Hi,
On 2015-08-20 00:44, Ben Greenfield wrote:
On Aug 19, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 04:14:10PM -0400, Ben Greenfield wrote:
First explain the problem, rather than the solution.
We receive a lot of spam that have very rare top level domains .site,
.l
Hello,
I am using v2.11.6 on CentOS 5 (and 6 and 7), without postscreen (it's a
final destination server, not accepting mail from the Internet).
I have tried enabling the proxy protocol to make postfix log correctly
user data when connections arrive from our haproxy proxy (currently in
test
HI!
Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
libicu I assume that SMTPUTF8 is currently not widely used.
How about other platforms?
Nikolaos Milas:
> Aug 19 17:13:54 vmail postfix/postfix-script[24279]: refreshing the
> Postfix mail system
> Aug 19 17:13:55 vmail postfix/master[22272]: reload -- version 2.11.6,
> configuration /etc/postfix
> Aug 19 17:14:09 vmail postfix/smtpd[24327]: warning: haproxy read:
> timeout error
Michael Str?der:
> HI!
>
> Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
> I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
>
> Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
> libicu I assume that SMTPUTF8 is currently not widely u
Hello,
> On Aug 20, 2015, at 3:14 AM, Christian Kivalo
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2015-08-20 00:44, Ben Greenfield wrote:
>>> On Aug 19, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
>>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 04:14:10PM -0400, Ben Greenfield wrote:
> First explain the problem, rather than
Hmm, for me, this would be overkill. But, I guess it depends on how much
mail you plan on processing.
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of NFXDD
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2015 1:48 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> Michael Str?der:
>> Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
>> I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
>>
>> Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
>> libicu I assum
On August 20, 2015 2:48:33 PM wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently not linked to
libicu I assu
Michael Str?der:
> wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> > Michael Str?der:
> >> Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
> >> I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
> >>
> >> Given that e.g. SUSE Linux builds of postfix are currently no
* on the Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:36:38PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> What mail products are SMTPUTF8-compliant at this time?
> will it ever be needed ?, with idn domains it allready encoded into 7bit,
> is postfix translate this to utf8 ?, dont know here since thunderbird works
> with idn dom
wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> Michael Str?der:
>> So I interpret your question it as an answer:
>> SMTPUTF8 is currently not widely used. ;-)
>
> 10 years ago, IPv6 implementation was driven by the concern that
> everyone was going to suffer from unavailable IP addresses.
>
> SMTP
Zitat von Mike Cardwell :
* on the Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:36:38PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
What mail products are SMTPUTF8-compliant at this time?
will it ever be needed ?, with idn domains it allready encoded into 7bit,
is postfix translate this to utf8 ?, dont know here since thunde
Michael Ströder wrote:
Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
Google does support SMTPUTF8 :
$ host -t mx gmail.com
gmail.com mail is handled by 20 alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com.
gmail.com mail is
On 20/8/2015 2:41 μμ, Wietse Venema wrote:
Postfix does not receive text followed by newline within the
time limit (1 second).
In other words the proxy doesn't send the HAPROXY header line.
That does not happen automatically. You need to turn it on.
It is turned on the proxy itself, but the l
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:24:26PM +0300, Nikolaos Milas wrote:
> With the setting:
>
>smtpd_upstream_proxy_protocol = haproxy
>
> does postfix expect the HAPROXY header line from ALL clients?
Yes.
> If so, how can
> we enforce the above setting e.g. ONLY for the ip address(es) of the prox
Nikolaos Milas:
> On 20/8/2015 2:41 ??, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Postfix does not receive text followed by newline within the
> > time limit (1 second).
> >
> > In other words the proxy doesn't send the HAPROXY header line.
> > That does not happen automatically. You need to turn it on.
>
> It
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 19:01:48 +0200, Mark Martinec stated:
> Michael Ströder wrote:
> > Does anybody here have experience with current usage of SMTPUTF8?
> > I have a discussion whether that's already used in the wild or not.
>
> Google does support SMTPUTF8 :
>
>
> $ host -t mx gmail.com
> gmai
18 matches
Mail list logo
