Le 16/09/2013 18:43, Viktor Dukhovni a écrit :
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:24:12AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
So I think putting "sender" first and indicating that *only*
listed senders are in scope makes sense:
reject_restricted_sender_wrong_login
this should likely automatically imp
Le 18/09/2013 05:40, Viktor Dukhovni a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:00:48PM +1000, li...@sbt.net.au wrote:
Return-Path:
...
Received: from p2p (unknown [124.11.170.87])
by geko.domain.tld (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E40A3827C6
for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:13:25 +1000 (EST)
Everythi
On 9/18/2013 4:27 AM, Emmanuel Fusté wrote:
> Le 18/09/2013 05:40, Viktor Dukhovni a écrit :
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:00:48PM +1000, li...@sbt.net.au wrote:
>>
>>> Return-Path:
>>> ...
>>> Received: from p2p (unknown [124.11.170.87])
>>> by geko.domain.tld (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E40A38
Emmanuel Fust?:
> In an "access" table, could I use any postfix "reject_xxx" and
> "permit_xxx" directive ?
> I did not find it in the documentation. It could be very powerfull.
It *is* documented.
OTHER ACTIONS
restriction...
Applythe named UCE restriction(s) (p
Wietse Venema:
> Emmanuel Fust?:
> > In an "access" table, could I use any postfix "reject_xxx" and
> > "permit_xxx" directive ?
> > I did not find it in the documentation. It could be very powerfull.
>
> It *is* documented.
>
> OTHER ACTIONS
>restriction...
> Applythe
Hello,
since a certificate recreation (new CSR with 2048 key size) STARTTLS with
postfix seems to have stopped working. Apache SSL works fine, using the same
certificate.
postfix/tlsmgr[8892]: warning: request to update table
btree:/var/spool/postfix/smtpd_scache in non-postfix directory
/var
Am Mittwoch, 18. September 2013, 13:23:13 schrieb Florian Lindner:
> Hello,
>
> since a certificate recreation (new CSR with 2048 key size) STARTTLS with
> postfix seems to have stopped working. Apache SSL works fine, using the same
> certificate.
Ok, got it. The certificate was somehow corrupted
Le 18/09/2013 12:48, Wietse Venema a écrit :
Wietse Venema:
Emmanuel Fust?:
In an "access" table, could I use any postfix "reject_xxx" and
"permit_xxx" directive ?
I did not find it in the documentation. It could be very powerfull.
It *is* documented.
OTHER ACTIONS
restriction...
On Wed, September 18, 2013 2:54 pm, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 9/17/2013 10:40 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>> reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
>>> reject_invalid_hostname, reject_non_fqdn_hostname,
>> This should have blocked the example message, but did not. Why?
> He's using Po
>On 9/16/2013 5:41 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
>>
>> Received: from mail02.corp.ena.net (unknown [96.4.3.90])
>> by mr11.mail.ena.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C091480688
>> for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:04:46 -0500 (CDT)
>>
>> My forward DNS lookup for this host is an internal IP address that
>> d
Emmanuel Fust?:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> Le 18/09/2013 12:48, Wietse Venema a ?crit :
> > Wietse Venema:
> >> Emmanuel Fust?:
> >>> In an "access" table, could I use any postfix "reject_xxx" and
> >>> "permit_xxx" directive ?
> >>> I did not find it in the documentation.
Hello world,
I'm not sure it this is the right place to ask, so if it's not, feel
free to tell me.
I configured DANE TLSA RRs for incertum.net, port 25 a few days ago,
but until now, the only "test" I could perform was bootstrapping a
recent Postfix snapshot and the latest OpenSSL and send myself
Dave Jones:
> >On 9/16/2013 5:41 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> >>
> >> Received: from mail02.corp.ena.net (unknown [96.4.3.90])
> >> by mr11.mail.ena.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C091480688
> >> for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:04:46 -0500 (CDT)
> >>
> >> My forward DNS lookup for this host is an int
Hello everyone,
I have checked on the official postfix documentation, but I have not found any
explanation on how to do what I want. I am sorry if this question has been
asked before.
I am using postfix with virtual users, registered in an LDAP server. So far,
everything is working fine.
However
On 9/18/2013 8:09 AM, li...@sbt.net.au wrote:
> On Wed, September 18, 2013 2:54 pm, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> On 9/17/2013 10:40 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
reject_invalid_hostname, reject_non_fqdn_hostname,
>>> This should have blocked t
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 08:54:50AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >>> This should have blocked the example message, but did not. Why?
