SV: SV: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

>This is easy. > >How does Postfix decide the nexthop for a given domain? What controls >do you have? I suppose a transport map in the ways of .domain-a.se : .domain-b.se : * smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10035 In addition to your recepie should work? (Domain-a and domain-b being the "normal" domains?)

SV: SV: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

A bit of a goof there... domain-a.se : domain-b.se : * smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10035 Från: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] för Jan Johansson [j...@mupp.net] Skickat: den 22 mars 2011 08:22 Till: postfix-users@postfix.org Ämne: SV

Re: attachments being logged

Am 22.03.2011 04:34, schrieb brian: > I'm occasionally seeing file attachments being logged, like so: > > postfix/smtpd[14027]: read from B8F5EDA8 [B8F5F9BD] (1420 bytes => -1 > (0x)) > postfix/smtpd[14027]: read from B8F5EDA8 [B8F5F9BD] (1420 bytes => 1420 > (0x58C)) disable the debug

Limit the number of forwarded emails

Hi all. I'm new to the list, and quite new to postfix. I'm running postfix 2.3 on one of my RHEL 5 servers, and have set up postfix to forward all emails to our Microsoft Exchange infrastructure. On the server running postfix, I have an applications that automatically generates emails. The issue

Limiting outgoing message sizes for a single domain (yahoo)

Hi all, sorry to bother you, but I'm smashing my head on a problem from some time and even I've read previous posts and other Postfix documentation, there's still something I don't catch. Currently if from my postfix installation, behind a static IP, I try to send email to yahoo I often get the er

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

Am 22.03.2011 09:05, schrieb Kenneth Holter: > Hi all. > > I'm new to the list, and quite new to postfix. > > I'm running postfix 2.3 on one of my RHEL 5 servers, and have set up > postfix to forward all emails to our Microsoft Exchange > infrastructure. > On the server running postfix, I have a

Re: Getting abused by backscatter spam

Am 22.03.2011 05:38, schrieb Simon: > Hi There, > > We are using postfix on debian lenny. Everything is mysql backed and > we are using amavisd-new (spamassassin with daily updates from > saupdates.openprotect.com and updates.spamassassin.org & clam-av), > postfix-policy greylisting and postfix-po

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

Thanks for the quick reply. Your solution seems to be a very good one, but unfortunately that default_destination_rate_delay parameter is not available in the postfix version I'm running (2.3). I'm using the postfix implementation shipped with RHEL 5, which is not the most current one. - Kenneth

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

On 3/22/2011 8:33 AM, Kenneth Holter wrote: > Thanks for the quick reply. > > Your solution seems to be a very good one, but unfortunately that > default_destination_rate_delay parameter is not available in the > postfix version I'm running (2.3). I'm using the postfix > implementation shipped with

Re: Limiting outgoing message sizes for a single domain (yahoo)

On 22/03/2011 9.29, Angelo Amoruso wrote: > sorry to bother you, but I'm smashing my head on a problem from some > time and even I've read previous posts and other Postfix documentation, > there's still something I don't catch. > Currently if from my postfix installation, behind a static IP, I try

Re: Limiting outgoing message sizes for a single domain (yahoo)

On 22/03/2011 09:29, Angelo Amoruso wrote: Hi all, I've seen that messages above 2-3 MB total size get such treatment, while smaller ones get through without problems. So, until I investigate the problem with Yahoo, I'd like to limit message sizes which could be (attempted) delivered, so my users

Re: Limiting outgoing message sizes for a single domain (yahoo)

Angelo Amoruso: > today I've just played with postfwd (http://postfwd.org/) and I was able > to achieve the desired result, ie having a way to reject with a failure > code mails directed on a specified domain (in my case yahoo.it and > yahoo.com) when total size is above a predefined limit. > > An

Re: attachments being logged

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:34:43PM -0400, brian wrote: > I'm occasionally seeing file attachments being logged, like so: > > postfix/smtpd[14027]: read from B8F5EDA8 [B8F5F9BD] (1420 bytes => -1 > (0x)) > postfix/smtpd[14027]: read from B8F5EDA8 [B8F5F9BD] (1420 bytes => 1420 > (0x58C))

Re: SV: SV: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 07:27:27AM +, Jan Johansson wrote: > A bit of a goof there... > > domain-a.se : > domain-b.se : > * smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10035 The "*" entry is not required, that's what "default_transport" is for. If you want non-default nexthops for the relay_domains, just use the defau

SV: SV: SV: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

>The "*" entry is not required, that's what "default_transport" is for. If >you want non-default nexthops for the relay_domains, just use the default >setting of "relay_transport = relay" without an explicit nexthop. So in other words I should say "Thanks for the rewrite-recepie, that one I would

Re: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 02:03:12PM +, Jan Johansson wrote: > >The "*" entry is not required, that's what "default_transport" is for. If > >you want non-default nexthops for the relay_domains, just use the default > >setting of "relay_transport = relay" without an explicit nexthop. > > So in o

SV: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

>Everything I suggested is standard transport behaviour. Well, granted. Maybe i should have said "The rest is trivial". Your suggestion about the pcre/pot 10035 was definitely over _my_ Postfix horizon.

