't tell you anything about the "why." You will
> want to read up on each of the things he tells you to do.
>
> But if you just want to get Postfix up and running, it's very easy to
> read along and adapt the steps to your environment. I use postconf -e
> for each
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 10:54 AM Todd Zullinger wrote:
> [...]
> I don't understand the appeal of any
> of these "AI" tools. They simply regurgitate text based on
> probability. They're masters of making shit talking sound
> almost reasonable. The amount of human time they waste is
> only sur
rongs don't make a right. But three lefts do.
> The system crontab mails to root. So there IS one change
> needed for postfix and that is to add to aliases:
>
> cat <>/etc/aliases || exit 1
> root:
> EOF
>
> newaliases
>
> And then restart postfix
>
>
On 6/27/25 9:22 AM, Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
I want to create a simple howto for local mail delivery with postfix.
I did a LOT with postfix ~7 years ago, and found many of my notes this
morning.
Thing is that google AI did not show the preferred way to edit main.cf
which is to use
perfectly
fine to directly edit the file, or manage it with configuration tools
like Ansible.
You have maybe not spent time on the postfix list! I did years ago...
postconf -e IS really nice in setting up scripts for changing postfix
on multiple systems. And tracking changes you made.
Thus
You are right, in part, in "working out of the box". And it is why I
went off into left field. Not necessarily a bad thing.
The system crontab mails to root. So there IS one change needed for
postfix and that is to add to aliases:
cat <>/etc/aliases || exit 1
root:
Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
> I want to create a simple howto for local mail delivery with postfix.
> I did a LOT with postfix ~7 years ago, and found many of my notes this
> morning.
>
> Thing is that google AI did not show the preferred way to edit main.cf which
> is t
Hi.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:22:39 -0400
Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
> So I want to start from scratch for all you that want a simple set of
> steps for postfix local delivery. But I stepped on my main.cf.
> Thus can someone point me to, or send me an unaltered F41 ma
le, or manage it with configuration tools
like Ansible.
> Thus can someone point me to, or send me an unaltered F41 main.cf?
> My googling did not find it.
One way would be to extract it from the RPM... something like:
$ dnf download postfix
$ rpm2cpio postfix-*.rpm | cpio -i --to-stdout .
I want to create a simple howto for local mail delivery with postfix.
I did a LOT with postfix ~7 years ago, and found many of my notes this
morning.
Thing is that google AI did not show the preferred way to edit main.cf
which is to use "postconf -e 'line'".
Surprised?
Almost there with postfix.
Google AI had me set:
home_mailbox = Mailbox
and the mail was going to ~/Mailbox
So I changed it to:
home_mailbox = /var/mail
Which is where mutt looks by default.
I also turned on:
mail_spool_directory = /var/mail
We will see how that goes. I have the
On 6/26/25 8:34 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
Or set up postfix local delivery to just use mailbox.
More googling.
The default is mbox. :)
But not in ~/Mailbox
default is /var/mail/user
You mentioned having to change some postfix settings,
perhaps sharing
Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
> Or set up postfix local delivery to just use mailbox.
>
> More googling.
The default is mbox. :)
You mentioned having to change some postfix settings,
perhaps sharing what those were might help?
I started a Fedora Workstation 42 Live image, instal
Just run mutt, then press 'c' and give either Maildir or Mailbox.
google has gotten better answering questions, once I figure out what to ask!
On 6/26/25 8:06 PM, Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
Or set up postfix local delivery to just use mailbox.
More googling.
On 6/26/25 8:02
Or set up postfix local delivery to just use mailbox.
More googling.
On 6/26/25 8:02 PM, Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
ARGH!!! :)
now to config mutt to read them...
On 6/26/25 7:53 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 6/26/25 4:44 PM, Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
I have been working on
ARGH!!! :)
now to config mutt to read them...
On 6/26/25 7:53 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 6/26/25 4:44 PM, Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
I have been working on configuring postfix for local delivery.
I tired both:
mailx -s "Subject" rgm < testit.txt
mailx -s "Subj
On 6/26/25 4:44 PM, Robert Moskowitz via users wrote:
I have been working on configuring postfix for local delivery.
