June 22, 2013 
< | 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 | >
June 22, 2013 [00:07:35] *** sphenxes01 has quit IRC[00:08:40] *** cilly has quit IRC[00:09:14] *** abyss has joined #postfix[00:11:14] *** robinho86 has left #postfix[00:12:08] *** danblack has joined #postfix[00:21:51] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[00:25:56] *** cilly has joined #postfix[00:26:41] *** danblack has quit IRC[00:49:01] *** wdp_ has quit IRC[01:00:41] *** MaximusColourum has quit IRC[01:11:55] *** CookieNinja_ is now known as CookieNinja[01:19:43] *** cilly has quit IRC[01:21:21] *** cilly has joined #postfix[01:23:04] *** Phoenixz has quit IRC[01:34:57] *** shinao1 has quit IRC[01:38:56] *** Guest34236 has joined #postfix[01:39:36] *** Guest34236 has quit IRC[01:40:40] *** danblack has joined #postfix[01:44:49] *** Guuest45818 has joined #postfix[01:44:53] <Guuest45818> Hi[01:45:29] <thumbs> did you really register that nickname?[01:46:07] <Guuest45818> sure[01:46:08] <pj> heh, he actually did[01:46:10] <Guuest45818> can I have a backup server running on the same ip?[01:46:11] <pj> go figure[01:46:38] <pj> no[01:47:04] <tharkun> What is a backup server?[01:47:04] <pj> if you mean can you have a primary and secondary server on the same IP, then no.[01:47:50] <pj> I'm assuming he means a secondary MX[01:48:13] <Guuest45818> and the secondary as primary then forward to 1. server[01:48:30] <Guuest45818> i mean both on same ip[01:48:53] <Guuest45818> it is not[01:49:07] <Guuest45818> possible[01:49:27] <pj> well, I take it back, you can run a HA failover solution that would take over on the same IP, but that doesn't really have much to do with postfix.[01:50:17] <Patrickdk> that isn't really a backup either[01:50:18] <Guuest45818> i can have postfix 192.168.1.1 as primary and then forward to 192.168.1.2[01:50:40] <Patrickdk> heh?[01:50:44] <Patrickdk> !goal[01:50:44] <knoba> Patrickdk: "goal" : describe your goal, not what you think the solution is[01:50:49] <pj> !tell Guuest45818 goal[01:50:49] <knoba> Guuest45818: "goal" : describe your goal, not what you think the solution is[01:50:53] <pj> lol[01:51:00] <pj> ok, I'll give him this one, then...[01:51:09] <pj> !tell Guuest45818 XY[01:51:09] <knoba> Guuest45818: "XY" : (#1) The XY problem is that you want to do X, but don't know how. You think that you can solve X by doing Y, so you ask us how to do Y. We tell you that's an odd problem to want to solve. Just ask us about the real problem., or (#2) http://mywiki.wooledge.org/XyProblem -- I want to do X, but I'm asking how to do Y...[01:51:58] <Guuest45818> somewhat confusing.[01:52:14] <Guuest45818> thanks to here[01:54:23] <pj> Guuest45818: what is the real problem you are trying to solve?[01:54:53] <Guuest45818> I need a mx backup for my nas[01:55:02] <pj> nas?[01:55:31] <Guuest45818> Network Attached Storage[01:55:49] <pj> yeah, what on earth does NAS have to do with an MX backup?[01:55:58] <pj> and ... that's not the problem[01:56:03] <pj> that's what you think the solution is[01:56:08] <pj> what is the *problem*?[01:57:04] <Guuest45818> postfix can accept arrived email and then send it to my Network Attached Storage[01:57:19] <pj> ummmm, no it can't[01:57:33] <Guuest45818> why?[01:57:39] <pj> because NAS is not a service that postfix can connect to.[01:57:46] <pj> it is just storage space.[01:57:57] <Guuest45818> the NAS has a email server running[01:58:21] <pj> now ... back up and tell me why you want to do this.[01:58:41] <Guuest45818> i want to put the NAS off[01:58:59] <pj> that makes no sense[01:59:53] <Guuest45818> in the best case on a raspbery pi the backup[02:00:24] <Guuest45818> as the NAS does not always run because of the emails[02:00:39] <pj> do you actually have some problem you're trying to solve, or are you just trying to use shiny new hardware because you can?[02:05:29] <Guuest45818> I want to use the raspberry as a backup.but i have no idea[02:08:17] *** luis_alen1 has quit IRC[02:09:20] <Guuest45818> http://www.synology.com/support/tutorials_show.php?q_id=448[02:10:21] *** biggimat has joined #postfix[02:11:20] <Guuest45818> http://dyn.com/email/dyn-email-backup-mx/[02:12:47] <thumbs> don't set up a backup mx.[02:13:13] <Guuest45818> thumbs: why not?[02:13:20] <thumbs> because it's not needed.[02:13:25] *** biggi_mat has quit IRC[02:14:05] <Guuest45818> but I can not receive emails on a failure[02:14:20] <thumbs> Guuest45818: the other servers will retry, don't worry.[02:14:47] <Patrickdk> yay, I won't miss any spam[02:15:37] <Guuest45818> I can even test it. thank you[02:21:32] *** cilly has quit IRC[02:25:05] *** Guuest45818 has left #postfix[02:26:01] *** cilly has joined #postfix[02:36:27] *** danblack has quit IRC[02:45:46] *** chalcedny has joined #postfix[02:48:49] *** danblack has joined #postfix[02:57:06] *** tandoori has joined #postfix[02:59:13] <tandoori> i am having severe difficulty finding any decent information about setting up postfix on os x. I would like to be able to send/receive mail from this server, for webmaster purposes, but maybe postfix isn't for this? All I see are tutorials that reference gmail's servers which is not what I am looking for[03:00:31] <thumbs> !tell tandoori basic[03:00:31] <knoba> tandoori: "basic" : http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html : a good starting place for Postfix beginners, many common questions are answered here.[03:01:01] <tandoori> I have a domain registered with the MX record pointing to my server. I just have no...ah I see[03:01:10] <tandoori> many thanks, thumbs, I will have a peek[03:02:50] <thumbs> !tell tandoori SOHO[03:02:50] <knoba> tandoori: "SOHO" : Small/home office hints and tips: http://www.postfix.org/SOHO_README.html[03:04:36] <tandoori> mmm. again, many thanks[03:08:26] *** NightTrain has joined #postfix[03:15:33] *** pj has quit IRC[03:17:53] *** nForce has joined #postfix[03:22:08] <nForce> This may not be the right place to ask, but I'm going to try. I've setup a support portal but its messages are getting sent to spam on Google services. I have SPF on the domain and I setup OpenDKIM and added the necessary milter config in postfix. The headers of the mail in gmail say that it passes DKIM and SPF but its still getting bucketed in spam. Is there anything else I'm missing? The[03:22:08] <nForce> only thing I can think of is that the mail server isn't using a fully qualified domain name. I'd have to ask my VPS for access to the reverse resolution entry for the delegated IP.[03:27:44] <jimpop> nForce: yep, you need the rDSN PTR from your VPS provider[03:35:23] <tandoori> i can't find 'myorigin' in my main.cf file, is it okay to just add it?[03:36:18] <lunaphyte> main.cf is nothing more than a place to place global overrides for postfix settings[03:37:29] <tandoori> ...im trying to follow the documentation that thumbs linked me, but its not very clear, and some things appear to be missing. most of that stuff appears to be commented out so i guess it would be okay[03:38:09] <lunaphyte> stuff commented out?[03:38:29] <tandoori> yeah, with the # symbol.[03:38:44] <lunaphyte> the sample configurations provided by the author with the software will match the documentation.[03:38:56] <tandoori> huh[03:38:59] <lunaphyte> if you were given your config by someone else other than the author, then who knows.[03:39:22] <tandoori> this is the default config that came with os x[03:39:49] <tandoori> im told that its disabled by default; im trying to enable it[03:39:50] <lunaphyte> super[03:39:55] <lunaphyte> why?[03:41:03] <tandoori> because i need to use it. I am hosting my own server and i need to be able to send/receive mail for webmaster purposes[03:41:24] <lunaphyte> why would you use os x for that?[03:41:34] <lunaphyte> anyway, just use a null client.[03:41:51] <tandoori> ..im not sure what that is[03:41:53] <lunaphyte> you don't need to run your own mail server just to send an email. that would be silly.[03:42:20] <lunaphyte> configure your software to submit mail to your provider's msa, just like regular mail software.[03:42:22] <tandoori> lunaphyte: because I don't like linux. I want to send/receive mail.[03:42:33] * tandoori sighs[03:42:39] * lunaphyte sighs[03:42:49] * jimpop signs[03:43:07] * thumbs gnarls[03:43:25] <lunaphyte> why don't you just find software you can run in the gui then?[03:43:42] <tandoori> ...i'll try my best to follow these walkthroughs.[03:43:56] <lunaphyte> just go get postfix enabler.[03:44:02] <tandoori> lunaphyte: I wasn't aware that such things existed[03:44:11] <tandoori> im absolutely new to postfix[03:44:12] <lunaphyte> poking around in the shell but then saying you don't like linux is - odd...