component ?
If anyone have an idea on what cause this behavior, I'll be glad to hear
from him ! :)
Thanks,
Ben
Le 20/11/2010 18:26, Wietse Venema a écrit :
Ben:
Hello,
I have a problem of relay access denied with postfix to deliver a mail
to one domain (only one, all other domains are ok). I ran smtpd in
Does the domain name match mydestination? If yes, show evidence.
Does the domain name match
Le 20/11/2010 18:26, Wietse Venema a écrit :
Ben:
Hello,
I have a problem of relay access denied with postfix to deliver a mail
to one domain (only one, all other domains are ok). I ran smtpd in
Does the domain name match mydestination? If yes, show evidence.
Does the domain name match
Le 20/11/2010 19:03, Victor Duchovni a écrit :
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 06:49:52PM +0100, Ben wrote:
I have a problem of relay access denied with postfix to deliver a mail
to one domain (only one, all other domains are ok). I ran smtpd in
Does the domain name match mydestination? If yes, show
Le 20/11/2010 20:55, Victor Duchovni a écrit :
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 07:45:41PM +0100, Ben wrote:
Thank you for your help ! The recipient domain should be configured as
final, but is not. I think that's the problem.
I joined the information you asked to avoid line breaking.
Tur
= maildrop
maildrop_destination_recipient_limit = 1
The problem is that maildrop seems to never been invoked. Postfix choose
local to deliver the mail, but I can't find why. I would like it uses
maildrop instead.
I join postconf -n, maildroprc, and a log extract showing the problem.
Any idea ?
Regards,
Le 01/12/2010 17:52, Christoph Anton Mitterer a écrit :
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 17:41 +0100, Ben wrote:
Postfix choose
local to deliver the mail, but I can't find why. I would like it uses
maildrop instead.
You need to set up your hosted domains to be virtual hosted
(http://www.postfi
Le 03/12/2010 17:39, mouss a écrit :
Le 03/12/2010 17:28, Ben a écrit :
Le 01/12/2010 17:52, Christoph Anton Mitterer a écrit :
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 17:41 +0100, Ben wrote:
Postfix choose
local to deliver the mail, but I can't find why. I would like it uses
maildrop instead.
You need t
Le 05/12/2010 02:51, mouss a écrit :
Le 03/12/2010 17:56, Ben a écrit :
[snip]
All domains are virtual, I managed to pass all mails to maildrop, it
works. The problem is that in this configuration, mail are not relayed
to other hosts when the user configure mail redirection.
A user can tell
I know there are instructions in the INSTALL document how to "port"
postfix to "unsupported systems" but I wonder if the list here has any
help for getting postfix built on newly released FreeBSD 8.0. . .
I tried simply duping the makedefs line for FreeBSD 7:
FreeBSD.7*) SYSTYPE=FREEBSD7
On Wed, 29 May 2013 10:34:37 -0400, Ben Johnson
wrote:
> On 5/28/2013 1:38 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Viktor Dukhovni:
>>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 01:18:25PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>>>
>>>> I strongly suggest that you swap the order of
Hi,
I've got a three instance setup, two instances start fine. One has
suddenly started to refuse to start.
To make matters worse, nothing is logged about its failure to start, so
I remain none the wiser !
The main.cf for the instance is as follows :
data_directory = /var/lib/postfix-inet
Hi Wietse,
> You removed the third instance name from the main.cf file of the
> "primary" Postfix instance (for example, the /etc/postfix/main.cf).
Its still listed right there in multi_instance_directories if that's
what you mean ?
postmulti -l also shows it ?
On 17/08/2013 15:23, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ben:
Hi Wietse,
> You removed the third instance name from the main.cf file of the
> "primary" Postfix instance (for example, the /etc/postfix/main.cf).
