May 15, 2011 
< | 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 | 31 | >
May 15, 2011 [00:18:01] *** hybridpollo has joined #postfix[00:18:42] <hybridpollo> Hey guys,sorry to bug… Let's say I have a list of domains under relay_domains… would you say the relay_host parameter is the one that needs to be used if there is any other domains not in the relay_domains table ?[00:18:58] <adaptr> !relay_host[00:18:58] <knoba> adaptr: Error: "relay_host" is not a valid command.[00:19:03] <adaptr> !relay_domains[00:19:03] <knoba> adaptr: "relay_domains" : A configuration parameter in the main.cf: What destination domains (and subdomains thereof) this system will receive mail for and will relay mail to. Subdomain matching is controlled with the parent_domain_matches_subdomains parameter. See also !address_classes[00:19:19] <adaptr> hybridpollo: to drive the point home: these parameters are not related.[00:19:57] <hybridpollo> thank you sir ![00:20:21] <hybridpollo> !relayhost[00:20:21] <knoba> hybridpollo: "relayhost" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: The default host to send non-local mail to when no entry is matched in the optional transport(5) table. When no relayhost is given, mail is routed directly to the destination. If your relay host requires authentication see the !saslclient channel factoid.[00:24:01] <hybridpollo> !address_classes[00:24:01] <knoba> hybridpollo: "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.[00:24:22] <cite> Hm. Just got spam mail number 99 and 100 over IPv6.[00:24:38] <cite> Guess that's a reason to celebrate, kind of.[00:25:26] <adaptr> and legit emails have yet to arrive ?[00:25:31] <adaptr> wher eth FCUK have you been![00:25:44] <adaptr> I've been reduced to using christian roessner's packages now[00:25:57] <cite> He does a good job with them.[00:26:09] <cite> They are, in fact, more suited to Ubuntu than mine were.[00:26:27] <adaptr> how so ?[00:27:17] <cite> Ubuntu has some "triggers" in their packages which are not present in Debian packages. For example, a Postfix package designed for Ubuntu can include a trigger that tells the Ubuntu FireWall to open port 25 one it gets installed.[00:27:53] <cite> s/one it/once it/[00:28:50] <adaptr> a trigger to selfdestruct ubuntu would be better[00:29:14] <cite> Can't really comment on that, don't use it.[00:30:01] <cite> But hey, I built Postfix 2.8.3 packages for CentOS - and they support Debian's dynamicmaps.cf :-)[00:30:21] <cite> You may now call me a fscking genius, if you like.[00:30:45] <adaptr> you fscking evil overlord[00:32:50] *** MondoBizarro has quit IRC[00:34:54] <cite> adaptr: As for your question - I _do_ receive legit mails via IPv6.[00:35:26] *** ced117 has quit IRC[00:35:32] <adaptr> of course, I was merely riling you[00:35:34] <cite> The funnies thing is - I sometimes order beer at a very small, local brewery not far from Munich (Bavaria, Germany) - and they send order confirmations and so on via IPv6.[00:36:17] <adaptr> either that's a very drunk enthousiast supporter, or they have no idea they are[00:36:31] <cite> But ATM, you are more or less helpless when it comes to IPv6 spam. I mean, sure, you still got content analysis and so on, but not having RBLs is a huge setback.[00:38:28] <cite> By the waym why does it say "know your unix basics" in the /topic? That's not a realistic expectation, 90% of the mailing list posters don't even know their Unix basics.[00:39:21] <cite> They are more the "cat cat.txt | grep foo | grep -v bar | head -n10 | tail -n1" crowd.[00:42:51] <hybridpollo> !relay_recipient_maps[00:42:51] <knoba> hybridpollo: "relay_recipient_maps" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: Optional lookup tables with all valid addresses in the domains that match $relay_domains. Specify @domain as a wild-card for domains that do not have a valid recipient list.[00:45:59] <hybridpollo> !relayhost[00:45:59] <knoba> hybridpollo: "relayhost" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: The default host to send non-local mail to when no entry is matched in the optional transport(5) table. When no relayhost is given, mail is routed directly to the destination. If your relay host requires authentication see the !saslclient channel factoid.[00:53:19] *** dall has joined #postfix[00:53:23] <dall> hello everybody[00:54:27] <dall> guys, i just installed an SSL certificate, after reload postfix i get "Relay access error", if i remove the rows about TLS all works good (in/out)[00:54:49] <dall> i see 250-STARTTLS but not AUTH LOGIN (After EHLO)[00:54:57] <dall> What could it be?[00:56:21] <Section1> i think you want sasl and not ssl[00:56:30] <Section1> or tls[00:57:17] *** e-anima has quit IRC[00:57:41] <dall> Section1, i'm using sasl[00:57:48] <dall> yes, TLS[00:58:31] <Section1> sasl != TLS[00:58:40] <dall> yes i know[00:58:43] <Section1> ok[00:58:43] <dall> i have SASL[00:58:49] <dall> and sals works good...[00:59:12] <standon> sals![00:59:14] <dall> but i would "encrypt" the communication so i have installed a certificate (TLS)[00:59:22] <Section1> in port 25?[00:59:35] <dall> y[01:00:05] <Section1> use submission[01:00:14] <dall> ???[01:00:34] <dall> telnet myip 25 and i see 250-STARTTLS after EHLO[01:01:42] <Section1> yes its waiting for the encryption[01:01:46] *** weta has joined #postfix[01:01:59] <dall> yes but there is a problem...because[01:02:14] <dall> if i DONT use TLS i CAN send messages[01:02:33] <dall> NOW wilt tls i CANT send message because i get RELAY ACCESS DENIED[01:02:40] <dall> *RELAY ACCESS ERROR[01:04:05] <Section1> hum i never i configure tls but i think the good way to do this is using a submission port[01:04:15] <Section1> wait for the experts opinion[01:04:33] <roe> what's the question?[01:04:59] <dall> roe, i have configured postfix....it send emails correctly[01:05:11] <dall> roe, but now i just set TLS and i get RELAY ACCESS ERROR[01:05:21] *** mandragor has joined #postfix[01:05:21] *** weedar has quit IRC[01:05:36] <roe> did you pastebin the pertinent details?[01:05:37] <dall> only added TLS and i can't send email for this error[01:05:43] <dall> no one moment...