Hello Wietse,
Am 10.09.2014 um 21:52 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Slow performance is typical for TCP window scaling problems. Have
> you tried to turn it off in your kernel?
Yes, Viktor suggested that also and I tried it. It does not make a difference,
the problem persists.
Regards,
Sean
Sean Durkin:
> Hello Wietse,
>
> Am 10.09.2014 um 21:52 schrieb Wietse Venema:
>
> > Slow performance is typical for TCP window scaling problems. Have
> > you tried to turn it off in your kernel?
>
> Yes, Viktor suggested that also and I tried it. It does not make
> a difference, the problem per
wietse:
This turned out to be easier than expected. Manpage fragment for
Postfix 2.12-20140907:
confirm_delay_cleared (default: no)
After sending a "your message is delayed" notification,
inform the sender when the delay clears up. This can result
in a sudden burst of notificatio
Hi Viktor,
Am 10.09.2014 um 23:03 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
> This trace has an insane level of debugging turned on, to the point
> that syslogd is overwhelmed and is losing messages. PLEASE DISABLE
> ALL VERBOSE logging. NO "-v" options in master.cf, NO debug_peer_list,
> ...
Yes, sorry, I crank
Roel van Meer writes:
What I am actually trying to do is a lookup with a single key in two maps.
Maybe stackmap or concatmap?
Now, if you specify two maps somewhere, and the first map returns a result,
there is no lookup done in the second map. With concatmap, both lookups
would happen,
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 02:36:51PM +0200, Sean Durkin wrote:
> > PLEASE DISABLE
> > ALL VERBOSE logging. NO "-v" options in master.cf, NO debug_peer_list,
>
> Yes, sorry, I cranked up the debug level, since normal logging looks like
> this:
>
> Sep 11 09:43:31 mail postfix/smtpd[25170]: connect
Hello, my friend
This is tom, I'm sending my greeting from China.
My customer send mail via my postfix server
main.cf
mynetworks = hash:/etc/postfix/mynetworks_table
/etc/postfix/mynetworks_table
ip1 PERMIT
ip2 PERMIT
Today, one of my customer send mail via the new ip.
And this new ip n
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 09:11:01PM +0800, Feel Zhou wrote:
> My customer send mail via my postfix server
>
> main.cf:
> mynetworks = hash:/etc/postfix/mynetworks_table
>
> mynetworks_table:
> ip1 PERMIT
> ip2 PERMIT
>
> Today, one of my customer send mail via the new ip.
> And this new
Hi Wietse,
Am 11.09.2014 um 13:49 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> What is the distribution of DATA sizes before failure? In your
> example I see numbers around 3kB, 9kB, 12kB.
At the moment, I see these sizes:
- always exactly 17511 bytes from smtp-out-127-*.amazon.com (today, seems to be
only 3 diffe
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:25:57PM +0200, Sean Durkin wrote:
> I can contact support, but they of course charge you for
> everything they do, and as long as I haven't ruled out that the
> reason is just some stupid configuration mistake on my part (or a
> routing/filtering issue at my hosting prov
First, I think this is somewhat academic because many users will
be confused when they receive more than one notification for the
same email message, regardless of the content of that notification.
Historically, Postfix will send a "relayed" notification when the
sender requests "SUCCESS" notifica
wietse:
First, I think this is somewhat academic because many users will
be confused when they receive more than one notification for the
same email message, regardless of the content of that notification.
right. Users tend to not read such messages :-/
Presently, we have a new feature to se
Sean Durkin:
> Hi Wietse,
>
> Am 11.09.2014 um 13:49 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> > What is the distribution of DATA sizes before failure? In your
> > example I see numbers around 3kB, 9kB, 12kB.
>
> At the moment, I see these sizes:
>
> - always exactly 17511 bytes from smtp-out-127-*.amazon.com (t
A. Schulze:
>
> wietse:
>
> > First, I think this is somewhat academic because many users will
> > be confused when they receive more than one notification for the
> > same email message, regardless of the content of that notification.
> right. Users tend to not read such messages :-/
>
> > Pres
Den:
> I do not have any of these "receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks"
> in my master.cf or any other places anywhere.
Prove it.