I tired both:
mailx -s "Subject" rgm < testit.txt
mailx -s "Subject" rgm@localhost < testit.txt
/var/log/maillog shows
Jun 26 19:36:52 LX14
I have been working on configuring postfix for local delivery.
I tired both:
mailx -s "Subject" rgm < testit.txt
mailx -s "Subject" rgm@localhost < testit.txt
/var/log/maillog shows
Jun 26 19:36:52 LX140e-3 postfix/pickup[365674]: 73AF7383FD8: uid=1000
from=
Jun 26
er upgrade to F42, mutt + postfix no longer able to send
> email (Solved!)
>
> Hi
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:49:30 -0500 Ranjan Maitra via users wrote:
>
> > $ ll /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix
> > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 23 Jun 11 10:18 /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix -
Tim:
> > Actually list them individually. You'll most likely find that one of
> > them is a binary, and the others are symlinks to it.
Ranjan Maitra:
> Thanks, here you go:
>
> $ ll /usr/bin/sendmail.postfix
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 32K May 8 19:00 /usr/bin/sendmail.postfix*
> $ ll /usr/sb
ives --remove mta /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix
dnf -y reinstall postfix # To redo the alternatives
systemctl restart postfix.service
--
francis
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedor
er upgrade to F42, mutt + postfix no longer able to send
> email
>
> On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 21:48 -0500, Ranjan Maitra via users wrote:
> > Interestingly, the F42 machine has:
> > $ locate sendmail.postfix
> > /usr/bin/sendmail.postfix
> > /usr/lib/sendmail.postfix
On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 21:48 -0500, Ranjan Maitra via users wrote:
> Interestingly, the F42 machine has:
> $ locate sendmail.postfix
> /usr/bin/sendmail.postfix
> /usr/lib/sendmail.postfix
> /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix
Actually list them individually. You'll most likely find that one of
them is
Hi Todd,
Thanks very much for this!
On Wed Jun11'25 09:09:52PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> From: Todd Zullinger
> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:09:52 -0400
> To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users
> Subject: Re: After upgrade to F42, mutt
On Wed Jun11'25 09:21:33PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> From: Todd Zullinger
> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:21:33 -0400
> To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users
> Subject: Re: After upgrade to F42, mutt + postfix no longer able to send
&
postfix.
>
> I just installed postfix and mutt in a Fedorda 42 container
> and mutt reports: sendmail="usr/bin/sendmail -oem -oi" which
> seems to be entirely broken. You may have to set that
> manually in your muttrc in addition to fixing the symlinks
> to the
could be?
>
> I wanted to add that I upgraded using dnf system-upgrade
> plugin.
>
> My /etc/postfix/main.cf is carried over from F41 (and
> before).
There were issues for many folks with the merge of bin and
sbin. The result is that binaries aren't found as they
should be.
er upgrade to F42, mutt + postfix no longer able to send email
>
> Hi,
>
> After an upgrade to F42, I am no longer able to send email. When I press
> "send on mutt" after composing, I get
>
> Error sending message, child exited 127 (Exec error.).
>
> Any sug
Hi,
After an upgrade to F42, I am no longer able to send email. When I press "send
on mutt" after composing, I get
Error sending message, child exited 127 (Exec error.).
Any suggestions on what the error could be?
Many thanks and best wishes,
Ranjan
--
___
Tue, 13 May 2025 10:46:17 +0200
Marco kirjoitti:
> https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/systemd.preset.html
>
> For me it looks like preset shows the default, and Fedora/RHEL have
> many services disabled by default.
Thanks, now got it...
Jarmo
--
_
On Tue, 13 May 2025 11:10:29 +0300 jarmo wrote:
> Could someone explain what means this
>
> systemctl status postfix
> ● postfix.service - Postfix Mail Transport Agent
> Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service;
> enabled; preset: disabled) Drop-In: /usr/
Could someone explain what means this
systemctl status postfix
● postfix.service - Postfix Mail Transport Agent
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service; enabled; preset:
disabled)
Drop-In: /usr/lib/systemd/system/service.d
└─10-timeout-abort.conf
Active
Tue, 29 Apr 2025 13:48:17 -0400
Charles Dennett kirjoitti:
> On 4/29/25 12:54 PM, jarmo wrote:
>
> > But... As said, it was running ok, so far, when
> > came new kernel, updated, rebooted computer, postfix
> > sevice didn't start. In F41 it worked ok, when aft
On 4/29/25 12:54 PM, jarmo wrote:
But... As said, it was running ok, so far, when
came new kernel, updated, rebooted computer, postfix
sevice didn't start. In F41 it worked ok, when after kernel
update rebooted..
