November 18, 2007 
< | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | >
November 18, 2007 [00:00:28] <mfwitten> Well, I realize you are perhaps being sarcastic, rob0, but that's what I'm thinking.[00:00:40] <mfwitten> I believe postfix makes to many decisions or generalizes things improperly[00:00:51] <mfwitten> That's the conclusion I've come to, but it may just be I'm not understanding[00:01:03] <mfwitten> Unfortunately, no one here has tried to set me straight[00:01:16] *** WinBack has quit IRC[00:01:22] *** WinBack has joined #postfix[00:02:47] <rob0> "man sendmail" might help. You can pass anything you want in the "To:" header, it does not matter.[00:03:00] <mfwitten> Actually, I'm not being correct about it: postfix is probably fine, but the sendmail interface sucks ass.[00:03:13] <mfwitten> I can communicate directly with the daemon right?[00:03:18] <rob0> See, you are asking non-MTA questions. You want to know how to use email in general.[00:03:39] <mfwitten> That's the problem though, rob0[00:03:40] <rob0> And any MTA's sendmail is going to act similarly.[00:03:47] <mfwitten> right[00:03:56] <mfwitten> I'm really railing against sendmail[00:04:01] *** WinBack has quit IRC[00:04:08] <mfwitten> It's making a lot of decisions and trying to do the "right" thing.[00:04:17] <rob0> Life is too short for Sendmail MTA.[00:04:18] <mfwitten> Unfortunately, all of those decisions are not correct, in my case.[00:04:27] <mfwitten> What do you mean?[00:04:38] <rob0> oh I thought you were saying something else, nm[00:05:45] <rob0> Doesn't your mailing list software have some means of sending admin messages?[00:06:01] <mfwitten> The system is a little grosser than that[00:06:07] <mfwitten> I don't have control of the mailing list per se[00:06:23] <mfwitten> I would have to contact some people to get things setup or have the members change settings[00:06:31] *** netcrash has quit IRC[00:07:14] <mfwitten> In any case, I think I just need to do the SMTP protocol by hand.[00:07:35] <mfwitten> Sendmail is like Windows; it just tries to do too much for you and ends up fucking everything up[00:10:22] <mfwitten> What's the best way to talk directly to the smpt server part of postfix?[00:13:11] <mfwitten> telnet?[00:13:15] <mfwitten> netcat?[00:13:16] <mfwitten> Come[00:13:19] <mfwitten> Give me a hand here[00:14:41] * UQlev is crying reading this monolog[00:15:34] <mfwitten> Well maybe you guys should speak the fuck up?[00:16:31] <UQlev> mfwitten: about what?[00:16:32] <rob0> Oh I am dreadfully sorry sir. We will see to it that your money is promptly refunded.[00:16:55] <rob0> Who gives a crap about your silly problem? You're on /ignore.[00:17:16] *** mfwitten has quit IRC[00:17:22] <rob0> /ignore mfdimwitten[00:18:57] *** idle-boy` has quit IRC[00:19:16] *** idle-boy` has joined #Postfix[00:29:24] *** unixun has joined #postfix[00:30:20] *** oates is now known as oates|zzzZ[00:32:39] *** _matt has joined #postfix[00:32:40] *** UQlev has quit IRC[00:40:50] *** meandtheshell has quit IRC[00:41:11] <Flawless> I keep getting messages like this: [postfix/trivial-rewrite] warning: do not list domain example.org in BOTH virtual_mailbox_domains and relay_domains[00:41:22] <Flawless> Yet, if I don't, my mail system doesn't work as expected[00:41:34] <Flawless> I simply want to be able to make virtual aliases to other domains[00:42:46] <rob0> virtual_mailbox_domains, you said virtual ALIASES[00:42:51] <rob0> there is a difference[00:43:10] *** unixun has quit IRC[00:44:03] <Flawless> yes?[00:44:22] <Flawless> if I A) don't list example.org in virtual_mailbox_domains, the alias wont work[00:44:38] <Flawless> if I B) don't list exmaple.org in relay_domains, the relaying is denied[00:44:47] <Flawless> if I C) list it in both, I get the warning but it works[00:44:51] <Flawless> it just seems wrong[00:46:32] <Flawless> rob0: Did I misunderstand something?[00:46:37] <Flawless> rob0: Or do you have any other comments?[00:49:55] <rob0> virtual_mailbox_domains is not virtual ALIASES[00:50:04] <rob0> relay_domains is not virtual ALIASES[00:50:22] <rob0> if it works, I couldn't begin to guess why.[00:50:33] <rob0> !address_classes[00:50:34] <knoba> rob0: "address_classes" : http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html describes how Postfix deals with different classes of addresses: local, relay, virtual alias, virtual mailbox, and Internet.[00:51:02] <rob0> Any given domain must only be in one class.[00:51:40] <rob0> relaying denied? Sounds like a fundamental misunderstanding of SMTP.[00:51:51] <rob0> !basic[00:51:51] <knoba> rob0: "basic" : http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html : a good starting place for Postfix beginners, many common questions are answered here.[00:52:04] <rob0> ^^ tells you how to set up $mynetworks for relaying.[00:52:12] <Flawless> I did not[00:58:56] *** eviljames has joined #postfix[00:59:28] *** tmjb has quit IRC[00:59:47] *** war has quit IRC[01:03:22] <eviljames> Is there some magic that I've missed in getting postfix to work with nis?[01:03:49] <eviljames> I have the daemon running, try sending to user at address dot net from a hotmail account, and I'm being bounced.[01:04:12] <eviljames> It's rewriting address.net to 127.0.0.1 and then saying bad recipient user at 127 dot 0.0.1[01:04:38] <eviljames> the user is on a seperate machine, authenticated on this computer through nis.[01:06:31] <eviljames> sending to the root user (who is in this machine's passwd file) works.[01:08:12] <Flawless> rob0: I figured it out[01:08:18] <rob0> that sounds like nsswitch problem[01:08:24] <Flawless> rob0: And yes, I know about basic configurations... "thanks" ;)[01:10:34] <eviljames> rob0: mine sounds like nsswitch?[01:12:35] *** prebur has quit IRC[01:13:24] *** githogori has joined #postfix[01:15:28] <eviljames> Nov 17 16:14:39 Chimera postfix/local[6920]: 6F6DC11C6F0A: to=<eviljames at obscenely dot strangled.net>, relay=local, delay=0.81, delays=0.74/0.01/0/0.07, dsn=5.1.3, status=bounced (bad recipient address syntax: eviljames at 127 dot 0.0.1)[01:15:37] <eviljames> woops[01:19:08] *** wdp_ has joined #postfix[01:19:09] *** unixun has joined #postfix[01:19:27] *** wdp_ is now known as wdp[01:20:02] <wdp> ehlo[01:21:23] <eviljames> wdp: by chance are you an expert with postfix/nis?[01:21:36] <wdp> evadave, sorry, i don't use nis.[01:21:51] <wdp> eviljames, but whats your problem anyway?[01:22:11] <wdp> evadave, sorry.. nickcomplete ;)[01:23:11] <eviljames> wdp: well, I have a machine that is my nis/nfs server. /home is mounted through nfs on this linux machine.[01:23:35] <eviljames> This machine auths it's users through nis against a Solaris box. This machine is also responsible for mail on my network.[01:23:52] <eviljames> For whatever reason, the local user (root) can receive mail, any other user (eviljames) cannot.[01:24:15] <eviljames> the bounce message shows that eviljames at domain dot net is being rewritten to eviljames at 127 dot 0.0.1 and is being bounced for bad recipient.[01:24:46] <wdp> eviljames, and the box has a local account called eviljames?[01:24:53] <eviljames> no, eviljames is nis user.[01:25:12] <wdp> and root, is local or nis?[01:25:18] <eviljames> local[01:25:30] <wdp> so it's not using nis, correct?[01:25:43] <wdp> i mean[01:25:50] <rob0> Time to pastebin "postconf -n" and maybe some more logs with it[01:25:56] <wdp> yeah..[01:27:48] <eviljames> k[01:27:49] <eviljames> sec[01:28:13] *** rcsu has quit IRC[01:35:19] *** duki has quit IRC[01:35:37] *** duki has joined #postfix[01:38:26] <eviljames> http://pastebin.ca/778885 <- postconf -n[01:39:43] <eviljames> http://pastebin.ca/778887 <- /var/log/maillog from startup to sending a message from hotmail to user at domain dot net[01:40:48] *** duki has quit IRC[01:41:00] *** duki has joined #postfix[01:44:30] <rob0> Hmmm, toughie.[01:45:09] *** pitakill has joined #postfix[01:45:44] <Flawless> eviljames: what's the real value for [domain.net]?[01:46:07] <eviljames> obscenely.strangled.net[01:46:08] <rob0> does "postmap -q eviljames nis:passwd.byname" work?[01:46:13] <eviljames> yes.[01:46:27] <rob0> do you have getent?[01:46:42] <eviljames> yes[01:46:47] <rob0> (I think it's part of glibc, ok)[01:46:52] *** duki has quit IRC[01:46:57] <Flawless> getent eviljames[01:47:02] <rob0> no[01:47:08] *** duki has joined #postfix[01:47:31] <eviljames> getent passwd eviljames[01:47:32] <eviljames> works as well.[01:47:39] <rob0> I'm not sure what the database name would be for NIS.[01:47:54] <Flawless> eviljames: that's what I meant, fwiw[01:48:01] <eviljames> Flawless: that's what I figured :)[01:48:28] <Flawless> eviljames: ns lookup for obscenely.strangled.net work ok?[01:48:37] <rob0> ah, passwd it is[01:48:42] <eviljames> it returns eth0's address. eth1 is 192.168.x[01:48:47] <Flawless> ok[01:48:54] <eviljames> reverse dns does not work as this is a home machine :)[01:49:09] <eviljames> But I can manualy set eth0's address to obscenely.strangled.net in /etc/hosts[01:49:10] <shasta> ypmatch userid passwd?[01:49:19] <eviljames> shasta: success.[01:49:26] <Flawless> eviljames: You can easily control rDNS on rfc1918-zones[01:49:40] <eviljames> I was not aware of that.[01:49:41] <eviljames> :)[01:50:03] <rob0> A whole new world of evil is opened for James. :)[01:50:05] <Flawless> eviljames: apt-get install bind9 :)[01:50:08] <Flawless> ;)[01:50:09] <eviljames> haha[01:50:30] <eviljames> Flawless: apt-get? Ugly. This is a Slackware machine, the other is Solaris.