On 2013-09-20 09:42, azurIt wrote:
i'm having problems with spam forwarding - lot's of our users enabled
forwarding to gmail and every spam they receive is also forwarded.
Today gmail block us because of spam (which we were just forwarding,
not sending). Any tips how can i disable forwarding in c
Hello folks. I have set up a fresh instance of Postfix at my office to
help do some troubleshooting on another issue. There is a relay
upstream that is having issues forwarding mail from some devices here,
and this seemed the easiest way to get some data to help them
troubleshoot. Install is
I believe you are correct, but again I have no control over that part.
Also, I mistakenly attached the log attempt from the telnet session I
tried, the actual systems having issues have the from address within
brackets, here is the system in question:
Jul 6 15:18:42 localhost postfix/smtpd[4
That did the trick! Many thanks. ;)
On 2021-07-07 10:21, Kevin N. wrote:
It seems that in the MAIL command the IP address is still not between
[].
should be
On a quick look, it seems that you could try setting
resolve_numeric_domain = yes in your Postfix configuration and see if
that cha
in fact wrong, because
(a) it didn't need to *create* the output file, and
(b) it was able to write to the output file, it just didn't want to.)
Thanks for reading.
Jim
Wietse,
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 12:25 (-0500), Wietse Venema wrote:
> Jim:
>> On Artix, the default is 5120. (Aside: in 1985, that would have
> Postfix has limits on everything, so that the mail system will not
> get stuck. It's really a bad idea to disable them.
I ag
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:41 (-0500), Kris Deugau wrote:
> Jim wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 12:25 (-0500), Wietse Venema wrote:
>>> Instead, use Maildir format with one message per file,
>> I thought about that once, but I decided I have too many e-mail
>>
On Dec 30, 2008, at 11:44 PM, Hwan Dong wrote:
after there is some rejection, add "sleep/delay" before resuming
sending, this timer could be different from previous "constant
sending delay" as flow-control, this rejection delay is more like
"ok, it seems you are not happy or too busy, I am
On Dec 31, 2008, at 1:51 AM, Hwan Dong wrote:
much thanks for your comments. I looked at the backoff. But it is to
delay the undelieverable messages, is there any way to delay all the
following message for the SAME destination domain?
i.e. if one email to a...@hotmail.com is rejected, I sti
David, you've sent so many messages and replies that quoting anything
at this point is just wasting bandwidth. I'm going to jump in with a
few notes on what I've read here:
First, you are fixating on the wrong problem. If you have bounces
that are queued up, this is because you are accept
On Jan 12, 2009, at 10:11 PM, postmas...@klam.ca wrote:
I am not quit sure what that means. My ISP is Velcom's and all of
their ips have been blocked, so is Spamhaus saying that Velcom
itself are the N.A. branch of Ukrainian cybercrime spammers or that
the spammers are using Velcom's servic
On Jan 21, 2009, at 10:12 PM, Norm Mackey wrote:
I had been under the impression that I should tell users to use the
domain "example.com" (or example.org) as default settings in
software being tested and developed, in order that the software not
generate email which would be a problem for
On Jan 21, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Gábor Lénárt wrote:
450 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in local recipient table (in reply to RCPT TO command))
if there is an invalid, non existing mail address there. However
they argues that they would like us not to try to deliver mails
again a
On Jan 26, 2009, at 7:41 AM, Paweł Leśniak wrote:
One of our users is getting lots of returned mails because his email
address is used as return-path by spammer(s).
I would guess that your system accepting mail from unknown servers?
Start blocking those, and you'll find that these bounces
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:12 AM, Paweł Leśniak wrote:
Jim Wright pisze:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 7:41 AM, Paweł Leśniak wrote:
One of our users is getting lots of returned mails because his
email address is used as return-path by spammer(s).
I would guess that your system accepting mail from
On Jan 26, 2009, at 4:05 PM, Paweł Leśniak wrote:
I may be wrong, but I think I should not block sender on helo basis?
Most of what will be blocked are zombie systems that send no
legitimate mail, a very small number of legitimate mails 'may' be
blocked. It's a personal preference, I boun
g/http://www.postfix.org/BUILTIN_FILTER_README.html
> section "Preventing daily mail status reports from being blocked".
Yeah, or pflogsumm's own FAQ, which has had an entry for this for
about forever.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you repl
entation for another individual, that, too, is
welcome.
I hope those of you that have used it have found pflogsumm useful, and
I'll take this opportunity to again thank the various contributors,
over the years.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filteri
On Jan 28, 2009, at 6:55 AM, Mark Watts wrote:
I have a requirement to split a postfix relay installation across
two servers.