> >> He's using Postfix 2.6.6. The parms in his current config that would
> >> have triggered are for 2.2 or older, thus ignored I assume. He should be
> >> using
Stan Hoeppner:
> > for other users, the old-syntax was working, now updated
>
> That's strange. Usually when new syntax is introduced the old syntax is
> removed and no longer works. 2.3 -> 2.6 seems a rather long grace
> period. Does the pre 2.3 syntax still work today?
With Postfix, support
> Dave Jones:
> > >On 9/16/2013 5:41 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Received: from mail02.corp.ena.net (unknown [96.4.3.90])
> > >> by mr11.mail.ena.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C091480688
> > >> for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:04:46 -0500 (CDT)
> > >>
> > >> My forward DNS lookup for thi
On 2013-09-18 Andre Rodier wrote:
> However, some users or some programs are sending emails using a "From"
> email address that does not exists in the LDAP server.
>
> I would like to know how to reject emails that came from an email
> address not registered in the LDAP server. Obviously, I need t
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 03:27:14PM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> I'm not sure it this is the right place to ask, so if it's not, feel
> free to tell me.
This is Postfix related.
> I configured DANE TLSA RRs for incertum.net, port 25 a few days ago,
> but until now, the only "test" I could perf
Dave Jones:
> Received: from mail02.corp.ena.net (unknown [96.4.3.90])
> by mr11.mail.ena.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C091480688
> for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:04:46 -0500 (CDT)
Wietse:
> First, I can't fail to notice that the PTR record for 96.4.3.90
> says "mail02.corp.ena.net.", but th
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 02:41:54PM +0100, Andre Rodier wrote:
> I am using postfix with virtual users, registered in an LDAP server. So far,
> everything is working fine.
>
> However, some users or some programs are sending emails using a "From" email
> address that does not exists in the LDAP se
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:23:13PM +0200, Florian Lindner wrote:
> warning: request to update table btree:/var/spool/postfix/smtp_scache in
> non-postfix directory /var/spool/postfix
> warning: redirecting the request to postfix-owned data_directory
> /var/lib/postfix
> smtpd_tls_session_cache_
* Viktor Dukhovni :
> I ran posttls-finger from my laptop, and got:
[...]
> So you're all set.
Thanks for taking the time to do this, I appreciate it.
I noticed that posttls-finger is not part of any upstream source I
could find, leading me to github - is that intentional?
Stefan
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:49:53PM +0200, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> I noticed that posttls-finger is not part of any upstream source I
> could find, leading me to github - is that intentional?
It is inaccurate. The posttls-finger utility has been included in
Postfix snapshots since postfix-2.11-2
Hi Wietse,
Am 2013-09-04 23:45, schrieb wie...@porcupine.org:
Marko Weber | ZBF:
hello postfix list,
maybe an easy quest for you.
when i use multiple rbls in 'postscreen_dnsbl_sites'
Yes...
postscreen_dnsbl_sites =
1.list.org
anotherlist.org
nsafools.org
obamaisadrama.org
at e
On 9/18/2013 9:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner:
>>> for other users, the old-syntax was working, now updated
>>
>> That's strange. Usually when new syntax is introduced the old syntax is
>> removed and no longer works. 2.3 -> 2.6 seems a rather long grace
>> period. Does the pre 2.3
Hello,
I am wondering if it is possible to greylist email systems based on:
1. An error code (450 Helo Command Rejected: Host not Found).
2. If they are a 'org' domain.
I don't want to reject these messages outright but an automatic greylisting
based on the above for these
On 9/18/2013 6:50 PM, Voytek wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> On 9/18/2013 9:07 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>> Stan Hoeppner:
> for other users, the old-syntax was working, now updated
That's strange. Usually when new syntax is introduced the old
>> syntax is
removed and no longe
Stan Hoeppner:
> the fact that I have 'old syntax' in the main.cf , does that
> imply that at some point, instead of upgrading postfix, a new
> installation was done, and old config files copied across? (which
> is a distinct possibility when server was 'moved' from physical
> to vps), just curious
Christopher Kurtis Koeber:
> Hello,
>
> I am wondering if it is possible to greylist email systems based on:
>
> 1. An error code (450 Helo Command Rejected: Host not Found).
This is currently not supported. It would require a DNS-based
lookup table.
Instead, consider using a good DNSBL.
>
Thank you very much; I certainly have an AmavisD setup (Spamassasin, ClamAV
AntiVirus, etc.) behind this; I am just trying to cut down on false
positives while making as little a disruptive change as possible to the end
user.
I will try out your suggestion on #2.
Thanks again.
Regards,
Christop
32 matches
Mail list logo