[01:50:39] <Flawless> eviljames: slack-get, then :P[01:50:47] <eviljames> Solaris is the nis host, nfs host, etc.[01:50:52] <rob0> it's probably already installed[01:50:57] <rob0> (bind)[01:51:04] <Flawless> yeah, could be[01:51:07] <eviljames> rob0: yeah, bind9 is stock in Solaris.[01:51:16] <rob0> on Slackware I mean[01:51:21] <rob0> but anyway[01:51:22] <eviljames> oh, I bet it is, too.[01:51:41] <rob0> I'm wondering what/why that destination is being rewritten.[01:51:50] <Flawless> eviljames: anyway, bind wont fix your problem, but it can set rDNS for those 1918's[01:52:03] * Flawless wonders too[01:52:17] *** duki has quit IRC[01:52:24] <rob0> This is one of those rare times when I suggest verbose logging. :([01:52:33] *** duki has joined #postfix[01:53:07] *** icewaterman has joined #postfix[01:53:15] <rob0> debug_peer_list can work if you control the host from which you connect[01:53:18] <rob0> !debug[01:53:19] <knoba> rob0: "debug" : http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html : a good starting point for how to deal with problems and to report information to those who might help. Post your information in a pastebin such as http://pastebin.ca/ or http://rafb.net/paste/ .[01:53:22] <Flawless> eviljames: are you using some non-standard daemons?[01:54:11] <icewaterman> hi, i have a postfix issue. postfix rejects a mail fetchmail fetched (because the senders domain in the address does not exist - it is some spam). however as fetchmail fetches from 127.0.0.1 it should be accepted[01:54:39] <icewaterman> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, permit_sasl_authenticated, reject_unauth_destination, reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_non_fqdn_recipient, reject_unknown_recipient_domain, reject_unknown_sender_domain, check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:12525, check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:60000[01:54:48] <icewaterman> these are the restrictions that apply to postfix.[01:55:11] <Flawless> icewaterman: what's the log message? Does it _deliver_ from localhost?[01:55:27] <rob0> postconf mynetworks[01:56:39] <icewaterman> Flawless: http://rafb.net/p/LRcJ3b36.html[01:56:52] <icewaterman> mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8[01:56:57] <eviljames> Flawless: no, I just compiled 2.4.6 from source.[01:57:39] <Flawless> icewaterman: please paste with proper newlines[01:57:42] *** duki has quit IRC[01:57:49] *** prebur has joined #postfix[01:57:50] *** duki has joined #postfix[01:57:56] <Flawless> icewaterman: did you rewrite the log message?[01:58:26] <icewaterman> Flawless: yes, i censord my external domain and the internal as well as the target mailaddress[01:58:58] <icewaterman> Flawless: the reason i didnt include proper newlines is because the logs didnt contain them in the first place.[01:59:00] <Flawless> icewaterman: Is there some reason we can't see the actual log? and please try using newlines correctly :)[01:59:11] <Flawless> icewaterman: I'm sure the log did. Otherwise you've done something very strange[01:59:15] <icewaterman> Flawless: yes, that poor guy already gets enough spam :)[01:59:47] <Flawless> icewaterman: I'm sure you have a spam filter somewhere.[02:00:28] <eviljames> rob0: debug_peer_list can I set that to *hotmail.com or something along those lines?[02:00:29] <Flawless> Anyway, where is fetchmail sending _from_ ? Localhost?[02:00:39] <icewaterman> http://rafb.net/p/rQTVNt15.html[02:00:45] <icewaterman> Flawless: yes seems so[02:01:04] <icewaterman> sorry again for the newline problem, but the logs do not contain them[02:01:10] <Flawless> ok[02:01:11] <icewaterman> i simply cat the logs[02:01:41] <rob0> !debug_peer_list[02:01:42] <knoba> rob0: "debug_peer_list" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: Optional list of SMTP client or server patterns that cause the verbose logging level to increase by the amount specified in $debug_peer_level.[02:01:57] <Flawless> icewaterman: it's actually pretty simple[02:02:02] <rob0> I'm not sure about debug_peer_list, see postconf.5.html#debug_peer_list[02:02:06] <Flawless> icewaterman: You have a restriction on the _from_ adresses[02:02:13] <Flawless> icewaterman: So, <bvheui at aldiana-arlberg dot de>: Sender address rejected:[02:02:29] <Flawless> icewaterman: means that postfix cannot find aldiana-arlberg.de (DNS problems, so indeed it shouldn't find it)[02:02:38] <icewaterman> Flawless: yes, but shouldnt permit_mynetworks allow it and stop there[02:02:41] *** LEAVEMEALONE is now known as ziyax[02:03:01] <icewaterman> meaning: permit it and dont look for other restrictions[02:03:15] <Flawless> icewaterman: now, you could reasonably make postfix skip those validation checks for $mynetworks[02:03:27] <Flawless> icewaterman: yes, but you've pasted the _recipient_ restrictions[02:03:32] *** wdp has quit IRC[02:03:33] <Flawless> icewaterman: these are the sender restrictions :)[02:03:43] <icewaterman> Flawless: oops[02:04:04] <icewaterman> ouch smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_unknown_address[02:04:20] <icewaterman> i confused the two of those.[02:04:21] <Flawless> yes[02:04:24] <Flawless> so[02:04:25] <icewaterman> i[02:04:33] <rob0> You have that in smtpd_recipient_restrictions, so just remove smtpd_sender_restrictions[02:04:35] <Flawless> smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject_unknown_address[02:04:38] <icewaterman> will set permit mynetworks there as well[02:04:45] <Flawless> if you must[02:04:50] <Flawless> I think the default of "" is better[02:04:51] <rob0> reject_unknown_address ??[02:05:08] <Flawless> it doesn't make much sense, I'll agree[02:05:10] <icewaterman> rob0: yes, sounds pretty much useless[02:05:23] <Flawless> icewaterman: You DO know that envelope addresses can be forged, right? ;)[02:05:40] <icewaterman> a not existing domain will never recieve any mail stuff.[02:05:49] <Flawless> this is _from_[02:05:58] <icewaterman> uhm, again[02:06:02] <icewaterman> grrml[02:06:03] <Flawless> this means that users claiming to be bob at non-existing dot com will be denied[02:06:14] <icewaterman> yes, i do not want local clients to send spam i guess :)[02:06:27] <Flawless> I can see what the sentiment might have been, but it doesn't really stop anything[02:06:49] <Flawless> icewaterman: yes... and let's hope they are not smart enough to call themselves "billg at microsoft dot com", because that domain exists perfectly fine[02:07:30] <icewaterman> Flawless: well at least somebody was stupid enough to send something from a non existant domain for me to notice this problem ;)[02:07:42] <Flawless> icewaterman: that's true ;)[02:07:57] <Flawless> icewaterman: Just remove the check, the world will function a little smoother[02:09:42] <icewaterman> Flawless: well maybe. but we would all be out of our jobs if the world was running smooth so lets hope it doesnt come to that one day ;-)[02:10:54] <Flawless> icewaterman: it's really not helping very much[02:11:00] <icewaterman> thx for your help Flawless and rob0 . my homeserver now runs a little smoother :)[02:11:01] <Flawless> icewaterman: but hey, it's your mailserver.. :P[02:11:34] <icewaterman> msgid=<c56501c82790$41ff8da0$20ba9b23@bvheui>: saved mail to UNSURE[02:11:45] <icewaterman> grrml bogofilter didnt catch it properly :|[02:11:53] <icewaterman> well it is still learning[02:13:00] *** unixcoder has quit IRC[02:13:38] <icewaterman> bye[02:14:33] *** hparker has quit IRC[02:14:45] *** duki has quit IRC[02:23:18] *** rom11 has joined #postfix[02:25:49] *** unixtippse has quit IRC[02:26:04] *** fiXXXerMet has joined #postfix[02:26:10] <eviljames> hm.[02:26:34] <fiXXXerMet> Are there any utilities for postfix that keep track of statistics in a mysql db? Stats like messages sent, received, who sent them, when they were sent, etc?[02:30:18] *** prebur has quit IRC[02:30:39] *** flami has joined #postfix[02:39:36] <eviljames> changing the value of my hostname yields no results.[02:41:46] *** amrit|bbl is now known as amrit[02:42:46] *** flami has quit IRC[02:42:58] <eviljames> watching with tcpdump doesn't do me much good either :/[02:43:11] <eviljames> I can see the connection happening, and watch my mail server reject :/[02:43:20] *** pirho has quit IRC[02:43:43] *** djwonk has joined #postfix[02:44:11] <eviljames> Flawless, rob0 any other suggestions?[02:45:59] <djwonk> i'm running postifx on leopard. stock install, nothing changed. every once in a while, when I send one message from a Web app (locally), the message doesn't go through. But sending a second message seems to push the 1st one out. Then I get both messages. Any suggestions?[02:46:25] <eviljames> Do you have a queue set up?[02:46:48] <eviljames> btw, I am totally new to postfix, so don't take my advice :)[02:47:00] <djwonk> eviljames: i actually don't know. i'm creating a pastie of the log file now[02:50:25] <djwonk> http://pastebin.com/m6b00895[02:51:06] <djwonk> 20:19 was my 1st attempt. message didn't go out. 20:42 was second email. then both emails go through.