Re: Workaround for brain-dead BATV

Zitat von Noel Jones : On 8/4/2011 3:32 AM, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote: Hello we got problems with customers requesting MDN according to RFC-3798 with Disposition-Notification-To: header and using BATV on their gateways. On our side we honor read-request and sent MDNs with empty envelope sender

integrate postfix with php

Hi all I am using postfix-2.3.3-2.3.el5_6 on centos 5.6.I have configured postfix to server 2 virtual domains and now I want to integrate postfix with php to send mails to users in database using php script.is that possible in postfix? Regards Amira Othman Server Administrator

Re: integrate postfix with php

On 2011-08-08 09:28, Amira Othman wrote: Hi all I am using postfix-2.3.3-2.3.el5_6 on centos 5.6.I have configured postfix to server 2 virtual domains and now I want to integrate postfix with php to send mails to users in database using php script.is that possible in postfix? POSTFIX ha

Re: integrate postfix with php

Am 08.08.2011 09:28, schrieb Amira Othman: > I am using postfix-2.3.3-2.3.el5_6 on centos 5.6.I have configured postfix to > server 2 > virtual domains and now I want to integrate postfix with php to send mails > to users > in database using php script.is that possible in postfix? first: d

Re: integrate postfix with php

On Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:28:58 +0300, Amira Othman wrote: I am using postfix-2.3.3-2.3.el5_6 on centos 5.6.I have configured postfix to server 2 virtual domains and now I want to integrate postfix with php to send mails to users in database using php script.is that possible in postfix? google php

Re: Postscreen, Greylisting, Penalty Time

On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 04:46:48PM -0700, Steve Fatula wrote: [ broken formatting fixed ] > I see some previous posts regarding this - just my 2 cents worth. > There might be multiple triggers for the penalty time, but, one I'd > like to see would be just like postscreen_dnsbl_threshold, perhaps

Re: Question on max message size

On 8/6/2011 1:26 AM, Rob Sterenborg (Lists) wrote: > On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 01:04 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> Or do the smart thing: use a file transfer protocol for transferring >> files instead of an email protocol. HTTP and FTP are readily available >> good examples. > > We don't know why t

Re: OT: Question on max message size

On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 07:58 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 8/6/2011 1:26 AM, Rob Sterenborg (Lists) wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 01:04 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > >> Or do the smart thing: use a file transfer protocol for transferring > >> files instead of an email protocol. HTTP and FTP

Rejecting all mail from/to a domain

Hello everyone. I've been searching around trying to figure this out but it just eluding me. We've been getting a ton of mail from a certain domain which is all spam. Problem is that our mail system is also generating a bounce for each try. I would like to block absolutely everything to or

Re: Rejecting all mail from/to a domain

On 2011-08-08 20:29, Stephen Atkins wrote: Hello everyone. I've been searching around trying to figure this out but it just eluding me. We've been getting a ton of mail from a certain domain which is all spam. Problem is that our mail system is also generating a bounce for each try. Why ar

Re: Rejecting all mail from/to a domain

On 8/8/2011 2:29 PM, Stephen Atkins wrote: > Hello everyone. I've been searching around trying to figure this out > but it just eluding me. We've been getting a ton of mail from a > certain domain which is all spam. Problem is that our mail system is > also generating a bounce for each try. I w

Re: Rejecting all mail from/to a domain

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 12:29:38PM -0600, Stephen Atkins wrote: > Hello everyone. I've been searching around trying to figure this > out but it just eluding me. We've been getting a ton of mail from > a certain domain which is all spam. Problem is that our mail > system is also generating a b

Re: Rejecting all mail from/to a domain

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 01:46:08PM -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 12:29:38PM -0600, Stephen Atkins wrote: > > I would like to block absolutely everything to or from this > > domain no matter what. I found a couple of examples but they > > don't seem to want to work for me. > >

Re: Rejecting all mail from/to a domain

On 8/8/2011 12:51 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote: On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 01:46:08PM -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote: On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 12:29:38PM -0600, Stephen Atkins wrote: I would like to block absolutely everything to or from this domain no matter what. I found a couple of examples but they don't seem

Re: Postscreen, Greylisting, Penalty Time

>However, BTW a surprising number of legitimate sites, including  >Gmail, have not been trying the lower-priority MX at all. Gmail >clients also tend to pass off to another host for second and >subsequent attempts, always and only on the primary MX IP address. I don't see how Gmail will work, a

main.cf best practices

Thanks again for the help everyone. I setup these postfix servers about 5 years ago. I've pretty much ignored then except for postfix updates since then. I know this probably wasn't the best idea but I got moved into a different department and could barely keep up. Now I'm back and have the

lost connection after RCPT

We recently (within the last two weeks) started getting a very large number of logs like this: postfix/smtpd[29456]: lost connection after RCPT from cel-broadband1-ws-72.dsl.airstreamcomm.net[64.33.198.73] After doing packet traces it appears that the client is sending RST packets to our server,

