Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On 7/6/2011 12:08 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Some table types such as CIDR ignore the domain name. With table > types such as CIDR, regexp and pcre, check_client_access does no > prefix/suffix lookups. > > Given this, a pcre rule with ``/:/ DUNNO'' is sufficient to skip > IPv6 addresses. Thanks

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:36:02AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > I received a request to ignore IPv4 addresses as well in order to > improve performance. But given the extensive IF loops it seems > we'd only save something like a few picoseconds of CPU time (<30 > expressions processed). If th

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On 7/7/2011 5:58 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:36:02AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> I received a request to ignore IPv4 addresses as well in order to >> improve performance. But given the extensive IF loops it seems >> we'd only save something like a few picoseconds of CPU

Re: Postfix Spam Filter delivering email to two imap Servers

On 2011-07-06 5:17 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: >> ASSP (anti-spam proxy) has this ability (to deliver to two different >> destinations) if you put it in front of your postfix server... >> >> http://assp.sourceforge.net/ > I would not recommend putting proxy code in front of Postfix, however, > if

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 06:44:49AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 7/7/2011 5:58 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > > The anchors at both ends mean you are safe. You start with ^ and > > end with $, so nothing else can sneak in between those. > > > > A simpler expression to accomplish the same thing: > >

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On 7/7/2011 7:48 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 06:44:49AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> On 7/7/2011 5:58 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: >>> The anchors at both ends mean you are safe. You start with ^ and >>> end with $, so nothing else can sneak in between those. >>> >>> A simpler express

What (implicit) option control translation "user" to "first lastname"?

I have working postfix setup but there is one thing I don't quite understand where it comes from (and that bothers me) I only use one map which is a "sender_canonical" map to translate local user to a valid external email address. This works fine. However postfix also adds the full name (as take

Re: What (implicit) option control translation "user" to "first lastname"?

Johan Persson: > So I get the translation something along the lines of > > "u...@localhost.nil" => "first lastname " This is not the default Postfix format. The "first lastname" information was provided by the mail client, not Postfix. Wietse

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 08:24:42AM -0500, Noel Jones wrote: > On 7/7/2011 7:48 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 06:44:49AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > >> On 7/7/2011 5:58 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > >>> The anchors at both ends mean you are safe. You start with ^ > >>> and end with $,

new alternative to spamassassin

Greetings, I found an interesting alternative to spamassassin and was curious if anyone on postfix-users was using this, or had any opinion? its called rspamd, and is developed by a russian fellow named Vsevolod Stakhov https://bitbucket.org/vstakhov/rspamd/wiki/Home some of its features incl

spawn give a command time limit exceeded

Hi All, I need your help for a problem with Postfix. My postfix make several errors and I can not understand why. The error: Jul 7 17:16:42 mx02 postfix/spawn[9807]: warning: /etc/postfix/policy/sender_check.pl: process id 9812: command time limit exceeded Jul 7 17:16:42 mx02 postfix/spawn[981

Re: spawn give a command time limit exceeded

Damien Robinet: > Hi All, > > I need your help for a problem with Postfix. > > My postfix make several errors and I can not understand why. > > The error: > Jul 7 17:16:42 mx02 postfix/spawn[9807]: warning: > /etc/postfix/policy/sender_check.pl: process id 9812: command time > limit exceeded S

Re: spawn give a command time limit exceeded

Hi Wietse, Thank for your reply, I've add this line "my_service_time_limit = 3600" but I've alway the trouble ... Jul 7 18:18:48 mx02 postfix/spawn[19801]: warning: /etc/postfix/policy/dunno.pl: process id 19802: command time limit exceeded Jul 7 18:19:48 mx02 postfix/spawn[20189]: warning: /et

Re: spawn give a command time limit exceeded

Damien Robinet: > Hi Wietse, > > Thank for your reply, I've add this line "my_service_time_limit = > 3600" but I've alway the trouble ... > > Jul 7 18:18:48 mx02 postfix/spawn[19801]: warning: > /etc/postfix/policy/dunno.pl: process id 19802: command time limit > exceeded > Jul 7 18:19:48 mx02