[03:44:41] <tandoori> i freaking hate the way linux manages things[03:44:51] <nForce> simple and clean command line interfaces are what makes linux so beautiful[03:44:55] <tandoori> os x is much more friendly[03:45:03] <lunaphyte> nah[03:45:06] <jimpop> linux probably hates you too. ;-)[03:45:32] <lunaphyte> i don't know what "the way linux manages things" means anyway.[03:45:32] <tandoori> i didnt come in here to be attacked because of the OS I choose to use[03:45:44] <lunaphyte> why would you be attacked?[03:46:07] <lunaphyte> oh, heh. no. you must be confused other people having opinions with "you being attacked". don't do that. it's a waste of time.[03:46:20] *** tandoori has left #postfix[03:46:23] <lunaphyte> accusing people of attacking you is *quite* rude.[03:46:33] <lunaphyte> ... mile away[03:47:12] <nForce> ack I think all decent VPS should provide an interface to change the rdns entry for your delegated IP[03:47:16] <nForce> I had to open a support ticket[03:47:18] <nForce> oh well[03:47:29] <lunaphyte> me too. but it was so trivial, i didn't bother to complain.[03:48:14] <jimpop> nForce: that would be too easy for spammers to abuse. VPS providers have to be responsible for their network....[03:48:22] <jimpop> or their network gets blocked[03:48:32] <nForce> ah ok[03:49:30] <jimpop> that said, there are a lot of vps providers out there that still let you set that.[03:50:09] <adaptr> my ISP let me set it. they didn't check if I owned it or anything. they're great![03:50:42] <nForce> the next question is how long will I have to wait for the change to propogate?[03:50:43] <jimpop> i've seen a few start to check fwd dns before allowing the rDNS ptr[03:50:48] <nForce> 24-48 hours is the norm right?[03:50:53] <adaptr> ...for what[03:50:55] <jimpop> nForce: which VPS?[03:50:59] <lunaphyte> dns doesn't propagate. it expires[03:51:06] <nForce> ok well yes[03:51:08] <nForce> thats what I mean[03:51:08] <thumbs> bingo[03:51:18] <adaptr> yahtzee[03:51:34] <nForce> so in that case it will only matter for servers that already queried the IP and cached it[03:51:35] <rob0_> o6u!q[03:51:40] <lunaphyte> and there is no "the norm" either. that's silly. there is just whatever it is.[03:51:44] <nForce> which would be google only I guess[03:51:56] <adaptr> why are you guessing ?[03:52:00] <lunaphyte> anyway, share actual data, and we can offer actual answers. meta blabber is silly.[03:52:10] <adaptr> that's dumb. DNS is a determinate protocol[03:53:20] <jimpop> nForce: once your provider sets it, it will be immediately available to others.[03:53:25] <nForce> right[03:53:48] <nForce> after the TTL of the cached dns quries runs out?[03:53:55] <nForce> for those that already queried it that is[03:54:28] <lunaphyte> however long it persists in others' caches is defined by the ttl. if you want to know what that is, then look up the data, or share actual data here and someone will tell you.[03:54:37] <nForce> right[03:54:41] <nForce> ok[03:54:42] <jimpop> nForce: not the TTL but the refresh[03:54:47] <adaptr> well, not here, actually[03:54:55] <thumbs> just PM adaptr[03:55:09] <jimpop> TTL is only for good queires, not NXDOMAIN, etc[03:55:12] <lunaphyte> refresh?[03:55:22] <lunaphyte> no[03:55:27] <jimpop> refresh is another SOA field[03:55:34] <lunaphyte> nxdomain has a ttl just like anything else.[03:55:35] <nForce> its not NXDOMAIN though[03:55:40] <nForce> the IP has a valid name[03:55:43] <nForce> its just set by the VPs[03:55:46] <nForce> *VPS[03:55:48] <jimpop> oh[03:55:49] <lunaphyte> refresh doesn't have anything to do with this discussion[03:56:05] <nForce> its ip.vpsname.com or w/e[03:56:11] <jimpop> if it's already set, then use dig to get the SOA record, and see what the TTL is set to[03:56:16] <nForce> ah cool[03:56:18] <nForce> that works[03:56:22] <lunaphyte> soa? ttl? no[03:56:40] <lunaphyte> the soa isn't of relevance.[03:56:51] <jimpop> it contains the timings[03:57:14] <nForce> how long the client resolver holds on to the entry is defined by the rdns record then?[03:57:19] <lunaphyte> those timings aren't of relevance.[03:57:26] <lunaphyte> nForce: no[03:57:26] <nForce> hrmm[03:57:59] <jimpop> nForce: the client should retain the value up until TTL, but the client can also honor Refresh.[03:58:06] <lunaphyte> no[03:58:16] <jimpop> that said, Google doesn't honor TTL[03:58:37] <lunaphyte> the only value in the soa record that has any relation to client queries is the final integer.[03:58:56] <jimpop> lunaphyte: man dig ;-)[03:59:02] <lunaphyte> how long a record is cached is determined by the ttl. period.[03:59:10] <lunaphyte> man dig for what?[03:59:14] <jimpop> unless you are google[03:59:25] <jimpop> lunaphyte: for how to fetch TTL[03:59:38] <lunaphyte> sorry, no.[03:59:50] <jimpop> ok[04:01:06] <lunaphyte> the man page for dig doesn't discuss how to fetch ttl. that would be outside of its purview.[04:01:17] <jimpop> dude, you having a bad day?[04:01:19] <lunaphyte> *fetch a[04:01:24] <lunaphyte> huh?[04:01:32] <jimpop> nm[04:01:41] <lunaphyte> cmon now, that's not nice.[04:01:41] *** xcrracer has quit IRC[04:02:03] <lunaphyte> i'm contradicting you, sure. but that doesn't mean i'm having a bad day[04:02:10] <nForce> so if I want to send mail from two domains I should forget about it[04:02:17] <rob0> You thought your day was bad. Then I came along and made it worse![04:02:27] <thumbs> dammit. Let's ban rob0[04:02:37] <nForce> requiring a FQDN seems odd when SPF can validate the IP[04:03:02] <lunaphyte> spf can be used in a number of ways, many of which include use of dns.[04:03:36] <nForce> but I suppose I need to check all the boxes on google's list[04:03:45] <nForce> and I think having a FQDN is one of them[04:04:09] <lunaphyte> what do you mean "having an fqdn"?[04:04:19] <nForce> ip -> name -> ip[04:04:23] <lunaphyte> you can't do email on the public internet without an fqdn period.[04:04:31] <lunaphyte> oh. you mean fcrdns.[04:05:07] <lunaphyte> yes, that's a requirement many competent email admins insist on[04:05:15] <lunaphyte> [and even quite a few incompetent ones] :)[04:05:20] <lunaphyte> [they just don't know it][04:05:44] <lunaphyte> you might consider it a sort of "litmus test" - e.g. how much effort is being put into this system to run it responsibly.[04:05:53] <nForce> heh[04:05:56] <nForce> well I guess I'll wait for the support ticket to go through and try this again =([04:06:12] <lunaphyte> and there are of course other nuances which relate to ownership, corroboration, etc as well.[04:06:32] <nForce> SPF, DKIM and fcrds[04:06:35] <nForce> that should be enough, right?[04:06:56] <lunaphyte> it doesn't work that way. you just do what you can, then tias.[04:07:03] <lunaphyte> if more is needed, then more is needed.[04:07:07] <lunaphyte> there's no "should be"[04:07:35] <nForce> I'm asking whats needed in the average case[04:07:42] *** pj has joined #postfix[04:07:44] <lunaphyte> don't waste your time.[04:07:51] <lunaphyte> just set up what you can, and see how it goes.[04:07:56] <nForce> good point[04:08:00] <nForce> I guess I'll give it a go[04:08:36] <lunaphyte> placing expectations on arbitrary people's opinions of what is average and what's required in those cases gets you nothing more than set up for unexpected results.[04:08:55] <rob0> Another thing that's needed is to have a decent provider. If your upstream provider has bad abuse issues, mail from you (which is from the provider as far as anyone else can tell) is considered suspect.[04:09:29] <nForce> yes thats something I've been considering[04:09:36] <nForce> I may just have to switch VPS if its a real problem[04:09:47] <nForce> I just wonder if theres a way I can ask google if thats the case or not[04:14:05] <rob0> just find a multi-RBL checker and see what it says about your IP address[es][04:14:54] <nForce> I actually did that and it was all green (I wasn't on any of the blacklists it checked)[04:15:11] <nForce> but apparently google differentiates between blacklisted ips and bucketing things as spam[04:15:22] <lunaphyte> of course[04:15:28] <nForce> I think there is some type of category inbetween blacklist and approved[04:15:29] <lunaphyte> any respectable mail system does[04:15:39] *** xcrracer has joined #postfix[04:15:44] <jimpop> lunaphyte: what do you get for "dig +short soa postfix.org" ?[04:16:06] <lunaphyte> the postfix.org soa record[04:16:20] <jimpop> which OS ?[04:16:43] <lunaphyte> what are you getting at?[04:16:52] <jimpop> you know what i am getting at[04:18:05] <lunaphyte> i don't[04:18:17] <lunaphyte> the output is the same regardless of operating system[04:19:15] <jimpop> so show me the output[04:19:56] <lunaphyte> spike.porcupine.org. hostmaster.postfix.org. 2013062001 3600 3600 1209600 3600[04:20:10] <jimpop> ty[04:20:10] <lunaphyte> dude, it's the same thing you get...[04:20:29] <jimpop> indeed[04:20:36] <lunaphyte> why are you asking me to look up dns records for you?[04:21:23] <rob0> I tried to look up my wife's dress! Got slapped.