Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
Reason for the question:
My network has an internal (non-ISP forwarding) DNS server for both
internal and external resolution, and that is default nameserver
across the network including for the mail server. That DNS server
Hello,
+1 for this Request for Improvement.
I also faced this need.
Changing the machine solver was, unfortunately, not an option.
Thanks
Marco
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:21 PM Simon Wilson
wrote:
> Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
>
> Reason for the questio
22.04.21, 12:20 +0200, Simon Wilson:
> Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
One way I could think of is to use postfix' chroot features and
configure this specific DNS server in the chroot's resolv.conf.
--
Regards
mks
>> > receive_override_options = no_address_mappings
>> >
>> > and then permit mappings (which include always_bcc) to occur in the 2nd
>> > instance (for the mail that is returned by amavis), for example this
>> > might be in master.cf by:
>> >
>> > 127.0.0.1:10025 inet n - n -
Simon Wilson:
> Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
Edit /etc/resolv.conf.
No kidding - Postfix uses the SYSTEM LIBRARY for DNS lookups, and
the SYSTEM LIBRARY uses the resolv.conf file. Theree are no plans
to re-implement this part of the SYSTEM LIBRARY in Postfi
Markus Sch?nhaber:
> 22.04.21, 12:20 +0200, Simon Wilson:
>
> > Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
>
> One way I could think of is to use postfix' chroot features and
> configure this specific DNS server in the chroot's resolv.conf.
That may or may not work. The
I know this does not apply to all kinds of setup, but with
virtualization and containerization it should be easy to seperate
Postfix and provide a different nameserver in resolv.conf for it.
Cheers
Lars
Am 22.04.21 um 16:03 schrieb Wietse Venema:
> Markus Sch?nhaber:
>> 22.04.21, 12:20 +0200, Si
>> Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
>
> Edit /etc/resolv.conf.
>
> No kidding - Postfix uses the SYSTEM LIBRARY for DNS lookups, and
> the SYSTEM LIBRARY uses the resolv.conf file. Theree are no plans
> to re-implement this part of the SYSTEM LIBRARY in Postfix
On 22.04.21 16:08, Lars Liedtke wrote:
I know this does not apply to all kinds of setup, but with
virtualization and containerization it should be easy to seperate
Postfix and provide a different nameserver in resolv.conf for it.
Yes, but postfix' builtin chroot isn't sufficient for this. It'll
That is, what I meant with virtualization and containerization.
It has to be on a sepereate system, and that is not applicable for all
setups.
Am 22.04.21 um 16:28 schrieb Sven Schwedas:
> On 22.04.21 16:08, Lars Liedtke wrote:
>> I know this does not apply to all kinds of setup, but with
>> virt
Sven Schwedas:
> On 22.04.21 16:08, Lars Liedtke wrote:
> > I know this does not apply to all kinds of setup, but with
> > virtualization and containerization it should be easy to seperate
> > Postfix and provide a different nameserver in resolv.conf for it.
>
> Yes, but postfix' builtin chroot is
On 2021-04-22 12:58, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
Hello,
+1 for this Request for Improvement.
I also faced this need.
Changing the machine solver was, unfortunately, not an option.
we all love 127.0.0.1
solution is to not have spamasassin running on same host as postfix, or
tell spamassassin to use
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 4:37 PM Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On 2021-04-22 12:58, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
> > Hello,
> > +1 for this Request for Improvement.
> > I also faced this need.
> >
> > Changing the machine solver was, unfortunately, not an option.
>
> we all love 127.0.0.1
>
> solution is to not
Would it be an option to configure a policy for your DNS server to
**not** send queries from postfix host(s) through the add&tracker filter?
Cheers
tobi
On 4/22/21 12:20 PM, Simon Wilson wrote:
> Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS server?
>
> Reason for the question:
>
Dnia 22.04.2021 o godz. 16:44:13 Marco Pizzoli pisze:
>
> I needed to have Postfix to solve Internet DNS names, for obvious reasons.
> At the same time, I needed to be able to solve Intranet DNS names:
> monitoring server, backup server, etc...
I was once I need to get exactly this.