[03:01:22] *** skyion has quit IRC[03:01:37] <rom11> whaty is the prob djwonk[03:01:55] *** number9 has joined #postfix[03:02:36] <rom11> When the queue is active means it is added to the queue for delievery[03:04:27] *** Tachy_ has joined #postfix[03:05:06] <number9> Hello all. I have postfix up and running on a gentoo server (for some time) and I need smtpd auth. I have read the postfix howto and I can authenticate by hand (as per the example) but none of my mtas seem to like it. I am receiving mail via IMAP ok, but I can not send. Places I should start? My logs are being spam bombed constantly and are difficult to read.[03:11:29] <eviljames> can't you just set local_recipient or whatever?[03:11:43] <eviljames> That way if the destination user does not exist on your machine the message gets bounced.[03:11:58] <eviljames> Alternatively I can provide you with the main.cf I am using, and it will bounce every message![03:12:02] <eviljames> ;)[03:12:17] <number9> eviljames I forgot to mention; I am doing this so I can read/send from my iphone[03:12:32] <eviljames> also: any ideas why my postfix setup will not deliver mail to nis users on my system?[03:12:43] <number9> eviljames so I need a system that can authenticate me no matter where I am[03:12:48] <eviljames> I see.[03:13:03] <eviljames> Nice idea, and I plan to do the same (except with a blackberry)[03:13:46] *** ek has quit IRC[03:14:10] *** aatmaa has joined #postfix[03:15:10] <number9> eviljames Does the NIS problem have something to do with it reading the passwd file... I think you need to alias maps something?[03:17:21] *** Tachy has quit IRC[03:18:30] <rom11> what is the use of oldconfig?[03:20:33] <eviljames> in my /etc/aliases I have added "eviljames: eviljames at obscenely dot strangled.net"[03:20:57] <eviljames> The error message I am getting is bad recipient address syntax: eviljames at 127 dot 0.0.1[03:21:02] <eviljames> Which says to me that it is not looking up the name via nis.[03:25:27] <eviljames> argh, maybe I should just go read the source code.[03:26:26] *** skyion has joined #postfix[03:26:30] <number9> eviljames are you trying to do something that is listed here? http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html[03:28:22] <eviljames> I'll have to fully review this, the rewrite may be close[03:29:22] <eviljames> won't even deliver mail locally.[03:29:49] <eviljames> That's annoying. from: root to: eviljames - declined to send.[03:30:12] <number9> eviljames whoa, I would work on that first. I tend to dislike NIS, but mainly due to some grid computing headaches I ha dwith it.[03:30:42] <eviljames> other than this, nis is working great.[03:30:52] <eviljames> and combining with nfs for /home folder mounting it's pretty smooth.[03:30:59] <eviljames> Consistant desktops across machines and such.[03:32:45] *** number9 has quit IRC[03:43:21] *** icewaterman has quit IRC[03:43:25] *** icewater1an has joined #postfix[03:51:06] *** rmayorga_ has joined #postfix[03:52:28] *** rmayorga has quit IRC[03:55:59] <rob0> eviljames: back now[03:56:06] <eviljames> aloha[03:56:18] <eviljames> Why did I type that? I'm not even in Hawaii.[03:56:25] <eviljames> and Vancouver is not tropical enough.[03:56:26] <eviljames> :/[03:58:14] <rob0> Did you do the verbose logging? Is it pasted somewhere?[03:58:29] <eviljames> I haven't yet, been tackling other things.[04:01:25] <eviljames> be back in 10 minute or so... need a smoke.[04:03:37] <rom11> hi[04:13:25] *** slimjimflim has quit IRC[04:13:41] *** ming_zym has joined #postfix[04:15:40] <eviljames> rob0: status at last report: could not send mail from root to eviljames locally[04:15:59] <eviljames> the user eviljames is not in the local passwd file, it's through nis[04:23:56] *** rmayorga_ is now known as rmayorga[04:30:46] *** theblackbox has quit IRC[04:34:06] <eviljames> !debug_peer_list[04:34:07] <knoba> eviljames: "debug_peer_list" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: Optional list of SMTP client or server patterns that cause the verbose logging level to increase by the amount specified in $debug_peer_level.[04:36:37] <eviljames> rob0: still around?[04:41:17] <eviljames> ok I have peer level at 2, and am going to send a message from root to eviljames, pastebin the log[05:05:12] *** prebur has joined #postfix[05:05:21] *** ming_zym has quit IRC[05:08:25] *** rom11 has left #postfix[05:10:52] *** rom10 has quit IRC[05:12:09] *** phnord has joined #postfix[05:16:21] *** idle-boy`` has joined #Postfix[05:16:26] *** idle-boy` has quit IRC[05:25:14] *** ming_zym has joined #postfix[05:27:31] *** ek has joined #Postfix[05:30:13] *** andi__ has quit IRC[05:41:30] <eviljames> hooray, new people coming and going! Anybody able to start pointing me in the right direction for postfix+nis ?[06:14:33] *** ming_zym has quit IRC[06:17:47] *** solar345 has joined #postfix[06:17:50] *** ming_zym has joined #postfix[06:23:45] *** solar_ant has quit IRC[06:29:02] *** Kurt_ has quit IRC[06:35:41] *** pitakill has quit IRC[06:36:32] *** ming_zym has left #postfix[06:58:47] *** z3ndrag0n has joined #postfix[07:18:42] *** unixcoder has joined #postfix[07:21:47] *** aatmaa has quit IRC[07:39:20] *** jbt has joined #postfix[08:11:26] *** hparker has joined #postfix[08:13:31] *** Sieg has quit IRC[08:14:42] *** Sieg has joined #postfix[08:15:23] *** Zeit|awy_ has quit IRC[08:23:04] *** jbt has quit IRC[08:39:07] *** obscurant has quit IRC[09:23:40] *** lineman60 has joined #postfix[09:32:39] <lineman60> I have a few qestions about using postfix to detectect regualr expressions in headers, 1) do i want to make the chage in main.cf or header_cheacks[09:37:31] *** mitziyahu has joined #postfix[09:37:50] <mitziyahu> i have emails sent but i cant seem to find them in the logs. how's that possible?[09:40:31] <lineman60> did you check you que?[09:41:13] <lineman60> dont know much about postfix but it might be they have not been sent yet[09:41:32] <lineman60> *postfix que[09:43:13] <mitziyahu> their in the mailbox already[09:43:38] <mitziyahu> btw how bad is google.com 10.0.0.1: is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of user at domain dot com[09:43:39] <mitziyahu> ?[09:44:13] <lineman60> Huh?[09:45:31] <mitziyahu> that's an error im getting about this mail in the gmail box[09:46:32] <lineman60> did you set up a reverce DNS recrard?[09:48:04] <mitziyahu> yup[09:48:13] <lineman60> sorry i know i am not helping much but i think i am the only one in channle that is chattu[09:48:15] <lineman60> y[09:49:00] <mitziyahu> thats ok i appreciate the help :[09:49:01] <mitziyahu> :[09:49:04] <mitziyahu> :)**[09:52:59] <lineman60> to me it sounds as if google dose not know what to do[09:53:10] <lineman60> so its accepting it with questions[09:54:16] <lineman60> did you set up SPF?[09:57:22] <fiXXXerMet> what's up?[09:58:09] *** Marquel has joined #postfix[09:58:18] <lineman60> well i had some qestions about regular expression maching in postfix and mitziyahu is getting errrors in sending mail[09:58:21] <Marquel> morning[09:59:25] <Marquel> is it possible to make postfix smtp client use different local interface based on mail sender?[10:02:35] *** war has joined #postfix[10:07:19] <mitziyahu> whats a "best guess record"?[10:19:17] <whatever__> mitziyahu, google has a good example "v=spf1 include:_netblocks.google.com ~all"[10:19:42] <mitziyahu> which means?[10:20:12] <whatever__> ok, so you want to understand SPF first?[10:20:41] <mitziyahu> yeah[10:21:01] <mitziyahu> i googled for it but wasn't very clear[10:21:18] <whatever__> ok, go to http://www.openspf.org/[10:21:28] <whatever__> best practice i believe is to create your own spf[10:21:45] <whatever__> monitor the changes at the bottom of the page each time you change something[10:22:08] <mitziyahu> oh i already did[10:22:13] <mitziyahu> and i do quite get it, i think[10:22:21] <mitziyahu> but i get a neutral result from google[10:22:36] <mitziyahu> i just suspect this might be the reason my emails aren't always sent[10:22:52] <mitziyahu> well, are sent but not always received[10:23:54] <whatever__> mitziyahu, i don't know of any mail server that is so strict to reject your email because you have a "neutral" SPF[10:24:46] <mitziyahu> hmm[10:24:52] <whatever__> mitziyahu, that might be your missing the PTR record?[10:24:57] <mitziyahu> can you help me figure out whats wrong?[10:25:00] <mitziyahu> let me check[10:25:24] <mitziyahu> welll the address from is stars.co.il using a shared ip[10:25:50] <mitziyahu> but the mx record does have a reverse ptr record[10:27:54] <whatever__> you need to make sure that all your DNS configurations are correct, the sending SMTP server should have an IP address that is: 1- statically assigned, 2- has PTR, 3- The PTR has a corresponding A record and 4- would be lovely if a clarifying little SPF exists[10:29:36] <Marquel> wasn't MX record supposed to NOT be a CNAME?[10:30:56] <whatever__> Marquel, that is true[10:31:33] <mitziyahu> so my issue isn't a tad one :P[10:31:52] <mitziyahu> well if i get it, any domain im sending an email from MUST have a seprerate ip?[10:32:42] <Marquel> mitziyahu: no, but DNS configuration for that domain must be correct.[10:32:51] <mitziyahu> by any domain im referring to the domain in the "from/return-path" domain[10:33:21] <mitziyahu> but if it should have ptr then i need to have an ip for it alone. or did you mean the smtp server's domail?[10:33:42] <Marquel> mitziyahu: it's sufficient, if the ip of the server has a ptr.[10:34:05] <mitziyahu> oh so its all that way[10:34:06] <Marquel> that does not mean every domain needs its own ip, just the server's ip needs a ptr.