It may be easier to explain the actual requirements, I doubt that the
above statement is the ACTUAL requirement.
On Jan 29, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Magnus Bäck wrote:
You can easily find the relevant log entries by grepping your
maillog for the queue id, which is found in the first Received:
header added by your system. In this case look at this header:
Received: from TRXOMOPC (unknown [77.81.179.110]) b
Greetings,
I'm running Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and would like to know where I
can get more information on the following message in the maillog, and if
it's my problem or the senders problem. Maybe a possible fix?
I can send an email to this user , but
never get their reply. I believe the
Thx Magnus. I had the work 'approved' in the header_checks and just
didn't read what the message in the maillog was telling.
-jm
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Wednesday, February 25, 2009 at 00:15 CET,
Jim McIver wrote:
I'm running Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and would
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking email
from a domain.
Here is a snipet of the postqueue -p:
DF6A927D 3512 Tue Mar 3 18:42:35 MAILER-DAEMON
(connect to mx1.mail.yahoo.co.jp[124.83.183.240]: server dropped
connection without sending the initial SMTP greet
My mistake, the ones piling up in postqueue -p are the yahoo.co.jp. The
u...@domain.com is just listed in the maillog and it's a bogus email
address I'd like not to receive email from.
-jm
LuKreme wrote:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:32, Jim McIver wrote:
they just pile up in the postque
My mistake. The u...@domain.com is in the maillog. yahoo.co.jp is in
postqueue -p
-jm
Paweł Leśniak wrote:
W dniu 2009-03-04 21:32, Jim McIver pisze:
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking
email from a domain.
Here is a snipet of the postqueue -p:
DF6A927D
. How
can I blacklist the .co.jp so I don't receive their message to start with?
-jm
Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Jim McIver wrote:
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking
email from a domain.
Postfix 2.1 is ancient. Recommend an upgrade as some t
ent_access doesn't seem to stop it.
Sorry for my lack of understanding.
-jm
Noel Jones wrote:
Jim McIver wrote:
In looking at the file in xxx/deferred, my mailserver is trying to
return an undelivable message and it looks like there is something
wrong with the site. " said: 557 Invalid
/dev/rob0 wrote:
Please don't top-post. Thank you.
On Wed March 4 2009 17:10:49 Jim McIver wrote:
Guess I'm confused. I have a relay_recipient and recipient_access
files listing only valid user's email addresses for my company.
ie..
relay_recipients
bg...@lmtribune.com
Noel Jones wrote:
Jim McIver wrote:
Here's a snippet from maillog, but not sure if it's what your looking
for:
Thanks, this is very helpful.
Mar 4 15:10:13 mail postfix/smtpd[56190]: warning: Illegal address
syntax from unknown[113.9.198.198] in MAIL co
mmand: bikedev...@y
Noel Jones wrote:
Jim McIver wrote:
I am using vexira for virus/content filtering and it has an area to
put in blacklisted domains. I'll check if I can change to quarantine.
ie
[mailfrom-blacklist]
*.ro
*.nz
*yourtopbrands.com
*server.rwbtec.com
*.co.jp
etc...
If you can't ch
On Mar 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Ashwin Muni wrote:
Ex: I'm sending a mail to xyz.com and my server could not connect to
the xyz.com smtp server. My mail gets deffered and then it tries as
per my setting but later another user of mine tries to send mail to
the same domain and it happens again.
So, you send a lot of mails to XYZ Consulting? I'm sure that their
xyz.com domain can't be causing that many issues? Or were you just
using that as a generic example? If so, example.com is traditionally
used for such uses.
Regarding the hard bounces, a hard bounce is when a mail is bounc
On Mar 26, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Ivan Ricotti wrote:
I suspect that some windows users in my network is sending spam... and
the question is: how can I prevent this acting on postfix?
Two options. 1, Eliminate windows users from your network. 2, scan
outgoing mail for spam before accepting it f
even a keel
as things can get, these days :).)
I'm working on a new release even now. More information to
follow in a day or two.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apolo
On Feb 1, 2010, at 2:17 AM, Dimitrios Karapiperis wrote:
I attach some pieces of logs for better understanding
Feb 1 08:44:18 smtp postfix/smtpd[17200]: connect from
serial.domain.tld[111.222.333.444]
Feb 1 08:44:18 smtp postfix/qmgr[27864]: 88B76180FE: from=>, size=1997, nrcpt=2 (queue act
On Feb 15, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Eero Volotinen :
I have Postfix 2.1.5 running on Mac Server 10.4.11. I would like
to upgrade Postfix. Which version would you recommend?
Thanks in advance for advise.
How about latest stable version (2.7) ?
