hai,
i used to have this configuration in my postfix
master.cf
127.0.0.1:12345 inet n n n - 0 spawn
user=nobody argv=/etc/postfix/blah.py
main.cf
127.0.0.1:12345_time_limit = 3600s
postfix never complaint about this configuration when i reload it.
using
It's possible that amavisd slows down your postfix.
You can try to increase the number of amavis processes in the config:
$max_servers = 5;# number of pre-forked children
The number of amavisd processes is independent of the smtp processes.
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Alex wrot
Zitat von Hari Hendaryanto :
hai,
i used to have this configuration in my postfix
master.cf
127.0.0.1:12345 inet n n n - 0 spawn
user=nobody argv=/etc/postfix/blah.py
main.cf
127.0.0.1:12345_time_limit = 3600s
postfix never complaint about this configu
* Hari Hendaryanto :
> hai,
>
> i used to have this configuration in my postfix
>
> master.cf
> 127.0.0.1:12345 inet n n n - 0 spawn
> user=nobody argv=/etc/postfix/blah.py
>
> main.cf
> 127.0.0.1:12345_time_limit = 3600s
This parameter does not exist.
$
On 11/17/2011 4:27 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Hari Hendaryanto :
>> hai,
>>
>> i used to have this configuration in my postfix
>>
>> master.cf
>> 127.0.0.1:12345 inet n n n - 0 spawn
>> user=nobody argv=/etc/postfix/blah.py
>>
>> main.cf
>> 127.0.0.1:123
Stan Hoeppner:
> http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html
>
> 1 /etc/postfix/master.cf:
> 2 127.0.0.1:9998 inet n n n - 0 spawn
> 3 user=nobody argv=/some/where/policy-server
> 4
> 5 /etc/postfix/main.cf:
> 6 smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
>
On 11/17/2011 6:30 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Stan Hoeppner:
http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html
1 /etc/postfix/master.cf:
2 127.0.0.1:9998 inet n n n - 0 spawn
3 user=nobody argv=/some/where/policy-server
4
5 /etc/postfix/main.cf:
6
Solar Designer:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 08:02:03PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Solar Designer:
> > > OK. I took a look at the code and I see those difficulties now. How
> > > about something like the attached patch? It's totally untested other
> > > than that it compiles, and it's probably
* Stan Hoeppner :
> 1 /etc/postfix/master.cf:
> 2 127.0.0.1:9998 inet n n n - 0 spawn
> 3 user=nobody argv=/some/where/policy-server
> 4
> 5 /etc/postfix/main.cf:
> 6 smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> 7 ...
> 8 reject_unauth_destina
Hi,
I would like to know if the following scenario is possible with postfix:
We have a mailing list server list.domain.com .
my mailing lists have names of the forms m...@domain.com and
m...@subdomain.domain.com.
All mailing lists and most of their members belong to an ldap directory.
My pro
Hari Hendaryanto:
> On 11/17/2011 6:30 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Stan Hoeppner:
> >> http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html
> >>
> >> 1 /etc/postfix/master.cf:
> >> 2 127.0.0.1:9998 inet n n n - 0 spawn
> >> 3 user=nobody argv=/some/where/pol
Panagiotis Drakopoulos:
> Hi,
> I would like to know if the following scenario is possible with postfix:
>
> We have a mailing list server list.domain.com .
>
> my mailing lists have names of the forms m...@domain.com and
> m...@subdomain.domain.com.
>
> All mailing lists and most of their memb
Wietse Venema:
> > >> Note #11. Does this mean this is still valid, or that the docs need
> > >> changing?
> > > #11 is valid ONLY IF #2 exists. Without #2 it is a non-existent
> > > parameter.
> > >
> > > Wietse
> > >
> > yes sir, #2 does exist in my case...
>
> Why don't you show the real evi
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:28:35 +0700
Hari Hendaryanto articulated:
> On 11/17/2011 6:30 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Stan Hoeppner:
> >> http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html
> >>
> >> 1 /etc/postfix/master.cf:
> >> 2 127.0.0.1:9998 inet n n n - 0
> >> spawn
On 11/17/2011 7:03 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Hari Hendaryanto:
On 11/17/2011 6:30 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Stan Hoeppner:
http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html
1 /etc/postfix/master.cf:
2 127.0.0.1:9998 inet n n n - 0 spawn
3 user=nobod
Wietse Venema:
> Wietse Venema:
> > > >> Note #11. Does this mean this is still valid, or that the docs need
> > > >> changing?
