Hi,
we are using couple of servers with postfix to send newsletter
to clients. Sending is pretty fast but after a short time every
server is beign occupied with handling deferred mails.
I got idea that maybe it is possible to somehow handle deferred
mails on different machine. So primary servers
deb...@orthank.net:
> Hi,
>
> we are using couple of servers with postfix to send newsletter
> to clients. Sending is pretty fast but after a short time every
> server is beign occupied with handling deferred mails.
>
> I got idea that maybe it is possible to somehow handle deferred
> mails on d
Am 21.07.2011 12:55, schrieb deb...@orthank.net:
> Hi,
>
> we are using couple of servers with postfix to send newsletter
> to clients. Sending is pretty fast but after a short time every
> server is beign occupied with handling deferred mails.
>
> I got idea that maybe it is possible to somehow
Hi,
is smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
known for any problems ?
--
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
Am 21.07.2011 17:43, schrieb Robert Schetterer:
> Hi,
> is smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
> known for any problems ?
Do you have any problems? What is the reason for your question?
Best wishes
Grüße
Christian
--
Roessner-Network-Solutions
Bachelor of Science Informatik
50°34.725'N, 08°40.904'
Am 21.07.2011 18:07, schrieb Christian Roessner:
> Am 21.07.2011 17:43, schrieb Robert Schetterer:
>> Hi,
>> is smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
>> known for any problems ?
>
> Do you have any problems? What is the reason for your question?
>
> Best wishes
>
> Grüße
> Christian
no, i want to in
On 7/21/2011 10:43 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Hi,
> is smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
> known for any problems ?
I assume you read the docs. There are side effects that may cause
problems in some environments.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_proxy_options
I've been using it fo
Am 21.07.2011 18:42, schrieb Noel Jones:
> On 7/21/2011 10:43 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> Hi,
>> is smtpd_proxy_options=speed_adjust
>> known for any problems ?
>
> I assume you read the docs. There are side effects that may cause
> problems in some environments.
> http://www.postfix.org/post
Robert Schetterer:
> does it affect milters too ?
Postfix invokes the Milters with each SMTP command.
Postfix invokes the Milters with header/body content after the whole
message is received.
All this is mostly because of the way that Milters work, not because
of Postfix implementation details.
Am 21.07.2011 19:04, schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Robert Schetterer:
>> does it affect milters too ?
>
> Postfix invokes the Milters with each SMTP command.
>
> Postfix invokes the Milters with header/body content after the whole
> message is received.
>
> All this is mostly because of the way that
Hi All,
Here is a strange issue, incoming mail for yahoo fails roughly every 10th time.
Also this is (reportedly) only happening to yahoo emails, all other email
domains come through just fine.
The setup is on ubuntu 10.4 LTS with the standard packages, postfix, clamav,
amavis and spamassassin
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 06:39:58PM +, Eric Smith wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Here is a strange issue, incoming mail for yahoo fails roughly every 10th
> time. Also this is (reportedly) only happening to yahoo emails, all other
> email domains come through just fine.
>
> The setup is on ubuntu 10.
The problem is this yahoo and yahoo alone fails to make connections, the
problem is random,most emails come through just fine, the specific
failures are not repeatable. But an parker of ours uses yahoo business
serves for their email, they are getting timeout bounces on 1 in 10 emails
sent to us.
On 2011-07-21 20:55, Eric Smith wrote:
The problem is this yahoo and yahoo alone fails to make connections, the
problem is random,most emails come through just fine, the specific
failures are not repeatable. But an parker of ours uses yahoo business
serves for their email, they are getting timeou
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 06:55:35PM +, Eric Smith wrote:
> The problem is this yahoo and yahoo alone fails to make connections, the
> problem is random,most emails come through just fine, the specific
> failures are not repeatable. But an parker of ours uses yahoo business
> serves for their em
Hi there,
I thought this is a Postfix setting. Postfix 2.3.3.
Say, my postfix server manages domain1 and domain2. If I send a message
to X@domain1 and Y@domain2. Right now I get two separate messages (both
identical), how can I get just one single message for ALL domains?
Thanks
Yan
Co
Damn that was what I was afraid ofŠ..
Let see where that rabbit hole brings us, and thank you.