Since Apple made a signi
N switches.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php>.
> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:00:10 -0300
> From: Julio Cesar Covolato
> To: Jim Seymour , owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
> Subject: Re: Pflogsumm Version 1.1.3 Released
>
> Hi Jim!
>
> Any improviment to suport the reinjection from amavisd?
Nope. If I had, it would&
(UTF-8
stuff in here)
How can I make it so that Subject: =?utf-8?B?UX. is displayed correctly
in it's native language? (in this case it's Chinese but it could be another
language)
Jim.
x27;d copy them somewhere else before converting the
Subject: string
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de> wrote:
> * Jim Smith :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've enabled subject logging in my header checks so th
I'm setting up a new server completely from scratch on Snow Leopard,
Mac OS X 10.6.3, trying to compile Postfix 2.7. During make, I get
this:
In file included from dns_lookup.c:152:
dns.h:23:29: error: nameser8_compat.h: No such file or directory
make: *** [dns_lookup.o] Error 1
make: *** [u
On Apr 12, 2010, at 11:32 PM, Jim Wright wrote:
I'm setting up a new server completely from scratch on Snow Leopard,
Mac OS X 10.6.3, trying to compile Postfix 2.7. During make, I get
this:
In file included from dns_lookup.c:152:
dns.h:23:29: error: nameser8_compat.h: No such fi
On Apr 14, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
On Apr 14, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
What is the output from the following commands on this machine?
uname -s
uname -r
uname -v
In case this is useful. From Leopard 10.5 not Snow Leopard 10.6.
I had no issues (that
Our mailing list situaton is a little different from what normal list
software handles, so I'm trying to roll my own. I want to use address
extensions to identify the list. /etc/postfix/main.cf includes only
one instance of:
recipient_delimiter = +
For testing, the user sends to , and in alias
Thanks to Sahil Tandon and LuKreme for pointing out my mistake on the
debugging tool. I saw this done in an old archived post, and having
searched for but not found the "what to include in a problem report"
FAQ item, I winged it, incorrectly. I also forgot to specify the
version of Postfix: 2.6.
On Apr 14, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Jim Wright wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2010, at 11:32 PM, Jim Wright wrote:
>
>> I'm setting up a new server completely from scratch on Snow Leopard, Mac OS
>> X 10.6.3, trying to compile Postfix 2.7. During make, I get this:
>>
>> In
make on that platform. I run postfix on OS X, and don't expect the OS
to provide postfix with everything it needs.
Jim
On Jun 2, 2010, at 9:46 PM, Matt Hayes wrote:
> Yes.. I know this has come up quite a bit, but on freenode in #postfix
> this discussion once again erupted when
OS X 10.6.3, attempting to build 2.7.1-RC1:
(snip)
In file included from dns_lookup.c:152:
dns.h:26:28: error: nameser_compat.h: No such file or directory
make: *** [dns_lookup.o] Error 1
make: *** [update] Error 1
In my 2.7 build, I referenced this file: arpa/nameser_compat.h
Jim
On Jun 1
On Jun 3, 2010, at 8:25 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Jim Wright:
>> OS X 10.6.3, attempting to build 2.7.1-RC1:
>>
>> (snip)
>> In file included from dns_lookup.c:152:
>> dns.h:26:28: error: nameser_compat.h: No such file or directory
>> make: *** [dns_lookup
On Jun 3, 2010, at 1:36 PM, Moe wrote:
> My point is: When 'myhostname' and 'mydomainname' are left out of main.cf
> then postfix makes an attempt to auto-detect them.
There's your problem. Fix that. See my original reply at the start of this
thread.
On Jul 3, 2010, at 4:20 PM, Asai wrote:
> Thank you for your responses. Is there anything I can do on my end?
To put it simply, you're going to need to find a way to contact them postmaster
on the other end and let them know that legitimate mail is being blocked. You
will first need to find a
ssage size 5415340 exceeds size limit 5242880 of server
127.0.0.1
Is there anyway to fix this?
thx,
--
Jim McIver
On 9/27/2010 3:55 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
On 28/09/10 8:00 AM, Jim McIver wrote:
I'm running postfix 2.5.6 on Freebsd 7.2 and am having an issue with
message size limit and a user not being able to send a file.
I'm trying to limit the message size to 6 megabytes and in the mai
On 9/27/2010 6:53 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Jim McIver put forth on 9/27/2010 5:00 PM:
I'm running postfix 2.5.6 on Freebsd 7.2 and am having an issue with
message size limit and a user not being able to send a file.
I'm trying to limit the message size to 6 megabytes and in the mai
On 11/17/2010 12:12 PM, Jack wrote:
Hi Mark, thanks for your response, and I apologize if my brain is not
grasping what your saying.