> > > > #11 is valid ONLY IF #2 exists. Without #2 it is a non-existent
> > > > parameter.
> > > >
> > > > Wietse
> > > >
> > > yes sir, #2 does exist in my case.
On 11/17/2011 12:15 AM, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> I built a dual-Xeon quad-core box with 8GB using fedora15 and
>>> postfix-v2.8.5 and during various times during the day connections to
>>> port 25 timeout or are very slow. The majority of times this happens
>>> is under peak loads, but even times w
Wietse Venema:
> Wietse Venema:
> > Wietse Venema:
> > > > >> Note #11. Does this mean this is still valid, or that the docs need
> > > > >> changing?
> > > > > #11 is valid ONLY IF #2 exists. Without #2 it is a non-existent
> > > > > parameter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wietse
> > > > >
> > > > y
On 11/17/2011 8:06 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Wietse Venema:
Wietse Venema:
Wietse Venema:
Note #11. Does this mean this is still valid, or that the docs need
changing?
#11 is valid ONLY IF #2 exists. Without #2 it is a non-existent
parameter.
Wietse
yes sir, #2 does exist in my cas
Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment to me and
could not. Spamcop has decided to go off blacklisting all yahoo/shaw etc
servers worldwide.
Solution:
remove: reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net
from your smtpd_recipient_restrictions line until they fix their abuse
iss
On 11/17/2011 12:13 AM, Dilip Mishra // Viva wrote:
> Hello Group,
>
> I want to implement some restrictions on postfix by which it would
> reject domains without mx records, as well as those specified in
> access table. These are some domains to I do not want to send mails
> at all. My problem is
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 07:35 -0600, Dan The Man wrote:
>
> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment to me and
> could not. Spamcop has decided to go off blacklisting all yahoo/shaw etc
> servers worldwide.
>
> Solution:
> remove: reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net
> from you
I agree completely, but I don't think a student failing a course because
he only has a yahoo/shaw etc address and got a legitimate email bounced
would agree very much :)
I think my solution should stand, we got all the other rbl's,
and spamassassin etc, there really no need to have anything
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 08:08:13 -0600 (CST)
Dan The Man wrote:
>
>
> I agree completely, but I don't think a student failing a course
> because he only has a yahoo/shaw etc address and got a legitimate
> email bounced would agree very much :)
>
> I think my solution should stand, we got all the o
On 11/17/2011 8:12 AM, John Peach wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 08:08:13 -0600 (CST)
> Dan The Man wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I agree completely, but I don't think a student failing a course
>> because he only has a yahoo/shaw etc address and got a legitimate
>> email bounced would agree very much :)
>>
>>
Zitat von Dan The Man :
Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment to
me and could not. Spamcop has decided to go off blacklisting all
yahoo/shaw etc servers worldwide.
The subject is wrong. Spamcop simply list mailservers sending a lot of
spam and Yahoo for exampl
While benchmarking a SMTP content filter, using smtp-source as a traffic
generator and smtp-sink as sink, the message transfer rates were much
worse than expected (about 100 seconds, instead of just a few seconds
for 1000 messages).
It turned out the problem is in a TCP session over a loopback int
Am 17.11.2011 14:56, schrieb Tõnu Samuel:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 07:35 -0600, Dan The Man wrote:
>>
>> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment to me and
>> could not. Spamcop has decided to go off blacklisting all yahoo/shaw etc
>> servers worldwide.
>>
>> Solution:
>>
>
>
> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment ..
tell your students to use the email address provided by the school on the
school domain. Also, as a policy, I blacklist all yahoo, gmail, hotmail
junk and life is much better at the office.
If someone does not have a valid
Am 17.11.2011 15:39, schrieb Dennis Clarke:
>> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment ..
>
> tell your students to use the email address provided by the school on the
> school domain. Also, as a policy, I blacklist all yahoo, gmail, hotmail
> junk and life is much better
On 17 November 2011 01:13, Dilip Mishra // Viva
wrote:
> Hello Group,
> I want to implement some restrictions on postfix by which it would reject
> domains without mx records, as well as those specified in access table.
