* Daniel L. Miller :
> I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
> designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
> complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process and the
> result displayed. For example:
Have you tried "sendmail -bv ..."?
p@ric
How work name resolution in Postfix?
I have an internal server that resend mail to another box (in the same
IntraNet).
If I put in my local /etc/hosts something like:
192.168.1.25mail.aaa.tld
the box do what I want:
# ping mail.aaa.tld
PING mail.aaa.tld (192.168.1.25) 56(84) bytes of data
Am 22.05.2012 12:15, schrieb Barbara M.:
> # telnet mail.aaa.tld 25
> Trying 192.168.1.25...
> Connected to mail.aaa.tld.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 mail.aaa.tld ESMTP
> . . . .
>
>
> but Postfix seems to still search the real IP via DNS.
>
> Why?
> Any trick/config/workaround to force
On 05/22/12 12:15, Barbara M. wrote:
> Any trick/config/workaround to force Postfix to consider /etc/hosts?
To use other data sources than DNS you need the smtp_host_lookup option
(http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_host_lookup).
--
Martin
Barbara M.:
>
> How work name resolution in Postfix?
>
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_host_lookup
Wietse
smtp_host_lookup (default: dns)
What mechanisms the Postfix SMTP client uses to look up a host's
IP address. This parameter is ignored when DNS lookups are
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 22.05.2012 12:15, schrieb Barbara M.:
# telnet mail.aaa.tld 25
Trying 192.168.1.25...
Connected to mail.aaa.tld.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail.aaa.tld ESMTP
. . . .
but Postfix seems to still search the real IP via DNS.
Why?
Any trick/config
Barbara M.:
> Thanks.
>
> I put:
>
> smtp_host_lookup = native, dns
>
> In my idea this give higher priority to /etc/hosts
Postfix works as documented. See:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_host_lookup
Then search for any text that promises that Postfix
gives priority. If such text
This is certainly not of critical importance, but my curiosity makes me
wonder:
May 20 12:28:40 <2.6> hyperion postfix/smtpd[22436]:
What does the "<2.6>" signify in every Postfix log line entry?
I am running postfix-current on FreeBSD 8.3
mail_version = 2.10-20120423
* Henry Stryker :
>
> This is certainly not of critical importance, but my curiosity makes me
> wonder:
>
> May 20 12:28:40 <2.6> hyperion postfix/smtpd[22436]:
>
>
> What does the "<2.6>" signify in every Postfix log line entry?
Dunno. That's probably a function of your syslog daemon
--
Ral
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Wietse Venema wrote:
Barbara M.:
Thanks.
I put:
smtp_host_lookup = native, dns
In my idea this give higher priority to /etc/hosts
Postfix works as documented. See:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_host_lookup
Then search for any text that promises that Post
On 22/05/2012 15:29, Henry Stryker wrote:
This is certainly not of critical importance, but my curiosity makes me
wonder:
May 20 12:28:40<2.6> hyperion postfix/smtpd[22436]:
What does the "<2.6>" signify in every Postfix log line entry?
I am running postfix-current on FreeBSD 8.3
mail_versio
On 5/22/12 6:31 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> What does the "<2.6>" signify in every Postfix log line entry?
>
> Dunno. That's probably a function of your syslog daemon
Very good, and thanks for the quick answer. I was able to learn from
/usr/include/sys/syslog.h that this maps to a facility/
* Henry Stryker :
> Very good, and thanks for the quick answer. I was able to learn from
> /usr/include/sys/syslog.h that this maps to a facility/priority code.
>
> 2 = mail
> 6 = informational
Ah, interesting. Wouldn't have been able to guess this :)
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT
Hi All
I need to replace all occurences of "text1" in mailbody with "text2".
The regexp =>
/^(.*)text1(.*)$/ REPLACE $1text2$2 works if there is only one
occurence of "text1" in a line.
It changes only the last occurence of "text1" in a single line which
has multiple occurences of "text1" in
On 5/22/2012 10:33 AM, varad gupta wrote:
> Hi All
>
>
> I need to replace all occurences of "text1" in mailbody with "text2".
