helo being rejected

Hello All, I have a clients who's email server is getting a lot of helo rejects from it (windows box). The client has a .NET domain for their servers ( hardware ) and a .COM for their email address. I manually had a conversation with my postfix server that has these settings: reje

RE: helo being rejected

ostfix-us...@postfix.org > [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Joey > Sent: Tuesday, 16 December 2008 1:05 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: helo being rejected > > > > Hello All, > > I have a clients who's email server is

Assistance with email error

to be positive. Thanks! Joey

not sure why this is getting through

rt troubleshooting." Not sure I know how to resolve this, any help appreciated! Joey

need help figuring out why spf or other rule is not rejecting this

rt troubleshooting." Not sure I know how to resolve this, any help appreciated! Joey

spf record syntax check

I must be confused here, but I thought putting SPF like so would ALLOW my domains, add an expected other domain, and then -all reject the rest. Am I doing something wrong? mydomain.com. IN TXT "v=spf1 +a:earth.mydomain.com +ptr:some-other.com +ptr:mydomain.net -all" Thanks! Joey

Quick Test

Quick test. sorry. Thanks! Jack

RE: Proposing postfix to mgmt as an Exchange replacement

#x27;S PC backed up DAILY, every user will have to leave their computer on 24 x 7. If they forget to leave their computer on... Woops? No backup. What if you get PDA's at the office and need to sync phones to the server? Works in exchange... NOT possible in postfix ( or 3rd Party as of yet) Exchange does have a lot of benefits... It has many pitfalls as well, money, bad BAD BAD logging and a slew of other quirks, but in the end it is a solid tool which can't be simply removed without significant research and evaluation! Good Luck on your quest! Joey

authentication problem: unable to open Berkeley db /etc/sasldb2

sure whats going on. No sasl rpms have been updated they are the same. Any help appreciated. Joey Postconf -n results: alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/aliases biff = no body_checks = pcre:/etc/postfix/body_checks body_checks_size_limit = 21200 bounce_queue_lifetime

Updated RBL's & spam fighting

l.ahbl.org, We are seeing our spamassassin "Tagged" emails go up dramatically to the point that I get over 150 per day and have a few clients with more. Any suggestions or ideas are appreciated as we hate spam as much as the next guy! Thanks! Joey

RE: Updated RBL's & spam fighting

> > * Voytek Eymont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > rfci is not safe for smtp rejection. It is not intended for such use. > > > > > > mouss, thanks > > > > so, should be like this ? > > > > smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_rhsbl_sender dsn.rfc-ignorant.org > > That's STILL smtp rejection - he was

System stressed

what the smtpd -n smtp -t inet -u -o stress is really telling me. Is there anything else I can do to reduce the stress that the system is apparently under? I was also debating adding -o stress=yes into my master.cf, but I'm not sure that's the best way to go. Any help appreciate

RE: System stressed

> Subject: Re: System stressed > > Joey wrote: > > > > Hello All, > > > > I’m trying to understand this a little better. I read > > http://www.postfix.org/STRESS_README.html and have an ok idea about > > whats happening. > > > > I see sev

RE: System stressed

> -Original Message- > From: Wietse Venema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 1:37 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: System stressed > > Joey: > > > Does it say "-o stress=" OR "-o stress

Finally blocking some spam

o about 4K-5K. This method won't be good for everyone, but if you have had enough this is pretty good until something better comes along. it works! Joey

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: chteh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 11:38 AM > To: Joey > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Dear Joey, > > Thanks for your email, I am running 3 postfix mail servers too in our > research l

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Victor Duchovni > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 11:38 AM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:3

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Jorey Bump [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 12:51 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey wrote, at 10/13/2008 11:57 AM: > > > For us greylisti

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Jorey Bump [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 2:35 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey wrote, at 10/13/2008 01:42 PM: > > > You reach a poin

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 12:54 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > >> A spamhaus data feed for 1-5,000 commercial users is $1850/year... You > >> really should consider subscribing, rather than fighting spam with > >> country blocks... > >> > >>

RE: Finally blocking some spam

d if we haven't been emailed from their in an unreasonable amount can whitelist your servers. But don't be so quick to judge someone without spending the day in their shoes. We are all in this battle as admins, and I only shared my results to see if someone can benefit from it just like others have done in the past and helped me. Joey

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> > > On 13 Oct 2008, at 15:00, Joey wrote: > >> Joey wrote, at 10/13/2008 01:42 PM: > >> > >> Many school and government sites (not to mention China) can't seem to > >> configure rDNS and FCrDNS properly. I have given up trying to contac

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Jorey Bump [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 4:25 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey wrote, at 10/13/2008 03:50 PM: > > > You feel l

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of mouss > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 4:34 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey a écrit : > >> -Original Message

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of mouss > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 4:43 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey a écrit : > > > > One thing I didn&

RE: Finally blocking some spam

ist before if anyone else has similar resource with no luck. I have also searched the web without resolve. Joey

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of J Sloan > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 5:20 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > mouss wrote: > > Joey a écrit : > >

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Charles Marcus > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 5:28 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > On 10/13/2008, Joey ([EMAIL PROTECTE

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 5:37 PM > To: Joey > Subject: RE: Finally blocking some spam > > What anti-spam measurements do you currently use? > > What does your main.cf look like?

