Re: Low Budget Backups

2011-12-02 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 02.12.2011 07:02, schrieb email builder: > No other people have systems for doing this? we are using http://dbmail.org/ behind postfix and a replication-slave if you have only one server you can setup a slave on a different port as 3306 on 127.0.0.1 benefit of the slave is that you can stop

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Wietse Venema
DN Singh: > I will get more clear with an example: > > yahoo.com has different rejection codes, common of which is TS01. They say, > after TS01, you aren't supposed to attempt delivery for 4 hours. But, the Wietse: > According to "Yahoo! Postmaster Help Topics", TS01 means: > > * We are seeing unu

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:37:02AM +0530, DN Singh wrote: > Yes, I am trying some workarounds, like rate delays, to address unusual > traffic, and also joined their FBL for complainants. But, am still facing > problems with some MTAs. > Also, this only for Yahoo, there are others like hotmail, red

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread DN Singh
Okay. This means I was going in the wrong direction itself. Thank you guys, for making this clear. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:37:02AM +0530, DN Singh wrote: > > > Yes, I am trying some workarounds, like rate delays, to address unusual > >

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Wietse Venema
Viktor Dukhovni: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:37:02AM +0530, DN Singh wrote: > > > Yes, I am trying some workarounds, like rate delays, to address unusual > > traffic, and also joined their FBL for complainants. But, am still facing > > problems with some MTAs. > > Also, this only for Yahoo, there

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 08:24:29AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > > There is no scenario in which a site that accepts your mail (i.e. > > has not classified you as a spammer, correctly or not) will offer > > better service if all your mail delayed by a few hours, that just > > time-warps the proble

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Mark Goodge
On 02/12/2011 14:15, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 08:24:29AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: There is no scenario in which a site that accepts your mail (i.e. has not classified you as a spammer, correctly or not) will offer better service if all your mail delayed by a few hours,

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 02:23:53PM +, Mark Goodge wrote: > >That makes no sense at all, surely nothing more productive will happen > >when the spiggot is turned on 4 hours later with even more mail queued. > > The point is that "following instructions" is a reasonable proxy for > "being a leg

OT: Yahoo spam load (was: Dead Destination configuration)

2011-12-02 Thread Wietse Venema
To get some idea of Yahoo spam load (and keyword trends) see http://visualize.yahoo.com/ and click the green buttons. Wietse

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Mark Goodge
On 02/12/2011 14:35, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 02:23:53PM +, Mark Goodge wrote: That makes no sense at all, surely nothing more productive will happen when the spiggot is turned on 4 hours later with even more mail queued. The point is that "following instructions" is

Re: Dead Destination configuration

2011-12-02 Thread Wietse Venema
Mark Goodge: > > I've seen no evidence that this interpretation is correct. On what > > basis do you assert that this is Yahoo's policy? > > Experience, mostly. I've found that ceasing retry attempts for four > hours, then restarting, typically results in the queue clearing as fast > as you can

Re: OT: Yahoo spam load (was: Dead Destination configuration)

2011-12-02 Thread Steve Fatula
From: Wietse Venema >To: postfix-users@postfix.org >Sent: Friday, December 2, 2011 8:42 AM >Subject: OT: Yahoo spam load (was: Dead Destination configuration) > >To get some idea of Yahoo spam load (and keyword trends) see >http://visualize.yahoo.com/ and click the green buttons. > >  >I wish th

Re: OT: Yahoo spam load

2011-12-02 Thread Robert Schetterer
Am 02.12.2011 21:15, schrieb Steve Fatula: > *From:* Wietse Venema > *To:* postfix-users@postfix.org > *Sent:* Friday, December 2, 2011 8:42 AM > *Subject:* OT: Yahoo spam load (was: Dead Destination configuration) > > To get some idea of Yahoo spam load (and keyword trends) s

Using postfix w/ mimedefang's Unix socket

2011-12-02 Thread Philip Prindeville
I tried to set up Postfix (2.6.6) on a Centos6 system (yes, I've filed a bug for them to bump to something 2.8.x-ish)... as: Dec 1 20:26:05 localhost postfix/smtpd[7743]: warning: connect to Milter service unix:/var/spool/MIMEDefang/mimedefang.sock: Permission denied # ls -ld /var/spool/MIMEDe

Re: Using postfix w/ mimedefang's Unix socket

2011-12-02 Thread Wietse Venema
Philip Prindeville: > Would it make sense to add a parameter of additional gid's that > you want smtpd to retain? Perhaps you can use a class "inet" socket on 127.0.0.1. That will have less impact on the Postfix security architecture. With 64k ports, you won't run out of them quickly. Wie

How to reject mail on secondary MX?

2011-12-02 Thread Ken D'Ambrosio
Hey, all. I've got a primary -- my actual destination/IMAP server -- and, for various reasons, a secondary SMTP server. My primary only rejects mail to invalid recipients (spam is dealt with internally). I'd like my secondary to reject invalid recipients, also. I can bring over /etc/aliases and

Re: How to reject mail on secondary MX?

2011-12-02 Thread Robert Schetterer
Am 02.12.2011 23:02, schrieb Ken D'Ambrosio: > Hey, all. I've got a primary -- my actual destination/IMAP server -- and, for > various reasons, a secondary SMTP server. My primary only rejects mail to > invalid recipients (spam is dealt with internally). I'd like my secondary to > reject invalid

Re: How to reject mail on secondary MX?

2011-12-02 Thread Erwan David
Le Fri 2/12/2011, Ken D'Ambrosio disait > Hey, all. I've got a primary -- my actual destination/IMAP server -- and, for > various reasons, a secondary SMTP server. My primary only rejects mail to > invalid recipients (spam is dealt with internally). I'd like my secondary to > reject invalid rec

Re: Using postfix w/ mimedefang's Unix socket

2011-12-02 Thread Philip Prindeville
On 12/2/11 2:19 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Philip Prindeville: >> Would it make sense to add a parameter of additional gid's that >> you want smtpd to retain? > > Perhaps you can use a class "inet" socket on 127.0.0.1. That > will have less impact on the Postfix security architecture. > With 64k p

Re: Using postfix w/ mimedefang's Unix socket

2011-12-02 Thread Philip Prindeville
On 12/2/11 8:23 PM, Philip Prindeville wrote: > On 12/2/11 2:19 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: >> Philip Prindeville: >>> Would it make sense to add a parameter of additional gid's that >>> you want smtpd to retain? >> >> Perhaps you can use a class "inet" socket on 127.0.0.1. That >> will have less impa

Re: Low Budget Backups

2011-12-02 Thread email builder
  Does anyone have any low-end/low-budget backup suggestions for user mail spools?  Consider hobby type scenarios or small businesses with a cheap single hard drive rented (dedicated/shared) server where there may not be budget for another server or paid ba

Re: Low Budget Backups

2011-12-02 Thread email builder
>> No other people have systems for doing this? > > we are using http://dbmail.org/ behind postfix and a replication-slave > if you have only one server you can setup a slave on a different port > as 3306 on 127.0.0.1 > > benefit of the slave is that you can stop it at any time, make a > copy o