I have 2 multi-instance postfix on one server. if for each instance it will
be different. For example:
for the instance1 the main:
a.com default._domainkey.a.com
b.com default._domainkey.b.com
for the instance2 the main:
c.com default._domainkey.c.com
d.com default._domainkey.d.com
For this I n
Hello, thanks for replies,
I change my cert_file parameter to fullchain.pem. So now I don't have
error for server:
Sep 22 15:00:25 jolly postfix/smtpd[15774]: connect from
unknown[192.168.5.1]
Sep 22 15:00:25 jolly postfix/smtpd[15774]: Anonymous TLS connection
established from unknown[192.1
Hello,
I would like some suggestions on how to get less spam, I will paste my
configuration at the end of the mail.
Maybe somebody with a nice setup could post his/her setup?
As you can see, I am experimenting with reject_unknown_client_hostname.
What's your opinion about that setting?
I've nev
Hello, I have solved this problem.thanks.
set up the SigningTable of opendkim and the main.cf of postfix(each
instance),and it will work.
--
Sent from: http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Postfix-Users-f2.html
feier8097:
> I have 2 multi-instance postfix on one server. if for each instance it will
> be different. For example:
>
> for the instance1 the main:
> a.com default._domainkey.a.com
> b.com default._domainkey.b.com
>
> for the instance2 the main:
> c.com default._domainkey.c.com
> d.com default
thanks a lot. I've solved this problem.
--
Sent from: http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Postfix-Users-f2.html
[An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-3.4.7.html]
Fixed in Postfix 3.4:
* Robustness: the tlsproxy(8) daemon could go into a loop, logging
a flood of error messages. Problem reported by Andreas Schulze
after enabling S
On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 01:21, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Benny Pedersen:
> > Daniel Miller skrev den 2019-09-20 23:12:
> >
> > > I'm seeing some higher levels of attempted logins from various
> > > sources. Are there any automated filters that are suggested? Or do I
> > > simply add a check_client_a
On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 at 14:36, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like some suggestions on how to get less spam, I will paste my
> configuration at the end of the mail.
>
> Maybe somebody with a nice setup could post his/her setup?
>
> As you can see, I am experimenting with reject_unk
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 03:07:54PM +0200, benoit wrote:
> I change my cert_file parameter to fullchain.pem. So now I don't have
> error for server:
>
> Sep 22 15:00:25 jolly postfix/smtpd[15774]: connect from unknown[192.168.5.1]
> Sep 22 15:00:25 jolly postfix/smtpd[15774]: Anonymous TLS connect
Hello,
Yes, the phone use the port 25. I change my phone client to fairemail, and
everything is fine
Thank you
Sun Sep 22 18:19:56 GMT+02:00 2019 Viktor Dukhovni :
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 03:07:54PM +0200, benoit wrote:
>
> > I change my cert_file parameter to fullchain.pem. So now I don't
On 20 Sep 2019, at 17:12, Daniel Miller wrote:
I'm seeing some higher levels of attempted logins from various
sources. Are there any automated filters that are suggested?
The Spamhaus SBL and XBL are safe for use on submission ports, as is the
Surriel 'PSBL.' It's possible for innocent infect
Url is broken
El 22/09/2019 a las 16:47, Wietse Venema escribió:
[An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-3.4.7.html]
Fixed in Postfix 3.4:
* Robustness: the tlsproxy(8) daemon could go into a loop, logging
a flood of er
On Sep 22, 2019, at 12:41 AM, Daniel Miller wrote:
> Generally such an attitude, while understandable and often shared, is
> generally going to be met with a response that administering a mail server is
> not a part-time job and if you're not "qualified" then you should hire
> someone who is. I
> On Sep 22, 2019, at 2:41 AM, Daniel Miller wrote:
>
> administering a mail server is not a part-time job and if you're not
> "qualified" then you should hire someone who is.
I am curious whether administrators os "mailinabox" systems feel
the same way? Or has
https://mailinabox.ema
On 9/22/2019 8:24 AM, Dominic Raferd wrote:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 01:21, Wietse Venema wrote:
Benny Pedersen:
Daniel Miller skrev den 2019-09-20 23:12:
I'm seeing some higher levels of attempted logins from various
sources. Are there any automated filters that are suggested? Or do I
simp
On 9/22/2019 12:59 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
On 20 Sep 2019, at 17:12, Daniel Miller wrote:
I'm seeing some higher levels of attempted logins from various
sources. Are there any automated filters that are suggested?
The Spamhaus SBL and XBL are safe for use on submission ports, as is the
Surriel
Francesc Pe?alvez:
> Url is broken
WILL != IS.
Wietse
> El 22/09/2019 a las 16:47, Wietse Venema escribi?:
> > [An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
> > http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-3.4.7.html]
> >
> > Fixed in Postfix 3.4:
> >
> >* Robustness
I've been running my own Postfix (Dovecot, MySQL, Rspamd) server thanks
to these instructions
(https://thomas-leister.de/en/mailserver-debian-stretch/ ) for more than
a year without any issues.
I'm using a paid service (Mail Reflector) to handle the times my server
is down or (initially) to g
19 matches
Mail list logo
