Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Upgrade for Postfix & Mailman

Expand Messages
  • Larry Stone
    ... While I have no experience with OS X Server, I have been running a mail server (and related software) on OS X (Client) for several years. Most software for
    Message 1 of 15 , Jan 25, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, 25 Jan 2013, btb@... wrote:

      > On Jan 25, 2013, at 15.07, Jeff Bernier wrote:
      >
      >> Hello All,
      >>
      >> I am currently running Mailman (2.1.14) and Postfix (2.4.3) on an aging Mac
      >> OS X server (10.5.8). Mailman and Postfix on this system are Apple's
      >> implementation on their platform of course. Apple no longer supports the
      >> Xserve platform, and I am in need of replacing this system, and upgrading
      >> to newer versions of Postfix and Mailman.
      >
      > you may already know this, but do note that while the xserve and mac os
      > x server have gone away, the underlying components themselves [apple and
      > otherwise] have not, and are now just hidden away within "regular" mac
      > os x. apple sells software that you add to your standard install to
      > provide the apple management mechanisms as were found in os x server.
      > of course, this means that an xserve is not needed either, since it runs
      > just fine on any mac.
      >
      > that being said, *do not* misinterpret this information as a suggestion
      > or encouragement that you do this - it is intended only as information,
      > for the sake of it. quite to the contrary, if i were to offer
      > encouragement, it would be to move away from apple products for this
      > sort of thing, but not because the platform has changed.

      While I have no experience with OS X Server, I have been running a mail
      server (and related software) on OS X (Client) for several years. Most
      software for the "server" was installed from sources although I used the
      Apple provided versions of Postfix and amavisd-new. However, I am
      currently still running Lion on that machine and from what testing I've
      done, do not see an easy path forward to Mountain Lion (the current OS X
      version). In the upgrade to Mountain Lion, a lot of stuff was moved and
      some things (like amavisd-new) removed.

      One of the problems of the past was Apple's constant behind the scenes
      changes which required some reconfiguration at every major upgrade. If I
      do ever move forward with trying to upgrade, I most likely will go "build
      from sources" for everything (ignoring Apple's provided Postfix) with
      everything in /usr/local (which Apple so far does not touch) so that I am
      not at the whim of their changes.

      -- Larry Stone
      lstone19@...
    • Reindl Harald
      ... and that is why i said 10 years ago apple is crap on a server nobody believed me and sweared it is the bast you can have throw away this carp and learn how
      Message 2 of 15 , Jan 25, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Am 25.01.2013 23:46, schrieb Larry Stone:
        > One of the problems of the past was Apple's constant behind the scenes changes which required some reconfiguration
        > at every major upgrade. If I do ever move forward with trying to upgrade, I most likely will go "build from
        > sources" for everything (ignoring Apple's provided Postfix) with everything in /usr/local (which Apple so far does
        > not touch) so that I am not at the whim of their changes

        and that is why i said 10 years ago apple is crap on a server
        nobody believed me and sweared it is the bast you can have

        throw away this carp and learn how to work with a real
        operating system like linx or bsd
      • John Allen
        ... As has been said elsewhere not really that surprising. The flavour of the day is /the cloud/ ! ... I run a couple of servers for a small business co-op
        Message 3 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          On 25/01/2013 3:07 PM, Jeff Bernier wrote:
          Hello All,

          I am currently running Mailman (2.1.14) and Postfix (2.4.3) on an aging Mac OS X server (10.5.8). Mailman and Postfix on this system are Apple's implementation on their platform of course. Apple no longer supports the Xserve platform, and I am in need of replacing this system, and upgrading to newer versions of Postfix and Mailman.

          As has been said elsewhere not really that surprising.  The flavour of the day is "the cloud"!

          We use Postfix for our on campus SMTP Gateway, and Mailman for a small number of active lists. The traffic is light.

          Can anyone recommend a good replacement to this? Recommended Unix/Linux? Is a VM environment an option?

