Good day all,
I apologize in advance if the moderators consider this slightly OT.
We have many users moved to a MySQL database, planned for moving away from
Cyrus on Sunday Oct 3, we are almost ready to go but found a problem with
pop3 software we were going to use.
So basically, using postifx's
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Nick Edwards put forth on 9/10/2010 2:32 AM:
>
> > Before the fans cry foul of why not Dovecot. we have followed the list
> > thread of what may be a problem with Dovecot its author has identified
> but
> > decide
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Nick Edwards:
> > Another quick question before I depart for work, I understand also (from
> > that other lists thread) that postfix does not support maildir++ , with
> that
> > curiosity, I googled and found
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 12:36 AM, Charles Marcus
wrote:
> On 2010-09-10 5:50 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > Indexes can speed up IMAP performance a decent amount, but they don't
> > help POP performance at all.
>
>
> As far as I know, Courier's speed issues are mostly IMAP related, so if
> you're o
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 9/10/2010 00:32, Nick Edwards wrote:
> > Good day all,
> > I apologize in advance if the moderators consider this slightly OT.
> >
> > We have many users moved to a MySQL database, planned for moving away
>
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:35 AM, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
> On 09/22/2010 02:22 AM, Noel Butler wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 16:47 +1000, Nick Edwards wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Seth Mattinen
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Thanks, we have ov
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Noel Butler wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 16:47 +1000, Nick Edwards wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Seth Mattinen
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Thanks, we have over the weekend ran two testbeds at full thrashing wit
s
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Charles Marcus
wrote:
> On 2010-09-22 6:03 PM, Nick Edwards wrote:
> > By the way, I need to thank you, given your discussion with Timo was one
> > that had set alarm bells off on this, and the thread with Eddie
> > confirmed the risks, can&
"Make sure your PTR and A records match. For every IP address, there should
be a matching PTR record in the in-addr.arpa domain. If a host is
multi-homed, (more than one IP address) make sure that all IP addresses have
a corresponding PTR record (not just the first one)."
Apparently, I'm led to be
I know this is a few days old, but i've been away on holidays
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Andrew Beverley wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 13:25 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> > Gary Smith wrote:
>
> > >> As already stated, there's not a huge amount that you can do on your
> > >> own. However, i
Hello,
This error triggers only with postfix and milter-regex with ipv6
connections.
warning: milter unix:/var/smfs/milter-regex.sock: can't read SMFIC_CONNECT
reply packet header: Success
postfix 2.8.3
relevant section:
smtpd_milters = unix:/var/smfs/milter-regex.sock
milter_default_action =
Merry Christmas All!
I am wondering why I have two different errors for same reason?
: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[41.203.141.1]: 450 4.7.1 Client host
rejected: cannot find your hostname,
: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[115.153.142.125]: 550 5.7.1 Client
host rejected: cannot find
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-25 at 13:37:52 +1000, Nick Edwards wrote:
>
> > I am wondering why I have two different errors for same reason?
> >
> > : NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[41.203.141.1]: 450 4.7.1 Client host
> &
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sahil Tandon:
> > On Sun, 2011-12-25 at 13:37:52 +1000, Nick Edwards wrote:
> >
> > In the absence of full information, here's a WAG:
> >
> > > ...
> > > : NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT f
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/24/2011 9:37 PM, Nick Edwards wrote:
> > Merry Christmas All!
> >
> > I am wondering why I have two different errors for same reason?
> >
> > : NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[41.203.141.1]: 450 4.7.1
Hi,
I gave a secondary mx with 2 ipv4 and 2 ipv6 ip's.
I have dns'd one of each protocol for mx and ns
Trying to get postfix to play nice with mx on outbound. hostname,
mynetworks etc all setup right.
I have tried smtp_bind_address(6) but for some reason, although it
uses the correct IP, the rela
On 3/10/12, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Nick Edwards:
>> I have tried smtp_bind_address(6) but for some reason, although it
>> uses the correct IP, the relays are denied for spf failure on the
>> main server, even though they are all permitted in spf RR, ok, evident
>
> So
On 3/10/12, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 09.03.2012 16:01, schrieb Nick Edwards:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I gave a secondary mx with 2 ipv4 and 2 ipv6 ip's.
>> I have dns'd one of each protocol for mx and ns
>> Trying to get postfix to play nice with mx o
On 3/10/12, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Nick Edwards:
>> Is the smtp bind address correct method? or inet_interfaces?
>
> Everybody already knows that smtp_bind_address and smtp_bind_address6
> set the correct IP address for SENDING mail.
>
> If the RECEIVING server flags an
On 3/10/12, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 09.03.2012 17:23, schrieb Nick Edwards:
>> On 3/10/12, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>> logs are no good because it simply says rejected (ip) spf -all method.
>>
>> all other settings wont help e
On 3/10/12, Noel Butler wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 11:08 +1000, Nick Edwards wrote:
>
>> On 3/10/12, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> > what type of entries are you using in your SPF record?
>> > i found out that a/mx entries sometimes making troubles and since
&
Following from Charles's thread, but, not directly related, did not
want to hijack it so I'll ask for clarification here.
Having Seen Viktors statement about submission_*_restrictions = and
not putting all that crud into master.cf (yes, my bad too)
If I use:
submission_client_restrictions =
On 10/28/13, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 10/27/2013 4:30 PM, Nick Edwards wrote:
>> submission_client_restrictions =
>> check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/submission.hosts
>
> Typically this first line is all that would be used here to reje
On 4/27/14, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
> why do you reply off-list and top-posting?
why do you act like list nazi Harold Reindl?
pfft nobody cares about your shit
Howdy,
been out of sysadmining for a few years as I was promoted to network ops,
but with dose of that-virus going round our office the sysadmin teams are
all evicted for 2 weeks :)
I need a refresher hand with DKIM, we have in main.cf
smtpd_milters = inet:127.0.0.1:8891,inet:127.0.0.1:8892
non_
ntomas via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On 24.10.23 14:35, Nick Edwards via Postfix-users wrote:
> > I need a refresher hand with DKIM, we have in main.cf
> >
> >smtpd_milters = inet:127.0.0.1:8891,inet:127.0.0.1:8892
> >non_smtpd_milters = $smtp
Howdy,
I've never seen the point in this before, but i've been asked by a client
to implement it if possible, that is, place dnsbl checks on submission and
smtps connections, I've tried a few combinations but it does not seem to be
working, no doubt someone can see the error and slap me a new one
Thanks John! You nailed it, made the two changes you suggested, and it is
now blocking, client will be happy,
On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 8:52 PM John Fawcett via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On 07/07/2024 06:18, Nick Edwards via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> Howdy,
retired in
> 2021.
>
>
>
> Every main.cf config I've seen uses commas. Ive added them to your quote
> below.
>
> On 7/6/2024 11:18 PM, Nick Edwards via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> Main:
> submission_recipient_restrictions =
> reject_rbl_clien
29 matches
Mail list logo