I solved this
On 2021-04-22 16:44, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
I am afraid you did not get my point.
i dont know your solution then
rpz and qname can be problematic
https://labs.ripe.net/author/wouter_de_vries/making-the-dns-more-private-with-qname-minimisation/
I needed to have Postfix to solve Internet DNS
On 2021-04-22 16:53, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
Dnia 22.04.2021 o godz. 16:44:13 Marco Pizzoli pisze:
I needed to have Postfix to solve Internet DNS names, for obvious
reasons.
At the same time, I needed to be able to solve Intranet DNS names:
monitoring server, backup server, etc...
I was once I
On 22 Apr 2021, at 09:20, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> n 2021-04-22 16:44, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
>> Due also to some other constraints, I ended up relying on static
>> entries in /etc/hosts.
>
> this file is only for when real dns server is down, not used when dns server
> is up
What? /etc/hosts is p
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 04:53:21PM +0200, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> > I needed to have Postfix to solve Internet DNS names, for obvious reasons.
> > At the same time, I needed to be able to solve Intranet DNS names:
> > monitoring server, backup server, etc...
>
> I was once I need to get exactly th
Good evening,
Unfortunately, I have to revisit my topic from back in the day
Sending the proper reject-messages through the postfix works wonderfully, as
long as it is an external sender.
But now if a local sender sends an email to the full mailbox, again the Dovecot
replies, or the program
It appears that Nick Tait said:
>>> Chrome shows it as "Not secure" followed by postfix.com by gracefully
>>> hiding the implied www.
>> I think you meant to write "by disgracefully hiding...".
>
>I'm not hearing many reasons to use HTTPS... Just lots of reasons not to
>use Chrome? ;-)
Safari a
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 5:21 PM Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On 2021-04-22 16:44, Marco Pizzoli wrote:
>
> > I am afraid you did not get my point.
>
> i dont know your solution then
>
> rpz and qname can be problematic
>
> https://labs.ripe.net/author/wouter_de_vries/making-the-dns-more-private-with-q
On some OS the following code works - I use that for regression
testing when I need fake DNS data:
void
dns_setns(struct in_addr *ns, unsigned int port)
{
if ((_res.options & RES_INIT) == 0)
(void) res_init();
_res.nsaddr_list[0].sin_family = AF_INET;
_res.n
Dnia 22.04.2021 o godz. 09:33:04 @lbutlr pisze:
>
> What? /etc/hosts is processed before DNS, that is how adding adservers to
> /etc/hosts blocks those adservers from being accessed.
At least in Linux, it actually depends on the contents of file
/etc/nsswitch.conf . If there's an entry like "host
Dnia 22.04.2021 o godz. 17:24:34 Benny Pedersen pisze:
> >I was once I need to get exactly this.
> >I solved this by setting up my own nameserver at localhost, that
> >delegates
> >internal names to resolve by internal nameserver, and external ones to
> >resolve by external nameserver. It can be do
Dnia 22.04.2021 o godz. 12:04:23 John Levine pisze:
>
> Safari and Brave also show a Not Secure warning. Firefox won't connect
> at all unless you manually edit the https to http in the address box.
> Pick your poison.
My four instances of Firefox on four different computers (all newest
releases
It appears that Jaroslaw Rafa said:
>Dnia 22.04.2021 o godz. 12:04:23 John Levine pisze:
>>
>> Safari and Brave also show a Not Secure warning. Firefox won't connect
>> at all unless you manually edit the https to http in the address box.
>> Pick your poison.
>
>My four instances of Firefox on f
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, John Levine wrote:
> Nope, vanilla install on MacOS.
Not sure what your "vanilla install" is...
Firefox 88.0 on MacOS:
www.postfix.org
and
http://www.postfix.org/
show the web page just fine without a problem.
It would be nice if the people who write browsers don't try to fo
> Date: Thursday, April 22, 2021 19:26:57 +0200
> From: Claus Assmann
>
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021, John Levine wrote:
>> Nope, vanilla install on MacOS.
> Not sure what your "vanilla install" is...
>
> Firefox 88.0 on MacOS:
> www.postfix.org
> and
> http://www.postfix.org/
> show the web page ju
>I was once I need to get exactly this.
