> kwoody--- via Postfix-users:
> > The local recipient table has a list of all valid users in the format
> > u...@citytel.net. This is rebuilt when needed.
> >
> > Postifx is appending mail.citytel.net, not citytel.net.
>
> Over the last 25+ years, Postfix appe
dmail there or if
it was relevant. But it is so will go down that path.
Always just do a pkg install of postfix on new systems, but in this case it
didn't
replace sendmail like I thought it did.
Thanks.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- post
maintain reliability in terms of service
uptime and availability.
> On 3/05/2023, at 1:07 PM, Ken Peng via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> iCloud mail has two MX RR:
>
> icloud.com.3600INMX10 mx01.mail.icloud.com.
> icloud.com.
On 28/04/23 03:59, Sebastian Wiesinger via Postfix-users wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm not sure if I'm missing something but I can't find out why my
body_checks doesn't catch all the backscatter I'm getting right now.
Oh yuck.
I've found that the best way to blo
On 3/05/23 17:51, Ken Peng via Postfix-users wrote:
But anybody can use our (even setup correctly) mailserver as backscatter source?
Not if you configure postfix properly.
Peter
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To
Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
I updated the inet_interfaces documentation anmd clarified its
relationship with smtp_bind*_address and system-chosen source IP
addresses.
Wietse
When smtp_bind_address and/or smtp_bind_address6 are not specified, the
inet_interfaces setting may con
On 4/05/23 08:31, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Peter via Postfix-users:
Is this behavior of inet_interfaces overridden by smtp_bind_address?
From the way it's worded it looks to me like the inet_interfaces
setting overrides smtp_bind_address but this isn't clear to me. C
On 4/05/23 08:31, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Peter via Postfix-users:
Is this behavior of inet_interfaces overridden by smtp_bind_address?
From the way it's worded it looks to me like the inet_interfaces
setting overrides smtp_bind_address but this isn't clear to me. C
On 5/05/23 11:33, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
An empty inet_interfaces means that there is no constraint for the
SMTP client source IP address. I am adding some text for that.
I think the question is, what effect does it have on the server
listening address. This is from
... and key is ok
server and client not connect via ssl3
Any idea ?
--
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Hi
Problem is only via web aplications (php)
W dniu 8.05.2023 o 13:29, natan via Postfix-users pisze:
Hi
I have some problem with cert - user who connect via 465
postfix/smtps/smtpd[6901]: warning: TLS library problem:
error:14094418:SSL routines:ssl3_read_bytes:tlsv1 alert unknown
ca:../ssl
Hi
Exactly as you're saying - problem solved - CA cant load via aplications.
W dniu 8.05.2023 o 15:31, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users pisze:
On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 01:29:55PM +0200, natan via Postfix-users wrote:
I have some problem with cert - user who connect via 465
postfix/
On 8/05/23 00:27, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
After multiple such connnections, postscreen could theoretically
decide that the client is unlikely to ever connect to the primary
MX, but by then the client will likely already have given up, and
postscreen has done no harm.
Postscreen
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 03:17:21PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Hellow Postfix hackers,
>
> I have a questions while reading DANE docs. Is DNSSEC mandotary? For
> making DANE mail server.
>
> For now i'm running two postfix servers in public. Act
! I cannot
reproduce this problem, Because it is sporadic.
Please help us, under what circumstances does this return value appear?
How to avoid this problem?
We are using postfix 2.11 version.
Thanks _______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@post
server system is centos7.
2023-05-12 21:55，Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users：
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 03:32:45PM +0800, lty--- via Postfix-users wrote:
>
>> Hello The mail is transferred to the postfix service of the relay server
>> through the postfix service. Occasionally
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 07:09:41PM +0800, Tom Reed via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Hello
>
> How can I implement the following feature?
> the messages sent to:
>
> foo+la...@sample.com
> foo+lab...@sample.com
> ...