[10:34:09] <mitziyahu> now thats odd[10:34:22] <whatever__> :)[10:34:29] <whatever__> what is?[10:34:44] <mitziyahu> the fact that emails aren't always sent[10:35:06] <mitziyahu> and that some do arrive and some don't (on the same mail providers heh)[10:35:31] <Marquel> quick check in dns showed stars.co.il does point to an ip, but that ip does not have a ptr. if the server using that ip is the one sending mail, you need to assign a ptr for that ip.[10:35:50] <whatever__> mitziyahu, you might be looking at the problem from the wrong angle, Have you checked the outgoing log files for more details?[10:36:04] <mitziyahu> yeah, the emails are received[10:37:29] <whatever__> 1st, as Marquel referred, if stars.co.il is your outgoing then you need to get a ptr that is the best thing[10:38:14] <whatever__> 2nd, if your email is received then you might want to check with the destination. and maybe it is at the recipient's JUNK folder?[10:38:29] *** fiXXXerMet has left #postfix[10:38:32] <mitziyahu> nah it's not in the junk,. we've checked with the isps receiving[10:38:47] <mitziyahu> and stars.co.il is just the return-path/from domain[10:38:54] <mitziyahu> not the smtp server's address[10:39:43] <Marquel> did you make sure the server's address has a ptr?[10:40:07] <mitziyahu> gold.live4all.co.il[10:40:10] <mitziyahu> check for yourself :p[10:40:21] <whatever__> mitziyahu, ok, you are missing the point. if you are saying that emails are being delivered to the destination as per your logs, then you might want to contact the destination[10:40:27] <Marquel> already did so ;)[10:41:03] *** _pixmap has quit IRC[10:41:06] <mitziyahu> whatever__: yeah i know the issue is at their part, but they're lasy freaks :p and im guessing its some spam filtering[10:41:13] <mitziyahu> i just want to make our emails fail proof[10:41:30] <mitziyahu> "*are fail..."[10:42:04] <Marquel> you won't get to that point that easily. ;)[10:42:17] <mitziyahu> how so?[10:42:25] <mitziyahu> i mean fail proff spam-wise:p[10:43:26] <whatever__> mitziyahu, a good relaying restriction should be a good step[10:43:42] <Marquel> don't bother. i've seen a city's mx on a blacklist. for days. one should think there would be professionals working there, but ... you never know.[10:43:54] <mitziyahu> whatever__ relaying restriction? as in relay hosts?[10:44:09] <Marquel> no.[10:44:20] <Marquel> as in "who's allowed to send mails via this box".[10:45:07] <mitziyahu> how do i set that and what are "wanted" values?[10:45:22] <whatever__> you know, force authentication, ip restriction, all that good stuff[10:45:23] <Marquel> like the box itself (possibly a webapp), maybe a LAN (if there is one), authenticated users (use sasl or something), and - of course - all those having mail for someone who has his mailbox on your server.[10:46:40] <mitziyahu> well its an automated maillist and emails only go out from the servers themselves and they have relay hosts[10:47:33] <whatever__> mitziyahu, youre not a spammer are you ;)[10:47:33] <Marquel> there should be at least one local mailbox - postmaster. you never know what happens and that mailbox might be the only way for the mail server to tell you what went wrong.[10:49:43] <mitziyahu> i dont really follow lol:s[10:50:21] <Marquel> now...[10:50:56] <Marquel> wanting a "send-only mailserver" to be spam-proof is a good reason to believe someone wants to spam half the internet... (and maybe the other half later)[10:51:21] <mitziyahu> there are no emails leaving the smtp server other then mail lists[10:51:26] <mitziyahu> no, we are getting emails[10:51:33] <mitziyahu> but no users are sending from it[10:51:48] <mitziyahu> we have service mailboxes etc which leads to gmail boxes etc.[10:52:33] <Marquel> doesn't mean you're not a spammer ;)[10:53:26] <Marquel> besides: RFC dictates either the mail gets delivered to the user (and storing it in a junk-folder _is_ regarded as delivery, as long as the user can access the junk folder) or the sender gets a failure note.[10:53:31] <mitziyahu> hehe, matters not since if my content was spam (and not payed for) no email config would help me, would it?[10:53:41] <Marquel> yep.[10:54:04] <Marquel> you'd be on a blacklist faster than a blink of an eye and you'd never get your box removed from there.[10:54:16] <mitziyahu> well, i checked this with the ISP our servers are at since home users from that isp complained about not getting them[10:54:27] <mitziyahu> and it didn't end up in the spam box[10:54:58] <mitziyahu> those blacklists are the dumbest maintained thing i have ever seen lol[10:56:59] <Marquel> uuuuuhhhhhh.....[10:57:28] <Marquel> whatever__: just in case you know about this - is there a way to have sender based transports used?[10:59:06] *** duki has joined #postfix[11:08:08] *** amrit is now known as amrit|zzz[11:12:56] <whatever__> Marquel, hmm, do you want something to enforce some kind of policy?[11:13:36] *** rcsu has joined #postfix[11:18:37] *** theblackbox has joined #postfix[11:19:55] <mitziyahu> HAHA! moving the server had the crontab with not execute flags![11:20:11] <mitziyahu> i was baffeling with this for a month! damn misunderstanding lol[11:20:24] <whatever__> Marquel, I mean doesn't the http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html help doing what you want?[11:20:45] *** lkthomas has joined #postfix[11:20:46] <lkthomas> hey guys[11:21:16] <lkthomas> I am trying to seperate the per-user filter section with maildir box[11:21:29] <lkthomas> usually, they both stay in same server[11:21:35] <lkthomas> but I want to seperate them[11:21:52] <lkthomas> how could I use maildrop to be a middleman rather than delivery ?[11:22:32] <mitziyahu> you mean make it forward to another email address?[11:22:40] <lkthomas> hmm[11:23:01] <lkthomas> outside -> per user filter server 1 -> maildir delivery server[11:23:06] <lkthomas> outside -> per user filter server 1 -> maildir delivery server 2[11:24:18] <whatever__> lkthomas, did you read the http://www.postfix.org/MAILDROP_README.html ?[11:25:24] <lkthomas> guys, do you understand what I am trying to do ?[11:25:39] <lkthomas> you can't redelivery once you are on maildrop[11:25:46] <lkthomas> but I WANT That happen[11:26:45] <lkthomas> MTA can't deal with per-user rules[11:26:49] <lkthomas> but MDA could[11:27:02] <lkthomas> in the same time, MDA can't redelivery to MTA again[11:29:23] <lkthomas> I think this feature have been missing since day one[11:33:04] <lkthomas> with MTA, you could only do corpus training[11:42:29] <lkthomas> no one around ?[11:42:44] <adaptr> plenty[11:42:57] <adaptr> 181 people apart from us, apparently[11:43:51] *** githogori has quit IRC[11:44:32] *** ceegee has joined #postfix[11:44:38] <ceegee> hello[11:45:11] <lkthomas> seems a lot of people still using procmail[11:45:27] <ceegee> hrm[11:45:30] <adaptr> I think it's fair to say that procmail is the most used MDA on the planet[11:45:36] <ceegee> I have a problem with that[11:45:39] <lkthomas> is it ?![11:45:40] <adaptr> heh[11:45:46] <lkthomas> hmm[11:46:01] <lkthomas> procmail and maildrop can't read option from SQL[11:46:05] <adaptr> lkthomas why do you say "still" using procmail ?[11:46:15] <adaptr> what has come along to replace it, then ?[11:46:19] *** prebur has quit IRC[11:46:21] <lkthomas> isn't maildrop start to picking up ?[11:46:28] * adaptr is not aware of the next swiss army knife[11:46:29] <ceegee> I want to deliver a copy of all spammails to a special user account[11:46:37] <adaptr> procmail can do many things maildrop cannot[11:46:53] <lkthomas> really?[11:46:59] <ceegee> in main.cf I have mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail[11:47:28] <lkthomas> it have been almost 6years that no one is working on procmail anymore[11:47:41] <adaptr> lkthomas perhaps..because it's finished ? :)[11:47:42] <ceegee> and in the homedirs a .procmailrc with a forward rule[11:47:53] <lkthomas> hmm[11:48:30] <lkthomas> so can I use procmail to link up with mysql ? it looks like just shell script[11:48:47] <adaptr> what do you want mysql for ?[11:48:58] <lkthomas> each user got their own perference[11:49:11] <adaptr> local users ?[11:49:20] <lkthomas> virtual user[11:49:36] *** Zeit|awy has joined #postfix[11:49:37] <adaptr> procmail doesn't work with virtual mailboxes anyway[11:49:47] <lkthomas> se[11:49:48] <lkthomas> see[11:49:51] <lkthomas> hmm[11:49:59] <adaptr> in fact, neither does SA, since the preferences are stored in the user's home dir[11:50:09] <adaptr> unless that's what you want mysql for[11:50:33] *** ceegee has left #postfix[11:50:46] <lkthomas> I don't know how you could manage 2000domains with local user[11:51:14] <adaptr> that depends on the number of actual mailboxes[11:51:27] <adaptr> 50K mailboxes on one server is not impossible[11:51:28] <hparker> I do per user prefs with amavisd-new and allow them to make limited changes via a squirrelmail plugin[11:52:30] <lkthomas> I don't understand why no developer concern on virtual user actually[11:52:52] <hparker> mine uses virtuals, everything in sql[11:53:36] <lkthomas> I know you do[11:53:52] <lkthomas> and maildrop is pain in the ass[11:53:55] <hparker> dumps everything > 10 into a quarantine and they can get a daily/weekly email of what's there[11:54:12] <hparker> I don't use maildrop, though am going to look into it[11:54:54] <lkthomas> I am digging in MTA proxy to let me do per-user filter[11:55:09] <lkthomas> all docs I found to deal with MTA filter is corpus[11:55:12] <lkthomas> which is not something I want[11:55:32] <adaptr> hparker do you use a trained SA bayes?