This F42 have something, what makes postix sevice disabled
after reboot,
> Am 29.04.2025 um 13:50 schrieb jarmo :
>
> Tue, 29 Apr 2025 12:39:53 +0200
> Peter Boy Uni kirjoitti:
>
>
>> That’s a regression since F41.
>>
>> When you issue an systemctl status postfix just after reboot, you
>> should get a short infor
Tue, 29 Apr 2025 09:13:48 -0700
Mike Wright kirjoitti:
>
> Read what I posted to you before. It is disabled. That means it
> will NOT START automatically. You must enable it in order for it to
> be started automatically.
>
> the command "systemctl enable --now pos
On 4/29/25 08:35, jarmo wrote:
Tue, 29 Apr 2025 07:10:46 -0700
Mike Wright kirjoitti:
On 4/29/25 04:50, jarmo wrote:
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service; disabled;
preset: disabled)
That line says it is disabled.
Try "systemctl enable --now postfix", then
Tue, 29 Apr 2025 07:10:46 -0700
Mike Wright kirjoitti:
> On 4/29/25 04:50, jarmo wrote:
> > Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service; disabled;
> > preset: disabled)
>
> That line says it is disabled.
>
>
> Try "systemctl enable --n
On Tue, 2025-04-29 at 14:50 +0300, jarmo wrote:
> systemctl status postfix
> ○ postfix.service - Postfix Mail Transport Agent
> Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service; disabled;
> preset: disabled)
> Drop-In: /usr/lib/systemd/system/service.d
>
s with the original poster. When the
system comes up as multiuser, start up postfix. But postfix must first
wait for the network (or at least the bits of it needs) to come up.
I've had that issue with NTP. If you tried to start it before the
network (which was its default), it'd start,
On Tue, 2025-04-29 at 16:12 +0200, Benny Lyne Amorsen wrote:
> The recommended solution is to trigger service start off incoming
> connections, if possible. This is less ideal for things like Postfix
> which might need to send traffic before they receive it.
On this computer we don&#x
ng
connections, if possible. This is less ideal for things like Postfix
which might need to send traffic before they receive it.
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject
On 4/29/25 04:50, jarmo wrote:
Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/postfix.service; disabled; preset:
disabled)
That line says it is disabled.
Try "systemctl enable --now postfix", then "systemctl status postfix".
See if
ervice states to enable it in
the multi-user.target: WantedBy=multi-user.target
> jarmo:
>> Is this what you mean?
>> systemctl enable postfix
>> Created symlink
>> '/etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/postfix.service' →
>> '/usr/lib/systemd/syst
Barry kirjoitti:
> > Being enabled is not necessarily enough.
> > It must be enabled for the default target.
> >
> > Is it wanted by the default target?
> >
jarmo:
> Is this what you mean?
> systemctl enable postfix
> Created symlink
> &#
8:03:26 +0200
From: francis.montag...@inria.fr
Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users
To: Community support for Fedora users
Hi
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:50:39 -0700 "Doug H." wrote:
Does anybody have an opinion on this?
Seeing the postfix bug introduced by that (no sendmail), I
Tue, 29 Apr 2025 12:39:53 +0200
Peter Boy Uni kirjoitti:
> That’s a regression since F41.
>
> When you issue an systemctl status postfix just after reboot, you
> should get a short information about the reason. I suppose it is a
> complain about network availability at th
> Am 29.04.2025 um 10:51 schrieb jarmo :
>
> Where to look, postfix service won't start
> after reboot? Have to start manually every
> time...
> And yes service is enabled. Happens every
> time, when update kernel...?
That’s a regression since F41.