>
> all them will be delivered into:
> f...@
.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
https://www.mail-archive.com/postfix-users@postfix.org/msg99175.html [1]
This question has been consulted a few days ago, thanks to the team for
the reply
We have provided more detailed logs this time
SMTP server og:
May 16 08:41:14 smtp3 postfix-sen/qmgr[27776]: 3420CA2062F:
from
@smtp520 ~]# cat /etc/postfix/header_checks | grep -v '^#'
>
> /^Received:.+$/ IGNORE
>
> 2023-05-16 12:09，Tom Reed via Postfix-users： Relay server configuration is
> very simple. debugger_command =
> PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin ddd
&
hem is the user/email address that failed, but that
seems like a horrible hack to get around the silly base64 encoded string.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
the error
message
so why not report the email, instead of a base64 string?
On Tue, 16 May 2023 07:52:08 -0400 (EDT) Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
wrote:
> You appear to believe that
>
> - The Postfix SMTP server already knows the MAIL FROM or RCPT TO
> address when the remote
nfig_directory/relay_recips_access, check_recipient_access,
permit
Thanks so much for any ideas.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
In all honesty, the current situation of logging the base64 string
"UGFzc3dvcmQ6" does not help us.
Maybe we could reconsider, and actually log the data (raw or base64-decoded)?
On Tue, 16 May 2023 09:30:44 -0400 (EDT) Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
wrote:
> mailmary--
pd_recipient_restrictions on a per-domain
basis so I can relax some of these restrictions for cases like this,
instead of a more reactive approach where I'm always adding
sender_checks.pcre entries?
Thanks,
Alex
___________
Postfix-users mailing list --
fine tune your policy, one step further would be to
reject on a DKIM fail *ONLY* if there is no DMARC and no SPF setup.
And vise versa for SPF, if they are only using SPF and have no DKIM or DMARC
then reject on a failed SPF.
___
Postfix-users mailing
On 17/05/23 00:14, mailmary--- via Postfix-users wrote:
I am talking about the authentication email, not MAIL FROM or RCPT TO.
There is no "authentication email". There is a login username which can
be just about anything and in your case likely just happens to match the
us
Hi,
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 4:16 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 11:27:52AM -0400, Alex via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > > > $ host info.apr.gov.rs
> > > > Host info.apr.gov.rs not found: 2(SE
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 08:40:50PM +0800, Tom Reed via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> for Postsrsd, it rewrite all the sender addresses even if messages should
> be delivered locally.
>
> how to setup it to not rewrite sender for local addresses?
>
> Tha
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:15:35PM -0400, Bill Cole via Postfix-users
wrote:
> On 2023-05-16 at 21:09:35 UTC-0400 (Wed, 17 May 2023 09:09:35 +0800)
> Tom Reed via Postfix-users
> is rumored to have said:
> [...]
> > Since the message was sent to mailing list which rewrites en
https://www.mail-archive.com/postfix-users@postfix.org/msg99219.html [1]
https://www.mail-archive.com/postfix-users@postfix.org/msg99175.html
provide more information:
SMTP server log:
May 16 08:41:14 smtp3 postfix-sen/qmgr[27776]: 3420CA2062F:
from=, size=56791841, nrcpt=1 (queue
__
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 4:39 AM Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On 17.05.23 22:11, Alex via Postfix-users wrote:
> >I'm using postfix (postmulti) with amavisd and trying to have separate
> >content filters based on the doma
, May 18, 2023 at 8:00 AM Alex wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 4:39 AM Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users <
> postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
>
>> On 17.05.23 22:11, Alex via Postfix-users wrote:
>> >I'm using postfix (postmulti) with amavis
trictions =
permit_mynetworks,
check_sender_access ${indexed}sender_checks,
check_sender_access pcre:$config_directory/sender_checks.pcre,
check_sender_access
${default_database_type}:${meta_directory}/spamsources,
check_sender_ns_access ${indexed}/blac
Viktor,
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 7:16 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:20:38AM -0400, Alex via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > Maybe my issue is that the always_bcc user is going through a transport
> at
> &
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 08:54:16PM +0200, Joachim Lindenberg via Postfix-users
wrote:
> For Letsencrypt certificates I´d definitely go with 2 1 1
> 8D02536C887482BC34FF54E41D2BA659BF85B341A0A20AFADB5813DCFBCF286D and
> optionally the R4 derivate and add their successors when these
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:11:41AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:22:34PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> > And now i added TLSA record for only *outbond* smtp server,
> > .
