Re: Beginer questions about TLS and problem with connection when turned off

Gm, thank you for reply ad 1) Thank you for the explanation. ad 2) Unfortunately, I have read it. In a whole sentence: Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: connect from unknown[x.x.x.x] Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: lost connection after EHLO from unknown[x.x.x.x] Oct 11 18:59:2

Documentation Bug

Hello, I found a small bug in the online documentation on this page: http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html The option "message_size_limit" is described as: "The maximal size in bytes of a message[..]", This is wrong and should be: "The maximal size in bits of a message[..]". Regards Sven

master.cf

Hi, We have Postfix running for a while in combination with Zarafa. In Postfix I configured a disclaimer for every outgoing email. To complete this, I had to add an entry in the master.cf file like this: *smtp inet n - - - - smtpd -o content_filter=dfi

Re: Beginer questions about TLS and problem with connection when turned off

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:44:59 +0200 mirr...@gmail.com articulated: > 2011/10/12 Wietse Venema > > > mirr...@gmail.com: > > > Good morning, > > > > > > may I ask you for advice with a three beginner questions? I am > > > new to postfix, and I do not want to catch bad habits early on.. > > > > > >

.forward ignored

I have two identical CentOS 6 servers using postfix-2.6.6-2.1.el6_0.x86_64 (provided as a standard distribution package through the repos). On these boxes, postfix only serves as local mail server (just to send mail from the local system). One of them obeys .forward file for root account whi

Re: Is there a RHSBL for "parked domains"?

On 10/13/2011 02:37 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: * Noel Jones: You might be able to do something with check_recipient_mx_access. Mostly, these domains have no MX, but only an A record. But yes, I havne'T yet checked if they all resolve to but a few IPs Since all the non existing domains are

Re: .forward ignored

Nikolaos Milas: > I have two identical CentOS 6 servers using > postfix-2.6.6-2.1.el6_0.x86_64 (provided as a standard distribution > package through the repos). To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace r

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

On 10/12/2011 05:35 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 09:13:45AM +0300, Tolga wrote: Below are my postconf -n and master.cf: root@vps:~# postconf -n debug_peer_level = 3 debug_peer_list = localhost Don't. What should I do? Remove these? myhostname = vps.ozses.net No such

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

Am 13.10.2011 13:43, schrieb Tolga: >>> submission inet n - n - - smtpd >>> # -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt >>> # -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes >>> # -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject >>> # -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

On 10/13/2011 02:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.10.2011 13:43, schrieb Tolga: submission inet n - n - - smtpd # -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt # -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes # -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject # -o milter_

Re: what happens with this letter

On 12/10/2011 07:49, Vladimir Vassiliev wrote: But first line says: host imx1.rambler.ru[81.19.66.234] said: 452 4.7.1 Try again later (in reply to DATA command) How this connects with relay=imx1.rambler.ru[81.19.66.235]:25, delay=0.38, delays=0.06/0/0.14/0.18, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

Am 13.10.2011 14:04, schrieb Tolga: > Yes, it's a client connection. So, bottom line is, I need both 25 *and* 587 > if this is an MX. > If yes, I'm trying for days for nothing. is this your first mailserver? 587 is for ATHENTICATED smtp-submission and should be active because more and more I

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.10.2011 14:04, schrieb Tolga: Yes, it's a client connection. So, bottom line is, I need both 25 *and* 587 if this is an MX. If yes, I'm trying for days for nothing. is this your first mailserver? No, it's not my first mailserver, but I ha

Re: Beginer questions about TLS and problem with connection when turned off

Jerry: > > Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: connect from > > unknown[x.x.x.x] Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: lost > > connection after EHLO from unknown[x.x.x.x] > > Oct 11 18:59:24 none postfix/smtpd[1754]: disconnect from > > unknown[x.x.x.x] The CLIENT (not: POSTFIX) hangs u

Re: master.cf

Roland de Lepper: > Hi, > > We have Postfix running for a while in combination with Zarafa. > > In Postfix I configured a disclaimer for every outgoing email. To complete > this, I had to add an entry in the master.cf file like this: > > *smtp inet n - - - - s