[04:21:53] *** xcrracer has quit IRC[04:21:59] <jimpop> because I was trying to relate to nForce how to determine the ttl/refresh times for his DNS question. and you kept jumping in saying "no", etc.[04:22:14] <lunaphyte> right.[04:22:23] <jimpop> that was rude.[04:22:25] <lunaphyte> because that is not how you do that.[04:22:51] <lunaphyte> i'm sorry you think i was rude. my intent was to be frank and concise.[04:22:55] <jimpop> but it is, and you just showed the timings[04:23:03] <lunaphyte> dude. no, it's not.[04:23:13] <lunaphyte> those values are unrelated.[04:23:17] <jimpop> 2013062001 3600 3600 1209600 3600 are the serial, etc., etc[04:23:20] <rob0> let thumbs be frank! You just be concise.[04:23:29] * thumbs objects[04:23:37] <lunaphyte> the only possibly related value would be the nxdomain expiry value, which isn't related, since the label exists.[04:23:40] <rob0> overruled[04:23:56] <jimpop> the refresh is the one[04:24:02] <lunaphyte> no, it's not.[04:24:08] <lunaphyte> refresh is not used by clients.[04:24:13] <jimpop> and even on that, you earlier chimned in and said it wasn't[04:24:16] <pj> TTL is specified per-record, not in the SOA[04:24:18] <jimpop> but it is[04:24:24] <lunaphyte> dude. it's *not*.[04:24:53] <jimpop> i know that it is. sorry[04:25:28] <lunaphyte> i'm sorry. you're misinformed.[04:25:59] <jimpop> frankly i don't think you care, you just want to interject.[04:26:26] <pj> jimpop: all those numbers in the SOA record have to do with slave servers. If you're not an authoritative slave server then none of them matter.[04:26:49] <lunaphyte> that's certainly not a nice thing to say.[04:26:57] *** danblack has quit IRC[04:27:07] <lunaphyte> look, i'm not going to debate it with you. that's silly. however, it is important to me that information in #postfix be accurate. if it's not, yes, i am going to say something.[04:28:48] <pj> well, that last number is minimum TTL which is supposed to override the TTL value if the TTL is lower than the minimum, but I think even that's just a number for the authoritative server to use.[04:29:02] <jimpop> pj, for rDNS PTRs, you can use those numbers to determine when a PTR record will expire/change[04:29:11] <lunaphyte> that's not minimum ttl any longer[04:29:16] <lunaphyte> that's the nxdomain ttl[04:29:28] <jimpop> refresh is the key[04:29:29] <pj> ahhh, that makes more sense lunaphyte[04:29:41] <lunaphyte> rdns isn't special. it's the same as forward dns[04:29:49] <rob0> hmm? How are PTR TTLs / in-addr.arpa zones any different from any other TTLs?[04:29:59] <pj> jimpop: how? PTR records come with TTL values as well.[04:30:27] <jimpop> the ttl isn't what is used to check if a record has changed. refresh is.[04:30:45] <pj> is there actually any case where a non-authoritative server will ever even bother to look up the SOA at all?[04:30:58] <pj> I'm pretty sure that the SOA is just for authoritative slaves to look up.[04:31:16] <pj> jimpop: no, you check the record.[04:31:25] <pj> if it's changed, then it's changed[04:32:24] <jimpop> pj, humor me, how do you check the record?[04:32:28] <pj> jimpop: the refresh is used by slave servers as the interval between when the slave checks with the primary to see if there's a change.[04:32:36] <pj> jimpop: you query it on the server.[04:32:53] <jimpop> give me an example[04:33:12] <pj> I would but I have to go.[04:33:17] <jimpop> lol[04:33:23] <pj> you can keep arguing with lunaphyte and rob0, though.[04:33:32] <rob0> dig 2.2.0.192.in-addr.arpa. any[04:33:52] <jimpop> or dig +short soa 2.2.0.192.in-addr.arpa.[04:33:53] <pj> rob0: or even s/any/ptr/[04:33:59] <jimpop> much more scriptable[04:34:00] <lunaphyte> soa data is not used for determining when any dns data will change, ptr or otherwise.[04:34:21] <lunaphyte> the record's ttl is used for that.[04:34:35] <rob0> why soa? Where did you see that this overrides the record's own TTL?[04:34:53] <rob0> I didn't know that. I still don't. :)[04:36:27] <lunaphyte> clients do not check if a record has changed.[04:36:31] *** miscellt has quit IRC[04:37:00] <lunaphyte> they retrieve a record, and keep it until the record's ttl is reached, then when it is next needed, they retrieve it again. whatever value it is is the value they cache.[04:38:02] <jimpop> that's so 1990s. ;-)[04:38:29] <jimpop> i'm serious. times have changed, there's a lot more that goes on.[04:39:13] <jimpop> i;m not saying that you are old and out of touch, perhaps just uninformed. ;-)[04:39:18] <lunaphyte> the first three ttls of an soa record are use only by slave nameservers. they aren't used by clients. the last value is used for the nxdomain ttl, and so is used only indirectly by clients.[04:39:46] <lunaphyte> heh, funny. no, it's the same as it's always been. not sure why you'd think otherwise :p[04:39:58] <lunaphyte> i guess just misinformed ;)[04:40:38] <lunaphyte> of course, if you've got some documentation to substantiate all of this, i'd definitely be interested in it.[04:41:06] <lunaphyte> anyway, enough off topicness for now, i'd say.[04:41:54] <jimpop> i think most of it is proprietary. things done by DNS caches along the way. no client really queries the master any more.[04:42:20] <lunaphyte> heh, of course they do. how would data get anywhere?[04:42:24] <jimpop> if you do some tests with google, l3, you can clearly see that they respect refresh.[04:42:40] <lunaphyte> there's nothing to "respect". it's not used by that.[04:42:42] <jimpop> TTL is the max, but they check much more often[04:43:00] <lunaphyte> please. enough. if you want to continue the debate, take it to #dns[04:43:07] <jimpop> lol[04:44:56] <lunaphyte> google does indeed often refetch records before their ttls expire. that's got nothing to do with anyone's soa refresh value though. that's just their software deciding to be impatient[04:45:59] <jimpop> but you can tell how often they check by looking at the domain's refresh rate.[04:46:06] <lunaphyte> no[04:46:12] <jimpop> google does honor the refresh rate[04:46:19] <lunaphyte> dude, no.[04:46:22] <jimpop> ok[04:47:18] *** danblack has joined #postfix[04:47:19] <lunaphyte> it isn't a thing to be "honored". it's just simply their software configured to retrieve a given record before it expires, based on whatever interval they deem appropriate.[04:47:55] <jimpop> that interval is the domain's refresh rate contained in the SOA record.[04:48:00] <lunaphyte> no[04:48:05] <jimpop> lol[04:48:42] <lunaphyte> they have discussed their complex set of algorithms used to preemptively retrieve dns data before the ttl is reached.[04:48:49] <lunaphyte> please take some time to read up on it.[04:49:11] <jimpop> lol[04:49:30] <staticsafe> i don't think lunaphyte is joking[04:49:37] <jimpop> they use refresh. i've seen it.[04:49:45] <lunaphyte> no, they don't[04:49:49] <lunaphyte> i've seen it.[04:50:14] *** biggimat has quit IRC[04:50:15] <jimpop> you are just being obtuse[04:50:25] <jimpop> and difficult[04:50:39] *** biggimat has joined #postfix[04:51:35] <lunaphyte> please be civil[04:52:43] <lunaphyte> once you've got some substantiation to offer, then we can debate this further.[04:52:54] <jimpop> lol[04:53:04] <jimpop> same to ya[04:53:25] <lunaphyte> right, i know, lol[04:53:29] <jimpop> i've got experience with testing it.[04:53:36] <lunaphyte> then share the data[04:53:49] <jimpop> i didn't keep any data[04:53:56] <lunaphyte> demonstrate that things are not as heavily documented[04:54:02] <jimpop> it wasn't a research project, it was debuggin[04:54:03] <jimpop> g[04:54:40] <jimpop> doing exactly what nForce was doing, changing PTRs[04:56:02] <nForce> ack my VPS support is so slow[04:56:35] <jimpop> nForce: a lot of them have to escalate that to an upstream provider[04:56:50] <nForce> ah yes they might not be in charge of ip delegation[05:03:20] <lunaphyte> with the proliferations these days of vps providers, most aren't[05:06:37] *** danblack has quit IRC[05:07:46] *** krisfremen has quit IRC[05:17:08] *** krisfremen has joined #postfix[05:17:09] *** krisfremen has joined #postfix[05:17:28] *** whoami has quit IRC[05:22:58] *** whoami has joined #postfix[05:39:59] *** danblack has joined #postfix[05:49:41] *** danblack has quit IRC[06:00:01] *** UQlev has joined #postfix[06:04:31] *** UQlev has quit IRC[06:07:03] *** whoami has quit IRC[06:11:23] *** cilly has quit IRC[06:13:04] *** whoami has joined #postfix[06:13:21] *** cilly has joined #postfix[06:26:19] *** chalcedny has quit IRC[06:39:41] *** nForce has quit IRC[06:44:53] *** chalcedny has joined #postfix[06:46:48] *** chalcedny has quit IRC[07:04:58] *** s0ber has joined #postfix[07:13:02] *** chalcedny has joined #postfix[07:14:58] *** higuita has quit IRC[07:16:00] *** wald00 has joined #postfix[07:18:53] *** higuita has joined #postfix[07:32:19] *** chalcedny has quit IRC[07:33:45] *** shinao1 has joined #postfix[07:46:10] *** magyar