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Aaron Wolfe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 5:56 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > you might want to consider the invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBL > h

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Jorey Bump [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 6:09 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > > I don't think anyone can argue that these numbers are not t

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Jorey Bump [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 6:09 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey wrote, at 10/13/2008 05:10 PM: > Make sure you count t

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 6:06 PM > To: Joey > Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: RE: Finally blocking some spam > > > > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Joey wrote: > > >

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Nikita Kipriyanov > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 1:32 AM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > Joey wrote: > > I agree, how

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of j debert > Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 11:26 AM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >

RE: Finally blocking some spam

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of j debert > Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 12:53 PM > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Subject: Re: Finally blocking some spam > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Ha

header ?

Can someone tell me why headers shows received from 127.0.0.1 in the middle? Is this a filter thing, or is it someone connecting to that server making it look like that IP? Thanks! Microsoft Mail Internet Headers Version 2.0 Received: from mail.myserver4mail.net ([205.205.205.205]) by myse

multiple mx and timeout question

Hello All, I just wanted to confirm something. We are defining 3 servers for MX and the first one is basically nolisting. Should any server trying to deliver to the first mx IMMEDIATELY try to connect to the second, or should we see a delay like with greylisting? My understanding is there

RBL

Hello All, Does anyone have a good reference of how to create my own RBL so I can load IP's into it and check against it from postfix? Thanks!

RE: Finally blocking some spam

nions are important)? Just wanted to share the stats info and get your opinions. Thanks for all your feedback and support even when you didn't agree with my ideas! Joey

The Yahoo trickle

18:43:28 0.07 4.43 18:47:20 0.52 3.71 18:51:01 0.13 3.13 18:54:21 0.05 4.73 18:57:49 0.08 3.32 19:01:06 0.05 4.63 19:04:32 0.06 4.84 19:07:55 0.09 3.91 Can anyone offer any guidance on what direction I need to go? Thanks in advance, Joey

Re: The Yahoo trickle

On 9/3/2012 3:50 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 9/2/2012 10:07 PM, Joey Prestia wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I am familiar with yahoo being difficult to send email to > > [snip] > >> Can anyone offer any guidance on what direction I need to go? > > Start her

Re: The Yahoo trickle

On 9/3/2012 10:43 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 08:07:21PM -0700, Joey Prestia wrote: > >> yahoo_destination_concurrency_limit = 20 > > This setting is trumpted by the setting below: > >> yahoo_destination_rate_delay = 1s > > You have ser

BCC Transport Map

ashes. -- Thanks! Joey

Re: BCC Transport Map

like: @abc.com abc-bac...@hotmail.com Thanks! On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 4:44 AM, mouss wrote: > Le 23/12/2012 05:21, Joey J a écrit : > > Hello All, > > > > I have done this previously, but can't find any of my own documentation > > that I make. > > &g

Re: Accept external SMTP traffic only from MX hosts

ing and sending >> mail. What you want to do will reject large quantities of legitimate mail. >> >> -- Larry Stone >>lston...@stonejongleux.com >> >> > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > > -- Thanks! Joey

Multiple Targets on transport map

have our server try to deliver to 1.2.3.4 but if that fails try to deliver to 8.9.10.11 much in the same way as MX records function. I'm not seeing a way to accomplish this, any suggestions, or examples? -- Thanks! Joey

Forward being rejected because of spf

smtpd[1443]: disconnect from postfix.xyz.com[152.30.131.212] ehlo=2 starttls=1 mail=1 rcpt=0/1 data=0/1 quit=1 commands=5/7 -- Thanks! Joey

Host not found?

proto=ESMTP helo= -- Thanks! Joey

Fwd: Verify Proper method for sender restrictions

.com OK youarebad.com REJCT 1.2.3.4 550 Block-I dont like you 1.5.6.0/24 550 Block I dont like any of you. -- Thanks! Joey

Verify the proper configuration for blocking/whitelisting a sender.

.com OK youarebad.com REJCT 1.2.3.4 550 Block-I dont like you 1.5.6.0/24 550 Block I dont like any of you. -- Thanks! Joey

Re: Verify the proper configuration for blocking/whitelisting a sender.

