Den 2012-07-27 10:57, Dominique skrev:
The message is not cryptic, I just don't know what to do to fix it...
you are outside of mynetworks in postfix term, so postfix will have
sasl auth from client to reley
Can someone help me out ? Let me know what info is needed.
google postfix sasl a
Den 2012-07-27 20:43, Mark Alan skrev:
While using Postfix 2.9.3, iptables 1.4.12, under Ubuntu 12.04 LTS,
after upgrading to Postfix 2.9.x, using
suggest here "apt-get install shorewall"
it creates stable firewall
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:11:44 -0700, "Daniel L. Miller"
wrote:
> That's a fairly restrictive matching rule you
> have for your new connection state - what worked before might have
> changed. May I suggest removing the --syn for starters?
Tried your suggestion. The problem persists.
Thank you.
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:43:59 +0100, Mark Alan
wrote:
> after upgrading to Postfix 2.9.x, using
> I am now finding a lot of syslog entries like these:
>/var/log/syslog:Jul 27 12:00:32 mx kernel: [485xxx.x] FW
>DROP-OUT IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=xx.xxx.xxx.xx DST=xxx.xx.xxx.xx LEN=77
>TOS=0
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 13:48:55 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Den 2012-07-27 20:43, Mark Alan skrev:
>
> > While using Postfix 2.9.3, iptables 1.4.12, under Ubuntu 12.04 LTS,
> > after upgrading to Postfix 2.9.x, using
>
> suggest here "apt-get install shorewall"
I am afraid that shorewall is jus
Mark Alan:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:43:59 +0100, Mark Alan
> wrote:
>
> > after upgrading to Postfix 2.9.x, using
> > I am now finding a lot of syslog entries like these:
> >/var/log/syslog:Jul 27 12:00:32 mx kernel: [485xxx.x] FW
> >DROP-OUT IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=xx.xxx.xxx.xx DST=xxx.xx
Mark Alan:
> Using that exact same iptables configuration with qmail (instead of
> Postfix 2.9.x) does not raise any firewall drop-outs.
qmail makes fewer parallel connections than Postfix (especially
with Postfix VERP turned on), and so it can overflow state tables
that qmail doesn't.
Wi
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 09:10:34AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Thus, VERP increases the number of parallel connections. This may
> result in overflow of state tables in under-powered stateful routers,
> causing them to drop packets that don't match any existing state.
Or perhaps the state tabl
On 7/27/2012 10:18 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Dennis Clarke:
>> Do you think I can figure that one out ? No way. What I do find is
>> vast amounts of info about how to put in ClamAV and SSL bits and auth
>> bits and endless web pages that point to apt-get and RHEL yum this that
>> and the oth
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Viktor Dukhovni <
postfix-us...@dukhovni.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 09:10:34AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Thus, VERP increases the number of parallel connections. This may
> > result in overflow of state tables in under-powered stateful routers,
Hi guys,
I currently have a postfix setup with virtual users on a mysql database
and dovecot as lda.
I wanted to implement the "+" separator to route specific messages to a
custom destination folder (within the account).
Can I do that directly in postfix or should I create ad-hoc rules in
dovecot
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:42:59 +, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 09:10:34AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Thus, VERP increases the number of parallel connections. This may
> > result in overflow of state tables in under-powered stateful
> > routers, causing them to drop
On 2012-07-28 Andrea Gozzi wrote:
> I currently have a postfix setup with virtual users on a mysql database
> and dovecot as lda.
> I wanted to implement the "+" separator to route specific messages to a
> custom destination folder (within the account).
>
> Can I do that directly in postfix or sho
Den 2012-07-28 14:45, Mark Alan skrev:
I am afraid that shorewall is just a front end to iptables.
Using that exact same iptables configuration with qmail (instead of
Postfix 2.9.x) does not raise any firewall drop-outs.
respect, C is just a gui front end for ASSEMBLER
postfix will be much fa
Den 2012-07-27 17:26, Dennis Clarke skrev:
And please ignore the idiots on this list who say that you are
stupid.
I always do and know better regardless. Also, thank you for truely
wonderful software that saves me from SendMail.
and sendmail people will say the same to qmail :=)
Hi all,
I've already finished a Postfix server setup with virtual users and Dovecot
as virtual transport.
I just cannot find out why MS Outlook fails the smtp test unless I check
the "Log on to incoming mail server before sending mail" on the More
settings/ Outgoing Server tab.
Thanks in advance
- Original Message -
From: Stan Hoeppner
Date: Saturday, July 28, 2012 12:14 pm
Subject: Re: the mail server from source problem
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> On 7/27/2012 10:18 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Dennis Clarke:
> >> Do you think I can figure that one out ? No way. What
Am 28.07.2012 20:03, schrieb Mark Alan:
>> The solution is to exempt traffic sent from the machine from the rate
>> controls.
>
> In 2012, in a server facing the net and running other services besides
> mail, I would not call it a safe bet. In the event (that must be
> accounted for) of an intru
18 matches
Mail list logo