Its still listed right there in multi_instance_directories if that
On 17/08/2013 22:03, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ben:
What is the output from: "postmulti -l"? In my case I see:
- - y /etc/postfix
postfix-test- n /etc/postfix-test
postfix-foo - n /e
at
only attributes that matched a particular value would be returned.
since this isn't possible though, according to the ldap_table man
page, i'm wondering how else i might achieve my goal, without
requiring independent entries in ldap for each mailbox.
thanks
-ben
On Feb 01, 2009, at 23.15, ben thielsen wrote:
hi-
i'm using an ldap lookup map for virtual_maibox_maps and haven't
been able to get the lookup to work quite the way i'd like. users
exist in the ldap tree as
uid=user,ou=people,ou=users,ou=accounts,dc=example,dc=com, and
On Feb 01, 2009, at 23.58, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 11:15:00PM -0500, ben thielsen wrote:
dn: uid=user,ou=people,ou=users,ou=accounts,dc=example,dc=com
mailLocalAddress: u...@foo.com - delivered to foo.com/user/Maildir/
mailLocalAddress: u...@bar.net - delivered to
On Feb 02, 2009, at 06.15, Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:15 AM, ben thielsen wrote:
dn: uid=user,ou=people,ou=users,ou=accounts,dc=example,dc=com
mailLocalAddress: u...@foo.com - delivered to foo.com/user/Maildir/
mailLocalAddress: u...@bar.net - delivered to
om mailq and the timezone from $TZ (US/Eastern) for the output from postcat.
This is, IMO, the correct behavior.
> Wietse
--
Ben Winslow
this
frequently, and it's not directly related to the webmail software in use.
--
Ben Winslow
of the .41?
Thanks,
Ben
On 6/19/10 3:33 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Ben Munat put forth on 6/19/2010 5:20 PM:
>
>> What am I missing?
>
> You are missing the required evidence that would allow us to help
you. We
> need actual error messages, log entries, postconf -n output, etc.
The list
>
On 6/19/10 3:51 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Ben Munat:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
I have a colo server running a few websites and using postfix for a few
domains. The server came with a few IP addresses, but I'm using the main
address only and hanging on to the othe
On 6/19/10 10:31 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Wietse Venema put forth on 6/19/2010 5:51 PM:
Ben Munat:
main.cf:inet_interfaces = 64.69.38.41,127.0.0.1
and I hook up the main smtp process in master.cf like this:
master.cf:-o smtp_bind_address=64.69.38.41
This works only on the SMTP CLIENT
ssage_size_limit = 600
Try setting the message size to 6291456 (or 6300000), which is 6Mb.
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
7;d end up in a world where people genuinely thought that
Exchange or Domino were the equivalent of Postfix. Urgh.
Now if you said all MTAs *should be* Postfix ... ;)
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ail1.no-ip.com.
wesleyseminary.edu. 43098 IN MX 15 mail2.no-ip.com.
wesleyseminary.edu. 43098 IN MX 5 mail.wesleyseminary.edu.
;; ANSWER SECTION:
students.wesleyseminary.edu. 1674 INMX 5 students.wesleyseminary.edu.
Probably a good idea in any educat
ause Google use geolocation IPs. For specific hosts you
will obtain the IP that appears to be "closest" to your network.
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
copies of the zone. Although a bit
of a stretch, this IS a case where a temporary reject on an NXDOMAIN
could result in the message being accepted later with no user action.
--
Ben Winslow
Thanks for your suggestions,
--
Ben Winslow
ay's meeting will be today
>cat header_checks-ignored
/^Received: from localhost \(localhost \[127\.0\.0\.1\]\)\s+by
mta\.example\.com \(Postfix\) with ESMTP id/ IGNORE
#/^Received: from localhost \(localhost \[127\.0\.0\.1\]\)/
>postmap -hq - pcre:./header_checks-ignored < test_message
>
-ben
ocalhost [127.0.0.1])IGNORE
>postmap -hq - pcre:./header_checks-ignored < test_message
>
there must be something basic i'm overlooking?
-ben
)
by mta.example.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76ABF40DF1
for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:50:30 -0400 (EDT) IGNORE
this all works just as it should, when the operator does what he should.
thanks
-ben
ved
the header in question, taken from the message after arriving @gmail.com:
Received: by mta.example.com (Postfix, from userid 2000)
id E1056416B5; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:56:16 -0400 (EDT)
-ben
.net ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (mta.dipswitch.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
with LMTP id 15339-07 for ;
Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:12:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mta.dipswitch.net (Postfix, from userid 0)
id 368CE416DE; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:12:28 -0400 (EDT)
>
>cat message
hat information?
Connect.com.au in Australia (now a division of AAPT) has been running
Postfix for many years. Mainly because of the virtual domain support
dating back to the 1.x series.