has quit IRC[07:58:19] *** cetanu has joined #postfix[07:58:52] *** cetanu has quit IRC[07:59:19] *** cetanu has joined #postfix[08:00:09] *** cetanu has joined #postfix[08:12:05] *** wald00 has quit IRC[08:14:50] *** wdp has joined #postfix[08:14:50] *** wdp has joined #postfix[08:19:56] *** UQlev has joined #postfix[08:35:45] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[08:36:28] *** multi_io has quit IRC[08:36:37] *** multi_io has joined #postfix[08:43:33] *** ffiore has joined #postfix[08:43:34] *** wald00 has joined #postfix[08:56:36] *** ffiore has quit IRC[08:57:03] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[09:10:54] *** danblack has joined #postfix[09:11:48] *** cilly has left #postfix[09:33:09] *** Ulver has quit IRC[09:33:31] *** mandragor has joined #postfix[09:39:07] *** chalcedny has joined #postfix[09:40:49] *** mandragor has quit IRC[09:51:23] *** shinao1 has quit IRC[09:54:38] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[10:02:20] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[10:25:39] *** danblack has quit IRC[10:34:30] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[10:51:59] *** krisfremen has quit IRC[10:52:12] *** krisfremen has joined #postfix[11:10:00] *** Cromulent has joined #postfix[11:34:34] *** UQlev has quit IRC[11:52:39] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[11:59:25] *** sphenxes01 has joined #postfix[12:04:10] *** mibofra has joined #postfix[12:04:10] *** mibofra has joined #postfix[12:21:54] *** gencha has quit IRC[12:22:53] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[12:24:17] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[12:25:15] *** gencha has joined #postfix[12:28:58] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[12:33:05] *** NightTrain has quit IRC[12:38:23] *** hparker has quit IRC[12:38:34] *** hparker has joined #postfix[12:38:34] *** hparker has joined #postfix[12:55:09] *** drean has joined #postfix[13:12:03] *** grossing has quit IRC[13:32:40] *** sphenxes02 has joined #postfix[13:35:50] *** sphenxes01 has quit IRC[13:36:05] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[13:36:16] *** efazati has joined #postfix[13:36:48] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[13:36:52] <efazati> how can add multiple port for smtp / one port with tls and another port without tls?[13:39:46] *** net6a_serge has joined #postfix[13:41:50] *** NightTrain has joined #postfix[14:01:44] <pj> efazati: this is fairly easy to do, but you don't need to. STARTTLS is designed to support both plaintext and encryption on the same port.[14:04:58] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[14:05:00] *** sphenxes02 has quit IRC[14:23:35] *** master_of_master has quit IRC[14:23:57] *** chinmaygupta28 has joined #postfix[14:25:20] *** master_of_master has joined #postfix[14:26:26] <chinmaygupta28> How can i setup a newsletter with the help of a postfix MTA?[14:31:11] <chinmaygupta28> Links to the tutorials or forums would be of great help![14:37:14] *** master_o1_master has joined #postfix[14:39:08] *** higuita has quit IRC[14:40:21] *** master_of_master has quit IRC[14:42:56] *** TomWork has quit IRC[14:43:02] *** higuita has joined #postfix[14:43:20] *** TomWork has joined #postfix[14:44:13] *** chinmaygupta28 has quit IRC[15:32:04] *** streulma has joined #postfix[15:32:39] <streulma> hello, I have a postfix mailserver with mysql and dovecot, but I have relay access denied, where is the problem? Can't see in the logs...[15:45:15] *** UQlev has joined #postfix[15:49:38] <adaptr> !tell streulma welcome[15:49:38] <knoba> streulma: "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.[16:02:27] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[16:04:02] *** sphenxes01 has joined #postfix[16:06:31] <rob0> !relay_denied[16:06:32] <knoba> rob0: "relay_denied" : NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from CLIENT_HOST[CLIENT_IP]: 554 5.7.1 <RECIPIENT@RCPT_DOMAIN>: Relay access denied; from=<SENDER@SENDER_DOMAIN> to=<RECIPIENT@RCPT_DOMAIN> proto=ESMTP helo=<HELO>: This typically means that CLIENT_IP is not in mynetworks (and did not AUTH), and that RCPT_DOMAIN was not recognized as one of this Postfix's domains (not listed in mydestination, relay_domains or virtual_*_domains).[16:34:06] *** Cromulent has quit IRC[16:54:40] *** streulma has quit IRC[17:05:30] *** efazati has quit IRC[17:07:44] *** UQlev has quit IRC[17:12:41] *** guigouz has joined #postfix[17:13:55] <guigouz> Hi, I have a valid domain in my local config, but I must configure postfix to deliver mail to the domain's MX (now google) instead of delivering it locally[17:14:49] <guigouz> Use case is, @domain.com is valid locally but its MX is google, when local users from other domain try to send to @domain.com it gets delivered locally, not to google[17:14:51] *** Cromulent has joined #postfix[17:14:51] <adaptr> if google is the domain's MX record, that's where it wil lbe delivered[17:15:09] <adaptr> ah, so you're good, then[17:16:24] <guigouz> adaptr, yeah, something's wrong with the config (delivery priorities?) I may hard-code a rule for this specific domain on main.cf[17:16:29] <rob0> If Google is your MX, why do you need Postfix?[17:16:50] <adaptr> if google is your MX and you want postfix to deliver there, why have you configured postfix to deliver locally ?[17:16:52] <guigouz> i migrated this domain to google apps, but people still have their archive on my server[17:17:02] <adaptr> that's unrelated to either question[17:17:18] <adaptr> postfix is not a "mailbox server"[17:17:22] <rob0> Still see no reason for Postfix -- once mail is delivered, the MTA is done.[17:17:54] <guigouz> the accounts are on ldap, which is used by dovecot also[17:18:25] <guigouz> I could dig through the rules, but as it's an specific need, I think hard-coding a delivery rule for this domain would be simples[17:18:27] <adaptr> ....what does it have to do with postfix[17:18:27] <guigouz> simpler*[17:18:57] <rob0> For what purpose are you using this [misconfigured] Postfix instance?[17:19:33] <rob0> The misconfiguration is probably that you have told it that it hosts your domain, whereas now Google does.[17:20:04] <guigouz> yeah, that's it, and that's probably an iredmail bug[17:20:15] <adaptr> ...don't blame $randomsoftware[17:20:34] <guigouz> iredmail is just a set of config files/ldap schema[17:21:11] <adaptr> which you have zero clue about, presumably ?[17:21:49] <adaptr> I don't know that product, if it is a product, and not just another misguided tutorial[17:22:02] <guigouz> I've built the same setup (ldap, postfix, dovecot) around 10 years ago[17:22:11] <rob0> iredmail is fairly sane[17:22:15] <rob0> !iredmail[17:22:15] <knoba> rob0: Error: "iredmail" is not a valid command.[17:22:40] <guigouz> So, I have idea of what's happening[17:22:42] <rob0> but I can't continue if my questions are not answered.[17:24:00] <guigouz> rob0: I'm trying to avoid fixing the ldap queries for the domain, though it would be simpler to just add a map so everything addressed to @domain.com gets delivered to the correct mx before processing all the ldap maps[17:24:16] <guigouz> *s/though/thought[17:25:07] <adaptr> hacking lots of maps to correct something that should be absent is kinda silly.[17:25:07] <rob0> I still see no reason for Postfix to be running at all. What is it doing? Oh -- I already asked that.[17:25:23] <guigouz> rob0: there are several other domains hosted there[17:25:40] <rob0> So change the list of hosted domains.[17:26:02] <adaptr> guigouz: remove the google domain from [mydestination|virtual_mailbox_domains][17:26:05] <rob0> Maybe you need iredmail support.[17:26:48] <guigouz> yeah, I guess it's an iredmail bug, It still gets delivered locally even though I mark the domain as disabled on ldap[17:27:25] <rob0> it's not a bug, it's a misconfiguration[17:27:42] <rob0> well, maybe a bug, I can't say[17:28:20] <rob0> "mark the domain as disabled" sounds like it might have been the right thing to do[17:28:45] <rob0> depends what "disabled" means in that context, I guess[17:28:53] <guigouz> I'll file a support request for that on iredmail's forum[17:28:54] <adaptr> unless you can show what that means for postfix configuration, we can't help[17:32:35] <guigouz> adaptr: can I add a hashmap to virtual_alias_domains before the ldap rule ?[17:32:46] <guigouz> virtual_mailbox_maps = proxy:ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap/virtual_mailbox_maps.cf[17:33:06] <adaptr> ... which one is it[17:33:13] <guigouz> I'm trying to avoid fixing the ldap queries for that[17:33:34] <adaptr> virtual_alias_domains != virtual_mailbox_*[17:33:48] <rob0> postconf.5.html#virtual_alias_domains[17:34:05] <rob0> Specify "!pattern" to exclude a host or domain name from the list.[17:35:00] <rob0> But as adaptr points out, there is still some address class conflict / confusion here.