[11:56:16] <hparker> I autolearn at -1 and +12, and I hand train on my account.. Don't trust anyone else to hand train :P[11:56:32] <lkthomas> adaptr: obviously you don't know what's the advantage for virtual user at all[11:57:03] <lkthomas> I could use one SQL query and fix all account[11:57:05] <lkthomas> for example[11:57:10] <lkthomas> I want to disable 200domain account[11:57:20] <lkthomas> I just put one to two query[11:57:23] <adaptr> lkthomas obviously, you know everything about me[11:57:25] <adaptr> tard[11:57:55] <lkthomas> hparker: is there have any stable MTA proxy that is in production use ?[11:58:41] <hparker> I don't use any, but have heard decent things about policy-weightd or whatever it's called[11:59:03] <lkthomas> policy-weightd is not MTA proxy ?![11:59:44] <lkthomas> I am using policy-weightd for other purpose[12:00:08] <hparker> uhm... Not sure what you're asking about then... If you're talking something that answers and hands off to postifix then there's qsmtpd and assp that I know of[12:00:42] <hparker> the former should be stable, all of apache.org runs through it[12:01:27] <lkthomas> "former" ?[12:01:31] <lkthomas> what's the URL of that ?[12:01:40] <hparker> google?[12:01:46] <lkthomas> can't found[12:01:53] <lkthomas> be*[12:01:56] <hparker> I think it's an apache project, but not sure[12:04:14] <pingouin> how can i read a mail that is stuck in the mailq ?[12:04:41] <pingouin> i can see it's there with mailq command, but how can i read the mail itself ?[12:05:22] <lkthomas> pingouin: good question[12:05:29] <lkthomas> let's see if hparker got an answer[12:05:33] * hparker uses pfqueue[12:06:33] <pingouin> ok, i dont have pfqueue command, guess i got to apt-get it[12:06:36] <pingouin> thanks[12:06:55] <lkthomas> installed[12:06:58] <lkthomas> looks great :)[12:06:59] <lkthomas> thanks[12:07:17] <pingouin> allowing to delete, hold, release, or requeue messages.[12:07:25] <pingouin> sure you can read them also ?[12:07:32] <hparker> I think s[12:07:40] <hparker> hit ?[12:10:29] <hparker> lkthomas: Ok, race over... I missed the name, it's qpsmtpd.. here's an article on it http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/sysadmin/2005/09/15/qpsmtpd.html[12:15:56] <lkthomas> hparker: assp looks work but not good for adding new module on it such as another antivirus engine ..etc[12:16:22] <hparker> Never looked at it, I run everything post-queue[12:18:38] *** adam33 has joined #postfix[12:20:52] <whatever__> lkthomas, would MailScanner be something to consider or am I far away of what you are looking for?[12:21:39] <lkthomas> whatever__: I think you are VERY far away with what I am looking for[12:22:35] <hparker> yay, I can go to sleep in ~30 minutes....[12:27:10] <whatever__> lkthomas, I thought you said to do a per-user filtering and then redirect the mail again to the MTA for delivery?[12:27:47] <lkthomas> mailscanner is something so call just works[12:29:43] *** CyberCr33p has joined #postfix[12:29:49] <CyberCr33p> hello[12:30:36] <CyberCr33p> I try to make Outlook send e-mails but I get relay denied problems. I have sasl enabled. With other mail clients it works without problems.[12:30:41] <CyberCr33p> any idea how to fix it?[12:30:42] *** icewater1an is now known as icewaterman[12:32:08] <adaptr> ditch Outlook :)[12:32:28] <CyberCr33p> I don't use it but some of my customers do[12:32:55] <lkthomas> CyberCr33p: looks like your customers does not turn on "my smtp require auth"[12:33:05] <adaptr> IIRC Outlook needs some fancy options to connect "normally"[12:33:12] <CyberCr33p> I test it on my own at the moment[12:33:19] <CyberCr33p> smtp require auth is on[12:33:34] <adaptr> google for outlook postfix sasl or something, it's a well-known issue[12:33:49] <CyberCr33p> Also reject_non_fqdn_hostname doesn't work with outlook[12:34:11] <adaptr> I think you mean it works a little too well[12:34:27] <CyberCr33p> yes[12:34:42] <CyberCr33p> I get "not fully-qualified hostname"[12:35:48] <adaptr> blame outlook for that, it doesn't think it has one unless it's connected to a domain[12:36:09] *** pirho has joined #postfix[12:36:09] <CyberCr33p> I do[12:36:27] <adaptr> heh[12:39:01] <CyberCr33p> the same problem I have with my windows mobile phone[12:43:05] *** meandtheshell has joined #postfix[12:44:21] *** duki has quit IRC[12:45:43] *** lkthomas has quit IRC[12:53:11] *** blackflag has joined #postfix[12:53:22] <blackflag> Hello all :)[12:53:46] <blackflag> Im looking through the conf files to chane the logging[12:53:55] <blackflag> but was not able to find it.[12:54:00] <blackflag> Can someone hlep[12:54:26] <blackflag> I want to change on debian etch from syslog to new location[12:55:50] <hparker> logging is handled by your system logger, not postfix[12:57:42] <pingouin> isnt it /etc/syslog.conf ?[12:57:58] <blackflag> Can I not change the logging path?[12:58:06] <pingouin> isnt it /etc/syslog.conf ?[12:58:37] <hparker> :-o[12:58:49] <pingouin> man syslog.conf[12:58:59] <blackflag> hmm[12:59:01] <pingouin> or something like that ?[12:59:31] <blackflag> I want to use fail2ban and for me its not clear what logging file I have to use here[13:00:18] *** icewaterman has left #postfix[13:01:45] <blackflag> ahh , i see. It should be mail.log. Correct?[13:02:50] <whatever__> "Fail2ban scans log files like /var/log/pwdfail or /var/log/apache/error_log and bans IP that makes too many password" that means you can easily create symbolic links[13:04:40] <blackflag> cool :)[13:10:22] *** contraventor has joined #postfix[13:10:25] <contraventor> hi[13:11:00] <contraventor> how control attachment per user on postfix ?[13:11:37] <dragonheart> with a mail filter[13:12:01] <contraventor> dragonheart default on postfix ?[13:12:05] <contraventor> dragonheart ow maildrop ?[13:12:17] <dragonheart> which is a MDA[13:12:24] <contraventor> dragonheart hmmmm[13:12:45] <contraventor> dragonheart example , please, for mda with using on postfix[13:13:16] <contraventor> procmail doesn't owrk, because my users on mysql ( virtual users and domains )[13:13:25] <contraventor> owrk/work*[13:14:39] <dragonheart> you obviously know procmail better than me. i wouldn't look to postfix as a MTA's job isn't to control content[13:16:54] *** duki has joined #postfix[13:19:17] <whatever__> policyd?[13:19:22] *** idle-boy`` has quit IRC[13:19:51] *** idle-boy`` has joined #Postfix[13:23:39] *** idle-boy`` is now known as idle-boy[13:26:23] *** CyberCr33p has quit IRC[13:27:29] *** duki has quit IRC[13:27:38] *** duki has joined #postfix[13:40:31] <contraventor> whatever__ policyd work for this ?[13:44:12] *** wolfeySI has joined #postfix[13:44:21] <wolfeySI> can postfix do mynetworks on domain too or just on IP?[13:47:35] <contraventor> whatever__ ?[13:48:03] <wolfeySI> ?[13:48:23] <wolfeySI> well i want to send mail from university too[13:48:38] <wolfeySI> using eduroam*[13:49:35] <lennard> I think you want smtp auth[13:50:52] <wolfeySI> well that would be preferred i guess[13:51:35] <lennard> well, you wouldnt want to become open relay for everyone on your uni network wouldnt you :)[13:51:59] <wolfeySI> well i doubt many would find out, but then again YOU ARE RIGHT ;)[13:51:59] <adaptr> you can always disguise it as a Pen Test :)[13:52:15] <wolfeySI> right now TLS works[13:52:23] <wolfeySI> anything special for authentication?[13:53:02] <lennard> !smtpauth[13:53:03] <knoba> lennard: "smtpauth" : a feature that allows road-warriors (trusted users which are outside your network) to send mail via your mail server. The user needs to send a username and password which allows him/her to relay email. See: http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html[13:59:16] <contraventor> knoba how control attachment per user on postfix ?[14:00:10] *** blackflag has quit IRC[14:00:17] <Marquel> whatever__: sorry for the delay. still around?[14:02:08] <whatever__> hi yes i am here, sorry[14:04:03] <whatever__> man quad cpus are making a difference :)[14:04:16] <adaptr> they are ?[14:04:37] <adaptr> my taxes are still the same, so probably not that big a difference[14:05:33] <whatever__> no man, I have a total different experience with quad cores and 64 bits installations[14:05:36] <wolfeySI> hmm[14:07:43] <whatever__> dual quads give you 8 cores !! when your system is running at the load of 8 it is still OK[14:08:27] <whatever__> despite how many more threads it allows you[14:08:48] <adaptr> despite ?[14:08:57] *** prebur has joined #postfix[14:09:41] <whatever__> not despite of course there is another better word for that :) sorry[14:09:56] *** duki has quit IRC[14:11:16] <whatever__> i mean it does allow you more threads and that is a good thing :S you choose the proper words.[14:14:55] *** hparker has quit IRC[14:18:12] *** carl- has joined #postfix[14:18:46] <Marquel> whatever__: well, i'm trying to make my postfix a bit pseudonymous - so, some mail is sent via one ip (with the "real" ptr record) and some mail (chosen by sender) is sent via another ip (with a ptr to a pseudonymous domain).