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

Am 13.10.2011 14:18, schrieb Tolga: On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > is this your first mailserver? No, it's not my first mailserver, but I have lost my previous configuration > the question "if i need both" cares me a little bit because logically a > foreign > mailserver has a M

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

On 10/13/2011 03:24 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.10.2011 14:18, schrieb Tolga: On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: is this your first mailserver? No, it's not my first mailserver, but I have lost my previous configuration the question "if i need both" cares me a little bit beca

Re: Documentation Bug

sven.kie...@compact.de: > Hello, > > I found a small bug in the online documentation on this page: > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html > > The option "message_size_limit" is described as: > > "The maximal size in bytes of a message[..]", The documentation is correct. As the documentat

Re: master.cf

Hi Wietse, Yes..i've read this. So i'm trying chaining the content filters according to the Postfix book of O'reilly. I think this will be the solution to my configuration problem. Let's explain this in a basic mail-flow chart [portnr]: mail -> [25] smtpd 1 -> qmgr -> [10025] filter-daemon ->

Re: master.cf

Roland de Lepper: > Even when I'm trying to do the first filter via this way, I get an error in > logs saying: connect to 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10025: Connection refused You have NO SERVER that receives connections on port 10025. > What I configured: > > main.cf > content_filter = disclaimer:[12

Re: .forward ignored

On 13/10/2011 2:05 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote: To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace results. Thank you Wietsie. (In the meantime I upgraded to postfix v2.8.5 but the behavior didn't change.) I ran

Re: .forward ignored

Nikolaos Milas: > On 13/10/2011 2:05 ??, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions > > in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace results. > > > > Thank you Wietsie. > > (In the meantime I upgraded to postfix v2.8.5 but t

Re: master.cf

I tried all sorts of examples in documentation, but can't seem to get this to work ;-( Even the step-by-step example in Oreilly and the README file of postfix ( http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html) doesn't work at my site. I spend already 8 hours to get this working. I want to filter two it

Re: master.cf

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Roland de Lepper wrote: I tried all sorts of examples in documentation, but can't seem to get this to work ;-( Even the step-by-step example in Oreilly and the README file of postfix (http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html) doesn't work at my site. I spend already 8 hour

Re: Documentation Bug

Am 13.10.2011 14:35, schrieb wie...@porcupine.org: sven.kie...@compact.de: Hello, I found a small bug in the online documentation on this page: http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html The option "message_size_limit" is described as: "The maximal size in bytes of a message[..]", The document

Re: Documentation Bug

sven.kie...@compact.de: > We clearly have set up a maximum message size limit of the latter (2.5 > MiB). I don't get mail out of this system bigger than that. Prove it. Show some concrete evidence. Without that, no-one can tell you what mistake you are making. As per the mailing list welcome mes

Re: Documentation Bug

Am 13.10.2011 17:00, schrieb sven.kie...@compact.de: > Maybe I don't get it, or you use different representations of what is an byte > or KB instead > of KiB? If I'm seeing something wrong please point me to my failure. :-) you are missing the fact that e-mail is a text-only protocol and so ev

Re: .forward ignored

On 13/10/2011 4:59 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote: You need to STRACE the program that reads .forward files! That would be the local(8) delivery agent. Thanks Wietsie, I ran with: local unix - n n - - local -D -vv and found: Oct 13 17:48:47 vpnspot postfix/local[12683]: deliver_dotforward[3]: lo

Re: .forward ignored

Nikolaos Milas: > On 13/10/2011 4:59 ??, Wietse Venema wrote: > > > You need to STRACE the program that reads .forward files! That would > > be the local(8) delivery agent. > > Thanks Wietsie, > > I ran with: > > local unix - n n - - local -D -vv A few messages ago, I asked this: > To find ou

Re: Documentation Bug

On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 17:11 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > ... depending on the attachment the overhead can be very different Base64 always encodes 3 original bytes into 4 base64-bytes, so the factor to calculate the effective size for an attachment in an email is always 4/3*original_size. Of co

Re: Documentation Bug

Stefan Palme: > On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 17:11 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > ... depending on the attachment the overhead can be very different > > Base64 always encodes 3 original bytes into 4 base64-bytes, so the > factor to calculate the effective size for an attachment in an email is > alway

Re: master.cf

Hi Larry, Thanks. I already know this, but how is the configuration? That's were i'm struggeling with. If you have time, please give me a short example. Thanks in advanced. Kind regards, Roland On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Larry Stone wrote: > On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Roland de Lepper wrote

Re: Documentation Bug

On 2011-10-13 11:00 AM, sven.kie...@compact.de wrote: Maybe I don't get it, or you use different representations of what is an byte or KB instead of KiB? If I'm seeing something wrong please point me to my failure. :-) Or maybe you failed to read the welcome message when you joined the list?

