On 12/9/2011 7:57 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Wietse Venema:
>> This week I implemented a memcache client for Postfix in the hope
>> that it would be useful to share postscreen(8) or verify(8) caches
>> among multiple MTAs.
>>
>> The implementation is based on libmemcache. This was not too much
>
Hello!
i´m not quite sure if the problem is directly the virtual_alias_maps or
something it interacts with, so to say.
in main.cf i set
virtual_alias_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual.cf
unverified_recipient_reject_code = 550
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
and in mysql-virtual.c
First make sure that the domain you are sending to is set as a virtual mailbox
domain. It sounds like you've already set the virtual transport to dovecot
which is right. If you think mysql is the issue try making a virtual alias maps
hash file.
***Sent via RoadSync® for Android™
-Original
thank you for you reply.
virtual_mailbox_domains is set, as is virtual_transport.
do you mean using a hash-file to test it or for permanent use?
there are some 500 mail-users on the server, who change relatively often and
who have each a number of aliases..i´d rather avoid using a hash file,
espe
Well a hash file would be the simplest thing to ensure that postfix is
configured properly. I would have thought that all the information you need to
see what is going on would be in the mail log and the mysql log.
***Sent via RoadSync® for Android™
-Original Message-
From: lupin...@gmx
On Sunday 11 December 2011 07:21:13 lupin...@gmx.net wrote:
> i´m not quite sure if the problem is directly the
> virtual_alias_maps or something it interacts with, so to say. in
> main.cf i set
> virtual_alias_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual.cf
'postmap -q virtual@alias mysql:/etc/postfix
Am 11.12.2011 15:18, schrieb lupin...@gmx.net:
> thank you for you reply.
> virtual_mailbox_domains is set, as is virtual_transport.
> do you mean using a hash-file to test it or for permanent use?
> there are some 500 mail-users on the server, who change relatively often and
> who have each a n
thank you for the hint!
i activated the query-log and the query is executed ok. i also checked it via
postmap -q hutzenp...@domain.de mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual.cf
(which correctly did not return anything)
and
postmap -q correctu...@domain.de mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual.cf
which did ret
Wietse Venema:
>> This week I implemented a memcache client for Postfix in the hope
>> that it would be useful to share postscreen(8) or verify(8) caches
>> among multiple MTAs.
...
> Considering that memcache patches are floating around with several
> problems, and the amount of time that I put
One missing word makes all the difference.
Wietse
Wietse Venema:
>> This week I implemented a memcache client for Postfix in the hope
>> that it would be useful to share postscreen(8) or verify(8) caches
>> among multiple MTAs.
...
> Considering that memcache patches are floating around
G'day Postfix'ers,
I'm in the process of building-up a new company mail server. It'll
be an IMAP4 beast, using Maildir, and so I allocated the vast majority
of the freespace to /home, for IMAP folder storage. Then it occurred
to me: I know my users have poor habits, and tend to leave much of
the
Jim Seymour:
> G'day Postfix'ers,
>
> I'm in the process of building-up a new company mail server. It'll
> be an IMAP4 beast, using Maildir, and so I allocated the vast majority
> of the freespace to /home, for IMAP folder storage. Then it occurred
> to me: I know my users have poor habits, and
On Sun, December 11, 2011 5:44 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Combining memcache and proxymap
> ---
>
> It seems that memcache is best for (surprise) doing what it was
> designed for: a cache layer on top of a persistent database, where
> the cache is maintained by the clien
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 13:15:28 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wrote:
[snip]
>
> To turn on maildir support, append a trailing '/' to the name.
Yes, I caught that. (But thanks for the note, anyway). I plan to
let inbox be mbox format, just like it is in a "normal" mail spool.
Dovecot is perfectly hap
Hi
I need use the address aaa+xyz@domain when I have the only the address
aaa@domain.
In my main.cf I have recipient_delimiter = +.
I use Mysql to emails adress and domains.
What do I need to configurate this?
Thanks
My main.cf
smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name (Ubuntu)
biff = no
appen
On Sunday, December 11, 2011 at 18:38:07 UTC, jseym...@linxnet.com confabulated:
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 13:15:28 -0500 (EST)
> Wietse Venema wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> To turn on maildir support, append a trailing '/' to the name.
> Yes, I caught that. (But thanks for the note, anyway). I plan to
Jose Renato Attab Braga:
> Hi
> I need use the address aaa+xyz@domain when I have the only the
> address aaa@domain.