When you issue an
Tue, 29 Apr 2025 10:09:21 +0100
Barry kirjoitti:
> Being enabled is not necessarily enough.
> It must be enabled for the default target.
>
> Is it wanted by the default target?
>
> Barry
Is this what you mean?
systemctl enable postfix
Created symlink
'/e
> On 29 Apr 2025, at 09:52, jarmo wrote:
>
> Where to look, postfix service won't start
> after reboot? Have to start manually every
> time...
> And yes service is enabled. Happens every
> time, when update kernel...?
Being enabled is not necessarily enough.
Where to look, postfix service won't start
after reboot? Have to start manually every
time...
And yes service is enabled. Happens every
time, when update kernel...?
Jarmo
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe se
On Fri, 17 May 2024 11:13:15 -0400
Alex wrote:
> That's what I was looking for, and thought it would fix it, but alas, it
> didn't.
I have done complete kludgery to solve problems like this by disabling
the service that won't start at boot, then adding rc.local entries
to use "at" to start the se
> > I have a fedora38 server with postfix-3.7.9 (although this problem has
> > existed for a long time) that fails to start because I believe the server
> > has multiple interfaces.
>
> The issue is that the postfix.service unit has After=network.target
> (which is fine
On 5/16/24 6:40 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I have a fedora38 server with postfix-3.7.9 (although this problem has
existed for a long time) that fails to start because I believe the
server has multiple interfaces.
ifconfig shows just the primary ethernet interface, but "ip addr" shows
On Thu, 2024-05-16 at 21:40 -0400, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a fedora38 server with postfix-3.7.9 (although this problem
> has existed for a long time) that fails to start because I believe
> the server has multiple interfaces.
>
> ifconfig shows just the primary ethernet inter
Once upon a time, Alex said:
> I have a fedora38 server with postfix-3.7.9 (although this problem has
> existed for a long time) that fails to start because I believe the server
> has multiple interfaces.
The issue is that the postfix.service unit has After=network.target
(which is
On 5/16/24 18:40, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I have a fedora38 server with postfix-3.7.9 (although this problem has
existed for a long time) that fails to start because I believe the server
has multiple interfaces.
ifconfig shows just the primary ethernet interface, but "ip addr" shows the
rest.
Hi,
I have a fedora38 server with postfix-3.7.9 (although this problem has
existed for a long time) that fails to start because I believe the server
has multiple interfaces.
ifconfig shows just the primary ethernet interface, but "ip addr" shows the
rest. There are five total interfac
> Date: Thursday, January 05, 2023 17:06:40 -0700
> From: Sbob
>
># echo 'Test 5' | mail -s "Test: $(date)"
># my_user@my_fastmail_domain.com
>
>
> and now I see this in /var/log/maillog :
>
> Jan 5 17:03:37 F37-Server postfix/pickup[916]:
I found the maillog, per an entry I found I changed a couple of the
settings in /etc/postfix/main.cf, it said these were required:
smtp_tls_wrappermode = yes
smtp_tls_security_level = encrypt
Then I ran:
# systemctl enable --now postfix.service
and another test:
# echo 'Test 5'
this for mailx:
>
># mailx
> No mail for root
>
>
> Is there another log to look at?
You seem to have looked for (new) mail for root. You need to look in
the log files. For postfix that's generally /var/log/maillog, but you
may have set it up differently.
[to keep thing
I see this for mailx:
# mailx
No mail for root
Is there another log to look at?
On 1/5/23 16:44, Richard wrote:
Date: Thursday, January 05, 2023 16:31:49 -0700
From: Sbob
when I run a test like this:
# echo 'It worked! 4' | mail -s "Test: $(date)"u...@somedomain.com
No mail ever shows u
> Date: Thursday, January 05, 2023 16:31:49 -0700
> From: Sbob
>
>
> when I run a test like this:
>
># echo 'It worked! 4' | mail -s "Test: $(date)" u...@somedomain.com
>
> No mail ever shows up,
Before trying to debug this in more detail, what's in the mail log on
your sending server?
___
All;
I started setting up a sendmail server, but have now switched to a
sendmail server.
