Hi,
I have several alias domains, I mean where users should receive mails
for both u...@domain.com (call it 'canonical') and u...@domain.org
('alias') mail addresses.
However, the delivery is done by an LMTP server which can not handle the
alias domains, its user database (LDAP) only contains the
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:16:19AM +0100, Kristof Bajnok wrote:
> My other question was going to be how I could verify the 'alias' address
> in RCPT stage (a wildcard virtual_alias_maps entry prevents this),
How do you get your user information?
Bastian
--
Change is the essential process of all
On 01/03/2013 12:50 PM, Bastian Blank wrote:
>> My other question was going to be how I could verify the 'alias' address
>> in RCPT stage (a wildcard virtual_alias_maps entry prevents this),
> How do you get your user information?
LDAP, no local users. LDIF attached.
Currently, a custom policy sc
Kristof Bajnok:
> On 01/03/2013 12:50 PM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> >> My other question was going to be how I could verify the 'alias' address
> >> in RCPT stage (a wildcard virtual_alias_maps entry prevents this),
> > How do you get your user information?
>
> LDAP, no local users. LDIF attached.
>
Hi,
I'm trying to configure postfix not to use local accounts for delivery,
only LDAP. To do this I'm putting sth like this into main.cf:
local_recipient_maps =
ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-staff.cf
ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
$alias_maps
ldap-staff.cf and ldap-users.cf are
On 01/03/2013 02:28 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Currently, a custom policy script (domainalias-aware) verifies the
>> > recipient in LDAP, then Postfix queries the LDAP again for possible SMTP
>> > forwards (virtual_alias_maps). If found, then forwards the message via
>> > SMTP, else if passes the
Kristof Bajnok:
> Hi,
>
> I have several alias domains, I mean where users should receive mails
> for both u...@domain.com (call it 'canonical') and u...@domain.org
> ('alias') mail addresses.
>
> However, the delivery is done by an LMTP server which can not handle the
> alias domains, its user d
Am 03.01.2013 06:05, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 04:49:50AM +0100, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
/var/log/mail.info:
Jan 3 03:09:45 hostname postfix/smtpd[5781]: connect from
mail-we0-f173.google.com[74.125.82.173]
Jan 3 03:09:45 hostname postfix/smtpd[5781]: warning: Illegal
Michael Blessenohl:
> > The RFC specifies the maximal valid character set for email addresses.
> > Not all the constructs in this maximally valid character set are
> > safe on security, anti-relay, robustness, legacy-compatibility and
> > other grounds.
> >
> > This thread is a dead-end. If you wan
Can't I report it as a Bug? The Mailman software for example handles this kind of addresses quite nicely. Am 03.01.2013 16:20 schrieb Wietse Venema : Michael Blessenohl:
> > The RFC specifies the maximal valid character set for email addresses.
> > Not all the constructs in this maximally valid cha
An update on creating self-signed certs.
On 12/20/2012 09:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 02:15:35PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
People who want a more compact recipe for a self-signed cert on
a single SMTP server can use my "one-liner" (for machines whose
hostname is a
Michael Blessenohl:
> Can't I report
Your test was invalid.
hostname# postconf resolve_dequoted_address=no
hostname# postfix reload
postfix/postfix-script: refreshing the Postfix mail system
hostname# telnet locahost smtp
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Es
On 01/03/2013 04:12 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
Am 03.01.2013 06:05, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 04:49:50AM +0100, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
/var/log/mail.info:
Jan 3 03:09:45 hostname postfix/smtpd[5781]: connect from
mail-we0-f173.google.com[74.125.82.173]
Jan 3 03:0
On 01/03/2013 04:03 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> I have several alias domains, I mean where users should receive mails
>> > for both u...@domain.com (call it 'canonical') and u...@domain.org
>> > ('alias') mail addresses.
>> >
>> > However, the delivery is done by an LMTP server which can not handl
Please try again using the telnet command on a different machine than localhost.On localhost I get the same result as you. Am 03.01.2013 17:45 schrieb Wietse Venema : Michael Blessenohl:
> Can't I report
Your test was invalid.
hostname# postconf resolve_dequoted_address=no
hostname# post
Didn't work either. Sorry. Am 03.01.2013 18:02 schrieb martijn.list : On 01/03/2013 04:12 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
> Am 03.01.2013 06:05, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
>> On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 04:49:50AM +0100, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
>>
>>> /var/log/mail.info:
>>> Jan 3 03:09:45 hostname post
Michael Blessenohl:
>Please try again using the telnet command on a different machine
>than localhost(br(span style="font-family:Prelude, Verdana,
Please stop sending HTML-only posts to a mailing list.
