24PM +0100, Robert Linden wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Could someone please tell me if and how I can control the grouping of
> recipients in one delivery via pipe?
> If I have a content filter and I want it to receive each recipient in
> a seperate message I can have them spl
Robert Linden:
> Hello!
>
> Could someone please tell me if and how I can control the grouping of
> recipients in one delivery via pipe?
Deliveries are grouped by the next-hop destination. The next-hop
destination is either the recipient's domain, or the destination
that you specify with (transpo
On 12/22/10 6:56 PM, David Touzeau wrote:
Thanks for the information but when domain recipient is not available
but in DNS the message is kept for 5 days in the queue
That is incorrect.
Did you happen to set soft_bounce = yes ?
If the DSN cannot be delivered, the original sender was spoof
*For* non-existent or *From *non-existent?
I never knew that Postfix had a reject_unknown_sender. Does it have any
caveats that I should watch over?
Thanks,
C.R.
On 12/22/2010 7:53 PM, John Peach wrote:
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:52:03 +0200
Razvan Chitu wrote:
Hello again,
This time
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 20:23:51 +0200
Razvan Chitu wrote:
> *For* non-existent or *From *non-existent?
> I never knew that Postfix had a reject_unknown_sender. Does it have
> any caveats that I should watch over?
I wrote "for", which is what I meant and is why you get on backscatter
lists.
>
Server:
Centos-5.5
postfix-2.3.3-2.1.centos.mysql_pgsql
See server log below.
Client:
MS Windows XP 2002 sp3
avast-5.0.545
behind a NAT router 66.6.120.250
with avast mail scanner on:
C:\telnet smtp 25
421
Connection to host lost
C:\
with avast mail scanner off I get the normal:
C:\telnet
Le 22/12/2010 19:38, Joseph Conrad a écrit :
Server:
Centos-5.5
postfix-2.3.3-2.1.centos.mysql_pgsql
See server log below.
Client:
MS Windows XP 2002 sp3
avast-5.0.545
behind a NAT router 66.6.120.250
with avast mail scanner on:
C:\telnet smtp 25
421
Connection to host lost
C:\
with avast
Le 22/12/2010 18:52, Razvan Chitu a écrit :
Hello again,
This time the question is simple: my server is being maliciously used to
send spam, and this has to stop. Here are the log entries in question
(latest ones):
Dec 22 19:03:17 raptor postfix/smtpd[25021]: lost connection after RCPT
from dan7
How long is a Postfix queueid? Sometimes I'm seeing 10 Hex-Characters,
sometimes 11 (on different machines, though).
my machine (11):
Dec 22 17:04:53 mail postfix/qmgr[2819]: 7B31 41C3 654: removed
python.org (10):
Dec 22 20:12:21 albatross postfix/qmgr[12586]: 47C8 CEE9 91: removed
So what is t
Ralf Hildebrandt:
> How long is a Postfix queueid? Sometimes I'm seeing 10 Hex-Characters,
> sometimes 11 (on different machines, though).
The current implementation, subject to change, uses the inode number
followed by the (sub-second portion of the) time in microseconds.
The maximal length is de
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 02:21:45PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ralf Hildebrandt:
> > How long is a Postfix queueid? Sometimes I'm seeing 10 Hex-Characters,
> > sometimes 11 (on different machines, though).
>
> The current implementation, subject to change, uses the inode number
> followed by th
Sorry, I failed to put postconf -n output in my first post...
Server:
Centos-5.5
postfix-2.3.3-2.1.centos.mysql_pgsql
See server log below.
Client:
MS Windows XP 2002 sp3
avast-5.0.545
behind a NAT router 66.6.120.250
with avast mail scanner on:
C:\telnet smtp 25
421
Connection to host lost
Have the users disable outbound e-mail scanning.
I mean, if the file is on their hard drive, it's already been scanned
for virii. To scan it again is silly.
On 12/22/2010 12:04 PM, Joseph Conrad wrote:
Sorry, I failed to put postconf -n output in my first post...