>
> It is
work for header/body checks?
I'm not sure where to start, so I'm also not sure what other config details
I should provide to help make this determination.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
t would
> have never been able to figure that out on my own this time), and it now
> just doesn't actually create a copy of the email for the always_bcc user.
>
> Ideas on how to do it in my postfix-out instance? Ideally, I'd like it to
> have been processed by amavis so I can benefit from the additional header
> info.
>
>
>
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Hi,
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 12:39 PM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> > Alex via Postfix-users:
> > > Hi,
> > > I'm using multi-instance postfix-3.7.2 on fedora37 and would like to be
27; of doing so
is really small.
Or the more specialized/complex way is to custom code a scripting milter with
like MIMEDefang or MailMunge.
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Hi,
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 4:41 PM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Alex via Postfix-users:
> > > > I'd say, start with one instance per domain. The 'cost' of doing so
> > > > is really small.
> > &
ce
essentially processes mail for a somewhat related group of domains. Adding
transport maps to the front-end instance would be different than what I
remember doing with Viktor.
I don't have any content filters set up in the front-end postfix. How do I
connect the front-end postfix with the filters?
I think this is something I can implement, but I need more of a description
of how it should work, please.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
realization. Thank you so much.
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
he same policy applied to the always
BCC user as every other user using that transport.
Thanks,
Alex
>
>
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Hi,
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 9:47 PM Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 06:06:00PM -0400, Alex wrote:
>
> > Yes, I wasn't aware that's how it worked. I've now explicitly defined the
> > bcc-
checked/rejected/bounced individually?
Thanks
Michael
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
knows a better way to deal with this.
cheers,
raf
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
and only relay the
ooo in that case?
--
Cheers
spi
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Am 11.06.23 um 16:20 schrieb Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
spi via Postfix-users:
Hi all
My users have a local mail address user@internal.local with different
aliases (virtual_mailbox_maps, virtual_alias_maps). Receiving and
sending mails through different relay hosts (am using
I saw some domains have MX pointing to 127.0.0.1. what does this mean?
This will tell the sender of the email to connect to 127.0.0.1 which is itself.
It will send the mail program chasing its own tail.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users
Technically it's an invalid MX record because MX records must point to a
hostname, not an IP address.
They are probably trying (but failing) to implement a null MX record:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7505
Peter
On 12/06/23 19:50, wesley--- via Postfix-users wrote:
Note the
On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 11:28:46AM +0200, spi via Postfix-users wrote:
My users have a local mail address user@internal.local with different
aliases (virtual_mailbox_maps, virtual_alias_maps). Receiving and
sending mails through different relay hosts (am using
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
it doesn't allow users to email
themselves without breaking the restrictions.
I've been trying (and failing) to work around this, but I've not
succeeded yet.
Can anyone offer some advice on the best way to make this work?
Thanks,
Asai
________
On 6/12/2023 4:59 PM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 04:43:42PM -0700, Asai via Postfix-users wrote:
We have a situation where we want certain company groups to only be able
to email others in their group.
Isn't each user a member of "their group?
e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.
Website: https://www.ursc.gov.in
--
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email
On 23/06/23 07:05, André Rodier via Postfix-users wrote:
Is there any way, with postfix, to run a script on authentication
failure, with information like the IP address and the
username passed, for instance.
You can write your script up as a policy daemon and have it listen on an
inet or
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On 14/07/23 16:26, Aban Dokht via Postfix-users wrote:
https://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_sender_restrictions
check_sender_access type:table
...
