After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Bjørn T Johansen
I get the following in my log...:

Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/smtpd[2774]: connect from pat.havleik.no[10.1.1.4]
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/smtpd[2774]: 88AC71FA25F: client=pat.havleik.no[10.1.1.4]
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/cleanup[2789]: 88AC71FA25F: message-id=<[hidden email]>
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/qmgr[2195]: 88AC71FA25F: from=<[hidden email]>, size=12652, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/smtpd[2774]: disconnect from pat.havleik.no[10.1.1.4]
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09, delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/cleanup[2787]: 9DCA71FA264: message-id=<[hidden email]>
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/qmgr[2195]: 9DCA71FA264: from=<>, size=14394, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/bounce[2811]: 88AC71FA25F: sender non-delivery notification: 9DCA71FA264
Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/qmgr[2195]: 88AC71FA25F: removed
Aug 20 12:37:14 web postfix/smtp[2753]: connect to mx2.aftenposten.no[80.91.34.67]:25: Connection timed out
Aug 20 12:37:44 web postfix/smtp[2753]: connect to mx1.aftenposten.no[80.91.34.51]:25: Connection timed out
Aug 20 12:37:44 web postfix/smtp[2753]: 9DCA71FA264: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=none, delay=60,
delays=0.03/0/60/0, dsn=4.4.1, status=deferred (connect to mx1.aftenposten.no[80.91.34.51]:25: Connection timed out)


Outgoing port 25 is closes by my ISP, is there some new config I need to set? (didn't have this problem before I
upgraded...)

(this happends for just some of my mails and not for instanse for the postfix maillist...)



Regards,

BTJ


--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bjørn T Johansen

[hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone wrote:
"I understand that if you play a Windows CD backwards you hear strange Satanic messages"
To which someone replied:
"It's even worse than that; play it forwards and it installs Windows"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Wietse Venema
Bj?rn T Johansen:
> Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09, delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])

You are sending mail with

    Delivered-To: [hidden email]

into the pipe daemon.

See:
The RELEASE_NOTES file
man 8 pipe

        Wietse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Bjørn T Johansen
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
[hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:

> Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
> > delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
>
> You are sending mail with
>
>     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
>
> into the pipe daemon.
>
> See:
> The RELEASE_NOTES file
> man 8 pipe
>
> Wietse

Yes, in my master.cf file I have this..:

dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}


I can't use this anymore with version 2.5.x?


BTJ
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Sandy Drobic-2
Bjørn T Johansen wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
> [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
>
>> Bj?rn T Johansen:
>>> Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
>>> delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
>> You are sending mail with
>>
>>     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
>>
>> into the pipe daemon.
>>
>> See:
>> The RELEASE_NOTES file
>> man 8 pipe
>>
>> Wietse
>
> Yes, in my master.cf file I have this..:
>
> dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
>   flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
>
>
> I can't use this anymore with version 2.5.x?

The problem is not the pipe transport, it's that you are sending a mail with a
"Delivered-To:" header to the dovecot transport. This header is not supposed
to exist. That is the reason why the LDA thinks it is a mail loop.

--
Sandy

List replies only please!
Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Sandy Drobic-2
Sandy Drobic wrote:

> Bjørn T Johansen wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
>> [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
>>
>>> Bj?rn T Johansen:
>>>> Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F:
>>>> to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
>>>> delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding
>>>> loop for [hidden email])
>>> You are sending mail with
>>>
>>>     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
>>>
>>> into the pipe daemon.

> The problem is not the pipe transport, it's that you are sending a mail
> with a "Delivered-To:" header to the dovecot transport. This header is
> not supposed to exist. That is the reason why the LDA thinks it is a
> mail loop.
>

Amendment: "...not supposed to exist before the LDA adds that header."


--
Sandy

List replies only please!
Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Wietse Venema
In reply to this post by Bjørn T Johansen
Bj?rn T Johansen:

> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
> [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
>
> > Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
> > > delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
> >
> > You are sending mail with
> >
> >     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
> >
> > into the pipe daemon.
> >
> > See:
> > The RELEASE_NOTES file
> > man 8 pipe
> >
> > Wietse
>
> Yes, in my master.cf file I have this..:
>
> dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
>   flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
>
>
> I can't use this anymore with version 2.5.x?

Please read the documents that I referred you to.