[01:06:03] *** matadore has quit IRC[01:08:24] <dall> roe, http://nopaste.info/c92615a568_nl.html[01:08:48] <roe> and the logs?[01:09:03] <dall> roe, as I told you, WITHOUT tls all works good....[01:09:06] <dall> one moment i check[01:09:59] <dall> no other error, only this "Relay access denied;" when i was trying to send the email[01:12:25] <jumperboy> you have smtpd_tls_auth_only = yes[01:12:37] <jumperboy> did you configure your email client accordingly?[01:13:09] <jumperboy> !smtpd_tls_auth_only[01:13:09] <knoba> jumperboy: "smtpd_tls_auth_only" : When TLS encryption is optional in the Postfix SMTP server, do not announce or accept SASL authentication over unencrypted connections.[01:13:37] <dall> ops[01:13:39] <dall> hmmmm[01:13:45] <dall> do you refer to thunderbird[01:13:46] <dall> no[01:13:56] <dall> i left the old configuration[01:14:01] <jumperboy> right, tell it to use tls[01:14:05] <roe> pastebin logs?[01:14:06] <jumperboy> on port 25[01:14:28] <roe> dall, still waiting on the logs[01:14:56] <dall> roe, as i told you there aren't logs[01:15:05] <dall> only the row with this relay access error[01:15:13] <dall> jumperboy, i try[01:15:22] <roe> dall, no. what you said is that the only 'error' *you* see is Relay Access Denied[01:15:26] <jumperboy> you can't relay without tls, that's how you've configured postfix[01:15:37] <roe> but the logs show a lot more[01:15:53] <jumperboy> and that's good, just reconfigure your client and try again[01:16:09] <dall> ok i'm doing it[01:16:14] <dall> roe i'm seeing the logs[01:16:22] <roe> is there a connection line?[01:16:27] <roe> is there an authentication line[01:16:34] <roe> is there is disconnect line?[01:16:52] <roe> why is getting this information like pulling teeth[01:17:02] <dall> May 15 01:13:16 vmi2495 postfix/smtpd[25207]: connect from hostxxx-xxx-dynamic.xxx-xxx-r.retail.telecomitalia.it[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx][01:17:35] <dall> after this row...relay access error[01:17:39] <roe> ok[01:17:51] <roe> so look at your smtpd_recipient_restrictions[01:17:54] <jumperboy> yeah, the next line should say setting up TLS connection from...[01:18:21] <jumperboy> his client isn't using tls, which his config requires[01:18:28] <roe> what do those restrictions mean to you?[01:19:01] <dall> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated, reject_unauth_destination, permit_mynetworks <--- these?[01:19:17] <roe> yes[01:19:35] <dall> only sasl authenticated users can send...[01:19:56] <dall> reject domain doesn't manage from this server....[01:20:05] <dall> and my networks could send[01:20:30] <roe> when you are sending, are you authenticating?[01:20:58] <roe> or are you sending from the network 10.0.0.1-254?[01:20:59] <dall> no[01:21:04] <dall> no no[01:21:05] <dall> from my pc[01:21:17] <roe> so what makes you think you should be able to send email using this server?[01:22:16] <dall> no roe my question is....why i can send email without tls and now i cant'....... but now i understand the problem....without TLS the client doesn't do the authentication[01:22:32] <jumperboy> dall: YOU WIN![01:22:53] <dall> :)[01:22:57] <dall> thank you guys![01:23:06] <dall> just SENT!!!!!!!!![01:23:07] <dall> :d[01:23:12] <dall> eheh good! thank you again[01:23:29] <dall> 01:25 AM i'm not 100%[01:23:30] <dall> :D[01:23:33] <jumperboy> nice, now you might want to set up submission (port 587) next[01:23:53] <roe> yes, don't auth on 25[01:23:56] <roe> !submission[01:23:56] <knoba> roe: "submission" : Port 587 is submission, for user submission of mail, NOT suitable for mail exchange. See the commented example in master.cf. also see !msa, and rfc 2476 and 4409. Also read http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Port25rec0511.pdf[01:24:41] <jumperboy> note that it's sometimes as simple as uncommenting the submission section in master.cf (depending on your distro)[01:24:59] <jumperboy> but you should still understand the concepts used in the config[01:25:17] <dall> jumperboy, only to understand why i have to do it..... Why 25 is not good for auth ?[01:26:35] <jumperboy> well, the main reason is to bypass firewalls and impose more precise restrictions[01:26:39] <roe> 25 is meant for server-server communication and it is often blocked by ISPs. If you want to reliably send email from a client using that server, you need to use a port other than 25 (587 is the standard port to do so)[01:27:52] <dall> ah ok[01:27:55] <jumperboy> you can still allow submission on port 25, depending on your policy or user needs, but it's not required as much these days (used to need it for legacy clients)[01:28:23] <dall> no no, ok i understand i have to do it...[01:28:40] <dall> btw guys......[01:28:48] <jumperboy> and of course, webmail is sometimes a good last resort for users that can't use port 587 either[01:29:14] <roe> I'm not aware of any client that the port is not configurable[01:29:18] <dall> i just received the email i sent :-) (in spam :/) but i have received it -----> (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) :-P[01:29:47] <dall> (No client certificate requested)[01:29:50] <roe> some of the older clients will have trouble with authentication[01:29:59] <dall> :) so TLS worked good[01:30:06] <jumperboy> you mean it was classified as spam by the destination? why?[01:30:18] <dall> yes i sent it to gmail.com[01:30:23] <dall> and i see it on spam folder[01:30:52] <jumperboy> that might not be a good sign, depends on the reason...[01:30:56] <dall> its strange...sometimes i receive it correctly (this afternoon) and sometimes not[01:31:02] *** rcsu has quit IRC[01:31:11] <jumperboy> have you checked your ip address against any RBLs?