Re: SV: "Redirecting" all, but two, domains.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 02:29:18PM +, Jan Johansson wrote: > >Everything I suggested is standard transport behaviour. > > Well, granted. Maybe i should have said "The rest is trivial". Your > suggestion about the pcre/pot 10035 was definitely over _my_ Postfix > horizon. The "REDIRECT" fea

mailbox_size_limit is smaller than message_size_limit - 64bit issue?

Hello, i got following error in my log: postfix/local[8755]: fatal: main.cf configuration error: mailbox_size_limit is smaller than message_size_limit postfix/master[8737]: warning: process /usr/lib/postfix/local pid 8755 exit status 1 postfix/master[8737]: warning: /usr/lib/postfix/local: bad

Re: mailbox_size_limit is smaller than message_size_limit - 64bit issue?

Hajo Locke: > Hello, > > i got following error in my log: > > postfix/local[8755]: fatal: main.cf configuration error: mailbox_size_limit > is smaller than message_size_limit So don't do that. > but values are: > mailbox_size_limit = 409600 Prior to Postfix 2.9 this value is stored in a s

Milter question - three milters co-existance (dkim spamass clamav)

Hi there, I had two milters running on postfix: dkim-filter, spamass-milter. Both of these worked fine. I have added the clamav-milter to the config, but I noticed that now the spamass-milter does not 'seem' to do anything. System set-up: postfix v 2.8 Debian Squeeze The dkim-filter

Re: Milter question - three milters co-existance (dkim spamass clamav)

J4K: > Is this configuration correct, and can anyone think of what causes the > spamass-milter to be ignored? First, confirm that spamass-milter is ignored, by turning on logging in spamass-milter. Then, complain that Postfix is making mistakes. Wietse

Re: Mailbox limit not observed

On 2011-03-16 08:22:10 +0200, Henrik K wrote: > Postfwd ftw. > > http://postfwd.org/doc.html > > ctrl+f action==size Thanks. It also has other nice features, such as scoring. -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog:

Re: Milter question - three milters co-existance (dkim spamass clamav)

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:34 AM, J4K wrote: > > Hi there, > >    I had two milters running on postfix: dkim-filter, spamass-milter. > Both of these worked fine. > I have added the clamav-milter to the config, but  I noticed that now > the spamass-milter does not 'seem' to do anything. > > System s

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: > On 3/22/2011 8:33 AM, Kenneth Holter wrote: >> Thanks for the quick reply. >> >> Your solution seems to be a very good one, but unfortunately that >> default_destination_rate_delay parameter is not available in the >> postfix ver

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

On 3/22/2011 1:18 PM, Steve Jenkins wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List > wrote: >> >> There are reliable (S)RPM packages available for RHEL 5 that will get >> you to the parameters/functionality you need. >> The most common is by Simon Mudd referenced on >> http:/

Re: Milter question - three milters co-existance (dkim spamass clamav)

On 03/22/2011 05:39 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > J4K: >> Is this configuration correct, and can anyone think of what causes the >> spamass-milter to be ignored? > First, confirm that spamass-milter is ignored, by turning on logging > in spamass-milter. Then, complain that Postfix is making mistakes.

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

Brian Evans - Postfix List: > Yes, the web pages linked directly from the Postfix site are outdated, > but not the link referenced there (in the blog area) and above. > This includes RPMs for x86_64 for RHEL5 as well as SRPMS for Postfix up > to 2.8.1 at this time. Which link? The blog refers me t

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

On 3/22/2011 2:41 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Brian Evans - Postfix List: >> Yes, the web pages linked directly from the Postfix site are outdated, >> but not the link referenced there (in the blog area) and above. >> This includes RPMs for x86_64 for RHEL5 as well as SRPMS for Postfix up >> to 2.8.

Re: Limit the number of forwarded emails

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: > It is rather obscure. To say the least. :) >The first blog post, which references 2.6, has a > link that also contains info for 2.8. For the sake of anyone looking through the archives, that link is: http://ftp.wl0.org/offic

Address Tagging in Postfix?

I've been reading through http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html and Googling in an attempt to figure out how to allow "tagging" of email accounts for SPAM fighting purposes (mail to bob+any...@server.com gets delivered to b...@server.com), but haven't been able to figure it out. Can

Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility

--On Monday, February 28, 2011 11:32 PM -0500 Victor Duchovni wrote: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:22:52PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: With Debian, if I need mysql support I simply install the extra package postfix-mysql, which depends on libmysqlclient. (This is the same procedure for acquiri

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 01:44:37PM -0700, Steve Jenkins wrote: > I've been reading through > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html and Googling in > an attempt to figure out how to allow "tagging" of email accounts for > SPAM fighting purposes (mail to bob+any...@server.com gets deli

Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility

Quanah Gibson-Mount: > After filing a bug with RedHat about their GPL violation, they got on the > phone with Oracle, and Oracle updated the MySQL FOSS exception list to > include IBM Public License 1.0. So this is no longer a problem for anyone. Thanks. That is one less thing to worry about.