        Wietse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Bjørn T Johansen
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:16:22 -0400 (EDT)
[hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:

> Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
> > [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> >
> > > Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > > Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
> > > > delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
> > >
> > > You are sending mail with
> > >
> > >     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
> > >
> > > into the pipe daemon.
> > >
> > > See:
> > > The RELEASE_NOTES file
> > > man 8 pipe
> > >
> > > Wietse
> >
> > Yes, in my master.cf file I have this..:
> >
> > dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
> >   flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
> >
> >
> > I can't use this anymore with version 2.5.x?
>
> Please read the documents that I referred you to.
>
> Wietse


Yes, I did but I am not sure what the solution is? I see that the D flag adds a Delivered-To header and that
it checks the mail to see if it already has a Delivered-To header and the message is returned as undeliverable if so,
as of version 2.5.x...
But is the solution to this to remove the D flag from the pipe transport? Or should I increase
dovecot_destination_recipient_limit from 1 to 2?
Or?


Regards,

BTJ
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Wietse Venema
Bj?rn T Johansen:

> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:16:22 -0400 (EDT)
> [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
>
> > Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
> > > [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > > > Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
> > > > > delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
> > > >
> > > > You are sending mail with
> > > >
> > > >     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > into the pipe daemon.
> > > >
> > > > See:
> > > > The RELEASE_NOTES file
> > > > man 8 pipe
> > > >
> > > > Wietse
> > >
> > > Yes, in my master.cf file I have this..:
> > >
> > > dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
> > >   flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
> > >
> > >
> > > I can't use this anymore with version 2.5.x?
> >
> > Please read the documents that I referred you to.
> >
> > Wietse
>
>
> Yes, I did but I am not sure what the solution is? I see that the D flag adds a Delivered-To header and that
> it checks the mail to see if it already has a Delivered-To header and the message is returned as undeliverable if so,
> as of version 2.5.x...
> But is the solution to this to remove the D flag from the pipe transport? Or should I increase
> dovecot_destination_recipient_limit from 1 to 2?

Given this description:

              D      Prepend  a  "Delivered-To: recipient" message header with
                     the envelope recipient address. Note: for this  to  work,
                     the  transport_destination_recipient_limit must be 1 (see
                     SINGLE-RECIPIENT DELIVERY above for details).

                     The D flag also enforces loop detection (Postfix 2.5  and
                     later):  if  a  message  already contains a Delivered-To:
                     header with the same recipient address, then the  message
                     is  returned  as undeliverable. The address comparison is
                     case insensitive.

                     This feature is available as of Postfix 2.0.

Which solution would you pick when mail is returned as undeliverable
because a "mail forwarding loop" was detected?

You will have to use your own brain cycles.

        Wietse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Bjørn T Johansen
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:08:33 -0400 (EDT)
[hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:

> Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:16:22 -0400 (EDT)
> > [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> >
> > > Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
> > > > [hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > > > > Aug 20 12:36:44 web postfix/pipe[2802]: 88AC71FA25F: to=<[hidden email]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.09,
> > > > > > delays=0.07/0/0/0.02, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail forwarding loop for [hidden email])
> > > > >
> > > > > You are sending mail with
> > > > >
> > > > >     Delivered-To: [hidden email]
> > > > >
> > > > > into the pipe daemon.
> > > > >
> > > > > See:
> > > > > The RELEASE_NOTES file
> > > > > man 8 pipe
> > > > >
> > > > > Wietse
> > > >
> > > > Yes, in my master.cf file I have this..:
> > > >
> > > > dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
> > > >   flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I can't use this anymore with version 2.5.x?
> > >
> > > Please read the documents that I referred you to.
> > >
> > > Wietse
> >
> >
> > Yes, I did but I am not sure what the solution is? I see that the D flag adds a Delivered-To header and that
> > it checks the mail to see if it already has a Delivered-To header and the message is returned as undeliverable if
> > so, as of version 2.5.x...
> > But is the solution to this to remove the D flag from the pipe transport? Or should I increase
> > dovecot_destination_recipient_limit from 1 to 2?
>
> Given this description:
>
>               D      Prepend  a  "Delivered-To: recipient" message header with
>                      the envelope recipient address. Note: for this  to  work,
>                      the  transport_destination_recipient_limit must be 1 (see
>                      SINGLE-RECIPIENT DELIVERY above for details).
>
>                      The D flag also enforces loop detection (Postfix 2.5  and
>                      later):  if  a  message  already contains a Delivered-To:
>                      header with the same recipient address, then the  message
>                      is  returned  as undeliverable. The address comparison is
>                      case insensitive.
>
>                      This feature is available as of Postfix 2.0.
>
> Which solution would you pick when mail is returned as undeliverable
> because a "mail forwarding loop" was detected?
>
> You will have to use your own brain cycles.
>

Well, I just thought that the D flag was included for a reason and that removing the flag maybe would break something
else...