Re: lost connection after RCPT

On 2011-08-08 23:15, l...@airstreamcomm.net wrote: We recently (within the last two weeks) started getting a very large number of logs like this: postfix/smtpd[29456]: lost connection after RCPT from cel-broadband1-ws-72.dsl.airstreamcomm.net[64.33.198.73] After doing packet traces it appears t

Re: lost connection after RCPT

On 8/8/2011 4:15 PM, l...@airstreamcomm.net wrote: > We recently (within the last two weeks) started getting a very large > number of logs like this: > > postfix/smtpd[29456]: lost connection after RCPT from > cel-broadband1-ws-72.dsl.airstreamcomm.net[64.33.198.73] > > After doing packet traces

using smtpd_sender_restrictions to block mail from a domain

Hello all, I have attempted to block a domain from sending through my mail system. The result of my efforts is that this domain can still send mail. Here is what I have done. Created a sender_access file in /etc/postfix. The content: zeusmail.org REJECT apotmail.org REJECT postmap /etc/postfix/

Re: using smtpd_sender_restrictions to block mail from a domain

On 2011-08-08 Christopher Adams wrote: > I have attempted to block a domain from sending through my mail > system. The result of my efforts is that this domain can still send > mail. Here is what I have done. > > Created a sender_access file in /etc/postfix. The content: > > zeusmail.org REJECT >

Re: using smtpd_sender_restrictions to block mail from a domain

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Ansgar Wiechers wrote: > On 2011-08-08 Christopher Adams wrote: >> I have attempted to block a domain from sending through my mail >> system. The result of my efforts is that this domain can still send >> mail. Here is what I have done. >> >> Created a sender_access

Re: using smtpd_sender_restrictions to block mail from a domain

On Mon, 8 Aug 2011 16:46:13 -0700, Christopher Adams wrote: Thank you, wild guess is that sender is whitelisted, so check sender before client whitelist

Re: Postscreen, Greylisting, Penalty Time

rob0: >However, BTW a surprising number of legitimate sites, including? >Gmail, have not been trying the lower-priority MX at all. Gmail >clients also tend to pass off to another host for second and >subsequent attempts, always and only on the primary MX IP address. Steve Fatula: >I don't see ho

Re: main.cf best practices

Stephen Atkins: > My main goal is to figure out what I should > have in each section of main.cf (smptd/client restrictions to help stop > spam There is no universal solution against spam. Some people don't tolerate false negatives (spam not blocked), and some people don't tolerate false positive

Re: Postscreen, Greylisting, Penalty Time

>Surely the sender has a limited number of IP addresses.  Once a >client IP address passes postscreen's "after 220" tests, it is >whitelisted and can send mail without "after 220" tests for 30 days. Of course, it's finite. It's not small though. Here's the SPF record: ip4:216.239.32.0/19 ip4:64.

Re: Postscreen, Greylisting, Penalty Time

Steve Fatula: [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > >Surely the sender has a limited number of IP addresses.? Once a > >client IP address passes postscreen's "after 220" tests, it is >whitelisted and can send mail without "after 220" tests for 30 days. > >Of course, it's finite. It's

Re: lost connection after RCPT

On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 16:41:59 -0500, Noel Jones wrote: > On 8/8/2011 4:15 PM, l...@airstreamcomm.net wrote: >> We recently (within the last two weeks) started getting a very large >> number of logs like this: >> >> postfix/smtpd[29456]: lost connection after RCPT from >> cel-broadband1-ws-72.dsl.a

Re: using smtpd_sender_restrictions to block mail from a domain

On 8/8/2011 6:46 PM, Christopher Adams wrote: 3) Logs This is a mailman log that shows a subscription being approved by a mail administrator Aug 08 09:24:50 2011 (21056) lhdaccreditation: new albina.rit...@apotmail.com, via admin approval Is that the envelope sender or the From: header?

Re: using smtpd_sender_restrictions to block mail from a domain

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 04:46:13PM -0700, Christopher Adams wrote: [snip] > readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.0.16/README_FILES If this is really 2.0.16, you should consider upgrading! Postfix 2.4 has been EOL'ed as of March. 2.8 is current as of January. > 3) Logs > > This is a mailm

Re: Postscreen, Greylisting, Penalty Time

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 09:29:59PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > In my experience, gmail does not send one message from a massive > number of IP addresses. It copes with greylisting just fine, which > does not surprise me, considering that greylisting is such a > widely-used technique. Indeed. The