> These are some domains to I do not want to send mails at all. My problem is
On 17 November 2011 09:28, wrote:
> Zitat von Dan The Man :
>
>>
>>
>> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment to me and
>> could not. Spamcop has decided to go off blacklisting all yahoo/shaw etc
>> servers worldwide.
>
> The subject is wrong. Spamcop simply list mailserv
Mark Martinec:
> While benchmarking a SMTP content filter, using smtp-source as a traffic
> generator and smtp-sink as sink, the message transfer rates were much
> worse than expected (about 100 seconds, instead of just a few seconds
> for 1000 messages).
>
> It turned out the problem is in a TCP
Zitat von Mark Martinec :
While benchmarking a SMTP content filter, using smtp-source as a traffic
generator and smtp-sink as sink, the message transfer rates were much
worse than expected (about 100 seconds, instead of just a few seconds
for 1000 messages).
It turned out the problem is in a TC
On 17/11/2011 14:39, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment ..
tell your students to use the email address provided by the school on the
school domain. Also, as a policy, I blacklist all yahoo, gmail, hotmail
junk and life is much better at the
Wietse Venema:
> Mark Martinec:
> > While benchmarking a SMTP content filter, using smtp-source as a traffic
> > generator and smtp-sink as sink, the message transfer rates were much
> > worse than expected (about 100 seconds, instead of just a few seconds
> > for 1000 messages).
> >
> > It turned
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:48 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> never heard a more arrogant statement with so few knowledge!
>
I somewhat understand his position. What is ham and what is spam often
depends also some cultural background. For example I have anything with
"From: aol.com" blocked because
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 08:08 -0600, Dan The Man wrote:
>
> I agree completely, but I don't think a student failing a course because
> he only has a yahoo/shaw etc address and got a legitimate email bounced
> would agree very much :)
>
> I think my solution should stand, we got all the other rbl'
Greetings,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On 17/11/2011 14:39, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment ..
>>
>> tell your students to use the email address provided by the school on the
>> school domain. Also, as
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:39 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Spammers ARE blacklisted, even they are called "yahoo". Just have good
> > ISP with good reputation. My servers have never been blacklisted because
> > I just keep spammers away from them in early stage.
>
> this is a lets say polite: "no
Am 17.11.2011 16:20, schrieb Tõnu Samuel:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:39 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> Spammers ARE blacklisted, even they are called "yahoo". Just have good
>>> ISP with good reputation. My servers have never been blacklisted because
>>> I just keep spammers away from them in ea
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 16:30 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> if you really report 500 mails each day you should give over your
> job to someone with more qualifications because we are hosting some
> thousand mail-addresses and i could never report 500 spam-mails per
> day because they are not receive
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 06:39:29AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Solar Designer:
> > Does this mean you're going to implement it? Sounds great if so. And
> > the default action feature, please - I'd use them together.
>
> ACCEPT in header_checks == turn off header checks for this message.
Right
Am 17.11.2011 16:36, schrieb Tõnu Samuel:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 16:30 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> if you really report 500 mails each day you should give over your
>> job to someone with more qualifications because we are hosting some
>> thousand mail-addresses and i could never report 50
Hello
Postfix creates those "spool" directories at install
# cd /var/spool/postfix
# ll
total 28
drwx-- 2 postfix wheel 512 Nov 17 17:03 active
drwx-- 2 postfix wheel 512 Nov 17 17:03 bounce
drwx-- 2 postfix wheel 512 May 10 2011 corrupt
drwx-- 18 postfi
On 2011-11-17 16:05, Tõnu Samuel wrote:
> What is ham and what is spam often depends also some cultural background.
It does indeed. Having "Dick" as first name in a mostly English-oriented
environment doesn't work in my favor ;-)
--
Dick Visser
System & Network Engineer
TERENA Secretariat
Sing
On Thursday 17 November 2011 10:08:32 Frank Bonnet wrote:
> Postfix creates those "spool" directories at install
>
> # cd /var/spool/postfix
> # ll
> total 28
snip
> Does it recreate them if they are not present on the disk ?
"man postfix", see "check" and "start".