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

Steve Jenkins: > I've been reading through > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html and Googling in > an attempt to figure out how to allow "tagging" of email accounts for > SPAM fighting purposes (mail to bob+any...@server.com gets delivered > to b...@server.com), but haven't been ab

RE: [SPAM] - Re: Address Tagging in Postfix? - Bayesian Filter detected spam

> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix- > us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema > Subject: [SPAM] - Re: Address Tagging in Postfix? - Bayesian Filter > detected spam > > Steve Jenkins: > > I've been reading through > > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Steve Jenkins: >> I've been reading through >> http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html and Googling in >> an attempt to figure out how to allow "tagging" of email accounts for >> SPAM fighting purposes (mail to bob+any...@server.

Re: Getting abused by backscatter spam

Le 22/03/2011 05:38, Simon a écrit : > Hi There, > > We are using postfix on debian lenny. Everything is mysql backed and > we are using amavisd-new (spamassassin with daily updates from > saupdates.openprotect.com and updates.spamassassin.org & clam-av), > postfix-policy greylisting and postfix-p

fatal: unsupported dictionary type: mysql

Hello, Have compiled postfix with mysql support, but i am still getting this error: Mar 22 16:14:46 vmlinuxrh01 postfix/postfix-script[5435]: starting the Postfix mail system Mar 22 16:14:46 vmlinuxrh01 postfix/master[5436]: daemon started -- version 2.5.1, configuration /home/manjiri/postfixMan

Re: [SPAM] - Re: Address Tagging in Postfix? - Bayesian Filter detected spam

Le 22/03/2011 22:53, Simon Brereton a écrit : > > The number of javascript email input validations that wouldn't allow + as a > valid character (particularly the banks) Oh, not only banks. sigh. I once worked for a company to help fight spam, and among the recommendations I gave was to tag addr

Re: fatal: unsupported dictionary type: mysql

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:04:28PM -0700, Manjiri wrote: > Have compiled postfix with mysql support, but i am still getting this error: The Postfix software running on the machine: > > Mar 22 16:14:46 vmlinuxrh01 postfix/postfix-script[5435]: starting the > Postfix mail system > Mar 22 16:14:46

Re: fatal: unsupported dictionary type: mysql

Manjiri: > Though, I have 2 postfix built on the same machine. One is w/o mysql support > and the above one is with mysql support. > I know that it is possible to start multiple postfix instances on same > machine, but is it possible to install and build multiple postfix packages > on same machine

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:08 PM, mouss wrote: > if you're not running mailing lists, then yes, '-' is ok. if the domain > has mailing-lists, then '-' is already in use Interesting. Could the '-' delimiter still work in this case, as long as the tagged address doesn't match an existing address use

Postscreen: whitelisting by domains

Dear THis just a question. Is there a way to whitelisting postscreen against sender smtp domains name ? best regards

Re: Postscreen: whitelisting by domains

David Touzeau: > Dear > > THis just a question. > > Is there a way to whitelisting postscreen against sender smtp domains > name ? > Sorry, postscreen will not look up client hostnames. It needs to make a decision in milliseconds time to avoid slowing down good clients. Wietse

Re: fatal: unsupported dictionary type: mysql

Wietse Venema: > Manjiri: > > Though, I have 2 postfix built on the same machine. One is w/o mysql support > > and the above one is with mysql support. > > I know that it is possible to start multiple postfix instances on same > > machine, but is it possible to install and build multiple postfix pa

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

Steve Jenkins: [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:08 PM, mouss wrote: > > if you're not running mailing lists, then yes, '-' is ok. if the domain > > has mailing-lists, then '-' is already in use > > Interesting. Could the '-' delimiter still work in thi

Re: Getting abused by backscatter spam

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:56 AM, mouss wrote: > 1) nothing in your sample shows that you use postfix. > if using postfix, why is Return-Path in the middle of headers? > > 2) given the return-path you show, this is not backscatter. maybe you > meant envelope sender forgery? > > 3)  93.85.177.92 i

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Didn't I write that Postfix will attempt the unextended name first, > before trying the name without the text after $recipient_delimiter? I'm assuming you meant "extended name first" - otherwise I'm confused! :) Yes. I understand that with

Re: Address Tagging in Postfix?

Steve Jenkins: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > > Didn't I write that Postfix will attempt the unextended name first, > > before trying the name without the text after $recipient_delimiter? > > I'm assuming you meant "extended name first" - otherwise I'm confused! :) > >

Re: fatal: unsupported dictionary type: mysql

Thanks a lot. Another quick question: Even though, I have read this thread: http://old.nabble.com/Postfix-integration%3A-Oracle-or-LDAP--to29532158.html#a29532158 Is there any way to connect to Oracle database from postfix ? thanks again ! -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.co

RE: Getting abused by backscatter spam

On Behalf Of Simon > > Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by > mail-in2.{ourdomain}.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 038A71278B for > ; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:21:11 +1300 (NZDT) > X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail-in2.{ourdomain}.net > Received: from mail-in2.{ourdomain}.net ([127.