>I solved this by setting up my own nameserver at localhost, that
>delegates
>internal names to resolve by internal nameserver, and external ones to
>resolve by external nameserver. It can be done pretty easy if you can
>distinguish internal from external na
rud...@padaru.de:
> Good evening,
> Unfortunately, I have to revisit my topic from back in the day
>
> Sending the proper reject-messages through the postfix works wonderfully, as
> long as it is an external sender.
>
> But now if a local sender sends an email to the full mailbox, again the
You could run Postfix in a container (LXC) on the host. It would have
it's own IP and it's own resolv.conf.
In the message from the dovecot the @ is written, this
information is of no use to the sender, because he does not know the local
user name of the receiver.
The bounce mail must therefore contain the e-mail address that the sender
has addressed, the virtual address so to speak.
Mit freundlichen G
rud...@padaru.de:
> In the message from the dovecot the @ is written, this
> information is of no use to the sender, because he does not know the local
> user name of the receiver.
>
> The bounce mail must therefore contain the e-mail address that the sender
> has addressed, the virtual address so
Another +1 that with vanilla FF v87 + macOS HS, the power is in the
hands of the user (where it truly belongs) via a user-knob controlling
whether or not FF complains about non-https…
- - -
On 22 Apr 2021, at 10:51, Richard wrote:
Date: Thursday, April 22, 2021 19:26:57 +0200
From: Claus As
I just updated Firefox to version 88, and now "ftp://"; support is
disabled by default, and the plan is to remove support in Firefox 90.
I've re-enabled it, will have to enjoy it to the max while it lasts...
[ Wietse's upstream FTP site for Postfix source tarballs will soon no
longer be browser
The was brought up as a point of curiosity on Steve Gibson's "Security Now"
podcast a few months ago. My recollection is Chrome has the same plan. But the
interesting thing is Mozilla surveyed to see who used FTP. It was some fraction
of a percent as you can imagine. But later it dawned on me th
It appears that Viktor Dukhovni said:
>[ Wietse's upstream FTP site for Postfix source tarballs will soon no
> longer be browser-accessible. :-( ]
If you use a Mac, FTP is built into the Finder. Who needs a browser?
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:41:14PM -0400, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Viktor Dukhovni said:
> >[ Wietse's upstream FTP site for Postfix source tarballs will soon no
> > longer be browser-accessible. :-( ]
>
> If you use a Mac, FTP is built into the Finder. Who needs a browser?
Yes, bu
- Message from Wietse Venema -
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:01:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Wietse Venema
Subject: Re: Specific DNS server
To: si...@simonandkate.net
Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org
Simon Wilson:
Is there a way to make Postfix/postscreen use a specific DNS serv
> On Apr 23, 2021, at 12:36 AM, Viktor Dukhovni
> wrote:
>
> Yes, but it is rather a lot slower to produce a listing, because it
> wants to treat FTP as a filesystem... :-(
My apologies to Apple, just tried it again, and it turned out to be quite
performant, haven't done that in ages, perhaps
On 23/04/21 1:56 pm, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
I just updated Firefox to version 88, and now "ftp://"; support is
disabled by default, and the plan is to remove support in Firefox 90.
I've re-enabled it, will have to enjoy it to the max while it lasts...
You should be able to set an external prot
Le 22/04/2021 à 21:14, Sonic a écrit :
You could run Postfix in a container (LXC) on the host. It would have
it's own IP and it's own resolv.conf.
Would'nt the chroot feature built in postfix sufficient for this ?
Thank you for your time and replies.
Actually i use the dovecot quota service:
Dovecot conf:
service quota-status {
executable = quota-status -p postfix
inet_listener {
port = 12340
}
client_limit = 1
}
Postfix main.cf
smtpd_recipient_restrictions
Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:26:57 +0200 skrev Claus Assmann
:
> It would be nice if the people who write browsers don't try to force
> their kind of "standards" on others... ("but you can get a free cert"
> -- what happens when those browsers do not "accept" those free certs
> anymore?)
With the risk of
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:56:13 -0400
Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> I just updated Firefox to version 88, and now "ftp://"; support is
> disabled by default, and the plan is to remove support in Firefox 90.
Palemoon forever! :) (Or any other browser you may fancy :)
Luciano.
--
/"\
46 matches
Mail list logo