          I run a couple of servers for a small business co-op one Debian Wheezy and one Ubuntu (currently 12.04 LTS).
          Both run mail servers( Postfix+Dovecot+Amavis-new), WEB servers (HTTP, webdav, davical) plus a few odds and ends without breaking a sweat.
          The Debian machine ran Centos 5 until approx a 18 months ago.
          Both machines have been running for about 4 years without any unplanned outages (Not quite true we had a power outage that lasted 4 hours and the UPSs shutdown).

          I would like to get away from the Mac solution, and set up some flavor of Unix with more current versions of Postfix and Mailman. I know this is a very broad question, but I have a blank canvas here... just looking for a direction to go in.


          Any suggestions are appreciated.

          Go with Debian, I use Testing (wheezy) but any level would be good. Te only, very minor, problem is that Debian prefers Exim as the MTA because of the Postfix license (IBM vs GPL), but it is supported and I have not seen any plans to drop it.
          Ubuntu would be a good alternative, except that they seem to be pushing their cloud solution.
        • Bob Cohen
          Follows are several maillog entries. I m not clear on how to read them. warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client after `permit is ignored Does this mean,
          Message 4 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.

            warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored

            Does this mean, Postfix rejected an email based on the reject_rbl_client rule, which was placed in the main.cf after the permit. And, Postfix is ignoring the warning?

            warning: restriction `warn_if_reject' after `permit' is ignored

            Does this mean, Postfix rejected an email according to some rule in the main.cf. And, Postfix is ignoring the warning?

            Thanks for the help.

            -Bob

            Bob Cohen
            Writer, Internet Consultant, Teacher
            w: bobjcohen.com
            t: #itsabobworld
          • Reindl Harald
            ... if you want any meaningful answer you have to poast at least a full snippet of all lines to a specific message and output of postconf -n
            Message 5 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Am 26.01.2013 18:25, schrieb Bob Cohen:
              > Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
              >
              > warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
              >
              > Does this mean, Postfix rejected an email based on the reject_rbl_client rule, which was placed in the main.cf after the permit. And, Postfix is ignoring the warning?
              >
              > warning: restriction `warn_if_reject' after `permit' is ignored
              >
              > Does this mean, Postfix rejected an email according to some rule in the main.cf. And, Postfix is ignoring the warning?

              if you want any meaningful answer you have to poast at least
              a full snippet of all lines to a specific message and output
              of "postconf -n"
            • Wietse Venema
              ... This means that you have configured: something = something permit reject_rbl_client something As documented, evaluation stops at permit. Therefore,
              Message 6 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Bob Cohen:
                > Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
                >
                > warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored

                This means that you have configured:

                something = something permit reject_rbl_client something

                As documented, evaluation stops at permit. Therefore, reject_rbl_client
                is ignored.

                Wietse
              • Bob Cohen
                ... Thank you. -Bob log snippet 1 Jan 26 13:03:00 fortapache postfix/smtpd[29122]: connect from camomile.cloud9.net[168.100.1.3] Jan 26 13:03:00 fortapache
                Message 7 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Jan 26, 2013, at 12:40 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@...> wrote:

                  > if you want any meaningful answer you have to poast at least
                  > a full snippet of all lines to a specific message and output
                  > of "postconf -n"

                  Thank you.

                  -Bob

                  log snippet 1

                  Jan 26 13:03:00 fortapache postfix/smtpd[29122]: connect from camomile.cloud9.net[168.100.1.3]
                  Jan 26 13:03:00 fortapache postfix/smtpd[29122]: warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
                  Jan 26 13:03:00 fortapache postfix/smtpd[29122]: warning: restriction `warn_if_reject' after `permit' is ignored
                  Jan 26 13:03:00 fortapache postfix/smtpd[29122]: warning: restriction `warn_if_reject' after `permit' is ignored

