* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> No one is there to help me
You started your thread ignoring the list policy which tells how to ask for
help.
When I asked you to follow the rules you replied to me offlist.
I looked at your configuration and replied to the list.
You replied offlist again. You d
Hi,
Sorry for this.
I am sending you the saslfinger output
Usage: saslfinger [-chs]
Use "saslfinger -h" to find out what the options mean.
[root@quranmail postfix]# saslfinger -s
saslfinger - postfix Cyrus sasl configuration Thu Jun 9 11:24:25 MSD 2011
version: 1.0.2
mode: server-side SMTP AU
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Suresh Kumar Prajapati
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> and i dont find any saslauthd.conf file
>
> here is the /etc/sasl2/smtpd.conf
>
> pwcheck_method: saslauthd
> mech_list: plain login
That's a problem. In that file (/etc/sasl2/smtpd.conf) you are
specifying that you want to
Hi,
I;ve gone through this and setup the things according to the config there.
please let me know if I'm wrong anywhere.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Ingram wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Suresh Kumar Prajapati
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > and i dont find any saslauthd.con
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> [root@quranmail postfix]# saslfinger -s
> saslfinger - postfix Cyrus sasl configuration Thu Jun 9 11:24:25 MSD 2011
> version: 1.0.2
> mode: server-side SMTP AUTH
>
> -- basics --
> Postfix: 2.3.3
> System: CentOS release 5.6 (Final)
>
> -- smtpd is linked to --
>
Stephen,
* Stephen Ingram :
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Suresh Kumar Prajapati
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > and i dont find any saslauthd.conf file
> >
> > here is the /etc/sasl2/smtpd.conf
> >
> > pwcheck_method: saslauthd
> > mech_list: plain login
>
> That's a problem. In that file (/etc/s
Hi,
I've follow all the info you have give and the command show the following
output
[root@hostname postfix]# testsaslauthd -u tom -p redhat
0: NO "authentication failed"
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter
wrote:
> * Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> > [root@quranmail postfix]# sas
Hi,
Here is the interactive session output
[root@quranmail postfix]# telnet 217.23.4.146 25
Trying 217.23.4.146...
Connected to 217.23.4.146.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 ESMTP
ehlo google.com
250-
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE 10485760
250-VRFY
250-ETRN
250-AUTH LOGIN PLAIN
250-AUTH=LOGIN PLAIN
25
On 8 juin 2011, at 18:15, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 11:33:48AM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
>
>> After the period of double delivery is over, we will deliver emails only to
>> Google servers. So the virtual aliases map is to look like:
>>
>> public-addr...@univ-l
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> I've follow all the info you have give and the command show the following
> output
>
> [root@hostname postfix]# testsaslauthd -u tom -p redhat
> 0: NO "authentication failed"
IIRC you use saslauthd with PAM as backend.
Please try this:
% testsaslauthd -s pam -u tom -
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> Here is the interactive session output
>
> [root@quranmail postfix]# telnet 217.23.4.146 25
> Trying 217.23.4.146...
> Connected to 217.23.4.146.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 ESMTP
> ehlo google.com
> 250-
> 250-PIPELINING
> 250-SIZE 10485760
> 250-VRFY
> 250-E
Hi
following is the output from the command you have
[root@ ~]# testsaslauthd -s pam -u tom -p redhat
0: NO "authentication failed"
and then i change /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd
fiel MECH=shadow
and then run the following command
[root@ ~]# testsaslauthd -s shadow -u tom -p redhat
0: OK "Success."
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> Hi
> following is the output from the command you have
> [root@ ~]# testsaslauthd -s pam -u tom -p redhat
> 0: NO "authentication failed"
>
> and then i change /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd
> fiel MECH=shadow
> and then run the following command
>
> [root@ ~]# testsaslauth
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> Both are system users and I've assigned password to them using
> passwd user_name
> command as well
> saslpasswd2 user_name
So we have two ways to go: system accounts or separate mail user database.
I recommend using the separate database, because compromised accounts
Hi,
For the time being I just want to go with system accounts,once this is set ,
I can catch up with second option.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter
wrote:
> * Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> > Both are system users and I've assigned password to them using
> > passwd user_name
>
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> For the time being I just want to go with system accounts,once this is set ,
> I can catch up with second option.
Fine.
Run saslauthd with "-a shadow".
Run testsaslauthd and verify you have a user for whom authenication works.
Drop "smtpd_sasl_local_domain" in main.cf
Hi,
Followed your steps and this is output
warning: SASL authentication failure: Password verification failed
Jun 9 13:12:26 domain.com postfix/smtpd[1391]: warning:
fdsakjfhbdskj.fdsakjfhbdskj.com[ip_address]: SASL plain authentication
failed: authentication failure
testsaslauthd -s pam -u to
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 6/8/2011 7:35 AM, Бак Микаел wrote:
>> Oh, thanks. The maintainer must have renamed it.
>
> Yes, I renamed it quite a long time ago (in internet time) when it was
> suggested running it through the pcre engine was more optimal. If
> memory serves me correctly, I made the
Hi,
Can anyone help me...
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Suresh Kumar Prajapati <
er.sureshprajap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Followed your steps and this is output
>
> warning: SASL authentication failure: Password verification failed
> Jun 9 13:12:26 domain.com postfix/smtpd[1391]: warni
* Suresh Kumar Prajapati :
> Followed your steps and this is output
>
> warning: SASL authentication failure: Password verification failed
> Jun 9 13:12:26 domain.com postfix/smtpd[1391]: warning:
> fdsakjfhbdskj.fdsakjfhbdskj.com[ip_address]: SASL plain authentication
> failed: authentication fa
Hello
I'm trying to achieve sender dependent authentication.
