and another. I can't have more than 20
opened connections in a 10 minutes timeframe, or I'll get blocked.
Is there anyway I can do this?
Can anybody help please?
Thanks.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
his up?
Thanks.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 11:28, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> I do use destination_rate_delay for specific transport queue, and
>> I fou
Could you please refresh my mind?
Thanks.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 12:17, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> Hi Wietse,
>>
>> I don't really get. I
anks in advance.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 14:25, Viktor Dukhovni escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 11:34:45AM -0200, Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wrote:
>
>> This is what I'm tryin
7;m really trying to understand the solution here.
Thanks once again.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 14:47, Viktor Dukhovni escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 02:37:03PM -0200, Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wro
via the lmtp(8), pipe(8), smtp(8) and
virtual(8) delivery agents. With per-destination recipient limit > 1, a
destination is a domain, otherwise it is a recipient.
Is this correct?
Thanks in advance.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iag
n.tldslow:criticaldomain.tld
domain.tld slow:criticaldomain.tld
Is it right?
Thanks once again.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 14:47, Viktor Dukhovni escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 02:37:03PM -0200
Thank you so much Viktor, now I fully understand what you said.
Cheers.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 15:57, Viktor Dukhovni escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 03:29:53PM -0200, Rafael Azev
to 1s enables postfix cache's usage again.
Can you give me a tip?
Thanks once again.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07/01/2013, às 15:57, Viktor Dukhovni escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 03:29:53PM -0200, R
We send about 50k emails/day to 20k domains hosted on this provider that are
being blocked.
Any help would be very appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 07
ore efficient in delivery terms.
Anyway, thanks for your time and all the help. It was for sure very appreciated.
Any help here would also be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 08/01/2013, às 12:09
stop trying at
least for a while.
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 08/01/2013, às 13:34, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> I truly believe that postfix is the best MTA ever, but you might
>
Em 08/01/2013, às 14:21, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> Why keep trying when we have a clear signal of a temporary error?
>
> As Victor noted Postfix does not keep trying the SAME delivery.
Yes you're right and I know that. But it keeps trying for a
Att.
--
Rafael Azevedo | IAGENTE
Fone: 51 3086.0262
MSN: raf...@hotmail.com
Visite: www.iagente.com.br
Em 08/01/2013, às 14:07, Viktor Dukhovni escreveu:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 01:59:14PM -0200, Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wrote:
>
>> But Witse, would you agree with me that erro
>
> One of the most common reasons for a temporary delivery failure is a full
> mailbox. Or, where the remote server is acting as a store-and-forward, a
> temporary inability to verify the validity of the destination address.
I dont agree with that. Connection time out is the most common reason
> Configurable, perhaps. But it would a mistake to make this the
> default strategy.
>
> That would make Postfix vulnerable to a trivial denial of service
> attack where one bad recipient can block all mail for all other
> recipients at that same site.
Not if it could me parametrized. As I said
Yes Reindl, you got the point. I just want to wait for a while before retrying
to send email to the same destination.
> Am 08.01.2013 17:48, schrieb Wietse Venema:
>> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>>>> Instead, Postfix tries to deliver a DIFFERENT message. It would be
>>
Em 08/01/2013, às 17:16, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> Reindl Harald:
>>> Big deal. Now I can block all mail for gmail.com by getting 100
>>> email messages into your queue
>>
>> how comes?
>> how do you get gmail.com answer to any delivery from you with 4xx?
>
> He wants to temporarily suspend del
>
> Barring a clean "slow down" signal, and a stable feedback mechanism,
> the only strategy is manually tuned rate delays, and spreading the
> load over multiple sending IPs (Postfix instances don't help if
> they share a single IP).
I have multiple instances of Postfix running on multiple IPs.
I agree with Reindl, I guess Witsie is now better understanding the problem
here.
I'd see this as a "additional feature", not default configuration.
It would be even better if that could be parametrized on named transport basis.
- Rafael
Em 08/01/2013, às 19:02, Reindl Harald escreveu:
>
>
> When faced with a destination that imposes tight rate limits you
> must pre-configure your MTA to always stay under the limits. Nothing
> good happens when the Postfix output rate under load exceeds the
> remote limit whether you throttle the queue repeatedly or not.
