El 2015-03-09 21:31, Roger Walters escribió:
Hello,
I have a few chained content filters based on pipe, so when the first
script ends its task, it sends the processed headers to the second
script and so on.
It is clear how to get the content back to Postfix as an input, using
the sendmail comma
On Monday, March 9, 2015 4:21 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> For performance reasons, postscreen does not do PTR lookups, nor
> will PTR lookups be added to postscreen in the foreseeable future.
I'm not sure how one (type of) dns query is a performance concern,
and another is not, see below.
> Eithe
Roger Walters:
> Hello,
>
> I have a few chained content filters based on pipe, so when the first
> script ends its task, it sends the processed headers to the second script
> and so on.
>
> It is clear how to get the content back to Postfix as an input, using the
> sendmail command. My question
Kov?cs Albert:
> On Monday, March 9, 2015 4:21 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
>
> > For performance reasons, postscreen does not do PTR lookups, nor
> > will PTR lookups be added to postscreen in the foreseeable future.
>
>
> I'm not sure how one (type of) dns query is a performance concern,
> and anoth
2015-03-10 12:31 GMT+00:00 Wietse Venema :
> Roger Walters:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a few chained content filters based on pipe, so when the first
> > script ends its task, it sends the processed headers to the second script
> > and so on.
> >
> > It is clear how to get the content back to Postf
On Mon, March 9, 2015 17:55, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 05:08:24PM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
>
>> I have no idea what is going on.
>
> So it seems, but you're also thinking clearly.
>
Thank you. I will show this to my wife. However, that statement may
reduce your stature
Hi Viktor,
Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:33:08AM +, Mick wrote:
You'd have to look at postfix.org documentation I'm afraid.
One of:
http://www.postfix.org/mysql_table.5.html
That was generally enlightening.
RHS? Royal Horticultural Society ;
On Tue, March 10, 2015 09:38, L. D. James wrote:
>
> This email message is confidential and/or privileged. It is to be
> used by the intended recipient only. Use of the information
> contained in this email by anyone other than the intended recipient
> is strictly prohibited. If you have receive
On Tuesday, March 10, 2015 1:42 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> I'm not sure how one (type of) dns query is a performance concern,>> and
>> another is not, see below.
> You see no performance difference between querying a small number
> of well-operated DNS servers that are chosen by the local sy
The mystery has been solved.
The subject emails were not in fact sent through our smtp host but
originated from a web application running on a host that is not listed
as authorised in our spf. That was the real reason the person
reporting the error could not provide me with a copy of their origin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
If you want to block more DUL ip blocks, the easiest way is probably
to use some upstream DUL DNSBL providers, and use rbldnsd to create
your private DNSBL to provide your own additions.
There also is a community-maintained pcre file for smtpd
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 09:21:31AM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
> Mar 10 08:44:51 inet08 postfix/smtp[4688]: > mx00.1and1.com[74.208.5.3]:25:
> EHLO inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca
> Mar 10 08:44:51 inet08 postfix/smtp[4688]: < mx00.1and1.com[74.208.5.3]:25:
> 250-perfora.net Hello inet08.hamilton
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 05:33:38PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> Post largely unmunged logs for this claim. (You can obfuscate
> address localparts if you like).
So it seems you started this thread with:
:
host mx01.1and1.com[74.208.5.21] refused to talk to me:
501 Syntax
On Tue, March 10, 2015 14:04, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 05:33:38PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
>> Post largely unmunged logs for this claim. (You can obfuscate
>> address localparts if you like).
>
> So it seems you started this thread with:
>
> :
> host mx01.
14 matches
Mail list logo