[01:31:18] <dall> the DNS are configured correctly[01:31:27] <dall> is a dedicated ip address[01:31:29] <roe> !gmail[01:31:29] <knoba> roe: "gmail" : Google Mail issues?: http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=81126[01:31:39] *** Zeit|awy has quit IRC[01:31:46] <jumperboy> static ip addresses still send spam[01:31:49] <dall> i start today with this MX so it is new...i think is for that reason[01:32:09] <dall> jumperboy, i can send you my ip and domain[01:32:11] <dall> no problem for me[01:32:18] <jumperboy> anytime i get new IPs i check them against RBLs and request new ones if they're dirty[01:32:19] <dall> can i post here[01:32:39] <dall> the domain is: mail.mxadmin.net[01:32:54] <jumperboy> what's the email domain?[01:33:00] <jumperboy> the domain in the email address?[01:33:04] <dall> 93.104.211.190[01:33:09] <dall> mxadmin.net[01:33:36] <dall> but i set MX record to mxadmin.net (pointing to mail.mxadmin.net)[01:34:18] <dall> i also set SPF record[01:34:25] <dall> SPF in a TXT record[01:34:49] <dall> and if you do a reverse you could is mail.mxadmin.net for that ip.[01:35:41] <jumperboy> well, you're not in spamhaus, which is good, but you're in barracuda for 'poor reputation' which might just mean you're new[01:36:54] <dall> yes very new....today i have sent the first few emails[01:37:15] <jumperboy> that might be enough to mark you as spam initially[01:37:31] <dall> yes i think the same too[01:37:41] <jimpop> dall: there is no SPF record on the domain[01:37:43] <jumperboy> gmail probably hasn't seen your domain enough before to give you a good reputation[01:37:52] <dall> yes[01:37:54] *** loddafnir has quit IRC[01:37:57] <dall> jimpop, no?[01:38:04] <jimpop> dall: there is no SPF record on the domain[01:38:07] <dall> mail.mxadmin.net has the SPF[01:38:15] <jimpop> dall: there is no SPF record on the domain[01:38:35] <jimpop> i can say it again if you want[01:38:36] <jumperboy> yeah, the spf record is for the domain, not the mx[01:38:46] * jumperboy doesn't use spf[01:38:47] <dall> http://network-tools.com/default.asp?prog=dnsrec&host=mail.mxadmin.net[01:38:59] <jimpop> dall: there is no SPF record on the domain[01:39:28] <dall> do no repeat..only to understand do i have not to set SPF for mail.mxamdin.net ?[01:39:41] <jumperboy> dall: run this command: dig txt mail.mxadmin.net[01:39:41] <dall> do i have to set SPF for each domain i want to manage ?[01:39:51] <jumperboy> then: dig txt mxadmin.net[01:40:06] <jumperboy> you want spf on mxadmin.net, not mail.mxadmin.net[01:40:14] <dall> ops[01:40:16] <dall> my mistake[01:40:28] <dall> so if i have another domain like example.com[01:40:35] <dall> i have to add the SPF In that domain[01:40:37] <dall> not the MX[01:40:44] <jumperboy> right[01:41:00] <jumperboy> but i've never used spf, and it's never been a problem[01:41:02] <jumperboy> your call[01:41:02] <dall> my mistake.....thanks jumperboy and jimpop[01:41:09] *** friartuck has joined #postfix[01:41:31] <dall> i snot good? i know hotmail spam filter are very high and they advice to use SPF[01:41:38] <dall> *I KNOW[01:41:51] <jumperboy> just sayin'[01:42:03] <dall> k[01:42:16] <dall> btw...i change the SPF to mxadmin.net[01:42:19] <dall> but is correct ?[01:42:23] <dall> is it correct?[01:42:25] <jumperboy> you can google the endless discussions of the pros and cons, no need to rehash here[01:43:01] <dall> i don't think there are cons...maybe could be ignored...but "cons" i dont think[01:43:43] <dall> jumperboy, is it correct "v=spf1 a mx ip4:93.104.211.190 ~all" ? (obviously on mxadmin.net)[01:43:54] <jumperboy> new record hasn't propagated yet[01:44:09] <jumperboy> beats me, as i said, i don't use spf[01:44:25] <jumperboy> IT LIES!!![01:44:27] <dall> no no i don't have set it[01:44:31] <jumperboy> :)[01:44:55] <dall> :)[01:45:02] <dall> ok i remove it[01:45:24] <dall> jumperboy, if i cannot send to hotmail i will use your smpt :D[01:45:28] <dall> smtp[01:45:33] <dall> ahah[01:46:16] <dall> just remove!!![01:49:04] <dall> jumperboy, so if i don't use SPF there is another "method" to prevent spam OR to improve the reputation ?[01:49:55] <jumperboy> who is your user base?[01:50:34] <jumperboy> don't send spam and you won't earn a bad reputation[01:50:53] <jumperboy> dkim's an option, too[01:51:00] * jumperboy doesn't use dkim, either[01:51:52] <dall> no no is not a problem because i use the account[01:52:04] <dall> so there aren't spammer in my system (At the moment) :)[01:52:16] <jumperboy> then all you have to do is secure your system so it can't be abused[01:52:32] <dall> ok[01:52:43] <dall> so now the last thing is 587 port[01:52:50] <jimpop> dall, that IP address is listed in sorbs, you won't get far with it[01:53:03] *** xeodox has quit IRC[01:53:04] <dall> sorbs ?[01:53:25] <jumperboy> oh, right. i forgot to mention that, but i couldn't tell why?[01:53:33] <jumperboy> jimpop: did you find the reason for listing?[01:53:40] <dall> grrr why??[01:53:43] <dall> :([01:54:08] <jimpop> the reasons are listed quite clearly[01:54:18] <jumperboy> return code is 127.0.0.6[01:55:25] <jimpop> 9 spams from that IP to admin maintained accounts at sorbs, last occurred 12-Apr-2010[01:55:41] <dall> ?? guys i don't understand....why ??[01:55:44][01:55:45] <dall> OMG[01:55:56] <jumperboy> you got a stinky ip[01:56:02] <jimpop> dall: you will have to follow the sorbs delisting proceedure (www.dnsbl.nl.sorbs.net) to get it delisted[01:56:09] <jumperboy> did you get it recently?[01:56:18] <jumperboy> demand a new one![01:56:42] <dall> yes recently[01:56:55] <dall> i get other two ip[01:57:00] <dall> one moment i give you[01:57:10] <jumperboy> i've never had any problems getting new ip addresses if one is dirty[01:57:32] <jumperboy> providers usually understand[01:57:36] <jimpop> dall: since the last issue with that IP is over 1 year ago, it might just be worth asking sorbs to delist it[01:57:42] <dall> yes but they actived it for a webserver...[01:57:59] <dall> ok[01:58:11] <dall> i can do the request of delisting[01:58:13] <jumperboy> i've actually encountered RBLs that never delist, though. big hassle if you have to deal with them[01:58:36] <dall> jimpop, do you think is better to choose another ip ?[01:58:39] <dall> i have 93.104.210.116[01:58:46] <dall> and[01:58:47] <jumperboy> but check your other IPs to see if they're clean[01:58:50] <dall> 93.104.209.201[01:58:56] <dall> these other two IP.