Server:
Centos-5.5
postfix-2.3
Better keep the discussion on list. more eyes mean more chances to get
real help...
Le 22/12/2010 21:02, Joseph Conrad a écrit :
[snip]
Try sending with a real MUA (thunderbird, outlook) instead of using
telnet and send the logs as you did for telnet. this is just to make
sure avast is not de
Le 22/12/2010 21:31, Evan Platt a écrit :
Have the users disable outbound e-mail scanning.
I mean, if the file is on their hard drive, it's already been scanned
for virii. To scan it again is silly.
The real role of the AV here is to block smtp except to the submission
server. but that's on
On 12/22/2010 12:50 PM, mouss wrote:
The real role of the AV here is to block smtp except to the submission
server. but that's only for "residential" users who don't have a
firewall to do that. even for such users, a host firewall (Comodo is
free) is a better tool at that.
but not sure OP c
> Better keep the discussion on list. more eyes mean more chances to get
> real help...
>
> Le 22/12/2010 21:02, Joseph Conrad a écrit :
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Try sending with a real MUA (thunderbird, outlook) instead of using
>>> telnet and send the logs as you did for telnet. this is just to make
>>>
Joseph Conrad:
> Dec 22 11:15:36 smtp postfix/smtpd[8084]: >
> mcw-office.rockymountains.net[66.36.120.250]: 220 smtp.rockymountains.net
> ESMTP Postfix
> Dec 22 11:15:36 smtp postfix/smtpd[8084]: <
> mcw-office.rockymountains.net[66.36.120.250]: EHLO Kitten
> Dec 22 11:15:36 smtp postfix/smtpd[808
Outlook Express error:
An unknown error has occurred. Account: 'pop.rockymountains.net', Server:
'smtp.rockymountains.net', Protocol: SMTP, Server Response: '421 ', Port:
587, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 421, Error Number: 0x800CCC67
Says it comes from the server, but I guess that could come f
Should I be worried when I see: root+:|sleep 5 as the username?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mail Delivery System
Date: Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 02:33
Subject: Postfix SMTP server: errors from sc4-scan54.someserver.com[x.x.x.x]
To: Postmaster
Transcript of session follows.
Out:
Joseph Conrad:
> Outlook Express error:
>
> An unknown error has occurred. Account: 'pop.rockymountains.net', Server:
> 'smtp.rockymountains.net', Protocol: SMTP, Server Response: '421 ', Port:
> 587, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 421, Error Number: 0x800CCC67
You mentioned that AVAST is playing
John Brahy:
> Should I be worried when I see: root+:|sleep 5 as the username?
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Mail Delivery System
> Date: Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 02:33
> Subject: Postfix SMTP server: errors from sc4-scan54.someserver.com[x.x.x.x]
> To: Postmaster
>
>
> Trans
Guess Ethereal is WireShark, now. I dug through a dump with WS and didn't
see 421 coming from the server. Not got mind around WireShark filters,
yet.
Yes, that does appear to be the way avast works, by jumping in between.
When I telnet to port 25, avast jumps in and sends the EHLO then hangs up
Hi all,
I'm looking for some help of postfix server configuration. hope this is
the right place to ask.
I have a mail server running iRedMail (which is based on postfix). It
sends mails to our subscribers every 4s. I think this doesn't seem to be
a very heavy load. however, there're likely 140,000
Obviously it is well understood that the security of cryptographic
software, such as TLS, depends on good random numbers. Postfix's
tlsmgr(8) maintains a PRNG pool, which is fed from an external source,
configured via tls_random_source, typically /dev/urandom (default on
Linux systems). Presumably
Am 23.12.2010 04:59, schrieb Yaoxing:
> Hi all,
> I'm looking for some help of postfix server configuration. hope this is
> the right place to ask.
> I have a mail server running iRedMail (which is based on postfix). It
> sends mails to our subscribers every 4s. I think this doesn't seem to be
> a
58 matches
Mail list logo