[14:19:13] <whatever__> yes the proper word might be "let alone" i guess that should read "let alone how many more threads it allows you" :)[14:20:16] *** Filbert has quit IRC[14:21:53] <wolfeySI> hmmm[14:21:54] <wolfeySI> Nov 18 14:21:31 synchronized postfix/smtpd[17956]: warning: SASL authentication failure: no secret in database[14:22:00] <wolfeySI> i dont quiet get this[14:27:25] *** duki has joined #postfix[14:30:59] <wolfeySI> yuppie works after blindly trying ;)[14:31:33] <wolfeySI> Received from: ... (Authenticated sender: miha at mail dot wolfey.si)[14:31:36] <wolfeySI> beauty[14:31:39] <wolfeySI> thx for support[14:32:21] <whatever__> Marquel, not sure if it is doable the way you described, maybe and just maybe if you changed that to relay through different IP based on sender domain name[14:35:42] <Marquel> whatever__: all i've seen is relay_host - which is not what i want b/c the relay host should be chosen according to recipient.[14:36:47] <wolfeySI> btw, this authentication PLAIN means no encyrption?[14:37:11] <wolfeySI> Nov 18 14:36:24 synchronized postfix/smtpd[18714]: warning: link.wolfey.si[192.168.1.1]: SASL CRAM-MD5 authentication failed: authentication failure[14:37:39] *** duki has quit IRC[14:37:49] *** duki has joined #postfix[14:37:58] <rob0> wolfeySI: The preferred means of security (for lazy folk) is to require TLS for AUTH.[14:38:19] <rob0> But indeed, a PLAIN AUTH string is decodable.[14:38:31] *** faitZ has quit IRC[14:39:06] <wolfeySI> rob0: how to require TLS for AUTH?[14:39:51] <wolfeySI> i mean i dont need extra strong encryption[14:39:54] <wolfeySI> i just want SOME encryption[14:40:47] <whatever__> Marquel, do you have multiple domains and you want each domain to go with different IP? am I close?[14:41:18] <whatever__> sender at domain1 dot tld through 1.1.1.1 and sender at domain2 dot tld through 2.2.2.2[14:41:34] <rob0> See the TLS_README.[14:43:09] <wolfeySI> where[14:43:52] <wolfeySI> ahh ok[14:44:11] <rob0> Use your local copy in preference to the one online.[14:44:40] <rob0> Things change, and the online copy takes this into account, but it can be confusing.[14:45:11] <rob0> Your local copy is 100% relevant to your own Postfix version.[14:45:18] <Marquel> whatever__: jep.[14:45:30] <Marquel> whatever__: precisely.[14:46:12] <rob0> relay according to RCPT? That's simple: transport(5), transport_maps.[14:46:17] *** UQlev has joined #postfix[14:46:50] <rob0> Relay according to sender is a hack, but doable using sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.[14:47:48] *** pingouin has quit IRC[14:48:12] <wolfeySI> Nov 18 14:36:24 synchronized postfix/smtpd[18714]: warning: link.wolfey.si[192.168.1.1]: SASL CRAM-MD5 authentication failed: authentication failure[14:48:31] <wolfeySI> this...Nov 18 14:36:24 synchronized postfix/smtpd[18714]: warning: link.wolfey.si[192.168.1.1]: SASL CRAM-MD5 authentication failed: authentication failure[14:48:36] <wolfeySI> hmm[14:48:48] <wolfeySI> okey.. why SASL failed: no secret in database[14:48:50] <wolfeySI> i dont get this[14:51:15] <rob0> Haha, I was shocked when you said it worked. :) SASL is a major hurdle for a lot of folks.[14:53:45] <wolfeySI> rob0: well it seems it uses TLS (wireshark said 'ready to start TLS').. i dont see any plaintext commands/password[14:53:58] <wolfeySI> rob0: and it surives SASL PLAIN[14:54:11] <wolfeySI> i'm not sure if i can be satisfied with this or not[14:54:25] <wolfeySI> it's my private server[14:55:25] <rob0> I use AUTH now, but for a long time I just used an out-of-band hack.[14:56:02] <rob0> I had a simple web form which updated my IP address.[14:56:17] <rob0> (I still do, it's a dynamic DNS service.)[14:56:44] <wolfeySI> i use static ip and nice dns on adsl[14:57:20] <wolfeySI> hope you understand my concern: i dont need to be immune to NSA, i just want to prevent random kid from stealing my pass[14:58:37] <wolfeySI> university wireless does use WPA enterprise, dunno how much i should rely on it[14:59:24] <whatever__> rob0, does sender_dependent_relayhost_maps work on local IP addresses?[14:59:46] *** duki has quit IRC[15:00:05] *** duki has joined #postfix[15:01:15] *** ming_zym has joined #postfix[15:11:09] <Marquel> whatever__: and another dns-question... does postfix require existence of a MX record?[15:11:50] *** oates|zzzZ has quit IRC[15:12:51] <wolfeySI> Marquel: me as non-expert would guess your name server doesnt care about mx record, but foreign spam filters on other servers might ;[15:12:56] <wolfeySI> your mail server[15:12:57] <wolfeySI> sorry[15:13:20] <Marquel> wolfeySI: doesn't matter. both systems are under my control.[15:13:22] * wolfeySI would first block any mail from server without mx record, if i knew how[15:13:46] <wolfeySI> that would remove 90% of spam i get[15:14:34] <Marquel> wolfeySI: machine A (with MX) will send mail to machine B (without MX). if machine B wants to send mail to machine A, B will use SMTP AUTH at A.[15:14:47] *** solar345 is now known as solar_ant[15:16:54] * wolfeySI has no clue[15:16:55] <wolfeySI> enjoy[15:16:56] *** wolfeySI has quit IRC[15:19:34] <whatever__> Marquel, if you have reject_unknown_hostname yes[15:20:21] <Marquel> whatever__: in this case: outbound. so the target domain does not have a MX - what will postfix do?[15:20:42] <whatever__> no that is not what i meant[15:20:47] <whatever__> i meant inbound not out[15:21:19] <Marquel> inbound is no problem. you are either authorized or blocked. my problem is with outbound.[15:22:52] <whatever__> ok Marquel do you mean what server configuration should be followed for SMTP relays? or sender domain configuration?[15:23:09] <rob0> Postfix will deliver to "A" record in absence of MX.[15:23:24] <rob0> This is not Postfix-specific, this is RFC 821.[15:23:53] <Marquel> rob0: okay, thx. i hope it'll work that way, i sometimes get "MX record not found" and mail is deferred.[15:24:12] <Marquel> whatever__: sorry, that mx-question is unrelated to the other problem ;)[15:24:24] <rob0> whatever__: What is the difference between "local IP addresses" and other? Don't answer me, I know you meant RFC 1918, but answer yourself.[15:24:54] <rob0> IOW, at the IP layer, all IP addresses are created equal.[15:25:05] <rob0> The distinction is at the human layer.[15:29:01] <whatever__> rob0, I didn't mean RFC 1918 man this is private and public IP addresses :). I meant would it work on an IP address that is on the local machine. relay based on sender to multiple addresses on the same machine[15:30:39] <rob0> It works if you're running distinct smtpd(8) instances bound on those IP addresses.[15:30:55] <rob0> This is a FAQ here, and I still don't know why.[15:31:10] <rob0> In the real world, people do not read their mail headers.[15:32:06] <rob0> You'll have to work real hard and allocate a lot of resources to make your virtual domains look non-virtual.[15:35:24] *** duki has quit IRC[15:35:40] *** duki has joined #postfix[15:42:56] *** duki has quit IRC[15:43:18] *** duki has joined #postfix[15:43:26] <whatever__> or buy an MTA that does that for you ;)[15:44:05] *** mitziyahu has quit IRC[15:45:47] <rob0> buy?[15:45:51] <whatever__> rob0, I agree as long as emails are being delivered. I am not sure why use multiple IPs and complicated setup.[15:46:43] *** faitZ has joined #postfix[15:47:18] <whatever__> there are mail servers that does support virtual hosting and dedicates an IP address for each one as available on the server or manually defined[15:49:18] <Marquel> rlo[15:49:43] <Marquel> rob0: yeah, i've seen the possibility of binding multiple smtp transports to different IPs.[15:50:35] <Marquel> and no, this has nothing to do with "make a virtual domain look non-virtual" but more with "i don't want _any_ recipient, may he be ignorant of mail headers or not" to be able to see who i am. ;)[15:50:43] *** Filbert has joined #postfix[15:52:15] <whatever__> Marquel, define who I am please? do you mean the sending server?[15:52:58] <Marquel> jep, and it's owner.[15:56:40] <rob0> Sounds like a spammer's dream.[15:57:04] <rob0> You need a botnet.[15:57:30] <rob0> The whole idea is incredibly ignorant and offensive.[15:58:15] <Marquel> rob0: just b/c i want another PTR for some sender addresses?[15:58:42] <Marquel> it's not that i couldn't be found by just make a whois for the sending IP...[15:58:49] <rob0> '"i don't want _any_ recipient, may he be ignorant of mail headers or not" to be able to see who i am. ;)'[15:59:14] <whatever__> well Marquel i wish i could understand it any other way[16:00:12] <Marquel> okay, i'll try it this way: 1.1.1.1 as you mentioned before, whatever__, points to a domain which is in public whois - stating my real address. which is fine.[16:00:56] <Marquel> 2.2.2.2 should not. i _can_ use a freemailer for the same purpose as well. and if there's no way to change ip based on sender i'll do exactly that.[16:04:19] <Marquel> besides: everyone can do that by ordering a pseudonymous domain and set up a mta to use it.[16:06:25] <Marquel> it's not that i don't want to be found, i just don't want it to be easy. and since whois databases are public, it currently is easy.[16:06:30] <rob0> No one can hide the IP address of the sending MTA. If an IP address is associated with spam/abuse, eventually it gets blacklisted.[16:06:46] <Marquel> that's fine for me.[16:07:14] <rob0> And a lot of folks have policies against accepting mail from domains which are "hidden" in whois, like Domains By Proxy.[16:07:36] <Marquel> that's also okay for me.[16:10:34] *** m_g has joined #postfix[16:10:53] <Marquel> as said: i could use a freemailer and will eventually do so.