[01:59:10] <dall> (i'm tring but i always get invalid code)[01:59:28] * jumperboy misses openrbl.org[02:00:00] <dall> is there a tool that check an IP on these SPAM list ?[02:00:23] <jimpop> dall: try robtex.com[02:00:36] <jimpop> put in an IP, then look at the blacklists tab[02:02:57] <dall> ok[02:03:01] <dall> i check all the IP i have :)[02:03:56] <dall> jimpop, 93.104.209.201 seeems clean[02:04:51] <dall> hey guys....are you not SPAM list ADMIN......and add my ip there no? :D[02:04:52] <dall> ahahah[02:06:24] <jimpop> ;-)[02:07:58] <dall> amazing!!!! i have 3 IPs and i choose the worst!!!!!!![02:08:18] <jumperboy> happens[02:08:31] <jumperboy> but now you're wiser[02:09:12] <dall> yes[02:09:19] <dall> i'm changing all[02:09:24] <dall> DNS rverse[02:09:25] <dall> ecc ecc[02:10:01] <dall> sorbs is one of the most important spam list ?[02:10:14] <jumperboy> spamhaus is the most important[02:10:35] <jumperboy> but i think some people still subscribe to sorbs[02:10:52] <jimpop> spamassassin uses many, including sorbs[02:11:15] <jimpop> and there is know way to know what gmail, hotmail, etc use[02:11:42] <jimpop> but, since sorbs has a nice flashy website, i can only assume they are making a lot of $$ from someone......[02:11:50] <rob0> I use SORBS in scoring with postscreen.[02:12:07] <rob0> but, I only give them one point, 3 required.[02:12:20] <jumperboy> yeah, only a few are commonly used for outright rejection, like spamhaus[02:12:34] <rob0> Postscreen is doing an awesome job with that.[02:12:51] <jumperboy> rob0: liking postscreen? i haven't checked it out yet[02:13:09] <dall> spammassassin......i forgot to install it![02:13:18] <rob0> I give BRBL and SEM 2 points each, thinking of promoting them to 3.[02:13:48] <rob0> and I check dnswl.org and SWL too.[02:16:24] <dall> this robtex.com is very good![02:16:32] <dall> there are a lot of spam list[02:17:33] <jumperboy> dall: and those are just public ones[02:18:18] <dall> jumperboy, are there any other control i can do for my IP ?[02:18:26] <dall> *controls[02:19:09] <jumperboy> open relay test, but it looks like you've covered that[02:19:42] <jumperboy> are you using all the ip addresses on the same box?[02:20:55] <jumperboy> if so, be sure to set smtp_bind_address, so outgoing connections originate from good ip[02:21:03] <jumperboy> !smtp_bind_address[02:21:03] <knoba> jumperboy: "smtp_bind_address" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: An optional numerical network address that the SMTP client should bind to when making a connection.[02:21:25] <dall> yes yes, it's important[02:21:27] <dall> i already use it[02:21:40] <dall> http://nopaste.info/c92615a568_nl.html <----[02:21:50] <jumperboy> without that setting, it might use any ip on the interface[02:21:58] <dall> i only use ONE Ip, for receiving and sending[02:21:59] <dall> yes[02:26:06] <jumperboy> why /dev/urandom? why not /dev/random?[02:26:54] <dall> i have urandom and random[02:26:58] <jumperboy> ha, i'm using it too[02:27:02] <dall> :D[02:27:06] <jumperboy> wonder why[02:27:11] <dall> OMG 2:28 AM[02:27:13] <jumperboy> it's the default[02:27:15] <dall> yes i really do ot know :)[02:27:18] <dall> yes[02:27:28] <dall> but i don't know what it mean i have to check the configuration[02:27:33] <dall> *documentation[02:28:04] <jumperboy> get submission set up and it looks like your outgoing config is good[02:28:34] <dall> yes tomorrow it will be the first..[02:28:45] <dall> now here 2:30 am[02:28:49] <dall> where ar eyou from ?[02:30:17] <jumperboy> usa[02:30:48] <jumperboy> it's only 8:30 pm. time for mls soccer![02:31:07] <dall> :)[02:31:09] <dall> i go[02:31:13] <dall> thank you very much[02:31:19] <dall> thank you all of you[02:32:20] <dall> if i know something about postfix is your merit[02:32:23] <dall> :)[02:32:27] <dall> goodbye, see you soon[02:32:38] *** dall has quit IRC[02:34:51] *** wdp__ has quit IRC[02:37:49] *** n0sq has quit IRC[02:39:13] *** wdp_ has quit IRC[02:39:51] *** n0sq has joined #postfix[03:03:28] *** krzie has quit IRC[03:06:15] *** master_of_master has quit IRC[03:06:57] *** geek_cl has quit IRC[03:10:14] *** master_of_master has joined #postfix[03:14:23] <hybridpollo> have a good evening all, thanks for the help earlier.[03:14:50] *** hybridpollo has left #postfix[03:31:40] *** mu574n9 has quit IRC[03:33:23] *** mu574n9 has joined #postfix[03:52:26] *** kuhkatz has quit IRC[04:15:53] *** carloimperia has joined #postfix[04:28:51] *** carloimperia has quit IRC[04:40:27] *** mu574n9 has quit IRC[05:12:51] *** gimpy2938 has quit IRC[05:14:47] *** shoonya has joined #postfix[05:27:31] *** mandragor has quit IRC[06:05:48] *** cytrinox_ has joined #postfix[06:07:50] *** Timzzzz is now known as Timmooo[06:08:43] *** cytrinox has quit IRC[06:08:43] *** cytrinox_ is now known as cytrinox[06:11:53] *** TomHome has joined #postfix[06:17:06] *** fahadsadah has quit IRC[06:27:36] *** fahadsadah has joined #postfix[06:30:49] *** mlsmith9999 has joined #postfix[06:58:17] *** Hyphenex has quit IRC[07:17:34] *** shoonya has quit IRC[07:26:31] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[07:27:14] *** krzie has joined #postfix[07:27:15] *** krzie has joined #postfix[07:29:53] *** Timmooo is now known as Tim|Away[07:30:54] *** xeodox has quit IRC[07:35:29] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[07:37:58] *** xeodox has quit IRC[07:41:14] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[07:48:11] *** Penderecki has quit IRC[07:48:16] *** Penderecki has joined #postfix[07:52:56] *** xeodox has quit IRC[08:06:19] *** Alagar has joined #postfix[08:26:33] *** Tim|Away is now known as Timmooo[08:41:45] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[09:01:10] *** Zeit|awy has joined #postfix[09:02:41] *** e-jones has joined #postfix[09:15:49] *** Tykling has quit IRC[09:19:37] *** Tykling has joined #postfix[09:24:46] *** Tykling has quit IRC[09:28:36] *** Tykling has joined #postfix[09:29:01] *** Tykling has quit IRC[09:29:36] *** Tykling has joined #postfix[09:32:24] *** gerhard7 has joined #postfix[09:57:24] *** MondoBizarro has joined #postfix[09:57:55] *** loddafnir has joined #postfix[09:58:10] *** ImpatientSpoon has joined #postfix[10:06:49] *** Matic`Makovec has joined #postfix[10:06:56] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[10:07:21] *** ek_ is now known as ek[10:09:04] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[10:09:32] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[10:09:48] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[10:10:12] *** ced117 has joined #postfix[10:10:12] *** ced117 has joined #postfix[10:11:25] *** roentgen has joined #postfix[10:29:43] *** Timmooo is now known as Tim|Movie[10:44:45] *** rcsu has joined #postfix[10:45:37] *** wdp has joined #postfix[11:09:42] *** carloimperia has joined #postfix[11:29:34] *** ced117 has quit IRC[11:34:40] *** brancaleone has joined #postfix[11:37:00] *** n0sq has quit IRC[11:37:13] *** dall has joined #postfix[11:37:18] <dall> hello everybody! :)[11:39:14] *** Internat has quit IRC[11:39:26] <dall> i have set up TLS with a signed (authority) certificate.... on the log i see the "connect" then "setting up TLS connection" then "Anonymous TLS connection established"[11:39:34] *** Internat has joined #postfix[11:40:00] <dall> what means "anonymous" on the last message ?[11:41:54] *** ced117 has joined #postfix[11:41:54] *** ced117 has joined #postfix[11:42:28] <dall> ops...find the solution http://www.davekb.com/browse_computer_tips:postfix_anonymous_tls_connection_established_from:txt[11:42:29] <dall> :)[11:44:02] *** xeodox has quit IRC[11:51:03] *** n0sq has joined #postfix[12:00:46] *** e-anima has joined #postfix[12:09:45] *** overrider has joined #postfix[12:10:00] *** jfried has joined #postfix[12:13:20] <overrider> Is there a way to blacklist / reject all mail, except for a list of mail addresses (user1 at mydomain dot com,user2@mydomain.com,user3@mydomain.com)? Eg a default deny all and then whitelist what i need. All Docs i find obviously do the exact opposite.[12:14:20] <adaptr> what do you think the difference is ?[12:17:27] <overrider> i think by blacklisting all mail except those from or to a certain set of e-mail addresses i can prevent a group of people sending or receiving mail to or from anywhere except amongst themselves[12:18:07] <overrider> If that makes sense. Is it possible to do, somehow?[12:22:23] <Habbie> sure, just have a wildcard DENY in your access file[12:23:01] <Aprogas> By default Postfix rejects mail to users that don't exist.[12:23:48] <Aprogas> Sender and recipient addresses are easily spoofed though, so it's not a very solid security measure.[12:24:47] <Aprogas> !tell overrider access[12:24:47] <knoba> overrider: "access" : http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html : An overview of access(5) controls in the Postfix smtpd(8) SMTP server.[12:25:36] *** Tim|Movie is now known as Timzzzz[12:26:42] *** carloimperia has quit IRC[12:27:01] <overrider> aright thanks for the infos[12:27:21] <overrider> bah keyboard sticky[12:38:55] *** kuhkatz has joined #postfix[12:39:30] *** MondoBizarro has quit IRC[12:40:04] *** MondoBizarro has joined #postfix[12:58:54] *** wdp has quit IRC[13:10:27] *** wdp has joined #postfix[13:12:19] *** chris| has quit IRC[13:13:10] *** chris| has joined #postfix[13:13:35] *** chris| has quit IRC[13:18:13] *** chris| has joined #postfix[13:47:49] *** wdp_ has joined #postfix[13:56:29] *** Cain` has joined #postfix[13:58:23] *** Cain has quit IRC[13:58:42] *** Cain` is now known as Cain[14:27:00] *** war9407 has quit IRC[14:28:32] *** kaos has quit IRC[14:36:31] *** ImpatientSpoon has quit IRC[14:38:52] *** cytrinox_ has joined #postfix[14:42:11] *** cytrinox has quit IRC[14:42:12] *** cytrinox_ is now known as cytrinox[14:45:52] <adaptr> Habbie: that's horrible advice[14:46:27] <Habbie> adaptr, why?[14:46:50] <adaptr> the proper solution would be a simple access map for the addresses he wants to allow, followed by reject[14:47:03] <Habbie> isn't that what i said?[14:47:05] <adaptr> no[14:47:23] <Habbie> oh, you mean to specify the reject in the right main.cf line[14:47:30] <adaptr> !tell Habbie access[14:47:30] <knoba> Habbie: "access" : http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html : An overview of access(5) controls in the Postfix smtpd(8) SMTP server.[14:47:36] <adaptr> the difference is subtle, but important[14:55:35] *** roentgen has quit IRC[15:04:41] *** TomHome has quit IRC[15:06:12] <dall> I'm fighting with hotmail SPAM filter.......who will win ?!?![15:06:14] <dall> :|[15:13:13] <Habbie> adaptr, agreed[15:17:18] *** geek_cl has joined #postfix[15:21:50] <dall> guys.... one question[15:21:56] <dall> i set up TLS[15:21:59] <dall> for postfix[15:22:01] <dall> and dovecot...[15:22:28] <adaptr> !tell dall enter[15:22:28] <knoba> adaptr: Error: No factoid matches that key.[15:22:37] <adaptr> pfft all bots R stupid[15:22:49] <dall> when i SEND i see on the mail source (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))[15:23:03] <dall> when i receive (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))[15:23:08] <roe> !learn enter as An enter key is no substitute for proper punctuation.[15:23:27] <adaptr> dall: where is the question[15:23:32] <dall> why are differents? is not used my certificate ?[15:23:45] <dall> the first is mine (256 bit)[15:24:00] <adaptr> dall: why should they be the same[15:29:00] <adaptr> I knew that was a thinker[15:31:53] <dall> no the same....my question is.... when I send will be used my TLS/SSL certificate and when i receive postfix will use the sender TLS/SSL?[15:32:11] <adaptr> obviously[15:32:19] <adaptr> they're completely different processes[15:34:45] <dall> ok ok...[15:34:50] <dall> but i think is viceversa[15:34:54] <dall> no?[15:35:30] <dall> when postfix SEND will connect to the other smpt so it will use the other tls certificate[15:36:27] <dall> ........nothing.......i've understood[15:36:27] <dall> :D[15:38:16] <dall> adaptr, do you think i have to use DKIM? is it good to pass hotmail spam filter?