                  log snippet 2

                  Jan 26 12:51:52 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: warning: 68.168.97.243: hostname 68-168-97-243.dedicated.codero.net verification failed: Name or service not known
                  Jan 26 12:51:52 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: connect from unknown[68.168.97.243]
                  Jan 26 12:51:53 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
                  Jan 26 12:51:53 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: warning: restriction `warn_if_reject' after `permit' is ignored
                  Jan 26 12:51:53 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from unknown[68.168.97.243]: 450 4.1.8 <apache@...>: Sender address rejected: Domain not found; from=<apache@...> to=<42z4r2l5udb@...> proto=ESMTP helo=<68-168-97-243.phx.dedicated.codero.com>
                  Jan 26 12:56:53 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: timeout after RSET from unknown[68.168.97.243]
                  Jan 26 12:56:53 fortapache postfix/smtpd[28960]: disconnect from unknown[68.168.97.243]



                  postconf -n

                  alias_database = /etc/postfix/aliases
                  alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/aliases
                  command_directory = /usr/sbin
                  config_directory = /etc/postfix
                  content_filter = amavisfeed:[127.0.0.1]:10024
                  daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
                  home_mailbox = Maildir/
                  html_directory = no
                  local_recipient_maps = $virtual_alias_maps
                  mail_owner = postfix
                  mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq
                  manpage_directory = /usr/share/man
                  mydestination = /etc/postfix/local_domains
                  myhostname = fortapache.bjcserver.com
                  myorigin = $myhostname
                  newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases
                  queue_directory = /var/spool/postfix
                  readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.3.3/README_FILES
                  relay_domains = $mydestination
                  sample_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.3.3/samples
                  sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail
                  setgid_group = postdrop
                  smtpd_client_restrictions = reject_unauth_pipelining,
                  check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/access,
                  check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/poprelay,
                  permit
                  reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org,
                  reject_rbl_client dnsbl.sorbs.net,
                  smtpd_helo_restrictions = check_helo_access pcre:/etc/postfix/tld.pcre,
                  permit
                  warn_if_reject,
                  check_helo_access pcre:/etc/postfix/tld.pcre
                  smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
                  check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/access,
                  reject_unknown_recipient_domain,
                  reject_unauth_destination,
                  permit
                  smtpd_sender_restrictions =
                  reject_unknown_sender_domain,
                  reject_non_fqdn_sender,
                  check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/tld.pcre,
                  check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/access,
                  check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/poprelay,
                  permit
                  warn_if_reject,
                  check_reverse_client_hostname_access pcre:/etc/postfix/tld.pcre

                  soft_bounce = no
                  virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual

                  Bob Cohen
                  Writer, Internet Consultant, Teacher
                  w: bobjcohen.com
                  t: #itsabobworld
                • Bob Cohen
                  ... Thank you. Does that mean I need to put the something = something before permit? Note I just posted some log entries and postconf -n. -Bob Bob Cohen
                  Message 8 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Wietse Venema <wietse@...> wrote:

                    > Bob Cohen:
                    >> Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
                    >>
                    >> warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
                    >
                    > This means that you have configured:
                    >
                    > something = something permit reject_rbl_client something
                    >
                    > As documented, evaluation stops at permit. Therefore, reject_rbl_client
                    > is ignored.

                    Thank you. Does that mean I need to put the something = something before permit? Note I just posted some log entries and postconf -n.

                    -Bob

                    Bob Cohen
                    Writer, Internet Consultant, Teacher
                    w: bobjcohen.com
                    t: #itsabobworld
                  • Reindl Harald
                    ... logically yes how do you imagine that anything does something after permit took action?
                    Message 9 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Am 26.01.2013 19:13, schrieb Bob Cohen:
                      >
                      > On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Wietse Venema <wietse@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >> Bob Cohen:
                      >>> Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
                      >>>
                      >>> warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
                      >>
                      >> This means that you have configured:
                      >>
                      >> something = something permit reject_rbl_client something
                      >>
                      >> As documented, evaluation stops at permit. Therefore, reject_rbl_client
                      >> is ignored.
                      >
                      > Thank you. Does that mean I need to put the something = something before permit?

                      logically yes

                      how do you imagine that anything does something after "permit" took action?
                    • Viktor Dukhovni
                      ... Postfix is *issuing* the warning, it takes a flight of fancy to think Postfix is ignoring the warning. When Postfix warns you that: thing Y after [thing]
                      Message 10 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:25:00PM -0500, Bob Cohen wrote:

                        > Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
                        >
                        > warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
                        >
                        > Does this mean, Postfix rejected an email based on the
                        > reject_rbl_client rule, which was placed in the main.cf after the
                        > permit. And, Postfix is ignoring the warning?