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 30/07/11 12:53 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Frank Bonnet:
>>
>> Thanks for any info/links/idea
>
> grep @ /home/*/.forward
And pray that none of them are using procmail. ;)
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ls_random_source = dev:/dev/urandom
smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/certs/signed-cert.crt
smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/certs/cert.key
smtp_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/certs/ca.crt
Any thoughts? Anything else I can post to aid in debug?
Thanks,
Ben
53 (0x35))
** snip ** ..._.
Jan 9 20:12:18 postfix/smtpd[11743]: write to 01633968
[0164BE1B] (37 bytes => 37 (0x25))
** snip **
Jan 9 20:12:18 postfix/smtpd[11743]: read from 01633968
[016438CB] (5 bytes => -1 (0x))
Jan 9 20:12:18 postfix/smtpd[11743]: disconnect from
**[***]
--
Thanks,
Ben
#x27;m stuck on making
canonical(5)ization conditional on the output of the restrictions.
Any advice would be appreciated.
(Apologies if this post shows up twice; I jumped the gun on the first
submission, and I think it was discarded.)
Thank you,
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 01:25:36PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
>
> > I understand how to chain smtpd restrictions, but I'm stuck on making
> > canonical(5)ization conditional on the output of the restrictions.
> > Any advice would be appreciated.
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 02:30:16PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > > then use smtp_generic_maps, to convert from the Postfix-canonical
> > > form to that specific external form.
> >
> > So use transport(5)? If I want to rewrite to form x, use t
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:05:54PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 02:30:16PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > Ben Rosengart:
> > > > > then use smtp_generic_maps, to convert from the Postfix-canonical
> > &g
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 10:44:02AM -0500, Ben Rosengart wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:05:54PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > You need to rewrite (sender and non-sender) addresses based on the sender?
>
> Just sender addresses.
Lost interest, Wietse? :-)
Am
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 03:20:30PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 10:44:02AM -0500, Ben Rosengart wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:05:54PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You need to rewrite
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:26:09PM -0500, Ben Rosengart wrote:
>
> Apologies. I'm thinking parts of this over and if I reanimate the
> thread, I will be sure to provide full context.
Let me try this again.
I want to rewrite *sender addresses* (preferably headers only) when
these
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:06:25PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:26:09PM -0500, Ben Rosengart wrote:
> >
> > I want to rewrite *sender addresses* (preferably headers only) when
> > these conditions are _all_ met:
> >
> > 1. Clie
he SPF record, and yes, the logs.
Regards,
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822 not knowing his in its entirety [...]"
-- J
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:47:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > If, upstream, I separate the recipients into different transports,
> > will this cause the upstream Postfix to "split the envelope" and send
> > the mail in >1 transactio
Then there's http://code.google.com/p/milter-perl/, but there's very
little information available about it.
If you've written a milter in Perl -- what did you use?
Thanks,
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 12:53:56AM +0200, karave...@mail.bg wrote:
> - ?? ???? Ben Rosengart (ben.roseng...@morganstanley.com),
> 15.03.2012 ?? 00:34 -
>
> > What is the best Perl interface for milters?
>
> Why use milter interface? There are other w
ffecting one-time-only parts of the
protocol, such as smtp_helo_name? We don't RSET and re-HELO after each
transaction, do we?
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822
u to introduce this change?
Thanks,
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822 not knowing his in its entirety [...]"
-- Jorge Luis Bor
ge. To discard only one recipient without discarding the
entire message, use the transport(5) table to direct mail to the
discard(8) service.
I hope this helps,
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian
it's
happening because I am logging from the EOM callback.
Any pointers on what to try next would be greatly appreciated.
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:43:03AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > Dear Postfixers,
> > I am testing a milter which, under some circumstances, adds a
> > header to a message. The problem is that the header is simply not added.
> >
> > I have
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:04:11PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > >
> > > Are you implementing your own Milter on-the-wire read/write
> > > routines?
> >
> > No, I am using Sendmail::PMilter.
>
> Is that from CPAN or elsewhere?
= shift;
$ctx->addheader('X-MS-Floodstopper', 'hi!');
return(SMFIS_CONTINUE);
}
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822 not knowing his in its enti
unning this as an
smtpd_milter and you as a non_smtpd_milter?
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822 not knowing his in its entirety [...]"
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 01:19:52PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > I enabled verbose mode in smtpd(8), but I don't know what to look for
>
> Adding headers is implemented in cleanup(8).
Before or after header_checks?