[17:35:37] <rob0> hmmm, what would Karl Marx do?[17:36:14] <adaptr> berate us for being capitalist swine ?[17:37:27] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[17:37:49] <rob0> He'd try to break down the address class barriers![17:38:02] <rob0> or that[17:38:03] <adaptr> I did not see that coming.[17:39:52] <rob0> Well, our time is up for today. I'd like to thank our contestants for playing, and our audience, and all the folks watching at home. adaptr, tell our contestants what great prizes they win just for playing.[17:40:26] <adaptr> a shining new link to the official documentation![17:40:55] <rob0_> !docs[17:40:55] <knoba> rob0_: "docs" : Postfix documentation http://www.postfix.org/documentation.html[17:42:17] *** str3 has joined #postfix[17:42:19] *** str3 has left #postfix[17:42:26] *** Shadow010 has joined #postfix[17:42:38] <adaptr> you may wonder how we keep them so fresh and clean each time - we buy in bulk![17:55:21] <guigouz> rob0, adaptr, thanks[17:55:40] <guigouz> I just added !domain.com to virtual_mailbox_domains, before the ldap rule[17:56:26] <adaptr> using $randomcomplicatedmap for everything because you use it SOMEwhere is the height of folly.[17:56:48] <guigouz> i'll shutdown this server in a couple of months, i hope[17:56:49] <adaptr> you don't have hundreds of domains. and even then, a hash map would work fine[17:57:09] <guigouz> I have dozens of domains, but this one is the only exception[17:57:51] <adaptr> we've recently had somebody along who put several hundred domains directly into virtual_*_domains. it's messy.[17:59:30] <guigouz> i've always had my user tables on ldap, I'm giving up hosting an email server because i can't cope with spam and users calling me "people at <somedomain> are not receiving my messages"[17:59:56] <adaptr> email is not trivial to administer[18:00:00] <guigouz> yeah[18:00:33] <guigouz> when I started people still had open relays and that wasn't much hassle[18:00:45] <guigouz> but it grew in complexity[18:02:15] <guigouz> I'll evaluate opensrs.com in the following weeks, open for suggestions of other hosted services[18:08:02] *** amboss has joined #postfix[18:08:53] *** grossing has joined #postfix[18:18:36] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[18:24:01] *** v0lZy has joined #postfix[18:24:33] <v0lZy> Anyone willing to give me a few pointers?[18:27:25] *** UQlev has joined #postfix[18:28:01] <lunaphyte> huh?[18:28:08] <lunaphyte> please just ask your question[18:28:18] <v0lZy> I have a series of questiosn... total postfix n00b here[18:28:37] <v0lZy> most tutorials I read are about configuring postfix + dovecot with a database[18:28:48] <lunaphyte> tutorials aren't for beginners[18:28:52] <v0lZy> i feel more comfortable storing emails each in its own file on the filesystem[18:29:07] <v0lZy> and given that i dont have huge amounts of users[18:29:20] <lunaphyte> you should. the filesystem is a database that is particularly efficient at storing arbitrary data[18:29:23] <v0lZy> i'd like to manage users with postfix, preferably flatfile[18:29:26] <v0lZy> is that possible?[18:29:42] <lunaphyte> of course[18:30:03] <lunaphyte> [all of this information is contained within the documentation provided with the software][18:30:34] <v0lZy> ok[18:30:36] <v0lZy> next question[18:30:47] <v0lZy> im looking to tag emails in thunderbird and have that propagate to another computer[18:30:56] <lunaphyte> i don't know what that means[18:31:05] <lunaphyte> what's the actual goal?[18:31:33] <v0lZy> well, several people need to check 1 mailbox[18:31:41] <patdk-wk_> nothing to do with postfix[18:31:46] <v0lZy> and they need to know if anything is being worked on and by who etc[18:31:47] <patdk-wk_> that would be an imap issue[18:32:14] <v0lZy> i thought i'd tag emails with custom tags like u can do in thunderbird... and thunderbird says it can store this information on the server if the server supports it[18:32:21] <v0lZy> now im not sure if postfix needs to suport it or dovecot.[18:32:29] <lunaphyte> well, find out.[18:32:31] <patdk-wk_> heh? postfix only delievers email[18:32:43] <patdk-wk_> what part of that has to do with delivering mails? to other servers?[18:32:51] <lunaphyte> v0lZy: go find out how the thunderbird feature actually works.[18:32:53] <v0lZy> i see, ok, dovecot then[18:33:13] <jimpop> yeah...but.. it's possible to use header_checks to "tag" emails that are then filtered via Tbird (over IMAP even)[18:33:24] <v0lZy> lunaphyte: it works by storing the information on the sever ... or locally in an mbf file if it cant on the server (that later part is a game breaker)[18:33:37] <lunaphyte> v0lZy: yes, but *how*, exactly?[18:33:52] <lunaphyte> we understand the gist. find out how it *actually* works.[18:33:58] <v0lZy> jimpop: what do u mean? like change subject lines or inject headers? i dont think that sits with thunderbird though in what i had in mind[18:34:14] <lunaphyte> "if the server supports it" - you need to go find out *what* that actually means[18:34:15] <jimpop> Tbird can filter based on email headers[18:34:42] <v0lZy> jimpop: but i need to change those on the fly[18:35:04] <jimpop> oh, well that is in deed a Tbird question[18:35:07] <v0lZy> like... 'pending' and then 'john' or 'sally' or whatever.[18:36:01] <v0lZy> but does this have anything to do with postfix, if thunderbird stores this in its own file on the server[18:36:13] <v0lZy> i dont think it writes to the files themselves, it keeps a separate file for this info[18:36:26] <lunaphyte> so far this is unrelated to postfix, yes.[18:36:51] <lunaphyte> maybe #thunderbird can help you further though[18:37:15] <v0lZy> ok, thanks for the time being guys[18:37:32] <v0lZy> ill see if i can get this postfix wonder up and going and tie it up with dovecot first[18:38:51] <lunaphyte> use lmtp and relay_domains[18:39:27] <lunaphyte> [not the silly methods that the various "blogs" and "howtos" will undoubtedly suggest][18:41:22] <v0lZy> yeah, i see the howtos usually suggest setups with databases and bloat etc[18:41:31] <v0lZy> i dont need local users[18:41:37] <lunaphyte> that too, yes.[18:41:38] <v0lZy> just remote users, 15 or so of them[18:41:50] <v0lZy> multiple domains though[18:41:56] <lunaphyte> well, that's unrelated[18:42:07] <v0lZy> what is lmtp bw?[18:42:08] <lunaphyte> there is no "local" or "remote" users.[18:42:23] <lunaphyte> lmtp is how you should deliver messages from postfix to dovecot[18:44:00] <v0lZy> ah, yes, i recall reading about it now[18:45:58] *** master_of_master has joined #postfix[18:48:09] <UQlev> v0lZy, try to avoid group accounts, better use group alias to individual accounts[18:49:12] *** master_o1_master has quit IRC[18:53:48] *** ced117 has joined #postfix[18:57:56] <v0lZy> UQlev: u mean to use 1 email domain and then add an alias for each account as opposed to an alias for the entire domain?[18:59:08] <UQlev> v0lZy, no, it is not related to domains. If you wish same message will be delivered to a few people use group alias[18:59:14] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[18:59:34] <v0lZy> ah, no, its a bit different. they need to connect to the same account[18:59:53] <UQlev> v0lZy, that is what I recommend to avoid[19:00:04] <v0lZy> any particular reason why thats a bad idea?[19:01:17] <UQlev> v0lZy, it will be a mess when several people operate with 1 account, emagine when messages are deluted with spam[19:01:54] <UQlev> spammers especially love group accounts[19:03:34] *** mibofra has quit IRC[19:04:41] <v0lZy> UQlev: hm, maybe u can advice on what to do in this case[19:05:03] <v0lZy> they have a single email which receives requests for quotations from different sources[19:05:32] <v0lZy> they need to track what has already been done and who is working on it etc[19:05:43] *** mibofra has joined #postfix[19:05:58] <v0lZy> if each user has their own account, then they get copies of the same email and work on the same things twice[19:06:03] <v0lZy> thats what im trying to get around.[19:06:28] <UQlev> v0lZy, the 1st who reply sends quotation to the customer and CC to a group[19:07:50] <UQlev> v0lZy, or advise a group that "I have taken it"[19:10:32] <v0lZy> thats not practical in this case.[19:10:49] <v0lZy> quotes take a rather long time to prepare[19:11:00] <v0lZy> they should know before they start work on one[19:11:46] <v0lZy> so they should advise on who took it but that means more mails...[19:11:57] <patdk-wk_> there are MANY MANY long threads about this on dovecot[19:11:58] <v0lZy> i think it would be bast to adapt the workflow to have shared folders or something[19:12:24] <v0lZy> and drag from one folder to another based on who's doing it[19:12:42] <v0lZy> any creative solutions? :D[19:12:57] <UQlev> v0lZy, might be ticketing system[19:13:26] <UQlev> v0lZy, when I drag a message how do you know who did it?