Wietse
Hello Wetsie,
That's a piece of cake.
My master.cf in full is below.
Would you like to see my main.cf?
receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks is not actually found in
main.cf as I selectively chose every single line in main.cf myself but I can
copy-paste it for clarity should that help
Hello again Wietse,
Here goes my main.cf. There is no
"receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks"
anywhere here as well. Would be absolutely and genuinely thankful for any
suggestions...
# See /usr/share/postfix/main.cf.dist for a commented, more complete version
# Debian specific: Speci
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 09:24:38AM -0700, Den wrote:
Do not post main.cf files. Rather, post or attach output of
"postconf -n" that is not line-wrapped after cut/paste, you
need to post it with the original line-breaks preserved.
> # Debian specific: Specifying a file name will cause the first
Den:
> Hello again Wietse,
>
> Here goes my main.cf. There is no
> "receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks"
> anywhere here as well. Would be absolutely and genuinely thankful for any
> suggestions...
>
> # See /usr/share/postfix/main.cf.dist for a commented, more complete version
>
>
Hello Viktor,
Thank you for your message.
It is my functional, active, and fully operational main.cf that has been
working perfectly fine. The only thing removed for privacy / security
reasons was a big list of actual domain names hosted on this server. Not
sure if it is really needed to know the
Den:
> Hello Viktor,
>
> Thank you for your message.
>
> It is my functional, active, and fully operational main.cf that has been
> working perfectly fine. The only thing removed for privacy / security
> reasons was a big list of actual domain names hosted on this server. Not
> sure if it is real
Hello Wietse and Viktor,
OK. Let me post the postconf -n with just one domain name I am fine to
disclose. Hope it will help. Thank you so much for your fast replies.
Appreciate your taking part in troubleshooting my problem...
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases
append_at_myorigin = yes
append_dot_myd
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:20:06AM -0700, Den wrote:
> header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/spamdiscard
So this is is the actual setting.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 09:24:38AM -0700, Den wrote:
> header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/filter
And this is not.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 08:24:40AM -0700,
CentOS 6.5, postfix-2.6.6-6
I used http://www.linuxmail.info/postfix-dovecot-ldap-centos-5/ as a
guide to get postfix and dovecot working with LDAP.
My issue is that postfix uses the literal cn to write mail to, so in my
test case I get 'testUser1' However, when I log in via dovecot using
IMAP,
That's right Viktor. Your are absolutely right.
The correct line is header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/spamdiscard
and running this: postmap -q "X-Spam-Flag: YES/"
regexp:/etc/postfix/spamdiscard
returns no errors.
The postmap -q "X-Spam-Flag: YES/" regexp:/etc/postfix/filter
is a typo as I
John Oliver:
> CentOS 6.5, postfix-2.6.6-6
>
> I used http://www.linuxmail.info/postfix-dovecot-ldap-centos-5/ as a
> guide to get postfix and dovecot working with LDAP.
>
> My issue is that postfix uses the literal cn to write mail to, so in my
> test case I get 'testUser1' However, when I log
Hi Sean,
> Meanwhile, I've managed to record a tcpdump of such a failed session.
> What exactly am I looking for there?
I remember a possibly similar situation back in 2008... the culprit was
a not-fully-up-to-date Cisco ASA firewall that corrupted TCP SACK fields
and hence had the remote sit
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 02:42:11PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> John Oliver:
> > CentOS 6.5, postfix-2.6.6-6
> >
> > I used http://www.linuxmail.info/postfix-dovecot-ldap-centos-5/ as a
> > guide to get postfix and dovecot working with LDAP.
> >
> > My issue is that postfix uses the literal cn t
Am 11.09.2014 um 20:53 schrieb John Oliver:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 02:42:11PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> John Oliver:
>>> CentOS 6.5, postfix-2.6.6-6
>>>
>>> I used http://www.linuxmail.info/postfix-dovecot-ldap-centos-5/ as a
>>> guide to get postfix and dovecot working with LDAP.
>>>
>>>
Sean Durkin:
> Meanwhile, I've managed to record a tcpdump of such a failed
> session. What exactly am I looking for there?
- The receiving host's window announcement in the tcp handshake
and in subsequent ACKs.