I setup a new Fedora 37 server VM and have taken these steps per
https://fedoramagazine.org/use-postfix-to-get-email-from-your-fedora-system/
1)
# dnf install postfix mailx
2)
# MY_EMAIL_ADDRESS
Good morning,
TL;DR
If your Fedora 36 Postfix SPF configuration is broken due to the
latest pypolicyd-spf update, install python3-authres and restart
postfix to get it working again.
I noticed when I updated my system this past weekend that SPF was no
longer working after receiving
Hi,
I have a fedora32 server system with amavisd and postfix installed and
would like to block all email from China and a number of other
countries. It doesn't look like there's an easy way to do this.
Perhaps a better approach would be to block all email and only allow
connectio
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 18:51:57 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 4/12/20 6:03 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:44:44 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/12/20 11:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> >>> I have selinux enforcing and postfix
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 18:51:57 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 4/12/20 6:03 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:44:44 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/12/20 11:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> >>> I have selinux enforcing and postfix
On 4/12/20 6:03 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:44:44 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/12/20 11:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that postfix does
not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce 0 selinux
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:44:44 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 4/12/20 11:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that
> > postfix does not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce 0 selinux sets it
> >
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:44:44 -0700 Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 4/12/20 11:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that
> > postfix does not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce 0 selinux sets it
> >
On 4/12/20 11:56 AM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that postfix does
not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce 0 selinux sets it to work again).
You need to describe how you have it configured and what isn't work
Am 12.04.2020 um 22:49 schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 21:45:00 +0200 Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am 12.04.2020 um 20:56 schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
Hi,
I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that postfix does
not "work" if selinux is enabled (se
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 21:45:00 +0200 Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> Am 12.04.2020 um 20:56 schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that
> > postfix does not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce
Am 12.04.2020 um 20:56 schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
Hi,
I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that postfix does
not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce 0 selinux sets it to work again).
[ ... ]
but I am not sure: are these the best ways to use po
Hi,
I have selinux enforcing and postfix for mail delivery. It turns out that
postfix does not "work" if selinux is enabled (setenforce 0 selinux sets it to
work again).
However, I don't really want to leave selinux in disabled mode. So, I was
looking around and found the fo
On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 10:55 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 2020-03-24 04:45, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 03:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> > > On 2020-03-23 23:06, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > > > Yes, indeed. Can it be paused while
On 2020-03-24 12:50, Tim via users wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 10:06 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>> btw, postfix is started via systemd but not VPN, that is, it is not
>> started via systemd.
> What about, using whatever method you use to start and stop VPN, you
> i
On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 10:06 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> btw, postfix is started via systemd but not VPN, that is, it is not
> started via systemd.
What about, using whatever method you use to start and stop VPN, you
include start and stop commands for postfix?
--
uname -rsvp
Linux
On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 08:20 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> I am using postfix to deliver my work mail from a remote location.
> This works fine when I am on VPN (the postfix traffic goes through
> VPN then). However, it gets identified as spam when VPN is not up.
> Since most p
On 2020-03-24 04:45, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 03:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> On 2020-03-23 23:06, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>>> Yes, indeed. Can it be paused while VPN is not up? And btw, postfix is
>>> started via systemd but not VPN
On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 03:27 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 2020-03-23 23:06, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > Yes, indeed. Can it be paused while VPN is not up? And btw, postfix is
> > started via systemd but not VPN, that is, it is not started via systemd.
>
> How about running
On 2020-03-23 23:06, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> Yes, indeed. Can it be paused while VPN is not up? And btw, postfix is
> started via systemd but not VPN, that is, it is not started via systemd.
How about running postfix in a VM where the VPN is always up?
--
The key to getting good answers
On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 22:58:25 +0800 Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 2020-03-23 22:49, Kai Bojens wrote:
> > Am 2020-03-23 14:20, schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
> >
> >> So, I am wondering if I could please set up my services for postfix to
> >> be delayed unless/until VPN is u
On 2020-03-23 22:49, Kai Bojens wrote:
> Am 2020-03-23 14:20, schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
>
>> So, I am wondering if I could please set up my services for postfix to
>> be delayed unless/until VPN is up and running. If so, how do I go
>> about doing this?
>
> If your
Am 2020-03-23 14:20, schrieb Ranjan Maitra:
So, I am wondering if I could please set up my services for postfix to
be delayed unless/until VPN is up and running. If so, how do I go
about doing this?
If your VPN is started via systemd you should take a look at Wants,
Requires, Before, and
Dear friends,
I am using postfix to deliver my work mail from a remote location. This works
fine when I am on VPN (the postfix traffic goes through VPN then). However, it
gets identified as spam when VPN is not up. Since most people do not routinely
check their spam folders especially when the
n recognizes both the interfaces.
>
> It should be on the IPV4 (and IPV6) tab for the specific VPN config
Thanks for this. However, it appears that my postfix does use VPN when it is
on. I guess I now have to figure out how to force postfix to delay service
until VPN is on (because VPN is not always
On Sat, 2020-03-21 at 09:05 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> Where do you find this checkbox? I have looked at all the GUI options
> but can not find it. Btw, NetworkManager in the Connection
> Information recognizes both the interfaces.
It should be on the IPV4 (and IPV6) tab for the specific VPN c
t all the GUI options but can
not find it. Btw, NetworkManager in the Connection Information recognizes both
the interfaces.
Thanks,
Ranjan
>
>
> On Fri, 2020-03-20 at 22:46 -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am on a fully updated F31 and I would like my t
fully updated F31 and I would like my traffic (especially
> postfix) to go through Cisco's AnyConnect VPN when that is up. (I am
> reduced to having to use this proprietary software because of 2-
> factor authentication required for VPN at my institution.)
>
> Anyway, I came across
Hi,
I am on a fully updated F31 and I would like my traffic (especially postfix) to
go through Cisco's AnyConnect VPN when that is up. (I am reduced to having to
use this proprietary software because of 2-factor authentication required for
VPN at my institution.)
Anyway, I came acros
On Sun, 6 May 2018 15:05:55 -0400
Tom Horsley wrote:
> SASL mechanisms LOGIN XOAUTH2
Hey! I just found the problem. The XOAUTH2 is what doesn't work.
I finally discovered the smtp_sasl_mechanism_filter parameter
and set it to just login, and the mail is flowing again.
Since oauth2 was invented
I had postfix setup to relay all the mail from my
desktop to the stoopid office365 server we are forced
to use at work. It worked fine on fedora 27.
Now, with everything configured identically
on fedora 28, postfix can't seem to send out any mail.
I don't suppose anyone else has
Cristian Sava writes:
I don't see any mention that glibc-2.25 has disabled SSLV3 and
glibc.spec does not seem to disable it. Am I missing something?
Maybe that's because glibc don't give a fig about SSL.
I really haven't been paying much attention, but I must've been out of town
when glibc
On 10/05/17 10:45, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 10/04/2017 04:15 PM, Nelson Crosby wrote:
>> Because Legacy Software, I need to be able to support SSLv3 on my
>> Postfix server. From what I can figure, however, this is disabled
>> in the SSL library itself, as I still ca
On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 18:46 +1300, Nelson Crosby wrote:
> ... However, with the following in
> `/etc/postfix/main.cf`:
>
> smtpd_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv2
> smtpd_tls_protocols = !SSLv2
>
> I can run `postconf -d` and get this output:
>
> sm
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 06:46:10PM +1300, Nelson Crosby wrote:
> On 05/10/17 15:45, Samuel Sieb wrote:
...
>
> It *has* been suggested to me that Postfix might be inserting `!SSLv3`
> because
> OpenSSL doesn't have that support compiled in. I think this might not be the
are forbidden while everything else is
allowed (i.e. TLSv1+).
Upon further investigation, I have noticed that instead I need:
smtpd_tls_protocols = !SSLv2
Which has the same defaults. However, with the following in
`/etc/postfix/main.cf`:
smtpd_tls_mandatory_protocols = !SSLv2
On 10/04/2017 04:15 PM, Nelson Crosby wrote:
Because Legacy Software, I need to be able to support SSLv3 on my
Postfix server. From what I can figure, however, this is disabled
in the SSL library itself, as I still cannot get a successful
handshake with the following configuration line, which
1 - 100 of 231 matches
Mail list logo
