Re: Method to drop unknown user messages to black hole

2007-07-13 Thread Jorey Bump
Bob Bob wrote: > My first question is a general one. Do you all choose to send > reject/nonexistent user messages or just black hole them? Rejecting is > obviously the simplest solution but I am concerned about being > blacklisted from sending garbage back out. There are ways of course to > stop b

Re: Method to drop unknown user messages to black hole

2007-07-13 Thread Anthony Tibbs
Hi Bob, Perhaps I am missing something here, but with my Postfix setup (which is based on two instances of Postfix + amavisd-new + Cyrus), messages are checked against a user database at the outer postfix, and rejected during the SMTP connection for invalid recipients, before lmtp/etc. even see

Method to drop unknown user messages to black hole

2007-07-13 Thread Bob Bob
Postfix & Cyrus Have been finishing off the server ready for accepting external smtp connections. No more fetchmail... I note that in todays spam environment more and more administrators are choosing to black hole any messages with invalid recipients. In a standard postfix setup this is pretty ea

Re: Cyrus/Sieve- Global Filter?

2007-07-13 Thread Sebastian Hagedorn
-- George Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 13. Juli 2007 22:30:25 +0100 regarding Cyrus/Sieve- Global Filter?: Cyrus IMAPD 2.2.12 on FreeBSD configured with sieve support, SquirrelMail with Avelsieve. I need to create a global cyrus filter of any kind, so that all delive

Cyrus/Sieve- Global Filter?

2007-07-13 Thread George Cooke
Hello list. I apologise if I am asking a stupid question(s), I am a complete POSIX n00b, but read as much as I can. Cyrus IMAPD 2.2.12 on FreeBSD configured with sieve support, SquirrelMail with Avelsieve. I need to create a global cyrus filter of any kind, so that all delivered mail messages m

Re: LTMPD rejecting large messages, maxmessagesize is _not_ set

2007-07-13 Thread Chris St. Pierre
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: >> Why would Cyrus return that? Obviously something is wrong with the >> delivery, but under what circumstances would a) lmtpd invoke the >> sendmail binary? > > That would happen if the user in question has a sieve redirect rule. Yep, I just fig

Re: LTMPD rejecting large messages, maxmessagesize is _not_ set

2007-07-13 Thread Sebastian Hagedorn
-- "Chris St. Pierre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 13. Juli 2007 12:10:59 -0500 regarding Re: LTMPD rejecting large messages, maxmessagesize is _not_ set: Right you are. It's Postfix's 'sendmail' binary that appears to be generating the error, although I'm still perplexed

Re: LTMPD rejecting large messages, maxmessagesize is _not_ set

2007-07-13 Thread Chris St. Pierre
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Chris St. Pierre wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, David Carter wrote: > >> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Chris St. Pierre wrote: >> >>> LMTPD is rejecting large messages; I've been unable to figure out the exact >>> threshold, but I am seeing messages like this in my Postfix logs: >>> >

Re: LTMPD rejecting large messages, maxmessagesize is _not_ set

2007-07-13 Thread Chris St. Pierre
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, David Carter wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Chris St. Pierre wrote: > >> LMTPD is rejecting large messages; I've been unable to figure out the exact >> threshold, but I am seeing messages like this in my Postfix logs: >> >> Jun 28 20:23:12 vostok postfix/qmgr[9323]: 22F5373D

Re: 8G RAM in 32bit platform

2007-07-13 Thread A J Thew
On 7/13/07, Patrick T. Tsang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > Sorry, I didn't mention it is Redhat AS5.0 > > The bigsmp no longer exists. I thought the 5 kernels were PAE by default now (?) Alan Thew > > Anyone tried 32bits Redhat AS5.0 with 8G RAM for cyrus imapd? > > Thanks > Patrick > >

Re: LTMPD rejecting large messages, maxmessagesize is _not_ set

2007-07-13 Thread David Carter
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Chris St. Pierre wrote: > LMTPD is rejecting large messages; I've been unable to figure out the > exact threshold, but I am seeing messages like this in my Postfix logs: > > Jun 28 20:23:12 vostok postfix/qmgr[9323]: 22F5373D6F6: > from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, size=16243464, nr

Re: 8G RAM in 32bit platform

2007-07-13 Thread Patrick T. Tsang
Hello, Sorry, I didn't mention it is Redhat AS5.0 The bigsmp no longer exists. Anyone tried 32bits Redhat AS5.0 with 8G RAM for cyrus imapd? Thanks Patrick - Original Message - From: "David Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Patrick T. Tsang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Friday, Jul

Re: 8G RAM in 32bit platform

2007-07-13 Thread David Carter
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Patrick T. Tsang wrote: > We will start up the mail server with 4G RAM. > As I know the 32bits cannot handle RAM more than 3.2G. > > The client plans to upgrade the RAM to 8G in coming years. > Can the 64bits platform is the only solution to it? You don't say which CPU or ope

Re: 8G RAM in 32bit platform

2007-07-13 Thread Olaf Fraczyk
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 15:19 +0800, Patrick T. Tsang wrote: > Hello, > > We will start up the mail server with 4G RAM. > As I know the 32bits cannot handle RAM more than 3.2G. I assume you mean Intel/AMD? If you do, then this is not true. You can have systems with 64GB RAM. But not on commodity ha

8G RAM in 32bit platform

2007-07-13 Thread Patrick T. Tsang
Hello, We will start up the mail server with 4G RAM. As I know the 32bits cannot handle RAM more than 3.2G. The client plans to upgrade the RAM to 8G in coming years. Can the 64bits platform is the only solution to it? Is there any outstanding problem of 64bits on Cyrus imapd server? Thanks Pat