Please find corresponding configuration files in attachment.
Although the sender dependent authentication is configured,for some
reason postfix don't follow those rules,but is checking virtual table
instead and rejects the incoming email
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:00:56 +0200
Dragan Zubac articulated:
> Hello
>
> I'm trying to achieve sender dependent authentication.
> Please find corresponding configuration files in attachment.
> Although the sender dependent authentication is configured,for some
> reason postfix don't follow those
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 10:12:17AM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
> On 8 juin 2011, at 18:15, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 11:33:48AM +0200, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
> >
> >> After the period of double delivery is over, we will deliver emails only
> >> to Google serve
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 06:19:30AM -, ross.sysadm wrote:
> I have problems with "expansion_limit".
>
> Postfix + Dovecot + AD + multiple email domains.
What Postfix feature is the table below supposed to support?
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
> server_host = srv-ad.cn.e
Is there something that shows the "expense" associated with each check.
I have looked through the documentation on the postfix site but could
not find anything.
John A
--
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
(Edmund Burke)
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 12:59:53PM -0400, John wrote:
> Is there something that shows the "expense" associated with each check.
> I have looked through the documentation on the postfix site but could not
> find anything.
Just common sense. Expense is mostly a question of latency and not over-usi
Hello
Sorry,I'll try to report a problem again following your instructions.
Summary
I'm trying to achieve the following :
- email arrives
- postfix checks the sender address
- postfix looks up username/password and relay host for that sender address
- postfix SMTP client connects to the appropr
On 6/9/2011 4:09 PM, Dragan Zubac wrote:
> Hello
>
> Sorry,I'll try to report a problem again following your instructions.
>
> Summary
>
> I'm trying to achieve the following :
>
> - email arrives
> - postfix checks the sender address
> - postfix looks up username/password and relay host for that s
Hello
I've sent en email with sender address specified on corresponding config
files,and postfix did not process that email according to its
specification. I just send logs captured at the moment the postfix was
receiving that email that should processed in different manner than
rejecting it.
Sin
On 06/09/2011 11:00 PM, Dragan Zubac wrote:
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps = hash:/etc/postfix2/sender_relay
/etc/postfix2 seems to be from a separate instance.
--
J.
Hello
Yes,I have two instances of postfix.
One is in /etc/postfix and another one is in /etc/postfix2 and both
works fine.
The problem is with sender dependent authentication that is configured
on the second instance and which seems inactive,meaning when second
instance of postfix receives an emai
On 6/9/2011 4:22 PM, Dragan Zubac wrote:
Hello
Yes,I have two instances of postfix.
One is in /etc/postfix and another one is in /etc/postfix2 and both
works fine.
The problem is with sender dependent authentication that is configured
on the second instance and which seems inactive,meaning when
Hi,
I don't really know where to post feature ideas, but this seems the only viable
option.
I was setting up a fallback MX server with Postfix and was struggling with
preventing backscatter mail. I thought I found a good solution, but it turned
out to be an illegal option.
Postfix has the
On 2011-06-09 Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> I was setting up a fallback MX server with Postfix and was struggling
> with preventing backscatter mail. I thought I found a good solution,
> but it turned out to be an illegal option.
>
> Postfix has the ability to do recipient address verification. When
>
Hello
Just to make clear here,so postfix feature to 'route' emails based on
the sender address is valid only for outgoing emails not for incoming ones ?
Sincerely
On 06/09/11 23:33, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 6/9/2011 4:22 PM, Dragan Zubac wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Yes,I have two instances of postfix.
>
Of course. It's a two-step process (well, really more, but
we'll call it two here).
1. - mail is received. There are lots of controls for
receiving mail based on recipient, originating network, or
authentication. None of the decisions to accept mail are
based on the sender (you can decide t
Well, when the primar is down, all incoming messages on the fallback are
deferred, because it can't do the verification. This means the result is the
same as having no fallback at all.
Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
On 2011-06-09 Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> I was setting up a fallback MX server with Post
On 2011-06-10 Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
>> On 2011-06-09 Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
>>> I was setting up a fallback MX server with Postfix and was struggling
>>> with preventing backscatter mail. I thought I found a good solution,
>>> but it turned out to be an illegal option.
>>>
Hello
Thank you,this clarify things a little bit.
Sincerely
On 06/10/11 00:25, Noel Jones wrote:
> Of course. It's a two-step process (well, really more, but we'll call
> it two here).
>
> 1. - mail is received. There are lots of controls for receiving mail
> based on recipient, originating net
Hi All,
i want only specific list of sender and specific list of recipient email
need to archive how to achive with it
where always_bcc will rediect all email . please any one can help me with
syntax or exmaple .
Regards,
Kshitij
- Original Message -
> From: "Ansgar Wiechers"
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Sent: Friday, 10 June, 2011 12:47:35 AM
> Subject: Re: unverified_recipient_tempfail_action = permit
>
> On 2011-06-10 Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> > Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
> >> On 2011-06-09 Wiebe Cazemier wrote
On 06/10/2011 10:40 AM, kshitij mali wrote:
Hi All,
i want only specific list of sender and specific list of recipient
email need to archive how to achive with it
where always_bcc will rediect all email . please any one can help me
with syntax or exmaple .
Regards,
Kshitij
Use :
sender_bcc_ma
42 matches
Mail list logo