But many times we just don'
> That's not what happens when a destination is throttled, all mail
> there is deferred, and is retried some indefinite time later that
> is at least 5 minutes but perhaps a lot longer, and at great I/O
> cost, with expontial backoff for each message based on time in the
> queue, …
I totally disa
I was watching my log files now looking for deferred errors, and for my
surprise, we got temporary blocked by Yahoo on some SMTPs (ips), as shown:
Jan 9 13:20:52 mxcluster yahoo/smtp[8593]: 6731A13A2D956: host
mta5.am0.yahoodns.net[98.136.216.25] refused to talk to me: 421 4.7.0 [TS02]
Message
>> There's gotta be a solution for this.
>
> There is - you need to register your mailserver(s) with yahoo
You mean Yahoo's Feedback Program (feedbackloop.yahoo.net) ?
- Rafael
escreveu:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 13:37:00 -0200
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wrote:
>
>>
>>>> There's gotta be a solution for this.
>>>
>>> There is - you need to register your mailserver(s) with yahoo
>>
>> You mean Yahoo's Feedb
>> I was watching my log files now looking for deferred errors, and
>> for my surprise, we got temporary blocked by Yahoo on some SMTPs
>> (ips), as shown:
>>
>> Jan 9 13:20:52 mxcluster yahoo/smtp[8593]: 6731A13A2D956: host
>> mta5.am0.yahoodns.net[98.136.216.25] refused to talk to me: 421 4.7
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> I agree with Reindl, I guess Witsie is now better understanding
>> the problem here.
>
> Please take the effort to spell my name correctly.
Sorry about that Wietse. It was a typo mistake. I didn't intend to offend you.
> When a site
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> I was watching my log files now looking for deferred errors, and
>> for my surprise, we got temporary blocked by Yahoo on some SMTPs
>> (ips), as shown:
>>
>> Jan 9 13:20:52 mxcluster yahoo/smtp[8593]: 6731A13A2D956: host
>&
Now Yahoo is giving another response:
said: 451 Message temporarily deferred - [160] (in reply to end of DATA command)
See, this is very hard to solve. I'm really truing to better understand the
problem in order to find out the best solution. I'd like to thank in advance
for the help, its being
Hi Guys,
We have lots of SMTPs running on different IPs sending to many different
destinations.
So what I need to do is, if any of this SMTP receives an email to specific
destination, the mail must be relayed to a specific SMTP.
We work with named transports for this specific domains, so I gue
Hi Ramesh,
I had a similar problem, but not using Amazon services.
I'd suggest you to check your DKIM configuration since its little bit tricky.
This is my suggestion:
1) Check your trusted-hosts file and make sure your sending server's IP is on
that list
2) Check your key list and make sure yo
Also, as far as I know postfix won't add any SPF header to your sending
messages. I think it will check for SPF for incoming mail only, so check your
domain and see if your DNS has any TXT valid SPF record.
-- Rafael
Em 12/01/2013, às 07:50, Ramesh escreveu:
>
> Hi All,
>
> We have ec2 ins
Sorry for the bad english.
Any help would be very appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
-- Rafael
Em 12/01/2013, às 20:57, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
>> We're having problems to deliver to specific destination because
>> of too many opened connections from the
Wietse Venema wrote:
> - If you mean something else, please stop wasting my time.
Thank you for your time.
- Rafael
Hello guys!
I was reading the smtp_fallback_relay doc at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_fallback_relay and couldn't be able
to make it work.
It says:
smtp_fallback_relay (default: $fallback_relay)
[…]
With bulk email deliveries, it can be beneficial to run the fallb
Nice Wietse!
Have you published a "what has changed list" already?
Thanks and congrats.
Cheers
Rafael
Em 04/02/2013, às 23:30, Wietse Venema escreveu:
> postfix-2.10.0-RC1 gives a preview of what the upcoming stable
> release will look like. I'll make one more pass over the documents,
> and
36 matches
Mail list logo