[16:11:02] <m_g> hey guys, can sub domains (e.g. sub.domain.tld) be used as virtual_alias_domains?[16:11:08] <m_g> i keep getting "user unknown in virtual table"[16:14:13] <rob0> !parent_domain_matches_subdomains[16:14:14] <knoba> rob0: "parent_domain_matches_subdomains" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: What Postfix features use "domain.tld matches sub.domain.tld" style pattern matching instead of ".domain.tld matches any subdomain". This is planned backwards compatibility: eventually, all Postfix features are expected to require explicit ".domain.tld" style patterns when you really want to match subdomains.[16:16:09] <m_g> rob0: i think i don't understand the explanation.. do i have to put it as .sub.domain.tld in virtual_alias_domains?[16:17:50] <rob0> CHECK your parent_domain_matches_subdomains. Best: turn it off, "parent_domain_matches_subdomains =".[16:18:25] <rob0> then, perhaps you'll see, your virtual_alias_domains lookup isn't doing what you thought.[16:20:01] <m_g> hm strange[16:20:10] <m_g> /etc/postfix/main.cf:parent_domain_matches_subdomains =[16:20:19] <m_g> but postconf -d | grep parent says:[16:20:24] <rob0> Oh, BTW: "user unknown in virtual table" is not the complete error.[16:20:27] <m_g> parent_domain_matches_subdomains = debug_peer_list,fast_flush_domains,mynetworks,permit_mx_backup_networks,qmqpd_authorized_clients,relay_domains,smtpd_access_maps[16:20:56] <m_g> it's not? haven't seen anyhting else in mail.log[16:21:14] <Marquel> whatever__: so you wouldn't enlighten me on my "problem"?[16:22:10] <m_g> why does postconf -d show a value different from the one i set in main.cf?[16:23:49] *** cpm has joined #postfix[16:24:39] <rob0> Because m_g didn't look at "man 1 postconf" to see what "-d" means.[16:26:02] <m_g> oh i guess it means default ;)[16:26:34] <m_g> ok right, but it's set to the correct value now but this doesn't tell me why my virtual domain isnt working?[16:27:13] <rob0> Scroll up, reread.[16:27:43] <m_g> "then, perhaps you'll see, your virtual_alias_domains lookup isn't doing what you thought." how can i see that?[16:27:53] <rob0> !postmapq[16:27:54] <knoba> rob0: "postmapq" : You can check your lookups with the postmap command. Example: if you defined "transport_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/transport.cf" you may check this mapping by running "postmap -q domain.com mysql:/etc/postfix/transport.cf" and see if it works.[16:28:49] *** hooch has quit IRC[16:28:58] <rob0> But before we proceed any further, in defense against GIGO, I should repeat that Postfix has no such error, "user unknown in virtual table".[16:29:00] *** khris has quit IRC[16:29:11] <whatever__> Marquel, I really don't have the right answer for your case[16:29:29] <rob0> Paste one such log entry here (a single line).[16:29:49] <m_g> status=bounced (User unknown in virtual alias table) from mail.log[16:30:00] <rob0> ok, then I guessed correctly.[16:30:22] <rob0> And the problem is not virtual_alias_domains, it's virtual_alias_maps.[16:30:40] <Marquel> whatever__: i thought i've read about such a feature once (sender_dependent_transport or something) with a hint it would be built into postfix at 2.x.something, but it seems i can't find that again :/[16:31:09] <rob0> postmap -q user@virtual_alias_domain <whatever your virtual_alias_maps lookup should be>[16:31:44] <rob0> !virtual_alias_maps[16:31:45] <knoba> rob0: "virtual_alias_maps" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: Optional lookup tables that alias specific mail addresses or domains to other local or remote address. The table format and lookups are documented in virtual(5).[16:32:23] <m_g> rob0: postmap -q myuser at sub dot domain.tld hash:/etc/postfix/virtual_alias prints my system user name[16:35:19] <m_g> isn't that correct?[16:41:39] * cpm hashes rob0[16:52:03] *** ming_zym has quit IRC[16:56:50] *** hooch has joined #postfix[17:01:33] <rob0> What's "postconf virtual_alias_maps"?[17:02:31] <m_g> hash:/etc/postfix/virtual_alias and that file contains only one line myuser at sub dot domain.tld mysystemuser[17:11:26] *** idle-boy has quit IRC[17:14:03] *** hemry has joined #postfix[17:17:29] *** NachXs has joined #postfix[17:17:47] *** NachXs has left #postfix[17:19:30] *** _pixmap has joined #postfix[17:25:23] *** vr is now known as vihaire[17:28:32] *** vihaire is now known as vr[17:46:51] *** guh has joined #postfix[17:47:07] <guh> hey[17:47:13] <guh> does someone uses mailman? i need some help[17:48:29] *** Bronsky_ has quit IRC[17:53:51] *** tuxnode has left #postfix[17:59:13] *** Zathraz has joined #postfix[17:59:16] <rob0> m_g: Out of ideas. The munged info presented looks quite right. Perhaps a typo? We're back in GIGOland, it seems.[17:59:33] *** follia has joined #postfix[18:00:02] <Zathraz> hi. I am migrating from exim to postfix. In a script I need an alternatieve for the command exim -bS which accepts batched smtp input from stdin[18:00:40] <Zathraz> what should I use?[18:04:15] <Zathraz> will 'sendmail -bs' do?[18:09:15] *** Bagualas has quit IRC[18:09:21] *** Bagualas has joined #postfix[18:22:52] *** khris has joined #postfix[18:25:42] *** Bronsky has joined #postfix[18:31:36] *** duki has quit IRC[18:32:04] *** duki has joined #postfix[18:37:31] *** Bagualas has quit IRC[18:37:57] <lineman60> guh whats up?[18:38:12] <guh> lineman60: hey[18:38:26] <guh> lineman60: im getting errors with virtual_maps, is it needed?[18:38:28] <lineman60> hello[18:38:42] *** Bagualas has joined #postfix[18:38:50] <lineman60> dont know[18:38:57] <lineman60> sorry[18:39:09] <guh> okay, thanks[18:39:16] <guh> lineman60: do u use mailman & postfix?[18:39:26] <lineman60> ya[18:40:11] <lineman60> but from what i understand it was just a drop in soultion[18:41:17] <lineman60> when dose postfix run the regualr expression matching[18:42:24] <lineman60> nm[18:44:30] <guh> lineman60: do i need a regexp script?[18:51:04] *** pitakill has joined #postfix[18:55:26] <rob0> virtual_maps was deprecated, Postfix 2.0, a long time ago.[18:55:48] * cpm virtualizes rob0[18:56:45] <cpm> http://www.zod2008.com/[18:59:24] *** unixcoder has quit IRC[19:00:13] * rob0 kneels before Zod[19:01:41] * cpm joins brother rob0[19:01:58] <rob0> Finally, honesty in politics.[19:02:17] <cpm> indeed[19:02:34] <cpm> I like the kids page[19:04:40] *** solar_ant has quit IRC[19:09:14] *** alys has joined #postfix[19:18:07] *** ashd has joined #postfix[19:21:59] *** cpm has quit IRC[19:25:41] *** Bagualas has quit IRC[19:26:27] *** Bagualas has joined #postfix[19:28:53] <js_> i see a lot of "MTA([127.0.0.1]:10025): 451 4.3.0 Error: queue file write error (in reply to end of DATA command" in the queue.. what do they mean?[19:29:25] <growltiger> time to run fsck[19:29:30] *** oates has joined #postfix[19:31:15] <js_> growltiger: is it safe to turn off the mta for as long as the fsck takes?[19:31:34] <growltiger> sure[19:31:54] <growltiger> your backup mx will take care of the mail[19:32:48] <growltiger> you are going to need to unmount /var anyways to run fsck[19:33:04] <rob0> It could mean a lot of things, other than possible FS damage. Information about the problem was logged.[19:34:11] *** alys has quit IRC[19:36:08] <js_> seems like the problem has something to do with amavis[19:40:50] <rob0> Sure, and your log excerpt is from amavis. You should be looking at the Postfix logs from the reinjection smtpd(8) on localhost:10025.[19:57:20] *** carl- has quit IRC[19:58:43] *** Zerberus has quit IRC[20:10:30] *** m_g has quit IRC[20:10:41] *** ashd has quit IRC[20:14:45] *** Bagualas has quit IRC[20:14:57] *** Bagualas has joined #postfix[20:24:24] *** prebur has quit IRC[20:26:38] *** unixcoder has joined #postfix[20:27:02] *** hparker has joined #postfix[20:28:57] *** thumbs has quit IRC[20:34:38] *** djwonk has quit IRC[20:45:20] *** amrit|zzz is now known as amrit|bbl[20:47:46] *** duki has quit IRC[20:48:13] *** duki has joined #postfix[20:52:35] <Zathraz> hi. I am migrating from exim to postfix. In a script I need an alternatieve for the command exim -bS which accepts batched smtp input from stdin. What should I use please? sendmail -bs ?[20:57:39] *** archvile has joined #postfix[20:59:19] *** prebur has joined #postfix[20:59:58] <adaptr> postfix attempts to be sendmail drop-in compatible, so chances are you can, yes - but man postfix[21:11:21] <archvile> hi, im having a problem with postfix not receiving any emails that i send to it, i can send and receive mail locally but other than that postfix isn't working correctly, and im unable to find anything in the logs about it failing to recieve the message. here is the log file (i snipped it a little bit) http://pastebin.com/m4dc9c0cb , and here is the postconf -n http://pastebin.com/m71883884 , any help is appreciated, thanks[21:12:31] <adaptr> archvile so you have messages in the log saying that it did receive the mail ?[21:12:41] <archvile> locally, yes[21:12:46] <adaptr> not locally[21:12:52] <archvile> from one user on the computer to another[21:13:00] <adaptr> I quote: "im unable to find anything in the logs about it failing to recieve the message"[21:13:13] <adaptr> this implies that there are successful deliveries in the log[21:13:29] <archvile> im sorry, i ment from other domains, such as gmail, etc, im unable to recieve mail from them, with no log entires[21:13:34] <adaptr> if there are *NO* messages in the log then postfix isn't *getting* them[21:13:39] <adaptr> at all[21:13:54] <adaptr> does the box have an MX record for a domain[21:14:11] <archvile> yes[21:14:54] <adaptr> is it actually *listening* on the network ?