If I am blocking 194.149.65.0/23 this is a standard format, it tells us that
the IP's are the 194.149.65.0-255 and 194.149.66.0-255.
Are we saying that the CIDR rul
On Aug 28, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Mail from yahoo.com is now rejected with:
Aug 28 16:24:05 mgate2 postfix/smtpd[53002]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from web34202.mail.mud.yahoo.com[66.163.178.117]: 554 5.7.1
: Helo command rejected: Malformed DNS
server reply; from= to= proto=SMTP
? At some point
in time I will move from ldap lookups to a file
Thanks in advance.
-jim
s a catch-all?
I've tested this and it *seems* to work. Just looking for someone to
confirm what I am seeing or tell me I'm a looney (or both).
Thanks.
-Jim
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:33:22AM -0500, Jim Rupprecht
right direction
here.
-Jim
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Jim Rupprecht wrote:
> Ok, same scenario new question.
>
> As I note below I defined several local domains as relay domains. Here
> is the list:
>
> ku.edu
> mail.ku.edu
> abc.org
> def.com
> ghi.org
>
there is no lookup table for it.
Adding "permit_auth_destination, as the second item under
smtpd_recipient_restrictions doesn't help.
Anyone have any thoughts on how I can do this?
:Jim
into the message.
Does anyone know of anything off the shelf that accomplishes this?
-Thanks in advance, Jim
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a problem, if the
address is invalid, postix rejects the mail during the smtp connection.
But if u...@myclientsdomain.
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a problem, if the
address is invalid, postix rejects the mail during the smtp
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged
address vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Jim Lang put forth on 11/16/2009 2:00 PM:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:07:05 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u
Our webhosting company(which is offsite) has told me that the
postfix-2.5 on our Freebsd 7.2 server is being used as an open relay for
email so they have closed port 25.
We want to be able to send email from the server, but not have it relay
for others. I've read what documentation I can find an
On May 1, 2011, at 10:47 AM, James wrote:
> Why does the barracuda think the "Client host" is ISP2.smtp but it
> blocks the IP of my server?
> Shouldn't relayhost make the barracuda see the "Client host" AND IP as
> ISP2.smtp?
My experience is that the barracude will look at where the message ori
Tell the postmaster at the receiving end that they are blocking legitimate mail
thanks to overly aggressive (ie. brain dead) settings from Barracuda. It
should not matter at all the IP address of the person sending an email.
Jim
On May 22, 2011, at 9:07 PM, Janantha Marasinghe wrote:
>
It's a terrible way to block spam. It's a GREAT way to block email. Huge
difference there... ;)
Jim
On May 23, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Janantha Marasinghe wrote:
> Dear All Postfix users who replied.
>
> Thanks all for your support. I got the mail admin at the otherend to w
Wow, over 48 hours and no solution(s) suggested? Everybody on
vacation? :)
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <h
On Nov 24, 2011, at 9:16 PM, Keith Steensma
wrote:
> Anyone have a recommendation for a 'free' client for a mac os x that works
> when communicating to a unix/linux server? I haven't found anything when
> 'googling' for an answer.
Terminal works just fine.
Also, how is this a Postfix questi
use the right source IP
> address because there is only one to choose from.
Done! Worked like a charm, Wietse. Thanks *very* much for your help.
I'd already had all the transport entries. (Holdover from when our
mail routing was significantly more complicated.) I simply had to
replace the
l backup. Works
like a champ. I'm going to use the same script on the new mailserver
I'm building at work.
I have two drives, which I swap once-a-month. The out-of-service
drive goes in the safe. At work I'll probably do three or four, with
at least one in the bank safety depos
ix server that expands
to the recipients you want, and have the application send to the
alias?
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php>.
. It's production-quality code and I *believe* it's
ready for release. It's been in-use on my server, here at home,
since February of this year. The only reason I haven't released it,
yet, is because, well, I kind of never got around to it :p.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail ser
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 17:37:31 +0100
Ignacio wrote:
> Hello Jim,
>
> Thank you very much, but there are more than 1000 possible options,
> and they change almost every week. It depends on projects and
> people involved in them.
One of us is confused. How would creating an al
mail/inbox
and in (a bit OT for this list, but while I'm at it), in dovecot.conf:
mail_location = maildir:~/Maildir:INBOX=~/mail/inbox
Thanks,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accep
pool.
Dovecot is perfectly happy with that.
>
> I don't know if Postfix will auto-create ~user/mail directories.