Any hints how smtpd_sender_restrictions can be overridden with an IP
based hash or cidr table?
/etc/postfix/sender_override.cidr
to store an email copy?
Thanks for your ideas and hints!
Reg
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
could have been named
enforce_mime_output_conversion in analogy to disable_mime_output_conversion
or some other way to configure this?
Cheers
Stephan
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
> This feature is available in Postfix >= 3.9.
Great!
And Thanks a lot, Wietse and Victor, for all the advice that help right now.
Cheers
Stephan
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to p
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
The RFC 4616 itself allows all ASCII characters and further UTF-8 encoded
Unicode chars except NUL for all message parts. So in the end from postfix side
only „:“ is impossible to use in the „authentication identity“, other „special“
characters are „allowed“.
Stefan
>
ts those are?
many thanks, L._______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
On 20/07/2023 21:14, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 07:11:41PM +0200, lejeczek via Postfix-users wrote:
I use what I believe is pretty much vanilla-common setup - snis.map I
had to restart the deamon/server in order for _postix_ to notice new
certs
On 23/07/2023 16:00, Wietse Venema wrote:
lejeczek via Postfix-users:
-> $ postfix reload # did not work, new certs/files where
only picked up with "full" restart, with "systemd" in this case.
and when done, then server-postifx supplied new certs
immediately - clie
On 23/07/2023 16:00, Wietse Venema wrote:
lejeczek via Postfix-users:
-> $ postfix reload # did not work, new certs/files where
only picked up with "full" restart, with "systemd" in this case.
and when done, then server-postifx supplied new certs
immediately - clie
On 23/07/2023 18:50, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 09:39:52AM +0200, lejeczek via Postfix-users wrote:
What is "snis.map", and how is it used in your configuration?
tls_server_sni_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/snis.map
And when did you r
On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 09:49:58AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Bernardo Reino via Postfix-users:
> > >> I cannot imagine why/when the cerbot client would fail to run the
> > >> post-hooks (in a sane environment).
> > >
> >
On 23/07/2023 22:44, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
On 23 Jul 2023, at 4:21 pm, Charles Sprickman via Postfix-users
wrote:
In the case of the dehydrated ACME client
(https://github.com/dehydrated-io/dehydrated) there's an option to run
a bunch of commands on successful u
lejeczek via Postfix-users writes:
> On 23/07/2023 22:44, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
>> On 23 Jul 2023, at 4:21 pm, Charles Sprickman via Postfix-users
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In the case of the dehydrated ACME client
>>> (https://github.com/dehy
. Your writing style makes it so painless to follow and truly learn
the techniques.
I got to meet you some time ago at NYC*BSDcon and confirmed that you were
just as cool as you came off in your writing.
Jonathan
On Sun, 6 Aug 2023, Michael W. Lucas via Postfix-users wrote:
On Sun, Aug 06
hem to refuse these messages?
Thanks,
Alex
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
; http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_proxy_filter
>
> provided you can dedicate an IP address (port 25 smtpd(8) instance) for
> this destination.
So I would do this in place of the transport filter I currently have in
place?
example.comsmtp:mx1.hc4719.iphmx.com
Th
On 07/31/2023 09:24 AM, Eugene R via Postfix-users wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Those "ugly characters" are there for a reason: they are specified by the
> Maildir standard (and the Dovecot's extensions to it) to encode various
> metadata such as message ID, size, flags, et
On 08/10/2023 01:25 AM, Eugene R via Postfix-users wrote:
> Hello
>
> I think something like this should work
> ----.domain.com:2,S
> That is, change @ into dot, remove ".eml", and add ":2,S" suffix (marking
> messages as re
ntifier./
>
>
>
>
>
> Get BlueMail for Android <https://bluemail.me>
> On 11 Aug 2023, at 03:35, H via Postfix-users <mailto:postfix-users@postfix.org>> wrote:
>
> On 08/10/2023 01:25 AM, Eugene R via Postfix-users wrote:
>> Hello
>>
&
n the wrong place? or is that^ config already a cause?
