Re: OT: spf2.0 (was Re: mx bind ip)

2012-03-11 Thread Noel Butler
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 22:33 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >no because i did not notice about spf2.0 until now > >and do not find anything about it on openspf.org > >http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax > > > >have you some good documentation/examples > >since i am the developer of our admin

Re: OT: spf2.0 (was Re: mx bind ip)

2012-03-11 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 11.03.2012 09:44, schrieb Noel Butler: > On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 22:33 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> >have you some good documentation/examples >> >since i am the developer of our admin-backends >> >it should be easy to integrate any record-types >> > >> I wouldn't worry too much about it. Yo

unused parameter? (policy_time_limit=600)

2012-03-11 Thread Ronald F. Guilmette
I've just updated from 2.8.5 to 2.9.1 and now, when I start postfix, I am getting the following set of messages (that I've never seen before): /usr/local/sbin/postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf: unused parameter: policy_time_limit=600 /usr/local/sbin/postconf: warning: /usr/loca

Re: unused parameter? (policy_time_limit=600)

2012-03-11 Thread /dev/rob0
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:50:51AM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > I've just updated from 2.8.5 to 2.9.1 and now, when I start > postfix, I am getting the following set of messages (that I've > never seen before): > > > /usr/local/sbin/postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf: > u

Re: mx bind ip

2012-03-11 Thread Bastian Blank
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 01:01:00AM +1000, Nick Edwards wrote: > I have tried smtp_bind_address(6) but for some reason, although it > uses the correct IP, the relays are denied for spf failure on the > main server, even though they are all permitted in spf RR, ok, evident > by fact that if I remove

Re: OT: spf2.0 (was Re: mx bind ip)

2012-03-11 Thread Noel Butler
On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 11:01 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > hm, since it contains the same data as spf1 and even hotmail itself > has only spf1 i tend to ignore it also in the future > Just had a look and you're right, but as it improved our deliverable success rates to hotmail many fold a f

Re: LoadShared Failover

2012-03-11 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 3/10/2012 8:30 AM, Michael Maymann wrote: > How do I best setup a loadshared failover postfix mailrelay solution for > this on RHEL6 ? You consult the RHEL6 documentation. If you don't find the answer there, you contact Red Hat support who will point you in the right direction. Isn't this wh

Re: unused parameter? (policy_time_limit=600)

2012-03-11 Thread Noel Butler
On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 03:50 -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > I've just updated from 2.8.5 to 2.9.1 and now, when I start postfix, > I am getting the following set of messages (that I've never seen before): > > /usr/local/sbin/postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf: unused > p