[15:52:52] *** e-jones has quit IRC[15:53:44] *** mroe has joined #postfix[15:53:44] *** mroe has joined #postfix[16:01:22] <dall> hotmail is not using TLS[16:02:41] <dall> I checked it on my log[16:03:07] *** Section1 has quit IRC[16:08:41] <adaptr> MTAs connecting to you will generally not use TLS.[16:29:11] *** wdp has quit IRC[16:29:46] *** torvald_ has joined #postfix[16:30:48] <torvald_> Hi, can anyone give me hint of how to reject one singel incoming domain on a postfix server? Getting alot of spam from one singel domain to all of my accounts. -_-[16:32:06] *** war9407 has joined #postfix[16:33:11] <Aprogas> !tell torvald_ access[16:33:11] <knoba> torvald_: "access" : http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html : An overview of access(5) controls in the Postfix smtpd(8) SMTP server.[16:33:40] <Aprogas> Addresses are easily spoofed though. Perhaps use some blacklists and other common anti-spam measures.[16:39:02] *** brancaleone has quit IRC[16:39:29] <torvald_> Thanks, i will try to put up a check_sender_access and a hashtable. Yep - i just wondered if there where a quick and dirty way to reject them since its by now the only spam that goes trough.[16:39:40] <torvald_> :)[16:40:20] *** hparker has joined #postfix[16:50:32] <torvald_> Will "smtpd_sender_restrictions = check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/access, permit_mynetworks" be legal syntax? With propor domain with the REJECT action i the indexfile? I ask because i fairly fresh on mailsystemes and i cannot afford the server to go down.[16:51:32] *** dall has quit IRC[16:52:08] *** Wolfsherz has joined #postfix[16:53:20] *** Wolfsherz has quit IRC[16:54:17] <Aprogas> Never experiment on a production server.[16:54:46] <Aprogas> It's legal syntax, but incomplete and Postfix will refuse to start.[16:58:00] <torvald_> I know, im just trying help out a couple of friends who have lost there linuxguy. ^^[16:58:42] <torvald_> But okey, thanks, I will try to read some more on how postfix needs to be configured to night. :][16:59:44] <torvald_> Somehow confusing to set up a test server without having any real data to work on.[17:00:38] <Aprogas> Learn to talk SMTP over telnet and you can easily test sender/recipient-based restrictions.[17:00:55] <adaptr> torvald_: use a good RBL, like zen. this will block 95% of all spam[17:02:04] <Aprogas> And make Postfix less liberal about what it accepts.[17:02:24] <torvald_> Aprogas: Jep, but I was just thinking it might be difficult to thing of every spamapproach. But for this case its a good ide.[17:02:24] <adaptr> postfix's a liberal ? damn commies![17:03:01] <torvald_> adaptr: Can I just at the zen RBL to policyd-wieght.conf?[17:03:06] <adaptr> no[17:03:14] <adaptr> why are you using a policy server ? do you know ?[17:03:16] <torvald_> I might have to read up apon that aswell.[17:04:31] <Aprogas> If you use policyd-weight, there is a chance you already use a set of blacklists. Make sure to keep the blacklists used up to date, not all stay good forever.[17:04:46] <torvald_> To adapt to the spam enviroment i guess.[17:04:51] <torvald_> Ok.[17:04:59] <adaptr> torvald_: if you're not using a RBL now, you're not doing much against spam[17:05:39] <torvald_> I see there are lists in use, and most of the spam is getting rejected. But as you say, not the last 5% maybe.[17:06:09] <adaptr> I didn't say anything like that. if you're using features you don't know well enough, why use them ?[17:06:21] <adaptr> you followed a tutorial, or two. thi soften fails[17:10:04] <Aprogas> thi harden succeeds[17:10:15] <torvald_> Im sure Ill make it work, I guess I just have to read some docs and try out on my own for bit. :) I was just wondering how I could block that one domain for now. But thanks anyway. :)[17:17:42] <standon> adaptr: this 'hirsh' guy on the list should be forcibly removed from his job and replaced by someone less bitter and more competent.[17:19:17] <adaptr> bitter ?[17:19:36] <adaptr> you prefer the resident nazi reindl, then ?[17:19:46] <adaptr> there's somebody I can do without[17:20:13] <standon> adaptr: my dislike for hirsh shouldn't be mistaken for preferene for reindl. :)[17:20:19] <standon> preference, rather.[17:20:28] <adaptr> I was eliciting your opinion[17:20:33] <adaptr> WINNING[17:20:34] <Aprogas> Not very nice to be talking about people behind their backs.[17:20:39] <standon> i especially dislike the people who lack humility when asking for help on the mailing list.[17:20:53] <standon> Aprogas: sorry to offend your moral leanings, please exercise /ignore if you are so inclined.[17:21:28] <standon> adaptr: WINNING sheen or kutcher style?[17:21:43] <adaptr> I didn't know there was more than one TIGERSTYLE[17:21:55] <adaptr> and galactic overlord, too[17:27:57] *** GoGi2 has quit IRC[17:38:12] *** Wolfsherz has joined #postfix[17:57:25] *** xpeed has joined #postfix[17:59:48] *** brancaleone has joined #postfix[18:28:15] *** cytrinox_ has joined #postfix[18:31:15] *** cytrinox has quit IRC[18:31:15] *** cytrinox_ is now known as cytrinox[18:59:40] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[19:08:23] *** Patrickdk has joined #postfix[19:12:48] *** xeodox has quit IRC[19:13:42] *** geek_cl has quit IRC[19:14:42] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[19:18:02] *** brancaleone has quit IRC[19:19:10] *** brancaleone has joined #postfix[19:21:02] *** xeodox has quit IRC[19:25:41] *** xeodox has joined #postfix[19:27:02] *** brancaleone has quit IRC[19:58:06] *** e-jones has joined #postfix[20:00:19] *** tris has quit IRC[20:29:26] *** roentgen has joined #postfix[20:34:37] *** xv7 has joined #postfix[20:34:47] <xv7> Are /etc/postfix/transport's entries handled by master(8) or local(8)?[20:35:55] <Aprogas> Is the pope appointed by the King of England or the King of Spain?[20:36:10] <standon> ladies and gentleman, we have ourselves a comedian![20:37:47] <rob0> Actually neither. It's qmgr(8)[20:37:57] <Aprogas> !tell xv7 trivial-rewrite[20:37:57] <knoba> Aprogas: Error: No factoid matches that key.[20:38:16] <rob0> assuming that by /etc/postfix/transport you mean transport_maps[20:38:22] <standon> it seems a few people need to review http://www.postfix.org/trivial-rewrite.8.html.