>
> The regexp =>
>
> /^(.*)text1(.*)$/ REPLACE $1text2$2 works if there is only one
> occurence of "text1" in a line.
>
> It changes only the last occurence of "text1" in
varad gupta:
> Hi All
>
>
> I need to replace all occurences of "text1" in mailbody with "text2".
>
> The regexp =>
>
> /^(.*)text1(.*)$/ REPLACE $1text2$2 works if there is only one
> occurence of "text1" in a line.
>
> It changes only the last occurence of "text1" in a single line which
> h
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> varad gupta:
>> Hi All
>>
>>
>> I need to replace all occurences of "text1" in mailbody with "text2".
>>
>> The regexp =>
>>
>> /^(.*)text1(.*)$/ REPLACE $1text2$2 works if there is only one
>> occurence of "text1" in a line.
>>
>> It change
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List
wrote:
> On 5/22/2012 10:33 AM, varad gupta wrote:
>> Hi All
>>
>>
>> I need to replace all occurences of "text1" in mailbody with "text2".
>>
>> The regexp =>
>>
>> /^(.*)text1(.*)$/ REPLACE $1text2$2 works if there is only one
>> occur
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:25 PM, varad gupta wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> varad gupta:
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>>
>>> I need to replace all occurences of "text1" in mailbody with "text2".
>>>
>>> The regexp =>
>>>
>>> /^(.*)text1(.*)$/ REPLACE $1text2$2 works if ther
varad gupta:
> >>> Kindly advise how to replace "text1" with "text2" for multiple
> >>> occurences of "text1" in the same line
>
> Can you suggest any way in which my requirement can be achieved (apart
> from writing my own filter?)
Like this:
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
header_checks = t
Thanks! That was it.
http://www.postfix.org/MULTI_INSTANCE_README.html#create in case anyone
else misses it.
--
Asa
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Viktor Dukhovni
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 11:44 PM
To: pos
On 5/22/2012 12:58 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Daniel L. Miller:
I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process and the
result displayed. For example
Daniel L. Miller:
> On 5/22/2012 12:58 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> > * Daniel L. Miller:
> >> I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
> >> designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
> >> complete Postfix configuration, and have both the process an
Hi,
One of our email user (his email address is: j...@ourcomapny.com) told me
he missed an important email he suppose to received last Friday around
7:30PM. I checked the maillog and I can't tell what's wrong. The email
is from another co-worker Liz (l...@ourcomapny.com), and there are 3
rec
On 5/22/2012 4:08 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Daniel L. Miller:
On 5/22/2012 12:58 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Daniel L. Miller:
I would find it quite useful to have a command, whereby either a
designated sender or recipient address can be tested against the
complete Postfix configuration, a
On 05/23/2012 01:40 AM, J Gao wrote:
postfix/virtual[31007]: 407738065: to=
Ugh - ugly HTML mail AND Mailscanner.
The message was delivered, your log clearly says so:
May 18 19:33:13 zeta postfix/virtual[31007]: 407738065:
to=, relay=virtual, delay=3.3,
delays=3.3/0.03/0/0.
Daniel L. Miller:
> >> Is there a way of specifying the sender address as well? Trying
> >> 'sendmail -f externalu...@otherdomain.com -bv myu...@mydomain.com'
> >> didn't work out...
> > It works correctly. See the example at the end of
> > http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html
> >
On 5/22/2012 5:04 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
sendmail -f sender (and yes, it does work correctly).
I've only tried the -bv option. Does my desired test require the -v and
actually deliver a message?
They differ only in whether mail is delivered or not.
Both use 100% exactly the identical same
Daniel L. Miller:
> On 5/22/2012 5:04 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > sendmail -f sender (and yes, it does work correctly).
> >
> >> I've only tried the -bv option. Does my desired test require the -v and
> >> actually deliver a message?
> > They differ only in whether mail is delivered or not.
> >
>
On 5/22/2012 6:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
I tried 'sendmail -f exter...@externaldomain.com -bv
myaddr...@mydomain.com'. This generates a mail delivery report to the
address specified as the -f parameter - instead of the login name
executing the sendmail command. So unless I have control of tha
30 matches
Mail list logo