That is bad etiquette.
After:
# postconf "resolve_dequoted_address = no"
# postfix rel
I'm sorry, I'll try not to use my smartphone again to answer mails from
this list.
I ment using a remote machine as client to connect to the postfix server
as opposed to connect to the machine itself. I don't know why it does
matter, but apparently it does. Using the hostname, IP or localhost
On 01/03/2013 09:48 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
I'm sorry, I'll try not to use my smartphone again to answer mails from
this list.
I ment using a remote machine as client to connect to the postfix server
as opposed to connect to the machine itself. I don't know why it does
matter, but apparent
Michael Blessenohl:
> I'm sorry, I'll try not to use my smartphone again to answer mails from
> this list.
>
> I ment using a remote machine as client to connect to the postfix server
> as opposed to connect to the machine itself. I don't know why it does
> matter, but apparently it does. Using
Am 03.01.2013 22:03, schrieb martijn.list:
> On 01/03/2013 09:48 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
>> I'm sorry, I'll try not to use my smartphone again to answer mails from
>> this list.
>>
>> I ment using a remote machine as client to connect to the postfix server
>> as opposed to connect to the ma
Thanks a lot for the help. There is no firewall messing with SMTP
inbetween. With both options
resolve_dequoted_address = no
allow_untrusted_routing = yes
it finally works. Because I don't have a backup MX, this set-up should
be fairly safe to use.
Am 03.01.2013 22:08, schrieb Wietse Venema
On 1/3/2013 4:59 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the help. There is no firewall messing with SMTP
> inbetween. With both options
>
> resolve_dequoted_address = no
> allow_untrusted_routing = yes
>
> it finally works. Because I don't have a backup MX, this set-up should
> be fairl
Am 04.01.2013 00:16, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 1/3/2013 4:59 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
Thanks a lot for the help. There is no firewall messing with SMTP
inbetween. With both options
resolve_dequoted_address = no
allow_untrusted_routing = yes
it finally works. Because I don't have a backup
Michael Blessenohl:
> Am 04.01.2013 00:16, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> > On 1/3/2013 4:59 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
> >> Thanks a lot for the help. There is no firewall messing with SMTP
> >> inbetween. With both options
> >>
> >> resolve_dequoted_address = no
> >> allow_untrusted_routing = yes
>
I think what David was trying to say is a way to "give up" the sending
process based on some errors.
I pretty much need the same thing.
What I ask is: is there anyway to run a postsuper command-like telling the
SMTP to give up of all deferred queue without just deleting the messages
from server,
Rafael Azevedo:
> What I ask is: is there anyway to run a postsuper command-like telling the
> SMTP to give up of all deferred queue without just deleting the messages
> from server, but sending it all back to the sender.
# postconf maximal_queue_lifetime=3
# postfix reload
# postfix flush
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:05:42AM -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> An update on creating self-signed certs.
>
> On 12/20/2012 09:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> >On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 02:15:35PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> >
> >>People who want a more compact recipe for a self-signed cert
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 07:28:20PM +0100, Kristof Bajnok wrote:
> > from the alias form to the canonical form. This will also validate
> > the alias form as a valid address in RCPT TO commands.
>
> Unfortunately, I can not accomplish this with a single query.
Actually, you can:
domain =
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 12:33:49AM +0100, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
> >Why are you so committed/determined to use special characters in the
> >local-part, especially after the experts explained you should not be
> >doing so? You obviously "need" to use '@' in local-part. Why do you
> >need to do
On 01/03/2013 10:10 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:05:42AM -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
An update on creating self-signed certs.
On 12/20/2012 09:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 02:15:35PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
People who want a more c
On 3 Jan 2013, at 18:33, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
Am 04.01.2013 00:16, schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 1/3/2013 4:59 PM, Michael Blessenohl wrote:
Thanks a lot for the help. There is no firewall messing with SMTP
inbetween. With both options
resolve_dequoted_address = no
allow_untrusted_routing =
32 matches
Mail list logo