[20:38:35] <standon> and, prior to that, perhaps even a glance at http://www.postfix.org/OVERVIEW.html is in order.[20:39:59] <xv7> rob0: is there something like nf-packet-flow, but for postfix instead?[20:42:58] *** basho__ has joined #postfix[20:44:07] <rob0> OVERVIEW as suggested is the best there is.[20:44:40] <rob0> But, those diagrams are not complete.[20:47:02] <standon> the code is complete; the interested reader can look there if s/he finds the helpful documentation to be insufficient. :)[20:47:13] <xv7> rob0: overview - where?[20:47:20] <standon> xv7: i linked to it already; scroll up.[20:47:37] <xv7> ah indeed[20:47:45] <standon> indeed, indeed.[20:47:49] <xv7> standon: what about http://felipeferreira.net/?p=66 ?[20:48:16] <xv7> apparently the same but in graphic[20:48:32] <standon> xv7: *shrug*, i don't have the cycles to review that with care.[20:51:30] <rob0> I see at least one oversimplification in it, so the rest is suspect.[20:53:49] *** webmonkey has joined #postfix[21:00:06] <xv7> I previously had postfix 2.7.1, then did an update to 2.7.2, and now delivery isn't feeding it to procmail anymore. main.cf never had a word about procmail, it seemed to be automatic depending on the existence of ~/.procmailrc.[21:01:03] <Aprogas> See the topic for instructions.[21:04:57] <adaptr> xv7: if there was no mention of procmail in main.cf, but per-user procmailrc's were being run, your distro decided to change the defaults supplied with the postfix source[21:05:26] <adaptr> of course, there might have been a global delivery route to procmail in master.cf[21:05:34] <adaptr> but that doesn't happen by itself either[21:05:51] <adaptr> (and is completely superfluous when mailbox_command already supports delivery to procmail)[21:11:26] *** brancaleone has joined #postfix[21:11:39] * standon nods with adaptr[21:13:15] *** weedar has joined #postfix[21:16:25] <cite> It's really amazing how fast a smartphone can send mails.[21:16:42] <cite> You see, I have this IMAP folder, called "Sent", which has mails from the last four years.[21:16:42] <standon> cite: hm?[21:17:00] *** loddafnir has quit IRC[21:17:14] <Aprogas> Just wait until your phone-provider starts blocking email in favour of their own overpriced equivalent service.[21:17:18] <cite> Now, just a few minutes ago, I changed a setting in "K9 Mail", basically designating the "Sent" folder as the one that contains messages which couldn't be transmitted.[21:17:32] <cite> And then I went to light up a smoke.[21:17:50] <cite> COming back later like five minutes, it turns out the smartphone had already sent about 4k mails.[21:18:00] <cite> That's amazing, for an embedded device running on battery, isn't it?[21:19:27] <Aprogas> So you resent all your sent mail?[21:20:00] <cite> Not all of it, nope, but about 4k, yes.[21:20:10] * jumperboy thinks he'll uninstall k9 mail, now...[21:22:08] <standon> my iPhone doesn't do that.[21:22:09] <standon> :)[21:22:32] <adaptr> my iphone sucks at email period.[21:22:38] <adaptr> my android sucked marginally less[21:22:50] <thumbs> I don't care for email on a phone[21:23:03] <standon> adaptr: i'm still waiting for push for any imap server, the way my $work blackberry does it so well.[21:24:00] *** loddafnir1 has joined #postfix[21:24:18] <adaptr> standon: that would require a persistent connection, or a server-client protocol extension[21:24:46] <standon> adaptr: indeed; so my message to apple is 'get it done, beyetches!'[21:25:00] <standon> because the blackberry does it with ease and no noticeable impact on battery.[21:25:10] <cite> IMAP IDLE does a fair job of emulating push mail.[21:25:36] <standon> cite: nope.[21:25:47] <cite> Why is that?[21:26:05] <standon> cite: not if you're mentioning it in the context of iphone which doesn't utilize it sufficiently (or, at all, if my memory serves).[21:26:26] <standon> cite: one still has to poll for message, notwithstanding server support for IDLE.[21:26:27] <cite> I was talking about a protocol.[21:26:42] *** krzie has quit IRC[21:26:56] <standon> cite: and, as you'll see from your lastlog, i was talking in context of iphone.[21:26:57] <standon> :)[21:27:21] <standon> cite: my production dovecot servers support IDLE just fine, but it's useless if the client doesn't leverage it.[21:27:23] <cite> I still don't know what your point is.[21:27:37] <standon> cite: that's a shame, but luckily i couldn't care less about your comprehension of my point.[21:27:46] <cite> Client does IDLE, server notifies it of new mail, client sees mail.[21:27:52] <standon> oh, my, god.[21:28:04] <cite> Make that a "fetches mail".[21:28:09] <standon> *sigh*[21:28:42] <cite> standon: That last comment of yours sounded a tad hostile. Did i unknowingly insult you?[21:28:50] <standon> cite: nope.[21:29:11] <standon> IDLE is great; but it is useless in the context of the iPhone. does that make sense yet?[21:29:23] <cite> Yes, now it makes perfectly sense.[21:29:40] <standon> and i'm making idle (look mommy, a pun!) chatter about my iphone which i quite like, but just lamenting this one particular nuisance.[21:29:52] *** MondoBizarro has quit IRC[21:29:53] <standon> cite: marvelous; i can now rejoice.[21:31:12] <lunaphyte> i recall an [alleged] response from mr. jobs to an inquiry about ios' lack of support for imap idle, citing purely technical reasons ["it's power hungry"] for its absence.[21:33:51] <standon> lunaphyte: yes, he did say something to that effect. so figure something else out, steve, since RIM got that one right. no power hungry issues bceause of how they implement push.[21:33:56] *** webmonkey has quit IRC[21:34:27] <lunaphyte> no doubt.[21:34:52] *** webmonkey has joined #postfix[21:35:10] <jimpop> isn't the problem client connection persistence? how many IP addresses does the avg iPhone user have within any given 3 hour period?[21:35:53] <adaptr> jimpop: no, the problem is that there are no iphone imap applications that keep the connection open[21:36:13] <jimpop> blackberries work differently since all email is VPN'ed, so VPN end points remain static for weeks.