Re: master.cf

First, please do not top-post on this list. Include comments "in-line" with what you are answering. On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Roland de Lepper wrote: I already know this, but how is the configuration? That's were i'm struggeling with. If you have time, please give me a short example. I did not s

Re: .forward ignored

On 13/10/2011 6:40 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote: A few messages ago, I asked this: To find out what system call is failing, see the strace instructions in http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html, and compare strace results. Hi Wietse, First, I found the cause: It was selinux (once more...). Alt

Re: .forward ignored

Nikolaos Milas: > I added in /etc/postfix/main.cf: > debugger_command = > PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin > (strace -p $process_id 2>&1 | logger -p mail.info) & sleep 5 The DEBUG_README example has a ';' between PATH=stuff and '('. debugger_command = PATH=/bin:/usr/b

Re: Not receiving e-mail on submission port

On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:29, Tolga wrote: > > > On 10/13/2011 03:24 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 13.10.2011 14:18, schrieb Tolga: >> >> On 10/13/2011 03:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> is this your first mailserver? >> No, it's not my first mailserver, but I have lost my previous configurat

Re: .forward ignored

On 13/10/2011 9:36 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote: The DEBUG_README example has a ';' between PATH=stuff and '('. debugger_command = PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin; (truss -p $process_id 2>&1 | logger -p mail.info)& sleep 5 Without this ';' you have a syntax error. Ahh,

Attachment Limit Size

Hi all, new to the group. Have recently setup POSTFIX as an SMTP relay front end to an Exchange 2007 backend. Have encountered the following issue: I'm using POSTFIX as an SMTP fronted relay to an Exchange 2007 backend. The default size

Re: Attachment Limit Size

what exactly do you think get better if you send the same message with a changed subject to the same mailing-list two days later? Am 14.10.2011 00:08, schrieb Joel Roberts: > Hi all, new to the group. Have recently setup POSTFIX as an SMTP relay front > end to an Exchange 2007 backend. Have > enc

Re: Attachment Limit Size

On 13 Oct 2011, at 23:08, Joel Roberts wrote: > Hi all, new to the group. Have recently setup POSTFIX as an SMTP relay front > end to an Exchange 2007 backend. Have encountered the following issue: > > > > I'm using POSTFIX as an SMTP fronted relay to an Exchange 2007 backend. The > default

Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

Hello Recently I've been doing modifications to my internal server smtp mail, so to authenticate e-mails that are sent The authentication mechanism I used is explained in the postfix site, very simple: http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html # server_dovecot All outgoing emails are deliver

Re: TLS Issues. certificate unknown: SSL alert number 46:

On 11 Oct 2011, at 15:54, "Simon Brereton" wrote: >>> >>> this is obseleted (I'm running 2.7.1) and to use >>> smtpd_tls_security_level = may instead - however, vim tells me that >>> the former is a valid configurable (it's highlighted) whilst the >>> latter is not. That's part of my confusion

RE: Attachment Limit Size

Harald, I sent the first message just after registering with the group and didn't receive a copy of it. I thought it hadn't gone through, but thank you for your helpful response. Thank you, Joel Roberts Network Administrator -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [ma

RE: Attachment Limit Size

Mark, The bounce back error comes from the Exchange server. It lists the POSTFIX server as the server that is rejecting the attachment based on size. The Exchange connector to the POSTFIX server is set to accept attachments up to 20 MB and on the back end I can send attachments up to 20 MB from

Re: Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

On 13 Oct 2011, at 23:37, Michel Bulgado wrote: > Hello > > Recently I've been doing modifications to my internal server smtp mail, so to > authenticate e-mails that are sent > > The authentication mechanism I used is explained in the postfix site, very > simple: > > http://www.postfix.org/S