That's easily addressed with a simply shell or Perl script I can
create. Heck, I could even set up a cron job to make sure they all
exist, in case I got absent-min
I wanted to do it the way I
described: Were the configs I noted really all I need do?
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php>.
tpd[48290]: disconnect from
unknown[89.73.201.168]
This particular one occurred seven times in a row, in quick
succession.
I've searched on this *fairly* seriously and come up with nothing.
Anybody got any idea what this is?
Thanks,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggres
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
[snip]
>
> why do you use "reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname" if you do
> not like the results of it?
Why do you answer the question when you obviously have not read it?
(Or at least apparently not understood
t happen all the time. It doesn't even happen often. Out
of nearly 6000 connections, today, there are 145 various "A.. OUT" and
"A.. OUT OOW" messages. Each of them occurs two-or-more times,
involving the same contacting IP.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 01:11:00 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 12.12.2011 01:04, schrieb Jim Seymour:
> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:14:08 +0100
> > Reindl Harald wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>
> >> why do you use "reject_unknown_reverse_client_h
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 19:15:35 -0500
Jim Seymour wrote:
> Each of them occurs two-or-more
> times, involving the same contacting IP.
Clarification: That was to say that, when it occurs multiple times
in a row, it's the same IP trying over-and-over again in each set of
retries. A
f gracefully QUITing, the client drops the connection.
I see. So the "odd" ipfilter message is probably as a result of the
client pulling the rug out from under the connection, as it were?
Thanks,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you repl
er setup. That is
the default deny at the end of bge1's output filters.
I must've messed-up, somewhere. I'll take a look in the morning.
Thanks, Wietse, Sahil, for the education.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to thi
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:56:40 -0600
"/dev/rob0" wrote:
[snip]
>
> I'm not sure how that might affect pflogsumm.pl; perhaps if Jim is
> still reading the list he can comment?
[snip]
I'm still reading, but I'm usually only seeing the stuff that
mentions Pflogsum
ivered to the mailboxes, but seems something is
> changed in the logging that give this result.
> Any hints?
[snip]
Not without seeing logfile entries. Please email me a few dozen
lines of an old logfile and a new one. (Only a few dozen of each,
please!)
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server e
two years.
I really should get 1.1.4 out the door...
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php>.
attempted
connection/login when "disable_plaintext_auth = yes" in dovecot.conf.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is
rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my
web form at <http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php>.
that makes a crude attempt to isolate the
domain or sub-domain from the hostname. It's taken from whatever the
logfile gives me, which, in turn, is dependent upon whatever the
reverse lookup returns.
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you r
ddress, displays in the stats "from=<>".
That's because the sender is the null sender. So it was either
display nothing at all, or show "from=<>" to make it clear those were
from the null sender.
>
[snip]
>
> Is it intended behavior?
[snip]
Yes.
Re
help.
Short cycle, this time, but I kind of wanted this one to work w/o
patches ;)
With no bug reports, say, w/in a week or so, I'm going to promote
this one to "stable."
Regards,
Jim
--
Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam
filtering. If you reply to this ema
s the helo name. Sometimes I
hear back and they're grateful for the pointer, sometimes I never hear back.
Other larger sites will silently drop mails from such misconfigured systems,
though this isn't consistent. If more systems would enforce this, I think it
would be better for everyone
Hi All!
New centos install. Been running sendmail for many years under redhat and
openbsd but with the maturity of postfix, and seeing as it's the default centos
mailer I thought I'd give it a try. This is a single-pc server, no LAN/WAN
issues invloved.
Here's the error message, clearly a rel
Hi. There must be a glaringly obvious solution to my problem that I
can't see for looking at it. Can anyone help?
A few "trusted" senders have trouble getting past my server's vicious
anti-spam defences. Sometimes their mail is sent over IPv6 from a
source address that has no reverse DNS en
On 26 Apr 2012, at 17:06, Noel Jones wrote:
Put here:
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/oksenders
Facepalm moment. Doh! Noel, thanks very much. This was the obvious
thing I'd overlooked. Putting a check_sender_access entry like this in
smtpd_client_restrictions does the trick. Thanks
On 27 Apr 2012, at 16:55, kar...@mailcan.com wrote:
In the end it's getting blocked, and that's what I want. But, if I
understand how this works, every one of those rejects is a DNS check
to
spamhaus, and some postfix load on my server.
Can I somehow configure to be more efficient about thi
On 27 Apr 2012, at 17:20, kar...@mailcan.com wrote:
Is there any way to prevent Postfix from making those repeated DNS
checks, regardless of whether it's externally to Spamhaus' servers, or
to a locally cached DNS result?
No. Well you could but it would be futile make-work that adds needless
1 - 100 of 297 matches
Mail list logo