[19:14:07] <v0lZy> based on the folder its dragged to[19:14:31] <UQlev> v0lZy, if you see the message is "read" how do you know it will be processed duly?[19:14:56] <v0lZy> by agreement that all messages from inbox are considered unprocessed.[19:15:40] <v0lZy> regardless if read or not.[19:16:09] <v0lZy> i wonder if i can make a search folder in thundebird to display all mails from all subfolders of a certain folder...[19:18:24] <UQlev> v0lZy, I expect there will be sone issues when 2-3 people simultaneously will drug the same message[19:19:07] <UQlev> v0lZy, your dovecot will get mad[19:19:15] <v0lZy> hm..[19:19:31] <patdk-wk_> it shouldn't[19:19:44] <patdk-wk_> only one user could lock and move it on dovecot at a time[19:19:51] <v0lZy> shouldnt it just bitch that it cant find the mail after the first user drops it somewhere?[19:20:16] <patdk-wk_> UQlev, you still using pre 1.0 dovecot?[19:20:33] <Zerberus> there is a reason why ticket systems exist, like otrs or rt[19:22:41] * UQlev agrees with Zerberus that ticket system is more appropriate for this case[19:23:04] <v0lZy> hm...[19:23:14] <v0lZy> so like thraq or someting?[19:24:47] <UQlev> http://freecode.com/search?q=ticket&submit=Search[19:27:04] <v0lZy> thanks for your suggestiosn[19:27:05] *** wdp_ has joined #postfix[19:27:18] <v0lZy> i think ill try seeing if it works with plain email[19:27:23] <v0lZy> and if no, hen ticket system somehow[19:27:48] *** eth00 has joined #postfix[19:27:51] *** eth00 has joined #postfix[19:28:39] *** chris_ has joined #postfix[19:30:51] *** wdp has quit IRC[19:31:06] *** Temikus has joined #postfix[19:33:54] *** Temikus has quit IRC[19:34:06] *** Temikus has joined #postfix[19:45:15] *** sorressean has joined #postfix[19:46:21] <sorressean> I'm trying to set up a mail system to only allow for delivery of mails (mainly for mailman). I don't want mail delivered out though. Is there a way I can allow local systems like mailman to deliver through postfix but prevent external mail? Is that just relay?[19:52:11] <UQlev> sorressean, it is possible if you prohibit relay[19:52:34] <sorressean> So I would only allow relay for $mydomain and localhost?[19:52:57] *** averagecase has joined #postfix[19:53:19] <UQlev> sorressean, local is not relay, it is delivery[19:53:54] <v0lZy> guys, if i want to have more than 1 domain, what should myhostname be set to?[19:54:29] <UQlev> v0lZy, hostname is irrelevan to domains hosted[19:55:00] <v0lZy> what is it relevant to?[19:55:13] <v0lZy> my compouters hostname is 'ocelot' as per /etc/hostname[19:55:19] <sorressean> ah nods. so I shouldn't have that?ah nods. I think I got it[19:55:22] <sorressean> thanks.[19:56:18] <Zerberus> v0lZy: the identity your postfix host uses has to match the DNS (forward + reverse) info[19:56:20] <UQlev> v0lZy, you have to have at least 1 DNS A-record to resolve your hostname[19:56:34] <v0lZy> i see[19:56:49] <v0lZy> so i configured an a host record and an mx record[19:57:00] <v0lZy> as test.mydomain.com[19:57:23] <Zerberus> please don't misuse domains you don't own[19:57:25] <v0lZy> so does my computers hostname need to be either 'test' or i have to update this myhostname variable to be 'test' since my hostname is 'ocelot'[19:57:53] <v0lZy> im not, its a subdomain of mine.[19:58:12] <v0lZy> just dont want to publicize it on the net...[19:58:14] <Zerberus> v0lZy: you pretty sure do not own mydomain.com[19:58:40] <v0lZy> Zerberus: no, i just wrote it that way so its not publicized all over the net, you kow log bots harvesting stuff.[19:59:07] <Zerberus> v0lZy: that's why I said that you shall not use foreign domains[19:59:17] <UQlev> v0lZy, it is useless hide your domain, or hostname[19:59:36] <v0lZy> ok, sorry, ill rephrase[19:59:38] <UQlev> v0lZy, these are public attributes[19:59:57] <lunaphyte> uh...[20:00:10] <lunaphyte> that is incredibly self centered.[20:00:19] <v0lZy> if my local hostname is 'ocelot' and my a host record is 'test.*.tld', arbitrary string for *, it would be appropriate to put 'test' into my myhostname variable in main.cf?[20:00:36] <lunaphyte> please do not use other people's domain names in your examples. it's inconsiderate.[20:00:54] <v0lZy> yeah, you are right, i appologize...[20:01:01] <Zerberus> v0lZy: $myhostname has to be an FQDN[20:01:16] <v0lZy> ah, ok Zerberus[20:01:26] <v0lZy> and it needs to match the A host record im MX-in my mails to..[20:01:55] <v0lZy> if i dont put that there, its gonna think 'ocelot' is its fqdn.[20:02:26] <v0lZy> do i add one for each domain name?[20:02:33] <v0lZy> or just pick one from the several domains and use that?[20:02:42] <lunaphyte> what exactly are you trying to accomplish?[20:02:48] <UQlev> v0lZy, just 1 for all[20:03:34] <v0lZy> lunaphyte: several domains on 1 mail server.. .like as if it was 1 company with multiple brands, 1 domain per each brand.[20:04:09] <lunaphyte> just choose a neutral hostname for the server, and point the mx record for each domain to that hostname[20:04:18] <UQlev> v0lZy, you may have multiple MX pointing to 1 hostname[20:04:33] <v0lZy> yeah i know the domain side of things[20:04:41] <v0lZy> just trying to make sense of how its done in postfix.[20:04:58] <v0lZy> cause right now im looking at mydomain[20:05:23] <lunaphyte> you just put each domain name in relay_domains[20:05:36] <v0lZy> and removing 'test' would leave me with *.tld, and thats not gonna work cause thats already used by a different email server...[20:05:42] <lunaphyte> mydomain should be example.com. myhostname should be foo.example.com[20:05:59] <v0lZy> i guess ill add ocelot.test.*.tld ...[20:06:29] <lunaphyte> you already have a mail server running and in use for example.com?[20:06:35] <lunaphyte> i'm confused[20:06:36] <v0lZy> but then i need to create that in my DNS records so that ocelot's FQDN is there too...[20:06:56] <v0lZy> lunaphyte: at the company I work with, i have an email server (axigen)[20:07:03] <lunaphyte> for what email addresses will this server be receiving mail? that is question number one. have you clearly defined the answer?[20:07:11] <v0lZy> I wanna test out postfix here at home[20:07:22] <lunaphyte> so then what is the problem?[20:07:43] <v0lZy> without endangering them so im using a subdomain test.company.tld[20:07:47] <lunaphyte> what would your toy server at home have anything to do with your employer's email system?[20:07:59] <lunaphyte> why are you trying to use your employer's domain name at home?[20:08:25] <v0lZy> lunaphyte: cause i dont have my own domain, and its just a scratchpad test im doing, its not for a permanent setup or anything[20:08:25] <lunaphyte> what are you actually testing?[20:08:35] <UQlev> v0lZy, do you have static IP at home? does your ISP let smtp packets through?[20:08:39] <lunaphyte> just use example.com[20:08:53] <v0lZy> UQlev: yes, i've ran mailservers at home before.[20:08:56] <lunaphyte> you don't need to involve your employer's domain name.[20:09:56] <v0lZy> lunaphyte: i want to have it publically accessible for the weekend to test an external mail cleaning service[20:12:03] <v0lZy> what i plan to do is forward all mail on my main server to my home server over the internet[20:12:21] <v0lZy> but my home server will be using an outsourced service with a higher mx priority set to that[20:13:02] <v0lZy> that way i dont need to modify my existing setup on the domain part[20:14:47] <v0lZy> What im currnetly confused about is myhostname vs mydomain .... .myhostname by default is a FQDN, and mydomain name is just the domain part. But does this mean that my computers hostname should have a FQDN ... so if my computer is 'ocelot', should i have an ocelot.test.*.tld, and set myhostname to that, while setting mydomain to test.*.tld[20:15:34] <UQlev> v0lZy, yes[20:15:59] <UQlev> don't use domain name as hostname[20:17:08] <v0lZy> k[20:17:10] <v0lZy> so i did this[20:17:47] <UQlev> v0lZy, I bet ".test." you also can omit if it is your domain example.com[20:17:51] <v0lZy> A host record ocelot.test.*.tld pointing to my IP, MX record pointing to ocelot.test.*.tld and a TXT record with spf entry for test.*.tld[20:19:03] <UQlev> v0lZy, why do you need subdomain?[20:19:20] <v0lZy> i explained above.[20:19:36] <v0lZy> I dont have a separate domain registered, and the domain im using already has a server defined[20:19:49] <v0lZy> my aim is to setup a server at home to test a spam service[20:20:05] <UQlev> does your server use domain name as hostname?[20:20:29] <v0lZy> idea is to forward all the emails i get to the main server, to the spam service and have them deliver it to a subdomain... that way i dont edit the existing setup until im happy that i wanna go with that service.[20:20:47] <v0lZy> a host which MX is pointed to is mail.*.tld[20:20:57] <UQlev> v0lZy, forward you can to IP without using any hostname[20:22:01] <UQlev> v0lZy, well, let your mail.