> Headers will never be
> added wh
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 06:20:04AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 01:19:52PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > > Ben Rosengart:
> > > > I enabled verbose mode in smtpd(8), but I don't know what to look for
> >
> It is not difficult to integrate the queue-file parser from the
> updated qshape(1) into your (my) code derived from milter versions
> of qshape. Good luck.
Thanks, that's very helpful, as is Wietse's suggestion of "postcat -h".
--
Ben Rosengart
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:55:49AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Rosengart:
> > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 02:27:11PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > >
> > > 2. I never liked milters (multi-threading complexity, and poor
> > > degradation
> >
rwarded or delivered locally.
Having worked with a system done your way and a system which preserved
constant envelopes, I would say that the differences are minor and
essentially a matter of taste.
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Au
entry on MX
> host A to forward user@B to user@B not work right (because the
> right-hand-side user@B would generate an MX lookup for B which would loop
> right back to host A)?
Is there a problem you're trying to solve, or are you just curious?
--
Ben Rosengart "
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 09:48:40PM +0800, Alvin Wong wrote:
> With just a single binary I have 80% thought of it being a Trojan.
23 lines of non-obfuscated bash.
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he wa
ore the transformed 4xx
> response is sent to the client.
For what it's worth, I agree with Noel that this would be a worthwhile
addition to postconf(5)'s section on soft_bounce.
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian
irements, one
must treat Postfix as an MTA toolkit, from which one builds an MTA.
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822 not know
ge, but it didn't go into this kind of detail.
Thanks,
--
Ben Rosengart "Like all those possessing a library,
Sendmail, Inc. Aurelian was aware that he was guilty of
+1 718 431 3822 not knowing his in its entirety [...]"
-Description:
Undelivered Message
I would like to revert to the previous behaviour where only the headers are
attached to the bounce.
Thanks
Ben Williams
Thanks that fixed it.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 10:31:43AM +1200, Ben WIlliams wrote:
>
> > Please can someone help me understand how to configure what is attached
> to
> > bounce messages.
> >
> > The ver
Hello,
I am experiencing something very similar to, or exactly the same as,
what is described at
http://www.tolaris.com/2009/07/15/stopping-spam-botnets-with-fail2ban/ .
Basically, someone/something has been attempting to relay mail through
my server (at least I believe that to be what's happenin
forge "u...@yahoo.com" if a spammer really
> wants to send mail there :-)
>
> Wietse
>
Thanks, Wietse.
Regarding your first reply, I've reviewed the information at
http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail and will do my best to
adhere to protocol going forward. (That was my first post; sincere
apologies.)
I have re-ordered those two rules and will post back if that doesn't
solve the problem. I really appreciate your time and assistance.
Best regards,
-Ben
(prior to closing this "hole"):
http://pastebin.com/QGE3cah5
Thanks for any insight here.
-Ben
On 5/31/2013 2:39 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 5/31/2013 12:22 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
>> I seem to be able to setup a desktop email client and send email to my
>> server, from any external network, and the email will be accepted for
>> delivery as long as a) the sender u
On 5/31/2013 3:52 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 5/31/2013 2:06 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
>
>> Okay. I understand. The implication here is that it doesn't matter
>> whether the user-agent connects directly to my server via SMTP to
>> delivery mail to my users, or he co
On 5/31/2013 4:11 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 03:06:38PM -0400, Ben Johnson wrote:
>> On 5/31/2013 2:39 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
>>> On 5/31/2013 12:22 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
>>>> Postfix "postfinger" output for this server (prior to cl
(besides perhaps Peer) is making any claim with respect to
"real-world" performance. The performance claims as documented assume
factors only within Postfix and the computer on which it's runnings'
control.
-Ben
Hey All,
Please excuse my loose terminology in the following description as I barely
know what I'm doing.
I have a strange problem where I'm unable to send some mail from mailman using
a postfix installation on the same host.
I have postfix mail_version 2.8.4 I have users authenticating and s
ng with "smtp.provider.net"?"
I've explained the problem in this regard ("domain mismatch" warnings).
We have considered using SubjectAlternativeNames, but we would have to
change our SSL work-flow considerably and spend a lot of money with our
"trusted" friends in the SSL CA business.
Have I missed anything fundamental? What are others doing to address
similar client demands?
Thanks for any pointers,
-Ben
On 7/15/2013 1:03 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> In absence of SNI either the MX of all domains point to one MX with a valid
> cert or you bring up an instance per domain.
