postfix wrote on 19/11/2016 07:59:
I know that this error comes from the fact, that the IPV6 stack misses the
interface name when binding. The postfix information page "Postfix IPv6 Support"
is really not helpful in that situation, specifying "that IPV6 is hardly used
smtp_bind_address6 coul
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:09:34PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> In examples, use an unrouted network such as 192.168.0.0/16 or 10.0.00/8.
Better, use the documentation networks: 192.0.2.0/24
See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5737
Bastian
--
Klingon phaser attack from front!
100% Damage t
Dear All,
I am trying to use ldap for recipents and domains for windows AD.
i installed postfix ldap
root@web:/etc/postfix# postconf -m
btree
cidr
environ
fail
hash
inline
internal
ldap
memcache
nis
pipemap
proxy
randmap
regexp
socketmap
static
tcp
tcp
texthash
unionmap
unix
root@web:/etc/postfix
postfix:
> Nov 19 06:13:02 tico postfix/master[23428]: fatal: bind
> fe80::4216:7eff:fea7:c56b port 587: Invalid argument
I have never seen this problem.
As a fix, don't specify link-local interfaces in main.cf:inet_interfaces.
Wietse
Hi guys,
I am trying to send automated command line mail via mutt but keep on getting
"SASL Authentication" failures. I have tried a LOT of different suggestions on
google and combinations of it.
I have Postfix setup (on Debian) as a local MTA (using gmail) which is working
fine.
However, whenev
An fe80:: IP address is not formally attached to any particular
interface. It "just happens" as part of the autoconfigure regime.
To use one in a listen or bind type statement, you would have to
expressly state which interface you wish to use.
For example, you need to use the argument "-I eth0" (
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 07:59:15AM +0100, postfix wrote:
> I changed this network to "real" IPV6 (before I used 6TO4
> tunnelling). Now, every host and every program (including postfix)
> rushes to use IPV6. But there are problems with postfix: on one
> Host (postfix-2.10.1-6.el7.x86_64) I had i
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 05:31:43PM +0100, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> The advantage with using "permit_sasl_authenticated, reject" as
> check_sender_access in the global config, is that authenticated
> senders won't be able to send with a adress outside of your domain
> either, thus achieving bot
Im talking about this:
smtpd_sender_restrictions = check_sender_access hash:/etc/file
/etc/file (before postmap)
mydomain.com permit_sasl_authenticated, reject
The result is that if sender domain is mydomain.com, the policy applied will
be "permit_sasl_authenticated, reject".
This will result i
On 18 Nov 2016, at 22:05, vod vos wrote:
Hi,
I have configured the TLS,
when I receive the mail such as yahoo mail,
the mail content is transferred encoding like base64.
When I send mail to yahoo account or others,
the content is clear text,
how to encrypt the content in an acceptable enco
[ top-posting fixed ]
> -Ursprungligt meddelande-
> [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] För /dev/rob0
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 05:31:43PM +0100, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> > The advantage with using "permit_sasl_authenticated, reject" as
> > check_sender_access in the global conf
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 01:33:34PM -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> A much simpler and better way to do this and to force the use of
> submission for your clients is to change the default on port 25,
> and to override relay restrictions in master.cf for submission,
> port 587:
>
> main.cf :
>
> [ ...
Yeah. The OP presumably had his "permit_sasl_authenticated" both in sender
restrictions and relay restrictions. Thats why I gave a example of sender
restrictions where I also said that every instance of
permit_sasl_authenticated need to be replaced (For example, if one is in
recipient restrictions
Hello.
I manage the email for several SMBs (between 100 and 900 mailboxes each),
where they are still running on-premises Exchange 2007 on Windows Server
2003 x64. Yes, I know this is old software, but upgrading their setup is
expensive because it involves getting new licenses (for the server OS,
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 10:44:11PM +0100, Josh Good wrote:
> This bug in SChannel (the SSL/TLS subsystem in Windows) in Windows
> Server 2003 is well known:
Indeed, it has been well known now for approximately a decade.
> Also, I've been able to replicate the problem, setting up a server with
>
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 05:05:22PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote:
o
> I am trying to use ldap for recipents and domains for windows AD.
> i installed postfix ldap
You did not fully implement that, see below.
> root@web:/etc/postfix# postconf -m
> ...
> ldap
> ...
Welcome to lazy evaluation.
Can the "Postfix lookup table types" section be updated to show which
version of postfix the various table types were introduced in? This
info is there for some tables types (cdb says 2.2 or later) but not all,
such as the recent randmap, pipemap and unionmap types.
This would help when trying to
On 2016 Nov 19, 23:14, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 10:44:11PM +0100, Josh Good wrote:
>
> > Also, I've been able to replicate the problem, setting up a server with
> > Ubuntu 16.10, which defaults to Postfix 3.1.0 as MTA and OpenSSL 1.0.2g
> > as crypto subsystem. After I enab
On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 02:21:06AM +0100, Josh Good wrote:
> > That's not how Postfix is expected to behave. Please post
> > configuration and logs. Mind you, Postfix is not the only MTA that
> > sends email over TLS, and other TLS implementations can be (and
> > often are) less capable, less fo
On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 17:13:26 -0400
"Bill Cole" wrote:
> On 20 Oct 2016, at 16:39, Keith Williams wrote:
>
> > No wait... What?
> >
> > This is no attack. Attack is when you try to break or enforce..
> > This is a probe, and from the probe we can deduce from the reported
> > disconnect that 1. h
20 matches
Mail list logo
