Displaying 20 results from an estimated 200 matches similar to: "RFC8501 IPv6 Wildcard PTR"
2015 Dec 22
2
Dovecot 2.2.20 autoexpunge
I have configured autoexpunge on some folders:
namespace inbox {
inbox = yes
location =
mailbox Junk {
auto = subscribe
autoexpunge = 30 days
special_use = \Junk
}
mailbox Trash {
auto = subscribe
autoexpunge = 2 weeks
special_use = \Trash
}
prefix =
separator = /
}
After adding these and restarting, logging in and out several times, I still see messages
2012 Jul 16
1
Selective TLS per local IP
We have the requirement to provide SSL on some IP addresses, but not others on our servers.
Providing SSL is the easy part and we're able to use multiple SSL certificates now. (thanks Timo!)
All is working ok, but we several IP hosts that do not require SSL and do not have valid certificates.
While we can limit access via a firewall ACL to TLS connect ports (993/995) we can't do so on
2015 Dec 22
2
Dovecot 2.2.20 autoexpunge
On Dec 22, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Teemu Huovila <teemu.huovila at dovecot.fi> wrote:
>
> The autoexpunge feature does not check the \Deleted flag.
>
> Are any errors logged in "doveadm log errors"? Could you post your complete output of doveconf -n please.
That?s what I thought. If I run expunge from doveadm manually, it will work as expected. I just never seem to get
2015 Dec 22
2
Dovecot 2.2.20 autoexpunge
> On Dec 22, 2015, at 9:49 AM, Dominik Breu <dominik at dominikbreu.de> wrote:
> the autoexpunge feature only removes mails wich have the \Delete Flag so no deletion of mails wich doesn't have this Flag(see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4315#section-2.1 or http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Tools/Doveadm/Expunge)
>
> you could run a cron job with a doveadm move comando to move the
2008 May 28
2
Sockets stuck in FIN_WAIT_1
I have a rather busy Apache 2.2 server; tons of small & some large
requests. It's a standard Dell 2650 server using the bge (broadcom)
network driver.
I seem to have a rather strange problem where after just a day or so
Apache just stops processing new connections. You can connect to port
80, but trying to get Apache to process any data just hangs. There is
nothing strange in
2015 Jan 01
2
Sieve permissions issue following update
On 1/1/2015 4:17 PM, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> On Jan 1, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Robert Blayzor <rblayzor.bulk at inoc.net> wrote:
>>> Hmm. This smells like a bug. I notice that your modification times of
>>> the .sieve and .svbin file are exactly the same (that is somewhat
>>> unusual). I'm looking at a potential bug that would explain your problem.
>>>
2003 Apr 18
2
dp.samba.org in a blacklist...
Samba organizers might want to look into this:
[ns1:~] dig 150.73.70.66.relays.osirusoft.com
; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> 150.73.70.66.relays.osirusoft.com
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 28005
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 13
;; QUESTION SECTION:
2012 Jul 16
2
Multi Server Exim/Dovecot and NFS
In reading the Dovecot NFS WIKI entry:
http://wiki2.dovecot.org/NFS
It mentions a FreeBSD NFS client caching bug. I believe that bug only exists pre-8.x ? It seems that a patch in the PR notes was MFC'd and made it into 8.x at some point. (at least I checked the source in 8.3 and it was there). So I assume that FreeBSD 8.x mitigates the issue? Maybe not?
So our deployment is multi
2015 Jan 14
3
pigeonhole ereject vs reject
Currently pigeonhole supports reject which would generate a NDR for each message. (If I understand the current documentation)
Using Dovecot LMTP it would be more optimal to kick a 5xx back to the primary MTA to reject the delivery rather than generating more back scatter NDRs.
Anyone know if this is possible now (to forgo the NDR)'s or do we need to wait for ereject ? If so, how much work
2015 Jan 14
2
pigeonhole ereject vs reject
On Jan 13, 2015, at 8:30 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>
> so what you want in your OP is just DISCARD in a sieve script and there is no point in "Using Dovecot LMTP it would be more optimal to kick a 5xx back" when the desired result is DISCARD
>
> why do you want the burden of keep the SMTP session with the client open until the mail is
2015 Jan 14
2
pigeonhole ereject vs reject
On Jan 13, 2015, at 7:34 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>
> and what would that change?