[21:15:02] <archvile> yep, ports 25, 110, and 995[21:15:20] <archvile> i turned off the firewall for testing[21:16:57] <adaptr> 995 ?[21:17:08] <adaptr> 110 is not used by postfix - for anything[21:17:19] <rob0> archvile: paste unmunged logs[21:17:22] <archvile> 110 is used for pop3 ssl[21:17:29] <adaptr> yeah, I was getting to that[21:17:38] <adaptr> archvile sure, but not by postfix, as it has nothing to do with that[21:17:51] <archvile> ok..[21:17:52] <archvile> lol[21:18:07] <archvile> rob0: what do you mean, do you want a longer log?[21:18:20] <archvile> or my domain?[21:18:29] <adaptr> actrual, untouched, log data[21:18:32] <rob0> snip.com. 86400 IN MX 10 mail.snip.com.[21:18:35] <adaptr> if you want useful help, that is[21:18:41] <archvile> sure[21:18:44] <adaptr> it's not our problem, really[21:18:49] <archvile> i never said it was[21:18:59] <archvile> im asking for help, from you, i never asked you directly[21:19:33] <adaptr> I merely indicate that hiding essential information doesn't bother me, it just won't help you[21:19:56] <archvile> i understand, but i don't know everyone in this channel[21:20:01] <rob0> It bothers me, because I don't like to waste my time.[21:20:06] <adaptr> you never will - I know perhaps 10 people[21:20:22] <archvile> ok? anyway, the only thing i snipped out was my domain, which is swflsolutions.com[21:20:42] <adaptr> and ? if you don't want to "expose" "sensitive data" - hint: it isn't - then don't, but it'll be that much harder to give useful advice[21:20:47] <rob0> swflsolutions.com. 3600 IN MX 0 smtp.swflsolutions.com.[21:20:53] <adaptr> heh[21:20:58] <adaptr> priority zero ?[21:20:59] <archvile> yes, thats nslookup[21:21:07] <archvile> should it be 10?[21:21:08] <rob0> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 26480[21:21:19] <rob0> problem solved[21:21:20] <adaptr> archvile no, it's dig :)[21:21:29] *** riderrr has joined #postfix[21:21:36] <rob0> smtp.swflsolutions.com. is NXDOMAIN[21:22:22] <archvile> lemme wiki, hold on i dunno what that is[21:22:46] <rob0> It means you have your MX pointing to a name which does not exist.[21:23:19] * hparker wonders if rob0 really exists[21:23:28] <adaptr> no, he's just a CNAME[21:23:28] * rob0 checks[21:23:44] <archvile> what would i point it to?[21:23:48] <rob0> Not even that ... I'm just a symlink.[21:23:49] <hparker> rob0: Watch it, you'll go blind![21:23:58] <adaptr> archvile to an existing FQDN[21:24:02] * rob0 gropes for the keyboard[21:24:11] <adaptr> where existing == one that actually points to a valid IP[21:24:21] <archvile> so, swflsolutions.com[21:24:24] <hparker> or fix that one[21:24:29] <rob0> s/IP/"A" record/[21:24:31] <archvile> or the my ip[21:24:53] <rob0> CNAME can resolve to an IP, but the value of MX should not be a CNAME.[21:25:02] <adaptr> rob0 noes, an existing FQDN points to a valid IP - the aforegoing IS the A record[21:25:17] <riderrr> can anyone tell me how to set up my smtp with bellsouth to authenticate my username?[21:25:33] <rob0> My point being that the hostname in MX should not be a CNAME.[21:25:58] <adaptr> I never implied that it should[21:26:03] <riderrr> my mail log: http://paste.lisp.org/display/51052[21:26:04] <adaptr> and yes, you can - I do just that :)[21:26:30] <rob0> haha I didn't say you couldn't, just that you SHOULD not. :)[21:26:40] <archvile> lol[21:26:45] <adaptr> I knows... just trying to confuse our poor OP[21:26:51] <rob0> it does go against RFC 821[21:26:58] <archvile> you guys are nuts, thanks alot dudes for pointing me in the right direction[21:27:01] <adaptr> to force him to learn SMTP and DNS muahahaha[21:27:21] <adaptr> rob0 it still goeth against 2821 ?[21:27:32] <rob0> probably[21:27:37] <adaptr> they have bin superceded, ya know[21:27:51] <adaptr> for.. aboot 5 years now[21:27:52] <adaptr> :)[21:28:08] <rob0> !sasl_readme[21:28:08] <knoba> rob0: "sasl_readme" : www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html[21:28:20] <rob0> riderrr: ^^ #client_sasl anchor[21:28:33] <rob0> or client_auth, I can't remember[21:28:44] <archvile> adaptr: i know that setting the priority to 0 is for like spam protection etc, but should the mx record be on a specific priority?[21:28:59] <hparker> It is? How?[21:29:01] <riderrr> do i place this in a file somewhere?[21:29:12] <rob0> A single MX of any priority is fine.[21:29:27] <archvile> rob0: may i ask how you got ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 26480 ?[21:29:28] <adaptr> archvile that's not so, wherever you read that[21:29:41] <rob0> riderrr: it is a README which is what you should do to it. READ.[21:29:59] <adaptr> rob0 Googling gets me here: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2007-April/056542.html <-- according to Stephen, 2821 APPEARS to allow CNAMES[21:30:02] <riderrr> ty[21:30:19] <adaptr> but it's muddy, even to SMTP archs[21:30:42] <hparker> Just cuz you can pop a cop in the jaw doesn't mean you should[21:31:01] <rob0> You should if you are sure you can get away with it. ;)[21:31:11] <hparker> Well, ok ;)[21:31:12] <adaptr> well, yeah - just because you can type doesn't mean you should be on IRC :)[21:31:17] <adaptr> same false analogy[21:31:42] <rob0> Ic ant' typ.e[21:31:45] <hparker> You always could, just wasn't recommended as a best practice[21:32:04] <adaptr> heh cops come with best practices now ?[21:32:39] <adaptr> RFC 1313: general solutions to the stash problem - how-to avoid detection AND get high![21:34:13] <archvile> rob0: what program did you use to get the result NXDOMAIN?[21:34:29] <adaptr> dig[21:34:39] <adaptr> or nslookup, but dig is about 100 times better[21:35:04] <riderrr> rob0: ok i added the line and reloaded but the address is still timing out?[21:35:13] <archvile> adaptr: is that a linux app?[21:35:29] <rob0> dig, but I had a typo. It's not NXDOMAIN, it points to a CNAME which happens to be:[21:35:30] <adaptr> archvile no, it's a *NIX program, part of the bind-utilities[21:35:39] <rob0> smtp.swflsolutions.com. 3600 IN CNAME smtp.swflsolutions.com.[21:35:48] <adaptr> rob0 neither, it just returns an empty A record[21:35:53] <rob0> Obviously that won't resolve.[21:36:10] <adaptr> damn, I see[21:36:14] <adaptr> must be going blind as well![21:36:21] <adaptr> it's this channel[21:36:24] <rob0> adaptr, you should be ashamed.[21:36:32] <rob0> What would your mother say?[21:36:43] <archvile> adaptr: seems to be working now[21:36:46] <archvile> i think[21:36:55] <archvile> atleast it gave me alot more to work with, thanks alot dudes[21:36:59] <adaptr> rob0 she'd say: I have no clue what you're saying[21:37:56] <rob0> rob0: She'd roll over in her grave. adaptr: But she's stil alive! rob0: This'll kill her.[21:38:05] <adaptr> feh[21:38:13] <riderrr> rob0: please see http://paste.lisp.org/display/51052#1[21:38:19] <rob0> Ty, ty, I'll be performing here all week.[21:38:30] * hparker turns off the mic[21:38:49] <hparker> The return of the silent comedian![21:39:03] <rob0>[21:39:11] <rob0>[21:39:22] <riderrr> rob0: should I go through the sudo dpkg-reconfigure postfix again?[21:39:51] * rob0 plugs in a mic[21:40:06] <rob0> riderrr: put the name of your relayhost in [][21:40:15] <rob0> relayhost = [whatever][21:40:29] <riderrr> how do i found out what that name is?[21:40:46] <adaptr> whatever the name or IP of the box you wish to send to[21:40:58] <adaptr> if you don't know that, nobody else will[21:41:36] <rob0> !basic[21:41:36] <knoba> rob0: "basic" : http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html : a good starting place for Postfix beginners, many common questions are answered here.[21:41:52] <rob0> !rob0[21:41:52] <knoba> rob0: "rob0" : a bot that reacts to newly joined users with reciting the !basic factoid :)[21:42:05] * rob0 unplugs the mic again[21:47:58] *** hemry has quit IRC[21:48:21] *** adam33 has quit IRC[21:51:21] *** z3ndrag0n has quit IRC[21:56:06] *** ovd has quit IRC[21:57:24] *** growltiger_ has joined #postfix[21:57:25] *** growltiger has quit IRC[21:57:32] *** guh has quit IRC[22:00:42] *** riderrr has quit IRC[22:00:59] *** adam33 has joined #postfix[22:03:54] *** djs_2_6 has quit IRC[22:04:23] *** meandtheshell has quit IRC[22:07:43] *** archvile has quit IRC[22:08:16] *** thumbs has joined #postfix[22:10:13] *** UQlev has quit IRC[22:10:21] <follia> hi, is there a way to run postfix as MTA? hee hee[22:11:33] <evadave> Indeed, "the Postfix MTA" is just a ruse. In reality it is a web-server.[22:12:29] <follia> exactly, a lot of ppl fall for this[22:30:39] *** etaylor has joined #postfix[22:41:53] *** atilaX has joined #postfix[22:46:47] *** diveli has joined #postfix[22:49:45] *** havvg has joined #postfix[22:55:50] *** rcsu has quit IRC[22:57:09] *** mark-use has joined #postfix[23:00:12] *** unixcoder has quit IRC[23:19:44] *** Marquel has quit IRC[23:19:51] *** follia has quit IRC[23:21:33] *** adam33 has quit IRC[23:28:22] *** Internat has quit IRC[23:29:03] *** j_s has quit IRC[23:36:34] *** mark-use has quit IRC[23:50:04] *** GoGi has quit IRC[23:52:00] <js_> i have a lot of "mail transport unavailable" on my queue, what should i do about those?[23:55:16] *** Internat has joined #postfix