Hey there all…
(Attempted to send this a few days ago, believe I hit an odd mailing list
issue).
At the day job, we periodically do an export of our ticketing system into an
internal alias where the alias does an :include:, for the cases where we need
to send an all-customers mail.
However, r
I originally had incoming_smtpd_restrictions set to:
reject_unverified_recipient
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net,
reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
permit
Later I added postscreen and commented out the reject_rbl_... entr
Dnia 23.11.2022 o godz. 12:43:47 raf pisze:
> I ssh to a vm and read locally with mutt (local delivery, mbox format),
> and if I want to see the pretty pictures, I bounce it (a mutt action)
> to a separate IMAP account on the same vm (virtual delivery), and
> Thunderbird on my laptop connects to th
On 23.11.22 01:58, Doug Hardie wrote:
I originally had incoming_smtpd_restrictions set to:
reject_unverified_recipient
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net,
reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
permit
Later I added postscreen and co
On 2022-11-23 at 04:58:09 UTC-0500 (Wed, 23 Nov 2022 01:58:09 -0800)
Doug Hardie
is rumored to have said:
I originally had incoming_smtpd_restrictions set to:
reject_unverified_recipient
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net,
reject_r
Dan Mahoney:
> Hey there all
>
> (Attempted to send this a few days ago, believe I hit an odd mailing
> list issue).
It was distributed, but I did not have time to respond.
> At the day job, we periodically do an export of our ticketing
> system into an internal alias where the alias does an :in
Hi,
I'm just wondering, what's the risk in adding 'reject_unknown_recipient_domain'
and 'reject_unverified_recipient' to the config.
I have tried all the different kind of default installs on Ubuntu 20 and none
of them contains these settings.
Is that because of the packager just didn't want
> On 23 Nov 2022, at 10:58 am, Juan Smitt Jr wrote:
>
> I'm just wondering, what's the risk in adding
> 'reject_unknown_recipient_domain'
> and 'reject_unverified_recipient' to the config.
That's generally the wrong question. You should be asking how to simplify
your configuration, not add bel
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:19:19AM -0800, Dan Mahoney wrote:
> However, recently, outlook365 decided it did not like having
> secret-al...@support.dayjob.org as the To: envelope -- and we'd rather
> not have that in the headers either as well!
The solution is to not put the actual list address in
Hi Viktor,
> These restrictions only make (modest) sense on an outbound relay MTA
Yes, this is exactly the case. Tons of customers sending tons of emails to
various addresses. Some are just entirely made up, some just contain typos.
We are trying to fix this on different levels of the business
On 2022-11-23 at 11:54:19 UTC-0500 (Wed, 23 Nov 2022 16:54:19 +)
Juan Smitt Jr
is rumored to have said:
Hi Viktor,
These restrictions only make (modest) sense on an outbound relay MTA
Yes, this is exactly the case. Tons of customers sending tons of
emails to various addresses. Some ar
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 04:54:19PM +, Juan Smitt Jr wrote:
> > These restrictions only make (modest) sense on an outbound relay MTA
>
> Yes, this is exactly the case. Tons of customers sending tons of
> emails to various addresses. Some are just entirely made up, some just
> contain typos.
C
On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 08:42:41PM +0100, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> Therefore I want to use local(8), as I understand it's best suited for this
> "old fashioned" style of using mail, ie. real Unix users logging in to their
> accounts and running a local mail client. It is simple and I don't have to
>
On Wed, 23 Nov 2022, raf wrote:
[...]
"v=spf1 mx -all" :)
[...]
I think it's more polite to use actual IP addresses so
as to eliminate a DNS lookup.
Given the flagrant abuse of includes and the like, I don't think
politeness is given much consideration; of course, that's my opinion.
--
Fre
Hello Victor!
Just by a chance I noticed this email and wanted to add a comment.
04.10.2022 02:52, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
..
Perhaps you previously had a "backports" package that uses a non-default
release label, and it persisted across the upgrade... You may need to
also look at the configs (I
> On Nov 23, 2022, at 4:49 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> On 23.11.22 01:58, Doug Hardie wrote:
>> I originally had incoming_smtpd_restrictions set to:
>>
>> reject_unverified_recipient
>> reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
>> reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net,
>> r
Thursday, November 24, 2022, 5:24:12 PM, Doug Hardie wrote:
> I am trying with the postscreen dns lookup disabled. Here is the main.cf
> section:
> # postscreen spam filtering
> postscreen_greet_action = enforce
> #postscreen_dnsbl_action = enforce
> #postscreen_dnsbl_sites = bl.spamcop
On 23.11.22 22:24, Doug Hardie wrote:
I am trying with the postscreen dns lookup disabled. Here is the main.cf
section:
# Incoming restrictions and Implement postfwd
incoming_smtpd_restrictions =
check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:10040,
reject_invalid_hostname,
r
18 matches
Mail list logo