> In my main.cf I have recipient_delimiter = +.
> I use Mysql to emails adress and domains.
> What do I need to configurate this?
In Postfix, nothing. Postfix will look up aaa+xyz@d
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:30:12 +
Duane Hill wrote:
[snip]
>
> You could also use Dovecot LDA or LMTP. Dovecot will create
> the directory structure automatically upon the first login or
> message delivery.
Wouldn't I lose Postfix' header and body processing if I did that?
There's
I think you need to be using virtual_mailbox_maps to create a list of valid
recipients.
Also I can see that dovecot has also accepted the message so you must have
configured something like "allow_all_users=yes".
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [own
Hi All,
This may be a weird one, and may be completely OT. If the latter:
Feel free to tell me to bugger off :)
System is FreeBSD 8.2, running ipfilter and
postfix-current-2.9.2019,4.
Occasionally I see something like this from ipfilter in
/var/log/messages:
bge1 @0:24 b ,25 -> 89.73.2
Am 12.12.2011 00:10, schrieb Jim Seymour:
> Occasionally I see something like this from ipfilter in
> /var/log/messages:
>
> bge1 @0:24 b ,25 -> 89.73.201.168,36545 PR tcp len
> 20 40 -AR OUT
>
> Looking in /var/log/maillog...
>
> Dec 11 17:47:08 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: co
Jim Seymour:
> Hi All,
>
> This may be a weird one, and may be completely OT. If the latter:
> Feel free to tell me to bugger off :)
>
> System is FreeBSD 8.2, running ipfilter and
> postfix-current-2.9.2019,4.
>
> Occasionally I see something like this from ipfilter in
> /var/log/messages:
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 18:10:34 -0500, Jim Seymour wrote:
> Looking in /var/log/maillog...
>
> Dec 11 17:47:08 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: connect from
> unknown[89.73.201.168]
> Dec 11 17:47:10 myhost postfix/smtpd[48290]: NOQUEUE: reject:
> RCPT from unknown[89.73.201.168]:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
[snip]
>
> why do you use "reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname" if you do
> not like the results of it?
Why do you answer the question when you obviously have not read it?
(Or at least apparently not understood it.)
Regards,
Jim
--
Not
Am 12.12.2011 01:04, schrieb Jim Seymour:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
> Reindl Harald wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> why do you use "reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname" if you do
>> not like the results of it?
>
> Why do you answer the question when you obviously have not read it?
> (Or at
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:35:23 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wrote:
[snip]
>
> Why are you blocking outbound TCP RST?
I am not, to the best of my knowledge.
There is a TCP control traffic rate limit in the border router, there
as a DoS prevention tactic, but that's it.
This doesn't happen all the t
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 01:11:00 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 12.12.2011 01:04, schrieb Jim Seymour:
> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
> > Reindl Harald wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>
> >> why do you use "reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname" if you do
> >> not like the results of it?
> >
>
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:15:35 -0500
Jim Seymour wrote:
> Each of them occurs two-or-more
> times, involving the same contacting IP.
Clarification: That was to say that, when it occurs multiple times
in a row, it's the same IP trying over-and-over again in each set of
retries. A total of 17 unique
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:41:56 -0500
Sahil Tandon wrote:
[snip]
>
> Postfix sends a 450 response because your DNS server cannot find the
> client's reverse hostname; following that, the client foolishly
> sends DATA, to which Postfix responds with a 554. Finally, instead
> of gracefully QUITing,
Wietse Venema:
> > bge1 @0:24 b ,25 -> 89.73.201.168,36545 PR tcp len
> > 20 40 -AR OUT
>
> Why are you blocking outbound TCP RST?
According to ipmon(8), -AR means the ACK and RST flags are set.
My question is why is your firewall blocking outbound ACK|RST?
Wietse
won't be perfect, so information should be cached for only a limited
> time).
Done in postfix-2.9-20111211-nonprod; the code is very lightly tested.
Wietse
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 20:03:59 -0500 (EST)
Wietse Venema wrote:
> Wietse Venema:
> > > bge1 @0:24 b ,25 -> 89.73.201.168,36545 PR
> > > tcp len 20 40 -AR OUT
> >
> > Why are you blocking outbound TCP RST?
>
> According to ipmon(8),
The web is rotting my brain. I never thought to actually ch
32 matches
Mail list logo