SASL crypt with TLS

I use SASl simple mechanism with PAM (plaintext) smtpd_sasl_security_options = noanonymous I want to encyypt SASl session with TLS What sets smtpd_sasl_security_options and sasl_tls_security_options ? Thanks Gaby

Re: spawn give a command time limit exceeded

Hi Wietse, Sorry I've forgot my main.cf, you can find it here: http://pastebin.com/Ydt0Xqtp And the master.cf: http://pastebin.com/G0MW6rZw Bests Regards, Damien 2011/7/7 Wietse Venema : > Damien Robinet: >> Hi Wietse, >> >> Thank for your reply, I've add this line "my_service_time_limit = >>

Re: SASL crypt with TLS

On 7/7/2011 11:51 AM, gaby wrote: > I use SASl simple mechanism with PAM (plaintext) > smtpd_sasl_security_options > > = noanonymous > I want to encyypt SASl session with TLS > What sets smtpd_sasl_security_options and > sasl_

Re: spawn give a command time limit exceeded

/etc/postfix/master.cf: sendercheck unix - n n - - spawn user=nobody argv=/etc/postfix/policy/sender_check.pl http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html#client_config says: To create a policy service that listens on a UNIX-domain socket called "pol

Re: Postfix sasl with mysql and multiple servers with different tables

On 2011-07-07 01:54, Simon wrote: Hi There, We are using Postix 2.7.1-1+squeeze1 on Debian Squeeze. I have a quick question regarding sasl auth with mysql and multiple servers... Is there a way to configure postfix to get its SMTP auth data from two different mysql servers with different DB name

Re: What (implicit) option control translation "user" to "first lastname"?

On 2011-07-07 16:09, Johan Persson wrote: I have working postfix setup but there is one thing I don't quite understand where it comes from (and that bothers me) I only use one map which is a "sender_canonical" map to translate local user to a valid external email address. This works fine. Howev

Postfix Issues with VPS and Plesk and smtp_bind_address

I am using Postfix verions 2.3.3 on a VPS managed by Plesk. There are two static IPs associated with my install, let's call them aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd and sss.ttt.uuu.vvv When I run ifconfig I see the two interface venet0:0 and venet0:1 Mail goes out fine until I tell the main.cf to use: smtp_bind

Re: Postfix Issues with VPS and Plesk and smtp_bind_address

Please don't highjack other users threads, always start your own message to the group. It looks like it can't talk to 127.0.0.1:10027 > Jul 7 13:00:34 who postfix/smtp[40187]: connect to > 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]: Connection timed out (port 10027) > Jul 7 13:00:34 who postfix/smtp[40187]: 1F3274160

Postfix 2.8.4 available

Postfix stable release 2.8.4 [An on-line version of this announcement will be available at http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-2.8.4.html] Postfix stable release 2.8.4 is available. This contains fixes and workarounds that were already included with the Postfix 2.9 experimental release.

Re: What (implicit) option control translation "user" to "first lastname"?

Thanks. After looking into this I verified that using a manual SMTP sending this does not happen and the conclusion is therefore that the simple "mail" command will create this from address based on the passwd file. That surprised me since I thought that the "mail" command didn't do any elabora

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

Le 07/07/2011 13:44, Stan Hoeppner a écrit : > On 7/7/2011 5:58 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:36:02AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >>> I received a request to ignore IPv4 addresses as well in order to >>> improve performance. But given the extensive IF loops it seems >>> we'd

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

Le 06/07/2011 23:14, Noel Jones a écrit : > On 7/6/2011 3:57 PM, mouss wrote: >> Le 06/07/2011 22:52, Noel Jones a écrit : >>> On 7/6/2011 3:44 PM, mouss wrote: Le 06/07/2011 07:07, Simon Deziel a écrit : > Hi all, > > Since I started using Stan's fqrdns.pcre file to reduce spam I