> I have not deleted them by e
Posting to list, sorry!
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 17.11.2011 16:20, schrieb Tõnu Samuel:
>> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:39 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Spammers ARE blacklisted, even they are called "yahoo". Just have good
ISP with good reputation. My s
Enough of this thread. Really.
Spamcop is risky if used for outright rejection. This is not new
information, and as pointed out, Spamcop themselves say so. The
subject line is pure ignorance, "abusing mail systems," absurd.
Reliance on email where you do not control both ends is also risky.
We
Solar Designer:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 06:39:29AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Solar Designer:
> > > Does this mean you're going to implement it? Sounds great if so. And
> > > the default action feature, please - I'd use them together.
> >
> > ACCEPT in header_checks == turn off header che
Le 11/17/2011 05:23 PM, /dev/rob0 a écrit :
On Thursday 17 November 2011 10:08:32 Frank Bonnet wrote:
Postfix creates those "spool" directories at install
# cd /var/spool/postfix
# ll
total 28
snip
Does it recreate them if they are not present on the disk ?
"man postfix", see "check" and "st
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:19:48 +0100
Dick Visser articulated:
> On 2011-11-17 16:05, Tõnu Samuel wrote:
>
> > What is ham and what is spam often depends also some cultural
> > background.
>
> It does indeed. Having "Dick" as first name in a mostly
> English-oriented environment doesn't work in my
Frank Bonnet:
> Hello
>
> Postfix creates those "spool" directories at install
>
> # cd /var/spool/postfix
> # ll
It creates them with "postfix start" (or "check"). This means you
have to run one of these commands before you can submit mail via
the Postfix sendmail command line.
Wietse
Le 17/11/2011 19:01, Wietse Venema a écrit :
Frank Bonnet:
Hello
Postfix creates those "spool" directories at install
# cd /var/spool/postfix
# ll
It creates them with "postfix start" (or "check"). This means you
have to run one of these commands before you can submit mail via
the Postfix
Hello,
I've got a postfix system serving virtual mailbox domains. It's using
Dovecot as an LDA, and I'm wanting to hook in quotas. My thinking is
that I have to do this in the LDA, but I'm curious about the
virtual_mailbox_limit parameter in main.cf? Is it used for quota or
size limits when using
On 2011-11-17 07:15, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I built a dual-Xeon quad-core box with 8GB using fedora15 and
postfix-v2.8.5 and during various times during the day connections to
port 25 timeout or are very slow. The majority of times this happens
is under peak loads, but even times when it's not at capa
Am 17.11.2011 19:45, schrieb David Mehler:
> I've got a postfix system serving virtual mailbox domains. It's using
> Dovecot as an LDA, and I'm wanting to hook in quotas. My thinking is
> that I have to do this in the LDA, but I'm curious about the
> virtual_mailbox_limit parameter in main.cf? Is
Reindl Harald:
> Am 17.11.2011 19:45, schrieb David Mehler:
> > I've got a postfix system serving virtual mailbox domains. It's using
> > Dovecot as an LDA, and I'm wanting to hook in quotas. My thinking is
> > that I have to do this in the LDA, but I'm curious about the
> > virtual_mailbox_limit p
Wietse -
Thank you for explaining your position on this in so much detail! You
definitely have a pretty strong and reasonable opinion here. I was
essentially after mail filtering capabilities analogous to those of a
network packet filter and I felt that those would reasonably fit into
Postfix pr
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 07:46:26PM +0100, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
>
> Hell no, amavisd can kill your system dead.
> It will take 100MB per process easily, and each of these takes much
Terrible misinformation. Amavisd-new preloads pretty much everything before
forking, which means childs just share
I'm about to do a migration from one server to another - old server runs
Debian Lenny, new one runs Squeeze, both with respective current versions
of postfix.
Long and short is that I'm basically preparing to migrate everything,
including users and a mailman configuration, to the new box. Bas
> On 17/11/2011 14:39, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Today I had an unhappy unix student try to submit an assignment ..
>>
>> tell your students to use the email address provided by the school on
>> the
>> school domain. Also, as a policy, I blacklist all yahoo, gmail, hotmail
>> junk and li
Ok, I agree with /dev/rob0 , this has gone way off topic for this list.