Best
eric
eric smith
senior network administrator
http://www.techsoft3d.com
email: e...@techsoft3d.com
skype: eric_ae_smith
phone: 510-333-1729
On 7/21/11 12:00 PM, "Jeroen Geilman" wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 03:03:53PM -0400, Zhou, Yan wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I thought this is a Postfix setting. Postfix 2.3.3.
>
> Say, my postfix server manages domain1 and domain2. If I send a message
> to X@domain1 and Y@domain2. Right now I get two separate messages (both
> identical), h
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 07:05:41PM +, Eric Smith wrote:
> Damn that was what I was afraid of?..
>
> >> So I am probably missing something in either my setup or in the log file
> >> hence why its included.
> >
> >No, the remote SMTP server not connecting to your server is not caused
> >by your
This box does one thing only cleans email before forwarding onto an
exchange forest. The system is over kill, quad core intel, 16GB memory,
hdd is a velociraptor. This is for a network on which we get around 1
email every second. System load never gets >0.1. DNS are two servers both
on gigabit
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
> us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Victor Duchovni
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 3:09 PM
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Subject: Re: setting for one single message with multiple domains
>
> On Thu, Jul
On 2011-07-21 21:08, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 03:03:53PM -0400, Zhou, Yan wrote:
Hi there,
I thought this is a Postfix setting. Postfix 2.3.3.
Say, my postfix server manages domain1 and domain2. If I send a message
to X@domain1 and Y@domain2. Right now I get two separ
On 2011-07-21 21:39, Zhou, Yan wrote:
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Victor Duchovni
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 3:09 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: setting for one single message with multip
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 09:39:19PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>> For mail others send, you can't. For mail you send, if it is important
>> (I would suggest not), configure the same transport:nexthop for both
>> domains:
>>
>> example.com smtp:example.com
>> example.net smtp:exa
On 2011-07-21 21:47, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 09:39:19PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
For mail others send, you can't. For mail you send, if it is important
(I would suggest not), configure the same transport:nexthop for both
domains:
example.com smtp:example.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:00:35PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>> It is useful, when you want envelopes with recipient in both domains
>> to be handled in a single transaction with the target nexthop, rather
>> than a separate transaction for each domain (default).
>
> I understood that part, but
On 2011-07-21 22:02, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:00:35PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
It is useful, when you want envelopes with recipient in both domains
to be handled in a single transaction with the target nexthop, rather
than a separate transaction for each domain (def
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:13:06PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> Now my application is connecting to a local Postfix, which then relays
> to the same remote Postfix.
>
> *Now this same remote Postfix is delivering two messages.*
> -
>
>
> He needs to configure domain-dependent transports on t
Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:00:35PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>
> >> It is useful, when you want envelopes with recipient in both domains
> >> to be handled in a single transaction with the target nexthop, rather
> >> than a separate transaction for each domain (default).
> >
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 04:27:00PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> The alternative would require what is called MX piggy-backing, where
> the MTA looks up the MX records for all the recipients of a message,
> and sorts the recipients by the MX IP address (instead of the
> next-hop domain name like P
On 2011-07-21 22:23, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:13:06PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
Now my application is connecting to a local Postfix, which then relays
to the same remote Postfix.
*Now this same remote Postfix is delivering two messages.*
-
He needs to configur
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:10:31PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> Ah - does setting a relayhost= not make that a single destination, then ?
Sure, if all remote mail goes to the same place. Anything that causes
the domains in question to resolve to the same transport:nexthop.
--
Viktor.
On 2011-07-21 23:14, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:10:31PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
Ah - does setting a relayhost= not make that a single destination, then ?
Sure, if all remote mail goes to the same place. Anything that causes
the domains in question to resolve to the
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:19:16PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 2011-07-21 23:14, Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:10:31PM +0200, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>>
>>> Ah - does setting a relayhost= not make that a single destination, then ?
>> Sure, if all remote mail goes to the
Let me try rephrasing this so hopefully someone who understand how the so
called advanced content filter can take a quick gander and let me know. By
advanced content filter, I mean this: http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html
So, here is my current setup from master.cf:
smtp inet n
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 02:33:35PM -0700, Steve Fatula wrote:
> So, mail should go from postfix -> lmtp -> dspam -> smtpd on port 10026,
> but using some sockets instead of TCP.
That's fine. The layer-4 transport is not important.
> So, assuming I have this correct, does this then qualify as the
36 matches
Mail list logo