#x27;s still OK to use the custom message for the block? Thank you! On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 3:59 PM Wietse Venema wrote: > Joey J: > > Hello All, > > > > Trying to make sure I'm doing this correctly, both at the right point > > within the mail c

Re: Verify the proper configuration for blocking/whitelisting a sender.

heck_sender_access hash:some-file > >check_sender_access cidr:other-file > > would it not be > > check_client_access for the cidr map ? > -- Thanks! Joey

Re: Fwd: Verify Proper method for sender restrictions

en)) { > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "REPLACE", command_len)) { > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "REDIRECT", command_len)) { > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "BCC", command_len)) { > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "STRIP", command_len)) { > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "IGNORE", command_len)) > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "DUNNO", command_len))/* > preferred */ > cleanup_message.c:if (STREQUAL(value, "OK", command_len)) /* > compat */ > > -- > Viktor. > -- Thanks! Joey

Re: Fwd: Verify Proper method for sender restrictions

don't like you or does 500 We don't like you Work? Thank you On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:51 AM Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:34:35AM -0400, Joey J wrote: > > > Since you are looking within the code, on a reject we used to put > > @abc.com 5

Message got through CIDR table reject rule

ofound.com; client-ip=170.130.34.30 Received: from mail.appreciatetheprofound.com (mx.mailhubone.com [170.130.34.30]) by mgw.mgw.postfixserver.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 77CE7808D7 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:13:25 -0400 (EDT) -- Thanks! Joey

Re: Message got through CIDR table reject rule

To confirm, each table needs an entry like so: check_client_access cidr:/etc/postfix/clientaccess check_client_access cidr:/etc/postfix/sender_reject_ip Thank you On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 12:38 PM Noel Jones wrote: > On 10/28/2020 11:22 AM, Joey J wrote: > > > I have the foll

Immediate NDR on Domain Typos

e NDR. @yaho.com REJECT Incorrect Domain Typed @gnail.com REJECT Incorrect Domain Typed I'm not sure if the right place is check_recipient_access and if things are different under the current version vs the older 2.11.x Any direction is appreciated! -- Thanks! Joey

unused parameter: mx_access=hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access

Hello, I'm getting the following when I start postfix ( literally that many times) /usr/sbin/postconf: warning: /etc/postfix/main.cf: unused parameter: mx_access=hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access /usr/sbin/postconf: warning: /etc/postfix/main.cf: unused parameter: mx_access=hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access

Re: unused parameter: mx_access=hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access

1.2015 um 05:49 schrieb Joey J: > >> I'm getting the following when I start postfix ( literally that many >> times) >> >> /usr/sbin/postconf: warning: /etc/postfix/main.cf <http://main.cf>: >> unused parameter: mx_access=hash:/etc/postfix/mx_access >>

Domain Relay Question

recceives mail from Postfix1 & Postfix2, nothing else accepted. -- Thanks! Joey

[pfx] pipelining issue

2.1.0 Ok In: RCPT TO: Out: 250 2.1.5 Ok In: RCPT TO: Out: 250 2.1.5 Ok In: BDAT 9104042 LAST Out: 451 4.3.0 Error: queue file write error In: QUIT Out: 221 2.0.0 Bye -- Thanks! Joey ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org

[pfx] Re: pipelining issue

69237]: COMMAND PIPELINING from [208.99.44.83]:49270 after RCPT: DATA\r\nQUITE\r\n On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 12:42 PM Wietse Venema wrote: > Joey J via Postfix-users: > > In: DATA > > Out: 354 End data with . > > Out: 451 4.3.0 Error: queue file write error > >

[pfx] Recommended APP to build approved transport recipients from Exhange / AD / LDAP

ng it to any destination. Im thinking there would be something open source out there, just not able to find it. -- Thanks! Joey ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org

[pfx] Re: Recommended APP to build approved transport recipients from Exhange / AD / LDAP

sed on the experience I have had so far, I believe the best most reliable method is to get the information from the source. On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 6:33 PM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users < postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote: > Joey J via Postfix-users: > > Hello All, > > > &g

[pfx] Re: Recommended APP to build approved transport recipients from Exhange / AD / LDAP

ble(5) and LDAP_README for more details. > > -- > Viktor. > ___ > Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org > To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org > -- Thanks! Joey ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org

[pfx] Re: Recommended APP to build approved transport recipients from Exhange / AD / LDAP

Postfix-users < postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 07:11:23PM -0400, Joey J via Postfix-users wrote: > > > To confirm, I'm creating the list of valid emails to accept and then > > forward and if not in that list reject. > > No, my advice is t

[pfx] reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname issue

under: smtpd_sender_restrictions The goal of course is to reduce junk mail, Any suggestions? -- Thanks! Joey ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org