On 2011-12-11 19:38, Jim Seymour wrote:
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
Hi Wietse,
we don't need to check fallback_relay anymore.
As I found out, uucp transport will be turned off in near future on my backup
smarthost site.
I thank you for your help!
-lutzn
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://f
Hi,
this is still an open issue.
> Ah, and another thing. I see the following in the logs:
> Dec 12 16:38:39 hostname postfix/smtpd[1374]: warning:
> network_biopair_interop: error reading 5 bytes from the network: Connection
> reset by peer
>
> I already googled and found some hints but none
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:42:12 -0600, l...@airstreamcomm.net wrote:
user per hour. Looking for some feedback from the community on your
experiences with Postfwd and Policyd, or any other postfix policy
servers
that you have used.
http://www.policyd.org/ postfwd cant imho do db updates if it ch
What is the output of:
postconf smtpd_reject_unlisted_recipient
Reason I ask is that the "unlisted recipient" check also
does the relocated check.
smtpd_reject_unlisted_recipient = no
I have to accept unlisted recipients as there are no local users.
Everything is being relaid to an Exchange
On 2011-12-13 3:11 AM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
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.
So, no maildir, then ?
You can't exactly mix the formats - it's one or the other.
Sure you can... dovecot is fin
lutz.niede...@gmx.net:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=603780 . My mail
> client is The Bat and even with this message in the logs it seems
> to work.
If the biopair message does not break mail, then ignore it. Postfix can't
prevent the client from closing the session.
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011, Noel Jones wrote:
On 12/12/2011 7:08 AM, Tomas Macek wrote:
I'm using Postfix 2.8.5 built from source and amavisd-new 2.6.4 from
Scientific Linux distribution. I have virtual domain 'virtdom.cz' and
some subdomain 'subdomain.virtdom.cz'. The server receives the
message an
On 12/12/2011 8:32 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
What is the output of:
postconf smtpd_reject_unlisted_recipient
Reason I ask is that the "unlisted recipient" check also
does the relocated check.
Wietse
It might also be relevant that I'm using recipient address verification
against the Exc
pleted in snapshot 20111213:
Support for a persistent backup database in the memcache client.
The memcache client updates the memcache whenever it looks up or
modifies information in the persistent database.
The persistent database can be shared with the proxymap service,
provided th
Hi All,
On one of our servers, we experienced this strange behavior.
A mail was sent to 2 other ids on the same virtual domain.
LMTP delivered a warning
and then after almost 24 hrs the mail was successfully delivered.
Pls see the logs below :
varad gupta:
> Dec 9 13:24:25 ms1 postfix/smtpd[6462]: B082DCCEB6:
> client=unknown[192.168.x.x], sasl_method=LOGIN,
> sasl_username=x...@domain.tld
> Dec 9 13:24:25 ms1 postfix/cleanup[24260]: B082DCCEB6:
> message-id=<004801ccb647$d6a829e0$83f87da0$@domain.tld>
> Dec 9 13:24:25 ms1 postfix/qmg
Wietse Venema:
> varad gupta:
> > Dec 9 13:24:25 ms1 postfix/smtpd[6462]: B082DCCEB6:
> > client=unknown[192.168.x.x], sasl_method=LOGIN,
> > sasl_username=x...@domain.tld
> > Dec 9 13:24:25 ms1 postfix/cleanup[24260]: B082DCCEB6:
> > message-id=<004801ccb647$d6a829e0$83f87da0$@domain.tld>
> > De
the
> cache is maintained by the clients of the persistent database.
Completed in snapshot 20111213:
Support for a persistent backup database in the memcache client.
The memcache client updates the memcache whenever it looks up or modifies
information in the persistent database.
The persiste
--
> >
> > 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 clients of the persistent database.
>
> Completed in snapshot 201112
se Venema
> > Cc: Postfix users
> > Subject: Re: memcache client for Postfix
> >
> > > Combining memcache and proxymap
> > > ---
> > >
> > > It seems that memcache is best for (surprise) doing what it was
> > >
* Wietse Venema :
> Wietse Venema:
> > Mueller, Martin (Messaging):
> > > Thanks for all the work making memcache support available, any
> > > thoughts on the potential use of this for anvil?
> >
> > As documented, anvil blocks a client that overwhelms the server.
> > For that, there is no need to
Hi all,
I'm not too familiar with postfix but our server seems to stop sending emails
usually only on the weekends. The rest of the week it's fine but once it gets
to about Saturday/Sunday morning it gets stuck. I've come in usually on Monday
and type "mailq" only to find hundreds if not thousa
Patrick Ben Koetter:
> * Wietse Venema :
> > Wietse Venema:
> > > Mueller, Martin (Messaging):
> > > > Thanks for all the work making memcache support available, any
> > > > thoughts on the potential use of this for anvil?
> > >
> > > As documented, anvil blocks a client that overwhelms the server
On 12/13/2011 2:17 PM, Gonzo Fernandez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm not too familiar with postfix but our server seems to stop sending
> emails usually only on the weekends. The rest of the week it's fine
> but once it gets to about Saturday/Sunday morning it gets stuck. I've
> come in usually on Mond
Gonzo Fernandez:
> Dec 11 05:09:19 batch-ca4-02 postfix/cleanup[31691]: warning: timeout on
> cleanup socket while reading input attribute name
> Dec 11 05:31:27 batch-ca4-02 postfix/cleanup[31691]: warning: 8A2993E3003B:
> read timeout on cleanup socket
Did the email arrive via smtpd (network),
Hi Wietse,
I believe the email arrive via pickup as shown below. Also, running qshape on
incoming queue showed all stuck there. Seems to happen between the late AM
hours on Saturday. Thank you for your help. Any ideas?
This is what I get when with the following command:
[root@batch-ca4-02 ~]#
Gonzo Fernandez:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> I believe the email arrive via pickup as shown below. Also, running
> qshape on incoming queue showed all stuck there. Seems to happen
> between the late AM hours on Saturday. Thank you for your help.
> Any ideas?
>
> This is what I get when with the following co
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Tomas Macek wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011, Noel Jones wrote:
On 12/12/2011 7:08 AM, Tomas Macek wrote:
I'm using Postfix 2.8.5 built from source and amavisd-new 2.6.4 from
Scientific Linux distribution. I have virtual domain 'virtdom.cz' and
some subdomain 'subdomain.virtd
24 matches
Mail list logo
