[pfx] Re: reject_unverified_sender: parallelism seems sub-optimal

Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4yzbyp1lr9zj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: ... |> i again stumbled over the fact that postfix receives many |> successive mails from these servers, then creates / refreshes the |> verify_sender DB, but seems to have "no

[pfx] Re: Is that correct behaviour?

On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 08:57:02AM +0100, Tobi via Postfix-users wrote: > > That would be unexpected. I'm implementing support for REQUIRETLS > > (RFC 8689) and that code is supposed to try multiple MXes before it > > gives up. > > > > Have you perhaps configured smtp_mx_session_limit=1 ? > > >

[pfx] [mailop] FYI: nixspam RBL has shutdown

[ Repost from "mailop" list ] Just FYI for those with the nixspam RBL configured in their systems (For example it's enabled in rspamd by default) It's just shutdown - https://www.nixspam.net/?old_domain=true Sad to see as it was always quite reliable as a signal of spamminess IMHO. Make sure t

[pfx] Re: reject_unverified_sender: parallelism seems sub-optimal

Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: > Hello. > > Full picture: i am still at the 9fans mailing-list, which over > time has been migrated to topicbox.com, and this is handled via > messagingengine.com (it is saddening to do configuration via > policy server as the two domains are distinct, sigh). >

[pfx] reject_unverified_sender: parallelism seems sub-optimal

Hello. Full picture: i am still at the 9fans mailing-list, which over time has been migrated to topicbox.com, and this is handled via messagingengine.com (it is saddening to do configuration via policy server as the two domains are distinct, sigh). Well, there started a lot of noise on these list

[pfx] TLSRPT broken confirmed, starting with 3.10-snapshot 20250105

Hello, sorry to have a similar, but different thread subject. I already deleted the others, so couldn't backup on those mails and just thought, hey, I have a look at my system. But I can confirm the non-working condition of the TLSRPT part of postfix, starting with snapshot 3.10-20250105, for

[pfx] Re: Is that correct behaviour?

Wietse: > Have you perhaps configured smtp_mx_session_limit=1 ? > > postconf smtp_mx_session_limit > postconf -P '*/*/smtp_mx_session_limit' Tobi: > postconf smtp_mx_session_limit > smtp_mx_session_limit = 2 > postconf -P '*/*/smtp_mx_session_limit' > postconf: warning: unmatched request:

[pfx] Re: TLSRPT issue

Hello all, I can confirm it works again for me now. Thank you Wietse! ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org

[pfx] Re: TLSRPT issue

Am 17.01.25 um 15:00 schrieb Florian Piekert via Postfix-users: I can confirm it works again for me now. same here, thanks Wietse! Andreas ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le.

[pfx] Re: TLSRPT issue

postfix-3.10-20250116 has been uploaded to ftp.porcupine.org. Wietse ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org