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
RC4 usage from ironport awhile ago,
https://community.cisco.com/t5/email-security/no-tls-for-ironport-cloud/td-p/2467698
unclear if/how it was resolved.
what specific postfix logging, if any, will ID what cipher is being
attempted/used ?
______
ls might be a bit more up-to-date on their end.
currently / so far, this server's config is
...
Though not relevant for the SMTP server, just stick with the defaults,
the above hodge-podge just leads to more email going out in the clear.
time to clean up some legacy bad habits! i certa
ready
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
egistry.
wouldn't have known to look. more reading ... thx.
what tool are you using to extract the
>> Handshake type: 01 (Client Hello)
>> Length: 00 00 9c (156)
from the OP log output?
_______________
Postfix-users mailing l
o tool. Just known structure of the TLS handshake packet.
noted. cool, as long as you don't read the specs/RFCs in raw binary or hex ;-)
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users :
>
> zonie via Postfix-users:
>> Hello,
>>
>> currently it's not possible to specify a username containing a colon ?:?
>> inside a ?smtp_sasl_password_map?, as the colon is used to split username
>> and passwor
would be able to do this.
___
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
ot!
-lutzn
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
ubleshoot this further would really be appreciated.
Thanks,
Alex
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
Thank you very much.
And "yes!!!", I understand you very well.
But, we want to make things simple.
> Gesendet: Montag, 14. August 2023 um 23:31 Uhr
> Von: "Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users"
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: [pfx] Re: How to block
ivery). Do we have to expact any problems
with that or is it safe?
> Gesendet: Montag, 14. August 2023 um 23:31 Uhr
> Von: "Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users"
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: [pfx] Re: How to block subaddressing from extern with a table
>
>
On 15/08/23 12:15, Jon Smart via Postfix-users wrote:
I have disabled port 587/465 to be accessed publicly.
These are the submission and submissions ports, for user submission of mail.
but port 25 must be open to internet for MTA communications.
Port 25 is for MX to MX communication, for a
= verify
address_verify_transport_maps = $transport_maps
address_verify_virtual_transport = $virtual_transport
Please help me to troubleshoot this issue. Thanks in advance!
_______
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email t
On 8/15/23 14:49, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
smtp_tls_loglevel = 0
Level 1 is typically more informative at negligible additional cost.
I have set this option and tried to send email once again:
Aug 15 18:11:48 flopster postfix/smtp[6025]: warning: TLS library problem
Well, in my case this is recipient verification - I am sending abuse complaints
in bulk and to eliminate tons of email bounces I have enabled address
verification.
On 8/15/23 15:43, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
So it seems that legitimate domains (from which one actually cares to
d.protection.outlook.com"
/var/log/postfix/postfix.log | wc -l
4343
any wisdom as to what this M$ noise is ? and what (else) to do about it? if
anything ...
___________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
#x27;s been the case; i'll poke
again, but TBH, not really worth the diagnostic bother beyond the annoyance.
as long as something isn't broken on my end; so far, i haven't see anything
that looks like anything more than noise.
___
Postfix-u
17T10:19:28.956613-04:00 svr01 postfix/qmgr[1360]:
4RF2p96g9nz5K: removed
i'll look some more at TLS handshake, but can't yet grok why it'd work in some
cases, and not others -- from *.outlook.com
as mentioned above, hardly a stress blip to worry about ...
________
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:02 AM Wietse Venema via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Your loop, based on Received: headers, newer at the top, older at
> the bottom:
>
> Received: from xavier.example.com (209.216.111.114) by
> CO1PEPF44F7.mail.p
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:53 AM Paul Enlund via Postfix-users <
postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> One thing to check is that your MX server allowed recipients is in sync
> with M365 allowed recipients.
>
Can you explain more of what you mean here? In this cas
201 - 300 of 7869 matches
Mail list logo
