On 30.01.24 20:20, Israel britto via Postfix-users wrote:
hello, I'm having a problem with spamhaus that I don't know how to solve.
Today I have 1 domain that uses 2 exclusive IPs 1.1.1.1 and 2.2.2.2
The PTR and rDNS entries are correctly configured:
1.1.1.1 > a1.domain.com
2.2.2.2 > a2.domain.co
> Indeed, RFC 5322 recommends (i.e. should) single space.
Is there a place where it explicitly mentions that for WSP? In section 3.3, it
says that "it is RECOMMENDED that a single space be used in each place that FWS
appears", but I did not find anything about WSP other than this:
```
date-time
Am 2024-01-30 23:56, schrieb Jonas Vautherin via Postfix-users:
...
Received: from mx5 ([15.102.1.34])
by compute1.internal (LMTPProxy); Fri, 05 Jan 2024 16:48:38 -0500
Received: from mx5.messagingengine.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mailmx.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DACD7272
> No, that is a wrong interpretation: day-of-week, ",", date, time, CFWS
> are all syntatic tokens and [] means optional. The blanks between the
> tokens do not belong to the syntax. If you generate a date-time with all
> optional fields it would be
>
> day-of-week,datetimeCFWS
>
> without any b
Michael Storz:
> FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) / obs-FWS
>
> A FWS can be a single WSP or a folded line.
>
> Therefore the date "Fri, 5 Jan 2024 16:48:37 -0500 (EST)" is syntactically
> incorrect, because there can be only one blank between "," and "5", not two
> by the syntax of RF
On 2024-01-31 at 03:32:20 UTC-0500 (Wed, 31 Jan 2024 09:32:20 +0100)
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
On 30.01.24 20:20, Israel britto via Postfix-users wrote:
hello, I'm having a problem with spamhaus that I don't know how to
solve.
Today I have 1 domain that
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4tpmnz1dqyzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|Postfix has to be compatible with libmilter, the reference
|implementation from Sendmail. It absolutely makes no sends for me
|to unilaterally add features. If you wish to propose libmilter API
|changes, such as c
On 2024-01-30 at 17:56:16 UTC-0500 (Tue, 30 Jan 2024 23:56:16 +0100)
Jonas Vautherin via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
My understanding of a "folding white space" from (amongst others)
RFC2822 [3] is
that it implies a carriage return (CRLF), and it is *not* the same
thing as a
white
On 30.01.24 20:20, Israel britto via Postfix-users wrote:
hello, I'm having a problem with spamhaus that I don't know how to
solve.
Today I have 1 domain that uses 2 exclusive IPs 1.1.1.1 and 2.2.2.2
The PTR and rDNS entries are correctly configured:
1.1.1.1 > a1.domain.com
2.2.2.2 > a2.domain.c
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 01:00:56PM +0100, Michael Storz via Postfix-users wrote:
> day = ([FWS] 1*2DIGIT FWS) / obs-day
>
> This says a day can consist of one or two digits preceded by an optional
> folding white space (FWS):
>
> FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) / obs-FWS
>
> SMFIP_NOQUIT would
> be a good protocol extension in general
"Use the source, Luke."
You mean something like
SMFIC_QUIT_NC
?
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Am 2024-01-31 15:09, schrieb David Bürgin via Postfix-users:
Michael Storz:
FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) / obs-FWS
A FWS can be a single WSP or a folded line.
Therefore the date "Fri, 5 Jan 2024 16:48:37 -0500 (EST)" is
syntactically incorrect, because there can be only one blank
Jonas Vautherin via Postfix-users:
> > Indeed, RFC 5322 recommends (i.e. should) single space.
A safe change is to change the strftime() call in the Postfix
mail_date() function, so that it uses %d (day-of-month as 01-31)
instead of %e (which replaces the leading 0 with space).
This is not only a
On 2024-01-31 at 10:12:06 UTC-0500 (Wed, 31 Jan 2024 16:12:06 +0100)
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
On 30.01.24 20:20, Israel britto via Postfix-users wrote:
hello, I'm having a problem with spamhaus that I don't know how to
solve.
Today I have 1 domain that
Michael Storz via Postfix-users wrote in
<0cf37c59789c8be39a442926261d2...@lrz.de>:
|Am 2024-01-31 15:09, schrieb David Bürgin via Postfix-users:
|> Michael Storz:
|>> FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP) / obs-FWS
|>>
|>> A FWS can be a single WSP or a folded line.
|>>
|>> Therefore
Claus Assmann via Postfix-users:
> > SMFIP_NOQUIT would
> > be a good protocol extension in general
>
> "Use the source, Luke."
>
> You mean something like
> SMFIC_QUIT_NC
> ?
And... Postfix 'knows' that constant since postfix-2.5.0, but there
is no code to negotiate or send it.
What would it
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:13:51PM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> - The MTA then needs to keep the Milter connection open while watting
> for new work. Once there is work, the MTA sends SMFIC_CONNECT and
> so on.
>
> - This sounds like the MTA needs a Milter connection cache that
postfix-users@postfix.org wrote in
<20240131155624.ga51...@veps.esmtp.org>:
|> SMFIP_NOQUIT would
|> be a good protocol extension in general
|
|"Use the source, Luke."
|
|You mean something like
|SMFIC_QUIT_NC
|?
I did, i have that symbol (like MDS256..), yes. So maybe, yes.
This is one
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4tq7t76ypkzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|Claus Assmann via Postfix-users:
|>> SMFIP_NOQUIT would
|>> be a good protocol extension in general
|>
|> "Use the source, Luke."
|>
|> You mean something like
|> SMFIC_QUIT_NC
|> ?
|
|And... Postfix 'kn
So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection
is not in an error state, sending
SMFIC_QUIT_NC
and later sending
SMTIC_CONNECT
are sufficient to make a Milter fully forget a past SMTP session and
to make it ready to handle events from a new SMTP session?
I'd like to
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection
|is not in an error state, sending
|
|SMFIC_QUIT_NC
|
|and later sending
|
|SMTIC_CONNECT
|
|are sufficient to make a Milter fully f
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20240131203248.XtHi_6Do@steffen%sdaoden.eu>:
|Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
| <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
||So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection
||is not in an error state, sending
||
||SMFIC_QUIT_NC
||
||and
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
> <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
> |So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection
> |is not in an error state, sending
> |
> |SMFIC_QUIT_NC
> |
> |and later sending
> |
> |SM
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
<4tqfyk4qzqzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users:
|> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in
|> <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>:
|>|So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection
|>|is not in an error
Looks like there is sufficient basis to make SMTPD_QUIT_NC rerquests
thts from Postfix. Just need to figure out how to enable/disable
this particular command based on the Postfix and Milter protocol
versions. There is already some 'set' intersection code for doing
such things on the Postfix side.
FYI: the libmilter interface is an internal communication protocol.
It is NOT publically documented on purpose (hence complaining about
missing documentation is somehow annoying).
--
Please don't Cc: me, use only the list for replies.
___
Postfix-users
26 matches
Mail list logo
