Hi,
I'm seeing regular postscreen segfaults on a test server with minimal
traffic. The patterns I noticed from the logs is that it seems to happen
when the server gets 2 ~simultaneous connections from the same host:
2024-02-04T14:33:31.876390 info postfix starting the Postfix mail system
2024-02-
These are the alpine packages themselves, but I'm not familiar with how
they're built so I can't rule out a bad build. It's also possible that I
didn't let the 3.8.3 version run long enough for it to crash as it happens
irregularly.
Anyways, spent some time building 3.8.5 from source and am now wa
> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2024 at 08:12:56PM -0500, Christophe Kalt via
> Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > These are the alpine packages themselves, but I'm not familiar with how
> > they're built so I can't rule out a bad build. It's also possible that I
> &g
+1 on setting up SRS, it helps with Gmail and I believe ARC does too
(although I don't have hard data on this). Interesting note about postgrey,
I didn't think that was effective any longer but maybe it is.
On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 9:01 PM Doug Hardie via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> w
Hi,
The two options I've seen for implementing SRS are milter and
[sender_]canonical_maps but it seems to me that neither are a good fit when
rewriting the envelope From as they happen early on (smtpd and cleanup
specifically) and before Postfix knows where the mail is going.
That's a bit of a pr
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 8:18 PM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> This location in the message flow seems right to me. And we already
> have an example for implementing an address rewriting _classes
> feature. This can even be configured in master.cf if one also
I hadn't seen postforward, thanks for the pointer! It's a good approach,
small cost of an extra hop, should be easy to enhance as well.
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024, 00:36 raf via Postfix-users
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 07:30:01PM -0500, Christophe Kalt via
> Postfix-users
On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 5:57 AM John Fawcett via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> For submission I only use xbl (return code 127.0.0.4) excluding other
> other data contained in zen like pbl that lists isp dynamic ip ranges from
> which you would normally expect to get connectio
Hi,
How do folks monitor the health of their postfix installations?
log monitoring seems to be essential, rates of warning/error messages
seem meaningful. Then there are the statistics regularly emitted, but
these seem more indicative of busyness.
Finally, monitoring queue sizes is probably adv
Hi,
3.10.0 is giving me new warnings:
2025-02-19T02:36:25.415861 warning postfix/smtp warning: DNSSEC validation
may be unavailable
2025-02-19T02:36:25.415870 warning postfix/smtp warning: reason:
dnssec_probe 'ns:.' received a response that is not DNSSEC validated
2025-02-19T02:36:25.527964 info
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 7:41 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 06:22:42PM -0500, Christophe Kalt via
> Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > Yes. What's even more puzzling is both builds are fairly recent. I just
>
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025, 20:08 Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 07:20:13PM -0500, Christophe Kalt via
> Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 7:41 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
> > po
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 8:57 AM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> That part of POSTFIX has NOT changed.
Hmpf, so the problem is probably with me, but I'm puzzled.
> Does the problem go away if you add "options trust-ad" to
> /etc/resolv.conf?
>
no.
> Does
13 matches
Mail list logo