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:35:56PM +0200, mouss wrote: > /^[0-9\.]$/ > is equivalent to > any string formed with digits and/or dots No, just any single character that is a digit or ".". You left off the "*" or "+" to make it a string composed of one (or zero) or more of said. > with pcre;

VPS and Plesk and smtp_bind_address problems

I apologize for the double posting. Here is my issue: I am using Postfix verions 2.3.3 on a VPS managed by Plesk. There are two static IPs associated with my install, let's call them aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd and sss.ttt.uuu.vvv When I run ifconfig I see the two interface venet0:0 and venet0:1 Mail g

Re: Postfix Issues with VPS and Plesk and smtp_bind_address

Le 07/07/2011 21:23, Jeffrey Starin a écrit : > I am using Postfix verions 2.3.3 on a VPS managed by Plesk. > > There are two static IPs associated with my install, let's call them > aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd and sss.ttt.uuu.vvv > > When I run ifconfig I see the two interface venet0:0 and venet0:1 > > Mai

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

Le 07/07/2011 22:48, Victor Duchovni a écrit : > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:35:56PM +0200, mouss wrote: > >> /^[0-9\.]$/ >> is equivalent to >> any string formed with digits and/or dots > > No, just any single character that is a digit or ".". You left off the > "*" or "+" to make it a strin

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On 7/7/2011 3:42 PM, mouss wrote: > > Noel, are you telling me that check_reverse... will match the client IP? > my understanding is that it will only match against the PTR. It's even documented. http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#check_reverse_client_hostname_access And I can say with auth

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On 7/7/2011 10:14 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 08:24:42AM -0500, Noel Jones wrote: >> On 7/7/2011 7:48 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 06:44:49AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 7/7/2011 5:58 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > The anchors at both ends mean you are saf

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Noel Jones wrote: > On 7/7/2011 3:42 PM, mouss wrote: > >> >> Noel, are you telling me that check_reverse... will match the client IP? >> my understanding is that it will only match against the PTR. > > It's even documented. > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#

Re: fqrdns.pcre and IPv6

On 7/7/2011 7:37 PM, Steve Jenkins wrote: > I'm currently using Stan's pcre file with check_client_access. But > even after re-reading this while thread and that doc link, I can't > tell whether I should keep it as-is or switch to > check_reverse_client_hostname_access. > > SteveJ Yes, absolutely

Re: Postfix Issues with VPS and Plesk and smtp_bind_address

On 7/7/2011 4:58 PM, mouss wrote: Le 07/07/2011 21:23, Jeffrey Starin a écrit : I am using Postfix verions 2.3.3 on a VPS managed by Plesk. There are two static IPs associated with my install, let's call them aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd and sss.ttt.uuu.vvv When I run ifconfig I see the two interface venet

reject_unauth_pipelining not working as I'd expect (bug?)

Hi! While crawling trough my logs, I've noticed a couple of bots getting rejected because of Improper use of SMTP command pipelining because of the reject_unauth_pipelining in smptd_recipient_restrictions. So I decided to give the old "sleep" trick a try. Only for unknown hosts, ofc... The http

Re: reject_unauth_pipelining not working as I'd expect (bug?)

On 7/7/2011 11:20 PM, ricardus1867 wrote: > > Hi! > > While crawling trough my logs, I've noticed a couple of bots getting > rejected because of Improper use of SMTP command pipelining because of the > reject_unauth_pipelining in smptd_recipient_restrictions. So I decided to > give the old "sleep

Re: reject_unauth_pipelining not working as I'd expect (bug?)

On 7/7/2011 11:20 PM, ricardus1867 wrote: > > While crawling trough my logs, I've noticed a couple of bots getting > > rejected because of Improper use of SMTP command pipelining because of > the > > reject_unauth_pipelining in smptd_recipient_restrictions. So I decided > to > > give the old "sl