>
Bringing-up a Postfix instance per domain would require unique ports (or
a dedicated IP address) for each
(Viktor, I'm going to reply to Wietse first, just because his questions
are fewer and I am hoping to clarify the points of confusion before
others reply.)
On 7/15/2013 1:24 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Johnson:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We host mail services for a few dozen d
On 7/15/2013 1:10 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:47:53PM -0400, Ben Johnson wrote:
>
>> In essence, our clients wish to use their own SSL certificates for their
>> SMTP connections.
>
> Are these submission clients? What does the above
On 7/15/2013 3:14 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Ben Johnson:
>> On 7/15/2013 1:10 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:47:53PM -0400, Ben Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>>> In essence, our clients wish to use their own SSL certificates for their
&
Hello mailing List,
is there a way to rewrite the recipient_canonical_maps based on the SMTP
Users?
What I want is a way to redirect all mail being send from user1 to
b...@example.com and all mail being send from user2 being redirected
to al...@example.com
Thanks a lot in advance,
Ben
sure what to try next. I must be missing something simple...
For privacy reasons, I have omitted it here, but I'll provide the
sanitized output of "postconf -n" if it would be helpful; just ask.
Thanks for any help with this!
-Ben
On 1/22/2014 3:46 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 03:07:33PM -0500, Ben Johnson wrote:
>
Thanks for expanding upon Wietse's response, Viktor.
>> I created the certificate with the following command:
>>
>> $ cat example_com.crt PositiveSSLCA2.c
ld = source
additional_conditions = and type = 'recipient' and active = 'y'
hosts = 127.0.0.1
And the `mail_access` DB table looks like this:
source access typeactive
myregisteredsite.comOK recipient y
Thanks for any assistance with this. I really appreciate it.
-Ben
On 3/1/2014 2:10 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 3/1/2014 12:17 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
Noel, thank you for the incredibly detailed response. I appreciate your
time.
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a need to whitelist a specific sender domain (and any subdomain
>> thereof) such th
this.
The suggested commands do not reveal anything bound to port 47107 at the moment
(this scan happened last night, though).
Any indication whether or not this is legitimate behavior on Postfix's part? I
can't find much on this specific message.
Thanks for any help,
-Ben
On 3/18/2014 11:14 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:09:44AM -0400, Ben Johnson wrote:
>
>> A daily rkhunter scan produced the following warning, which
>> mentions Postfix. Is this a false-positive?
>
> What is the anonymous port range on thi
= static:5000
virtual_mailbox_base = /var/vmail
virtual_mailbox_domains = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_domains.cf
virtual_mailbox_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_mailboxes.cf
virtual_transport = dovecot
virtual_uid_maps = static:5000
Thanks for any advice here!
-Ben
On 7/7/2014 1:45 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 7/7/2014 11:56 AM, Leonardo Rodrigues wrote:
>> Em 07/07/14 13:24, Ben Johnson escreveu:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I've noticed increased Postfix activity as of late and am
>>> concerned that
>>> s
On 7/7/2014 2:47 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
> Thanks, Leonardo and Noel! I really appreciate the prompt replies.
>
> Leonardo, I see no indication that whomever is sending this mail has
> authenticated. And given that local connections are permitted to send
> mail without authent
, `type` = "client", and `active` = "y".
One other related question: which is "less computationally expensive",
in the context of "smtpd_helo_restrictions":
"reject_invalid_helo_hostname" or "reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname"? In
other words, which one should come first?
Thanks for any help!
-Ben
> # blacklists after whitelists.
> reject_unknown_recipient_domain
> reject_unknown_sender_domain
> ...
>
> With recipient_access and sender_access entries that
> "OK" certain addresses or domains.
>
> Wietse
Perfect. Thank you for your time, Wietse. I really appreciate it.
-Ben
you are doing. Please include the
commands you are executing (ideally a transcript of the session) or a
more thorough explanation.
-Ben
permissions correct?
It is certainly possible to just bulk copy messages from one Maildir
to another. No magic involved. You just need to be careful about
putting them in the correct directories and maintaining the correct
permissions.
-Ben
My DNS has what I think are an appropriate TXT records
(_domainkey.lightandmatter.com and m1._domainkey.lightandmatter.com).
Below is the relevant section of my /etc/postfix/master.cf
file.
Is there some further configuration step that
1 - 100 of 764 matches
Mail list logo