*.tld forward to ocelot.*.tld[20:22:33] <UQlev> I don't see clear proof of necessity "test"[20:24:03] <v0lZy> i need to do it over the internet[20:24:22] <v0lZy> the thing is that this service is done through routing email through them[20:24:32] <UQlev> do it over internet once you have public IP on both sides[20:25:03] *** Motoko has joined #postfix[20:25:08] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[20:25:37] <v0lZy> so if mail is being set to user at * dot tld i am forwarding it to user at test dot *.tld and test.*.tld is pointed to the service, and they then forward to my home ip[20:26:55] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[20:27:05] <v0lZy> makes sense?[20:27:14] <UQlev> v0lZy, I see only that "test" is "5th wheel in a cart"[20:29:09] <v0lZy> lets just consider that test.*.tld is my tld.[20:30:15] <UQlev> you will make a separate zone for test.*.tld only for ocelot.test.*.tld?[20:30:19] <v0lZy> so my hostname on the pc is 'ocelot' and myhostname in main.cf is ocelot.test.*.tld, and there is an A record for ocelot.test.*.tld and an mx record for test.*.tld and an spf in a TXT record for test.*.tld[20:31:02] <v0lZy> UQlev: for the time being yes, but there will be other stuff coming in later[20:31:09] <v0lZy> its a playzone :)[20:31:37] <v0lZy> anyway.. mydomain i understand will now automatically be st to 'test.*.tld' if myhostname is set to ocelot.test.*.tld[20:31:41] <UQlev> well do it your best[20:32:21] <v0lZy> "myorigin" ... do i need this if im not posting any mails from the actual mail server?[20:33:04] <UQlev> myorigin probably has default value myhostname[20:33:41] <lunaphyte> leave it alone, and set append_at_myorigin = no[20:34:04] <lunaphyte> you don't want your mail server trying to clean up after crap has been submitted to it. just reject the crap[20:34:47] <lunaphyte> and, no, mydomain will not be automatically set[20:34:55] *** chris_ has quit IRC[20:35:14] <lunaphyte> set mydomain to example.com, and set myhostname to test.$mydomain[20:35:58] <v0lZy> i just specified them in the bariables as is, wihout using variables[20:36:05] <v0lZy> cool to know that that can be doen though[20:36:07] <UQlev> lunaphyte, he wants ocelot.test.example.tld[20:36:16] <lunaphyte> fine.[20:36:23] <lunaphyte> set mydomain to test.example.com, and set myhostname to test.$mydomain[20:36:37] <v0lZy> now im looking at myorigin and receiving mail sections...[20:36:42] <lunaphyte> also, for spf, you'll need the regular spf rr, as well as the old txt rr[20:37:01] <lunaphyte> if you're passing to dovecot, just put test.example.com in relay_domains[20:37:57] <v0lZy> rr ?[20:38:14] <v0lZy> havent gotten to dovecot part yet, overwhelemd with new info :D[20:38:58] <lunaphyte> dns rr[20:39:17] <v0lZy> ah.. reverse record = rr ?[20:39:30] <patdk-wk_> round robin[20:39:36] <patdk-wk_> your thinking ptr[20:39:58] <v0lZy> i just setup TXT record with v=spf1 ip4:myip -all[20:40:16] <patdk-wk_> myip is the only address that will ever send email for your domain?[20:40:28] <v0lZy> yeah.[20:40:37] <patdk-wk_> generally it's safer to use " a mx " in there also[20:41:05] <v0lZy> how so?[20:41:47] <v0lZy> uh.. now things get complicated... i have this computer behind NAT, in a virtual machine thats also doing NAT[20:41:47] <UQlev> v0lZy, less changes for your multiple MX[20:43:07] <lunaphyte> no, not round robin[20:43:13] <lunaphyte> resource record[20:43:25] <lunaphyte> you need to use the spf rr. not just txt[20:43:26] <patdk-wk_> ah[20:43:52] <v0lZy> hm[20:43:56] <v0lZy> is that the 'srv' record ?[20:44:29] <patdk-wk_> I really don't understand the reason for the srv type[20:44:58] <patdk-wk_> now you got me doing it wrong[20:45:00] <patdk-wk_> not srv[20:45:03] <patdk-wk_> it's spf[20:46:26] <v0lZy> ok, just new terminology here from me[20:46:45] <v0lZy> i've been seeting my spf records at my domain hosting provider as TXT records[20:46:47] <v0lZy> into which i put[20:47:01] <v0lZy> v=spf1 ip4:myip -all[20:47:41] <UQlev> v0lZy, it is enough for beginning[20:49:41] <v0lZy> ok, moving forward[20:50:12] <v0lZy> I have a public IP----NAT----NAT--postfix layout[20:50:26] <v0lZy> basically postfix is in a virtual machine thats natted to its host thats natted to the internet[20:50:38] <v0lZy> im looking at proxy_interfaces[20:54:30] <v0lZy> myorigin = $myhostname sounds ok to me.[20:54:57] <v0lZy> inet_interfaces = $myhostname i dont exactly understand[20:57:22] *** UQlev has quit IRC[20:57:25] <rob0> Why are you setting inet_interfaces?[20:57:32] *** ogny has joined #postfix[21:00:19] <v0lZy> well, im curious on how i would limit it to receive only on 1 IP if i thas like 5 netowork cards.. in case i want to some day run a fileserver and a mail server off of the same computer but different nics.[21:08:57] *** mechanicalduck_ has joined #postfix[21:09:01] <rob0> yep, that might do it, depending if the system can resolve "$myhostname".[21:09:43] <rob0> You can also use an IP address or an interface name, see postconf.5.html#inet_interfaces[21:10:55] <rob0> Of course mail service and file service do not conflict in terms of port/protocol usage, so you could probably have all services on all interfaces.[21:11:26] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[21:13:14] <v0lZy> it trys to resolve the local hostname to the ip through ping or something?[21:13:46] <v0lZy> proxy_interfaces is what im more puzzled about though[21:14:03] *** Temikus has quit IRC[21:14:06] <v0lZy> like i said, my postfix is running in a virtual machine thats NATed to the host, thats behind NAT itself.[21:14:26] <v0lZy> i suppose i need to give some public ip information to postfix[21:14:36] <v0lZy> but with multiple NAT points... im a bit lost[21:16:44] <rob0> !basic[21:16:44] <knoba> rob0: "basic" : http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html : a good starting place for Postfix beginners, many common questions are answered here.[21:16:53] <rob0> !proxy_interfaces[21:16:53] <knoba> rob0: "proxy_interfaces" : a configuration parameter in the main.cf: The network interface addresses that this mail system receives mail on by way of a proxy or network address translation unit. This setting extends the address list specified with the inet_interfaces parameter.[21:19:28] <v0lZy> yeah im reading that in the configuration file, but im not understanding it :D[21:21:30] <rob0> maybe postconf.5.html#proxy_interfaces will help?[21:23:04] <v0lZy> You must specify your "outside" proxy/NAT addresses when your system is a backup MX host for other domains, otherwise mail delivery loops will happen when the primary MX host is down.[21:23:11] <v0lZy> so... i dont need it if im not doing backup mx?[21:23:20] *** krisfremen has quit IRC[21:25:08] <rob0> myhostname should be a real, resolvable Internet name, which resolves to the IP address you're on, whether directly or by means of NAT or proxy.[21:25:42] <v0lZy> yeah, that it is.[21:26:17] <rob0> proxy_interfaces should be set so that Postfix knows what your "real" IP address is.[21:26:26] *** roentgen has joined #postfix[21:26:31] <rob0> (in the case of NAT or proxy)[21:26:52] <v0lZy> real IP on the network perimeter?[21:27:01] <v0lZy> would be a lot esier if it just asked for that....[21:27:16] *** roentgen has quit IRC[21:27:16] <v0lZy> but since im natted twice, how do i go about speficying this?[21:27:31] <v0lZy> closest NAT IP, furthest NAT IP ?[21:28:29] <rob0> Double NAT is just poor network design, FWIW. But anyway, whether single or double, a NATed IP address is not "real".[21:29:02] <rob0> proxy_interfaces = your.real.ip.addr[21:29:36] <v0lZy> well. its cause im virtualizing the machien running postfix[21:31:13] <v0lZy> wouldnt it be better to just put 'list of your publicly accessible IP's here or something :D)[21:32:59] <rob0> BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html#proxy_interfaces[21:45:18] <v0lZy> hanks rob0 , i think im gonna take a little break to clear my head[21:45:33] *** Cromulent has quit IRC[22:06:32] *** ChadLepto has quit IRC[22:07:17] *** ChadLepto has joined #postfix[22:08:45] *** Cromulent has joined #postfix[22:09:05] *** mechanicalduck_ has quit IRC[22:12:01] *** Corey has quit IRC[22:12:19] *** Corey has joined #postfix[22:22:37] *** Cromulent has quit IRC[22:26:46] *** sphenxes02 has joined #postfix[22:29:23] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[22:30:03] *** sphenxes01 has quit IRC[22:30:10] *** sphenxes has joined #postfix[22:33:02] *** averagecase has quit IRC[22:37:05] *** mechanicalduck has joined #postfix[22:38:18] *** master_o1_master has joined #postfix[22:41:58] *** master_of_master has quit IRC[22:42:20] *** krisfremen has joined #postfix[22:55:07] *** jarif has quit IRC[22:56:01] *** mechanicalduck has quit IRC[23:05:08] *** sphenxes has quit IRC[23:05:09] *** sphenxes02 has quit IRC[23:10:07] *** gu1lle_ has joined #postfix[23:11:13] *** kradalby has joined #postfix[23:13:21] <kradalby> I have recently configured myself a little mailserver that i am going to use for mailing lists. But i have problem with mail going to spam, does anyone have som tips i can take in account so this is more likly?