- Whether there is a "gap" in the sender packet sequence numbers
as seen by the r
Unless I am mistaken, this implements the same functionality as the
pipemap table. It queries tables in sequence, not in parallel.
Wietse
+static const char *dict_join_lookup(DICT *dict, const char *query)
+{
+const char myname[] = "dict_join_lookup";
+DICT_JOIN *dict_join = (DICT
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:47:09AM -0700, Den wrote:
> That's right Viktor. Your are absolutely right.
>
> The correct line is header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/spamdiscard
>
> and running this: postmap -q "X-Spam-Flag: YES/"
> regexp:/etc/postfix/spamdiscard
>
> returns no errors.
>
> The
Wietse Venema writes:
Unless I am mistaken, this implements the same functionality as the
pipemap table. It queries tables in sequence, not in parallel.
You are correct. The patch consisted of three parts. The first two parts are
used to get the basic file structure in place for the joinma
Any chance there is a UTM device in the email stream?
We see lots of these errors when our SonicWalls do an RBL lookup, don't like
the data in the email stream etc. The SonicWalls then just drop the connection
and Postfix logs the drop.
Hope that helps,
Mark
Den:
> I have a feeling that my subject line is a problem because much simpler
> header checks that contain only two or three simple dictionary words work
> just fine. Therefore I was also wondering if anyone who runs reject,
What text editor are you using? If it is any kind of word processor
soft
I am trying to fix a mailman footer issue as described here:
https://stuff.mit.edu/~jik/software/mailman_mimedefang/mailman_mimedefang_fix_footer.pl.txt
I believe I have everything set up including this line in main.cf:
smtpd_milters = inet:127.0.0.1:19534
However, there doesn't appear to be an
On 9/11/2014 4:24 PM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> I am trying to fix a mailman footer issue as described here:
>
> https://stuff.mit.edu/~jik/software/mailman_mimedefang/mailman_mimedefang_fix_footer.pl.txt
>
> I believe I have everything set up including this line in main.cf:
>
> smtpd_milters =
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:53:21AM -0700, John Oliver wrote:
> Postfix write to /var/vmail/testUser1
>
> Dovecot insists on reading from /var/vmail/testuser1
>
> How can I make postfix ignore/strip out capitalization and write to
> /var/vmail/testuser1 ?
Rewrite mail from testUser1 to testuser1
I am replying through a gadget / portable device now so my apologies if it
doesn't meet your gateway's etiquette requirements.
I am using a simple notepad as I don't like all these fansy word processors and
all but hey! thank you so much for the idea, Wietse! I'll run more tests to see
how it w
> It would be real kind of you
> if you could put the following into your subject field:
If you are going to refer to the GTUBE, best to just cite it by NAME, or
include an URL like:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/gtube/
Actually including it in a message is ... unwise.
Why is left as an exerci
On 11. sep. 2014 20.53.55 John Oliver wrote:
How can I make postfix ignore/strip out capitalization and write to
/var/vmail/testuser1 ?
This problem are gone if you stop using postfix as lda and use dovecot-lda,
and if you like to make it even more perfect make sure auth login users is
case
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:38:45 -0500
Noel Jones wrote:
> > Is it possible that mail arriving locally is bypassing the milter?
> >
> > postconf -n attached. I only removed the tls lines.
> >
>
> Does reviewing the docs answer your question?
> http://www.postfix.org/MILTER_README.html#plumbing
Is
Right, Michael.
Thank you for bringing this up and I really do appreciate your feedback.
I'll try to test this string with all the headers, not just my subject
field. Not sure it may get me somewhere though.
However, I think no matter what I put in my subject field or in the body
field the header
Viktor:
>Depending on your locale and MUA, subjects are sometimes encoded
>using either Quoted Printable or Base64 encoding. What you see
>on the screen may differ from the subject header on the wire.
>Header checks is a crude mechanism, that only deals with raw
>wire-form data.
Good point.
Wietse Venema writes:
Unless I am mistaken, this implements the same functionality as the
pipemap table. It queries tables in sequence, not in parallel.
Attached is the new patch. Sorry about the confusion.
This one has some documentation changes as well.
Thanks,
Roel
Add support for joinmap
45 matches
Mail list logo