Re: Attachment Limit Size

Joel Roberts: > I can test with telnet and post the results asap. Nothing shows > in the POSTFIX log if I?m tailing it while testing it. The Exchange > logs just say that it?s been rejected by the POSTFIX server. If you believe that Postfix is in error then you must provide POSTFIX logs and POSTFI

Re: TLS Issues. certificate unknown: SSL alert number 46:

On 10/13/2011 5:41 PM, Mark Homoky wrote: > On 11 Oct 2011, at 15:54, "Simon Brereton" > wrote: > this is obseleted (I'm running 2.7.1) and to use smtpd_tls_security_level = may instead - however, vim tells me that the former is a valid configurable (it's highlighted) whilst

Re: Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

On 10/13/2011 5:37 PM, Michel Bulgado wrote: > Oct 13 18:11:58 legolas postfix/smtp[26982]: 210081CEAAE: > to=, relay=192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1]:25, delay=2.7, > delays=1.6/0/0/1.1, dsn=5.7.1, status=bounced (host > 192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1] said: 554 5.7.1 : Sender > address rejected: Access denied

Re: TLS Issues. certificate unknown: SSL alert number 46:

On 13 October 2011 19:16, Noel Jones wrote: > On 10/13/2011 5:41 PM, Mark Homoky wrote: >> On 11 Oct 2011, at 15:54, "Simon Brereton" >> wrote: >> > > this is obseleted (I'm running 2.7.1) and to use > smtpd_tls_security_level = may instead - however, vim tells me that > the form

Re: TLS Issues. certificate unknown: SSL alert number 46:

On 10/13/2011 6:39 PM, Simon Brereton wrote: > smtp_tls_CAfile = ? > smtp_tls_cert_file = ? > smtp_tls_key_file = ? Typcially these would be set to the same cert & keys as used by smtpd. >> Not needed, you neither ask for nor verify client certs. > > Should I be? And if so, how do I do that? B

Confusing part of Docs

from postconf(5) for smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt: > Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to SMTP > clients, and require that clients use TLS encryption. According to > RFC 2487 this MUST NOT be applied in case of a publicly-referenced > SMTP server. Instead, this option shou

Re: Confusing part of Docs

On 10/13/2011 9:24 PM, Peter wrote: > from postconf(5) for smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt: > >> Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to SMTP >> clients, and require that clients use TLS encryption. According to >> RFC 2487 this MUST NOT be applied in case of a publicly-referenc

Re: Confusing part of Docs

On 14/10/11 15:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On the public internet you can't force remote SMTP servers to use > encryption when connecting to your server, because very few, if any, > public SMTP servers implement outbound encryption in this way. Most > send in plain text, and always have. For insta

Re: Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

Stan Hoeppner escribió: On 10/13/2011 5:37 PM, Michel Bulgado wrote: Oct 13 18:11:58 legolas postfix/smtp[26982]: 210081CEAAE: to=, relay=192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1]:25, delay=2.7, delays=1.6/0/0/1.1, dsn=5.7.1, status=bounced (host 192.168.1.1[192.168.1.1] said: 554 5.7.1 : Sender address rejec

Re: Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

Mark Homoky escribió: On 13 Oct 2011, at 23:37, Michel Bulgado wrote: Hello Recently I've been doing modifications to my internal server smtp mail, so to authenticate e-mails that are sent The authentication mechanism I used is explained in the postfix site, very simple: http://www.

Re: Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

On 10/13/2011 11:44 PM, mic...@casa.co.cu wrote: > In the internal mail server, I enable the use of SASL for the local > network, but external mail server (mx) is not. > > Perhaps this will be the problem? Perhaps. Did the two servers exchange emails without problem before enabling smtpd SASL o

Re: Postfix - Problem message delivery between MX servers

On 2011-10-14 00:37, Michel Bulgado wrote: [...] > I was wondering if you can implement a white list in postfix, to accept > smtp connections from the IP address of my mx server without any > authentication. [...] If your intention is to accept emails *only* from your external MX server and fro

Re: Confusing part of Docs

On 10/13/2011 10:04 PM, Peter wrote: > This is what I (and I think most people) understand "dedicated server" > to mean. There must be a better term for this that is less confusing. This is a result of your limited background and education Peter. The term "server" was used to describe a softwar