                        Postfix is *issuing* the warning, it takes a flight of fancy to
                        think Postfix is ignoring the warning. When Postfix warns you that:

                        "thing Y after [thing] X is ignored"

                        it means what it says: Thing Y which occurs after thing X is [always]
                        ignored. Therefore, a configuration with thing Y after thing X is
                        likely the result of confusion or a careless error.

                        In this case confusion. Restrictions are evaluated in order, don't
                        modify Postfix restrictions until you understand how they work.

                        Perhaps this will help:

                        http://jimsun.linxnet.com/misc/postfix-anti-UCE.txt

                        DO NOT parrot any of the specific examples in the guide, rather
                        read it ONLY for its explanation of how restrictions work, using
                        the specific examples only to help you understand the general rules.
                        The explanator material starts with:

                        General Notes On "hostname," "helo," "client," "sender"
                        and "recipient" Access Lists and Restrictions

                        and especially the section:

                        Understanding The Order In Which SMTPD Restrictions Are Applied

                        --
                        Viktor.
                      • Wietse Venema
                        ... No. It means you should read documentation instead seeking well-known answers on the mailing list. Start with these:
                        Message 11 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Bob Cohen:
                          >
                          > On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Wietse Venema <wietse@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > > Bob Cohen:
                          > >> Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
                          > >>
                          > >> warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored
                          > >
                          > > This means that you have configured:
                          > >
                          > > something = something permit reject_rbl_client something
                          > >
                          > > As documented, evaluation stops at permit. Therefore, reject_rbl_client
                          > > is ignored.
                          >
                          > Thank you. Does that mean I need to put the something = something
                          > before permit? Note I just posted some log entries and postconf

                          No. It means you should read documentation instead
                          seeking well-known answers on the mailing list.

                          Start with these:
                          http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html
                          http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html

                          and follow the hyperlinks.

                          Wietse
                        • Bob Cohen
                          ... Thank you. Sorry if I violated list etiquette. It s hard for a ham and egger like me to know what is or isn t common knowledge. Bob Cohen Writer, Internet
                          Message 12 of 15 , Jan 26, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Jan 26, 2013, at 5:05 PM, Wietse Venema <wietse@...> wrote:

                            > No. It means you should read documentation instead
                            > seeking well-known answers on the mailing list.


                            Thank you. Sorry if I violated list etiquette. It's hard for a ham and egger like me to know what is or isn't common knowledge.

                            Bob Cohen
                            Writer, Internet Consultant, Teacher
                            w: bobjcohen.com
                            t: #itsabobworld
                          • Ralf Hildebrandt
                            ... No. Everything after permit is ignored. ... Again, you seem to have something like: ... stuff ... permit ... more stuff ... in your restrictions. more
                            Message 13 of 15 , Jan 28, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              * Bob Cohen <bob@...>:
                              > Follows are several maillog entries. I'm not clear on how to read them.
                              >
                              > warning: restriction `reject_rbl_client' after `permit' is ignored


                              > Does this mean, Postfix rejected an email based on the
                              > reject_rbl_client rule, which was placed in the main.cf after the
                              > permit. And, Postfix is ignoring the warning?

                              No. Everything after permit is ignored.

                              > warning: restriction `warn_if_reject' after `permit' is ignored

                              Again, you seem to have something like:

                              ... stuff ...
                              permit
                              ... more stuff ...

                              in your restrictions. "more stuff" will be ignored.

                              --
                              [*] sys4 AG

                              http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
                              Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München

                              Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
                              Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer
                              Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Joerg Heidrich
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.