> nothing if you think about how mail works!
>
> * the MTA receives the message
> * the MTA confirms with 2xx status code
> * later the delivery server rejects
> * the MTA *must* create a bounce
>
> just don't reject mails after you confirmed you
2015 May 28
3
OT: Central sieve management
A bit off topic, but I was wondering if anyone here has a solution for centrally managing sieve for multiple users from a custom web application? We would like to implement pigeonhole sieve on our dovecot cluster, however we need to be able to access user?s sieve configurations from a central location for troubleshooting and support purposes.
2016 Aug 05
3
Dovecot password policy
> On August 5, 2016 at 6:47 PM "Michael A. Peters" <mpeters at domblogger.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 08/05/2016 08:41 AM, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> > Is there a way to configure Dovecot to perhaps filter/enforce which passwords are accepted before authenticating?
> >
> > Ie: Reject immediately (without a database lookup) if password is not X characters in
2016 Mar 03
2
Dovecot 2.2.21 - segfault
pid 31943 (dovecot), uid 0: exited on signal 11 (core dumped)
dovecot --version
2.2.21 (5345f22)
uname -a
FreeBSD 10.3-BETA2 #0 r295966M: amd64
bt full
#0 0x00000008008eb037 in t_push (marker=0x0) at data-stack.c:133
133 data-stack.c: No such file or directory.
in data-stack.c
(gdb) bt full
#0 0x00000008008eb037 in t_push (marker=0x0) at data-stack.c:133
frame_block = (struct
2023 Mar 17
1
Disable folder creation for details username
On 3/17/23 20:23, Robert Blayzor wrote:
> We?understand?there?is:
> lda_mailbox_autocreate
>
> Which we have yes, as we do want to create mailboxes automatically when the?first?message?comes?in,?but?not?these?folders.
That's the setting you want. In IMAP / dovecot context, "mailbox" means "folder".
The basic directory structure for an account, with INBOX and
2023 Mar 20
1
NSD zone file GENERATE directive
Hi Robert,
NSD doesn't understand the GENERATE directive. You'll have to create
your zone files using a script or template engine.
Regards,
Anand
On 20/03/2023 16:29, Robert Blayzor via nsd-users wrote:
> BIND has a handy feature $GENERATE directive in zone files that allows
> you to handle large ranges of things like PTR/A records without having
> to actually create long
2016 Jan 31
2
Dovecot 2.2.21 - segfault
dovecot --version
2.2.21 (5345f22)
FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE-p11 FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE-p11 #0 r294908M: amd64
Core was generated by `dovecot'.
Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
Reading symbols from /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so.0...done.
Loaded symbols for /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so.0
Reading symbols from /lib/libc.so.7...Reading symbols from
2023 Mar 17
1
Disable folder creation for details username
This may be more of a CPanel issue than Dovecot but CPanel uses Dovecot
and not sure if this is a knob we have available in Dovecot or we need
to reach out to Cpanel directly to see if this is some custom code they
added to their distros.
Anyway, W/R/T emails sent with dtails/ + addresses ie:
foo+bar at mydomain.com
And with LDA/LMTP, in Cpanel by default the detials part, in this case
2023 Mar 20
1
NSD zone file GENERATE directive
BIND has a handy feature $GENERATE directive in zone files that allows
you to handle large ranges of things like PTR/A records without having
to actually create long lists in very large zonefiles.
This was handy for things like IPv4/v6 PTR's and matching A/AAAA records
for large dynamic hosts, etc.
Does NSD support any type of range generation such at this?
--
inoc.net!rblayzor
XMPP:
2023 Mar 20
2
NSD zone file GENERATE directive
On 3/20/23 13:41, Anand Buddhdev via nsd-users wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> NSD doesn't understand the GENERATE directive. You'll have to create
> your zone files using a script or template engine.
Understood but certainly not helpful with large dynamic IPv6 PTR's...
Not that dynamic hosts NEED PTR's, but would still be nice to have.
--
inoc.net!rblayzor
XMPP: