Hello,
I have written a lightweight HTTP proxy for Postfix socket maps and policy
services.
DESCRIPTION
pfxhttp is a lightweight HTTP proxy seamlessly integrated with Postfix,
enabling communication with external HTTP-based APIs for socket maps and policy
services.
Common use ca
* natan via Postfix-users :
> Hi
> What is currently happening with the OpenArc project? On GitHub, I see the
> last modifications were made 7 years ago. Has the project completely failed?
> I'm asking because I see that Gmail/G-Suite are using it, and, after all,
> they are trendsetters. The OpenA
On 2025-01-13 17:41, Steffan Cline via Postfix-users wrote:
reject_rhsbl_sender mykey.dbl.dq.spamhaus.net=127.0.1.[2..99],
^
On 13.01.25 22:08, Tomasz Pala via Postfix-users wrote:
BTW you can use DQS via public resolvers just fine - although it's
better to use own D
Hi
What is currently happening with the OpenArc project? On GitHub, I see
the last modifications were made 7 years ago. Has the project completely
failed? I'm asking because I see that Gmail/G-Suite are using it, and,
after all, they are trendsetters. The OpenARC project seems quite useful
and
Scott K via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-01-14 15:30:
I was watching mail being delivered to root in my log so I decided to
try to create a root account in my email client but I wasn't able to,
I was getting username password error
show evidense logs
Florian Piekert:
> Question:
> I assume, it is not possible, based on EHLO of sending server, to
> NOT list STARTTLS in the pf 250 capabilities listing?
POstfix can suppress the STARTTLS by client IP address.
Example with table inlined in main.cf:
/etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtpd_discard_ehlo_key
On 2025-01-14 at 09:30:03 UTC-0500 (Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:30:03 -0500)
Scott K via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
> I was watching mail being delivered to root in my log so I decided to try
> to create a root account in my email client but I wasn't able to, I was
> getting username password
Christian Roessner via Postfix-users:
> Hello,
>
> I have written a lightweight HTTP proxy for Postfix socket maps and policy
> services.
>
> DESCRIPTION
> pfxhttp is a lightweight HTTP proxy seamlessly integrated
> with Postfix, enabling communication with external HTTP-based
>
Thanks
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 9:59 AM Bill Cole via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On 2025-01-14 at 09:30:03 UTC-0500 (Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:30:03 -0500)
> Scott K via Postfix-users
> is rumored to have said:
>
> > I was watching mail being delivered to root in my log so I de
Am 14.01.2025 um 16:17 schrieb Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
:
>
> Christian Roessner via Postfix-users:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have written a lightweight HTTP proxy for Postfix socket maps and policy
>> services.
>>
>> DESCRIPTION
>> pfxhttp is a lightweight HTTP proxy seamlessly integrated
>> w
That's what I thought but forgot thanks
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 9:59 AM Bill Cole via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On 2025-01-14 at 09:30:03 UTC-0500 (Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:30:03 -0500)
> Scott K via Postfix-users
> is rumored to have said:
>
> > I was watching mail being de
I removed Google DNS off of my name servers and confirmed that they're still
resolving everything fine. This should eliminate the issue Wietse mentioned
with too many name servers in the list. I haven't yet checked the logs today to
see if I'm still getting any errors using the public mirrors.
Scott K via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-01-14 14:45:
So after I disable Dovecot submission (by renaming
/etc/dovecot/protocols.d/submissiond.protocol to
submission.protocol.renamed) will Postfix then listen on 587
automatically? It was previously said that Dovecot was listening on
587 and Postfi
Patrick Ben Koetter via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-01-14 13:46:
* natan via Postfix-users :
Hi
What is currently happening with the OpenArc project? On GitHub, I see
the
last modifications were made 7 years ago. Has the project completely
failed?
I'm asking because I see that Gmail/G-Suite a
So after I disable Dovecot submission (by renaming
/etc/dovecot/protocols.d/submissiond.protocol to
submission.protocol.renamed) will Postfix then listen on 587 automatically?
It was previously said that Dovecot was listening on 587 and Postfix
listening on 25
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 1:59 AM Tomas
I was watching mail being delivered to root in my log so I decided to try
to create a root account in my email client but I wasn't able to, I was
getting username password error
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe se
Am 14.01.25 um 09:11 schrieb Christian Rößner via Postfix-users:
Hello,
I have written a lightweight HTTP proxy for Postfix socket maps and policy
services.
DESCRIPTION
pfxhttp is a lightweight HTTP proxy seamlessly integrated with Postfix,
enabling communication with external HTTP-ba
Greetings,
I have found myself with the task of moving/recreating the mail server of a
small ngo from an old VPS which hasn't been updated for years but still
works without any visible problem, to a new one.
The current server runs postfix 2.10.1 + postgrey on Centos 7.6.
The new server should
> Just FYI, it's better to turn off QNAME minimization on DNS servers used by
> MTAs and spam checkers.
My NSes are using 9.11 and I don't have that QNAME-minimization option
available in my config however looking at tcpdump, it doesn't look as if it's
minimizing it.
I plan to upgrade my NS so
Marco Fioretti via Postfix-users:
> Greetings,
>
> I have found myself with the task of moving/recreating the mail server of a
> small ngo from an old VPS which hasn't been updated for years but still
> works without any visible problem, to a new one.
>
> The current server runs postfix 2.10.1 +
i am trying
$ cat /etc/unbound/unbound.conf.d/spamhaus.conf
server:
qname-minimisation: no
randy
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 03:47:19AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre via Postfix-users
wrote:
> As documented in https://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html
> section "Mail forwarding domains", to forward mail to another user,
> I have in the /etc/postfix/main.cf file (something set up in 2009):
>
> virtua
On 2025-01-14 19:48, pgnd via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> "Spamhaus's initial recommendation was to disable QNAME minimization
> altogether, but ISC disagrees: the correct solution is for Spamhaus to fix
> its broken servers. QNAME minimization is an important privacy protection
> that is ena
--On Monday, January 13, 2025 6:31 PM -0500 Scott K via Postfix-users
wrote:
The last of these problems doesn't show in the log just Thunderbird
says it couldn't connect to the relay server and I should check to make
sure my email address is correct
If you're just starting to learn how to ma
Hi,
As documented in https://www.postfix.org/VIRTUAL_README.html
section "Mail forwarding domains", to forward mail to another user,
I have in the /etc/postfix/main.cf file (something set up in 2009):
virtual_alias_domains = vinc17.org
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual
and in the /e
As it seems bind turns off qname minimization for queries to SH. As I
can find something like this in the query log:
named[4205]: success resolving
'49.236.215.178.6.zen.dq.spamhaus.net/A' after disabling
qname minimization due to 'ncache nxdomain
So, I'd say it's not necessa
Hi Tomasz,
can you explain why it's better to turn off QNAME minimization MTAs and
spam checkers?
Andreas
Am 14.01.2025 um 18:56 schrieb Steffan Cline via Postfix-users:
Just FYI, it's better to turn off QNAME minimization on DNS servers used by
MTAs and spam checkers.
My NSes are using 9.1
27 matches
Mail list logo