All of us are free to handle spam as we decide to do it, if Dennis
wants to block @yahoo.* @gmail.com @hotmail.com , that's his decision.
In my case, the amount of spam I receive from these domains is
minimal (and is catch by
Hello list,
I am attempting to build a basic postfix setup that is able to send mail to
the internet. Receiving email is not a priority.
I've verified that this basic setup DOES work on an Amazon EC2 instance and
can be used to send email to anyplace it would like. However when I transfer
t
Le 11/11/2011 00:45, Steve Fatula a écrit :
> This check says that the RFC requires a fully qualified hostname for HELO.
> Most internet searches show this to be a "safe" check that shouldn't really
> kill any real mail. Lately, noticed no ebay mail was coming through, looked
> through the logs
On 17 November 2011 17:14, Tim Dunphy wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I am attempting to build a basic postfix setup that is able to send mail to
> the internet. Receiving email is not a priority.
>
> I've verified that this basic setup DOES work on an Amazon EC2 instance and
> can be used to send em
On 17 November 2011 14:02, Dennis Carr wrote:
> I'm about to do a migration from one server to another - old server runs
> Debian Lenny, new one runs Squeeze, both with respective current versions of
> postfix.
>
> Long and short is that I'm basically preparing to migrate everything,
> including u
* Simon Brereton :
> On 17 November 2011 14:02, Dennis Carr wrote:
> > I'm about to do a migration from one server to another - old server runs
> > Debian Lenny, new one runs Squeeze, both with respective current versions of
> > postfix.
> >
> > Long and short is that I'm basically preparing to mi
Hi,
>> When using amavisd-new, shouldn't the number of processes match the
>> number of smtpd processes?
>
> When using amavisd-new as a content_filter, the number of postfix
> smtp->amavisd feeder processes should be equal to (or maybe one less
> than for monitoring) the number of amavisd process
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 16:47 -0430, Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa wrote:
> Ok, I agree with /dev/rob0 , this has gone way off topic for this list.
I just keep reading all this discussion. Yes this is not postfix topic
but for any kind of decision I am highly interested in reasoning, not
decision. T
On 11/17/2011 7:37 PM, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> When using amavisd-new, shouldn't the number of processes match the
>>> number of smtpd processes?
>>
>> When using amavisd-new as a content_filter, the number of postfix
>> smtp->amavisd feeder processes should be equal to (or maybe one less
>> than
Thanks for replies, will try the changes and let u know the issues.
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Simon Brereton <
simon.brere...@buongiorno.com> wrote:
> On 17 November 2011 01:13, Dilip Mishra // Viva
> wrote:
> > Hello Group,
> > I want to implement some restrictions on postfix by which it
Hi,
>> Can you confirm that this is the relevant section I should be
>> adjusting to prevent timeouts connecting to port 25:
>>
>> smtp inet n - n - - smtpd
>> -o receive_override_options=no_address_mappings
>
> Yes, adjust the above service to control h
Sorry for jumping in guys but I seem to face a similar problem where there
are domains which gets changed. For eg: some may move from abc.net to
abc.org etc.
What I need is to replace such domains on my MTA's. How should I perfectly
achieve it? Also, how long could be the file?
On Tue, Nov 15, 20
Take a look at this: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html
There are a lot of examples and you'll find what you're looking for.
If you want to change the domain for incoming and outgoing e-mails you can
do this with canonical_maps. If you only want to apply the rules for
incoming ma
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 07:56:07AM +0100, Claudio Kuenzler wrote:
> Take a look at this: http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html
> There are a lot of examples and you'll find what you're looking for.
Yes, the document is a good place to start.
> If you want to change the domain for
Am 18.11.2011 03:41, schrieb Tõnu Samuel:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 16:47 -0430, Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa wrote:
>> Ok, I agree with /dev/rob0 , this has gone way off topic for this list.
>
> I just keep reading all this discussion. Yes this is not postfix topic
> but for any kind of decision I
Victor, take a look at my e-mail sent 3 days ago in the same thread. I
already mentioned the smtp_generic_maps there (order before canonical).
Now it depends on what Dilip wants to achieve, we didn't get enough
details.
smtp_generic_maps won't work, if you still need to receive e-mails for the
old
78 matches
Mail list logo