[23:14:24] *** sleepee_ has joined #postfix[23:15:02] <rob0> Deliverability is a very tough matter. First step,[23:15:09] <rob0> !fcrdns[23:15:09] <knoba> rob0: "fcrdns" : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_Confirmed_reverse_DNS : your IP address should resolve to $myhostname, which in turn should resolve back to your IP. This is very important if you want big sites to accept your mail. If you can't have it from your ISP, see !relayhost[23:15:38] <rob0> oh, actually a step before that: don't get hosting from a lousy provider![23:17:39] *** net6a_serge has quit IRC[23:21:51] <rob0> A good next step is to sign up for DNSWL.org and get whitelisted.[23:22:25] <patdk-wk_> setup spf+dkim[23:22:33] <rob0> and of course keep your output scrupulously spam-free, otherwise you'll be rightfully blocked.[23:24:51] <kradalby> thanks[23:25:24] <adaptr> but of all of those, FCrDNS is the most important one. without it, you have no chance.[23:25:34] <kradalby> k thanks[23:25:46] <kradalby> so rDNS is most important[23:25:56] <adaptr> it's required by the RFC[23:26:09] <kradalby> but if you have mailing list for multiple domains that is a problem?[23:26:24] <adaptr> common mistake. no, that has nothing to do with it.[23:26:37] <adaptr> yuo can host a zillion domains on a mailserver that is not in any of them[23:26:37] <rob0> With FCrDNS you can probably manage to build a reputation. Mailspike.org has a whitelist you do NOT sign up for.[23:26:41] <adaptr> it's just a mailserver[23:27:18] <patdk-wk_> repution can be done many ways by receivers[23:27:25] <patdk-wk_> by ip, by domain, by dkim[23:27:58] <patdk-wk_> generally, people start with ip, then add the others into the mix[23:28:30] <kradalby> ah ok, so if lets say google accepts my server list.example.org, then everything, until something breaks a rule from that server is accepted?[23:28:44] <kradalby> that makes sense[23:31:25] *** wdp_ has quit IRC[23:33:27] *** sorressean has left #postfix[23:41:16] *** ced117 has quit IRC[23:41:22] *** gavimobile has joined #postfix[23:43:21] <gavimobile> folks, I've setup a postfix server using ssl+tls. im not firmiliar with neither postfix or dovecot however I noticed when setting up a client like outlook, I am required to use ssl for pop and tls for smtp, however im not asked to require authentication. any ideas? or if im already using ssl + tls so authentication isn't required[23:43:58] <adaptr> you shouldn't be using SSL at all[23:44:15] <adaptr> for both IMAP and submission, use mandatory STARTTLS[23:44:55] <gavimobile> adaptr: ok[23:45:13] <gavimobile> what do you mean by submission?[23:45:24] <gavimobile> I only want imap and pop3[23:45:43] <jacekowski> SSL is just as good as starttls[23:45:49] <adaptr> presumably, you also want to send mail[23:45:59] <gavimobile> adaptr: yes I do.[23:46:00] <adaptr> jacekowski: please do not advise that here[23:46:22] <gavimobile> jacekowski: I think that most mail servers do use starttls rather than ssl[23:46:28] <gavimobile> it sounds like a good idea[23:46:41] <rob0> !smtps[23:46:42] <knoba> rob0: "smtps" : Port 465 is smtps, SMTP over SSL, a deprecated means of submission. This means that smtps should *not* be used, and that this factoid exists for historical purposes only and should not be implemented. See !submission for smtps' successor. That being said, Postfix can implement smtps with a separate smtpd(8) listener with \"-o smtpd_tls_wrappermode=yes\". See the commented example in master.cf.[23:46:51] <rob0> !outlook[23:46:52] <knoba> rob0: "outlook" : MS Outlook has numerous problems with TLS and AUTH support. Try using a better client to troubleshoot your Postfix server's AUTH features; then once you know it works, you can go back and break it such that Outlook will work. See the following MS KB article to enable transport logging in Outlook that may be of some help in troubleshooting, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300479/en-us[23:47:52] *** averagecase has joined #postfix[23:48:00] *** averagecase has quit IRC[23:51:47] *** BeepDog has joined #postfix[23:52:07] <BeepDog> is there is there a way to have postfix run a content filter *after* the aliases have been resolved and such?[23:52:22] <gavimobile> adaptr: ok, I think I got smarttls working now.[23:52:30] <gavimobile> but im still required to use ssl[23:52:44] <BeepDog> I'm going insane trying to deal with dspam, and the ${user} macro in the master.cf isn't properly resolved[23:52:47] <gavimobile> and its not requiring me to use authentication which I woud like[23:52:51] <adaptr> !tell BeepDog filter[23:52:51] <knoba> BeepDog: "filter" : see !filter_readme[23:52:53] <BeepDog> I need it to be the final destination user, not whomever it came in for[23:52:54] <adaptr> !tell BeepDog filter_readme[23:52:55] <knoba> BeepDog: "filter_readme" : http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html :: After-queue content filtering[23:53:03] <BeepDog> yeah that doesn't seem to work[23:53:05] <BeepDog> because that's how I'm doing it[23:53:14] <BeepDog> at least I think[23:53:30] <adaptr> BeepDog: here's a hint: deliver to dspam. then have dspam deliver to dovecot.[23:53:47] <adaptr> postfix > LTMP > dspam -> LMTP -> dovecot[23:53:51] <adaptr> that's what I use[23:54:01] <rob0> !receive_override_options[23:54:01] <knoba> rob0: "receive_override_options" : (default: empty) - Enable or disable recipient validation, built-in content filtering, or address mapping. Typically, these are specified in master.cf as arguments for the smtpd(8), qmqpd(8) or pickup(8) daemons. See: http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#receive_override_options[23:54:39] <BeepDog> adaptr: yeah that's what I'm doing heh[23:54:46] <BeepDog> actually wait[23:54:48] <BeepDog> no that's not what I'm doing[23:54:55] <BeepDog> I have a huge problem with permissions if I do it that way[23:54:57] <BeepDog> because I used to[23:55:03] <rob0> Use receive_override_options on either side or both sides of the filter as needed, if you're piping back to a reinjection smtpd.[23:55:12] <BeepDog> rob0: okay, thanks, I'll look into that[23:55:19] <BeepDog> because that is what I'm doing[23:55:31] <BeepDog> but it's not the incoming side however[23:55:35] <BeepDog> it's the spot that filters out to dspam[23:55:43] <adaptr> BeepDog: since dspam itself doesn't write to any mailboxes, you don't need permissions. just run dspam as a dspam user.[23:55:57] <BeepDog> but dovecot deliver needs to run as the local user[23:56:04] <BeepDog> so that it can drop mail into their home dirs[23:56:07] <BeepDog> right?[23:56:27] <BeepDog> because I'm trying to do it the same way you're doing it, but there must be something I'm missing[23:56:45] <BeepDog> right now I'm calling dspamc (which is probably less than ideal, but I couldn't figure out the LMTP bits)[23:57:01] <adaptr> I did not say "dovecot deliver". I said *dovecot*.[23:57:06] <BeepDog> oh[23:57:07] <BeepDog> hrm[23:57:11] <adaptr> re-read above.[23:57:15] <BeepDog> so you'd start up dovecot's LMTP server then?[23:57:19] <BeepDog> and it does all the delivering?[23:57:46] <BeepDog> so postfix doesn't do any local delivery at all then...[23:57:53] <patdk-wk_> it matters not if you use dovecot lmtp or dovecot lda[23:58:13] <BeepDog> well I'm trying to use dovecot LDA, with sieve and all that[23:58:25] *** mibofra has quit IRC[23:58:26] <BeepDog> could I see the stuff that wires the pieces together?[23:58:27] <adaptr> patdk-wk_: it does matter.[23:58:27] <patdk-wk_> yes, but why does this matter for dspamc?[23:58:31] <BeepDog> there's gotta be something simple I'm missing[23:58:37] <BeepDog> dspamc requires me to pass in a --user[23:58:43] <adaptr> exactly.[23:58:46] <BeepDog> patdk-wk_: and I need it to be the locally resolved user[23:58:48] <BeepDog> and that's being a pain[23:58:56] <patdk-wk_> heh[23:59:02] <patdk-wk_> use amavis :)[23:59:07] <adaptr> no thank you[23:59:08] <BeepDog> so if I can avoid that pain, and have dspam just tag a message happily for me, and associate it with the incoming user...[23:59:12] <BeepDog> yeah I'd rather not use amavis[23:59:16] <BeepDog> I'm like 99% of the way there[23:59:26] <adaptr> BeepDog: deliver to dspam.[23:59:26] <BeepDog> if I could just figure out how to specify the locally resolved user in master.cf I'd be done[23:59:33] <adaptr> you don't.[23:59:37] <BeepDog> darn[23:59:48] <adaptr> you deliver to dspam[23:59:50] <BeepDog> how do I deliver it to dspam LMTP then?[23:59:51] <patdk-wk_> deliever to dpsam and have dspam go to dovecot?