Instead of wasting time to write such long answer maybe a simple yes or no would be sufficient.......
Isn't that the idea with a mailinglist, getting help and verify solutions or am I misunderstanding something??


BTJ
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Wietse Venema
Bj?rn T Johansen:

> > > > Please read the documents that I referred you to.
> > >
> > > Yes, I did but I am not sure what the solution is? I see that the D flag adds a Delivered-To header and that
> > > it checks the mail to see if it already has a Delivered-To header and the message is returned as undeliverable if
> > > so, as of version 2.5.x...
> > > But is the solution to this to remove the D flag from the pipe transport? Or should I increase
> > > dovecot_destination_recipient_limit from 1 to 2?
> >
> > Given this description:
> >
> >               D      Prepend  a  "Delivered-To: recipient" message header with
> >                      the envelope recipient address. Note: for this  to  work,
> >                      the  transport_destination_recipient_limit must be 1 (see
> >                      SINGLE-RECIPIENT DELIVERY above for details).
> >
> >                      The D flag also enforces loop detection (Postfix 2.5  and
> >                      later):  if  a  message  already contains a Delivered-To:
> >                      header with the same recipient address, then the  message
> >                      is  returned  as undeliverable. The address comparison is
> >                      case insensitive.
> >
> >                      This feature is available as of Postfix 2.0.
> >
> > Which solution would you pick when mail is returned as undeliverable
> > because a "mail forwarding loop" was detected?
> >
> > You will have to use your own brain cycles.
> >
>
> Well, I just thought that the D flag was included for a reason
> and that removing the flag maybe would break something else...

> Instead of wasting time to write such long answer maybe a simple
> yes or no would be sufficient.......  Isn't that the idea with a
> mailinglist, getting help and verify solutions or am I misunderstanding
> something??

No, the purpose is to help you choose the best solution. It's your
system. You decide what is best.

- One possibility is to stop using the D flag and thereby disable
  loop detection in the pipe mailer (which didn't work before
  Postfix 2.5).

  However it is possible that you have other mail software that
  depends on the presence of this header. Only you can make that
  determination, not this mailing list.

- Another possibility is to keep loop detection, and to fix the
  system that falsely prepends the Delivered-To: header BEFORE mail
  is given to Postfix.

        Wietse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: After upgrading from 2.4.6 to 2.5.3..

Bjørn T Johansen
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:17:43 -0400 (EDT)
[hidden email] (Wietse Venema) wrote:

> Bj?rn T Johansen:
> > > > > Please read the documents that I referred you to.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I did but I am not sure what the solution is? I see that the D flag adds a Delivered-To header and that
> > > > it checks the mail to see if it already has a Delivered-To header and the message is returned as undeliverable
> > > > if so, as of version 2.5.x...
> > > > But is the solution to this to remove the D flag from the pipe transport? Or should I increase
> > > > dovecot_destination_recipient_limit from 1 to 2?
> > >
> > > Given this description:
> > >
> > >               D      Prepend  a  "Delivered-To: recipient" message header with
> > >                      the envelope recipient address. Note: for this  to  work,
> > >                      the  transport_destination_recipient_limit must be 1 (see
> > >                      SINGLE-RECIPIENT DELIVERY above for details).
> > >
> > >                      The D flag also enforces loop detection (Postfix 2.5  and
> > >                      later):  if  a  message  already contains a Delivered-To:
> > >                      header with the same recipient address, then the  message
> > >                      is  returned  as undeliverable. The address comparison is
> > >                      case insensitive.
> > >
> > >                      This feature is available as of Postfix 2.0.
> > >
> > > Which solution would you pick when mail is returned as undeliverable
> > > because a "mail forwarding loop" was detected?
> > >
> > > You will have to use your own brain cycles.
> > >
> >
> > Well, I just thought that the D flag was included for a reason
> > and that removing the flag maybe would break something else...
>
> > Instead of wasting time to write such long answer maybe a simple
> > yes or no would be sufficient.......  Isn't that the idea with a
> > mailinglist, getting help and verify solutions or am I misunderstanding
> > something??
>
> No, the purpose is to help you choose the best solution. It's your
> system. You decide what is best.
>
> - One possibility is to stop using the D flag and thereby disable
>   loop detection in the pipe mailer (which didn't work before
>   Postfix 2.5).
>
>   However it is possible that you have other mail software that
>   depends on the presence of this header. Only you can make that
>   determination, not this mailing list.
>
> - Another possibility is to keep loop detection, and to fix the
>   system that falsely prepends the Delivered-To: header BEFORE mail
>   is given to Postfix.
>
> Wietse

That's the answer I was looking for, thx! :)

BTJ