[21:36:39] <adaptr> jimpop: urgh, BS. BES simply uses a PUSH mechanism independent of IMAP or anything else[21:36:40] <jimpop> adaptr: that's because the connection endpoints keep changing as the iphone moves[21:36:54] *** webmonkey has quit IRC[21:37:04] <adaptr> jimpop: no, it isn't. also, that doesn't explain why it fails just as horribly when I don't move[21:37:13] <lunaphyte> eh, it's all just nonsense. if you want to have it disabled by default [for whatever "reason"], that's one thing - but if i don't care about "using my battery" and want to turn it on, but can't, because it's not there at all...[21:37:50] *** webmonkey has joined #postfix[21:37:57] <standon> lots of misinformation here folks, wow.[21:38:00] <standon> maybe we should just stick to postfix. :)[21:38:08] <jimpop> adaptr: you are confusing what I am saying with the problem you are having. two diff things[21:38:47] <adaptr> it's my entire raisin detter[21:57:00] *** tris has joined #postfix[21:59:47] *** astromme has joined #postfix[21:59:50] *** astromme_ has quit IRC[22:12:22] *** Timzzzz is now known as Timmooo[22:13:45] *** webmonkey has quit IRC[22:21:20] *** jfried has quit IRC[22:22:01] *** basho__ has quit IRC[22:25:22] *** s0ber_ has joined #postfix[22:27:14] *** s0ber has quit IRC[22:27:28] *** s0ber_ is now known as s0ber[22:31:53] *** seekwill has joined #postfix[22:32:10] *** ced117 has quit IRC[22:32:49] *** mandragor has joined #postfix[22:32:49] *** weedar has quit IRC[22:45:05] *** hparker has quit IRC[22:47:02] *** mandragor has quit IRC[22:49:26] *** aberrant has joined #postfix[22:49:34] <aberrant> hi all.[22:49:41] <aberrant> !welcome[22:49:41] <knoba> aberrant: "welcome" : welcome to #postfix! if you're joining for the first time, or are new to irc, the first thing you'll want to do is read the channel topic (/topic). it includes crucial instructions on how to effectively ask for help here, and what data you should include with your questions. the degree of success you'll have is directly related to how effectively you're able to follow those guidelines.[22:49:58] <aberrant> !debug[22:49:58] <knoba> aberrant: "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://dpaste.com/[22:53:10] *** hparker has joined #postfix[22:57:56] <aberrant> all mail results in bounces. My postconf -n: http://dpaste.com/542818/[22:58:24] <aberrant> I can't figure out why it's bouncing - compared with another system that's working, it should be fine.[22:58:28] <seekwill> Paste the logs[22:58:41] *** uqlev has joined #postfix[22:58:51] <adaptr> maybe you shouldn't have done relay_transport = error, then[22:59:46] <aberrant> log: http://dpaste.com/542820/[22:59:53] <adaptr> combined with inet_interfaces = loopback-only, this assures that you will never receive mail, and cannot send out mail[23:00:06] <adaptr> it is a very secure setup though[23:00:08] <aberrant> huh.[23:00:15] <adaptr> !why[23:00:15] <knoba> adaptr: "why" : are you sure that installing, configuring and maintaining a mailserver is really what you want to do here? it's not something that's for the faint of heart, and definitely not something for folks that are still just learning the basics of linux or unix. also see !nullclient[23:01:10] <aberrant> no. I don't want this to be a mailserver. I just want it to be able to send mail out. There's no reason for it to process inbound mail.[23:01:21] <thumbs> !nullclient[23:01:21] <knoba> thumbs: "nullclient" : a null client is a computer that can only send mail. it receives no mail from the network, and it does not deliver any mail locally. while postfix can be configured to fill this role, it is often unnecessary overkill, and a much simpler software package is more appropriate. see !nullclient_software for more details.[23:01:33] <thumbs> aberrant: then you don't need postfix[23:01:54] <aberrant> !nullclient_software[23:01:54] <knoba> aberrant: "nullclient_software" : a program that serves as a drop in replacement for /usr/sbin/sendmail and provides a simple means to submit messages to an existing msa without the need to install and maintain a full-blown mta/msa. examples include msmtp, esmtp, ssmtp and nullmailer. also see !msa[23:02:04] *** mroe has quit IRC[23:02:16] <seekwill> I think he's a spammer![23:02:21] <adaptr> you would think that[23:02:38] <adaptr> you've just been made irrelevant on #mysql and now you're looking for any validation[23:02:48] <adaptr> even a fellow-spamer[23:02:50] <seekwill> I try when I can[23:03:07] <aberrant> I'm not a spammer.[23:03:14] <xpeed> death to all spammers.[23:03:17] <aberrant> I just want errors from my ldap server to be sent :)[23:03:37] <adaptr> choose one of the options above then[23:03:41] <aberrant> ...and I got it. Thanks, adaptr.[23:03:43] *** e-jones has quit IRC[23:03:45] <adaptr> ssmtp is blissfully simple[23:04:00] <aberrant> yeah, the problem is that postfix is a standard here. I can't just go and replace it.[23:04:15] <adaptr> then they should get a clue[23:04:29] <adaptr> 10 to 1 they don't know the first thing about how to properly configure it[23:04:33] <aberrant> I'll let them know.[23:04:37] <adaptr> and they install it on every machine... brrr.[23:05:06] *** Matic`Makovec has quit IRC[23:05:54] <aberrant> anyway, thanks.[23:06:45] <adaptr> "having been set on the path to righteousness, the lonely wanderer rides off into the sunset"[23:06:51] <standon> lo[23:06:52] <standon> l[23:07:35] <xpeed> wth[23:12:40] *** aberrant has left #postfix[23:16:20] <jimpop> strange indeed[23:17:17] *** gerhard7 has quit IRC[23:23:23] <standon> indeedio.[23:25:54] *** brancaleone has quit IRC[23:35:39] *** hparker has quit IRC[23:35:47] *** TomHome has joined #postfix[23:36:47] *** plee has quit IRC[23:39:04] *** korozion has joined #postfix[23:39:09] *** plee has joined #postfix[23:41:07] <korozion> http://pastr.it/17053 could someone have a look at that and help me figure out what's wrong?[23:48:10] *** nsaquatics has quit IRC[23:48:28] *** rcsu has quit IRC[23:48:59] *** nsaquatics has joined #postfix