4.26- beta upgrade (was RE: Another MailScanner User!)

[Neil Robst]

oops... sorry everyone. Really must finish writing my posts before hitting
the send button :-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Neil Robst" <neilrobst at alm.org.uk>
To: "MailScanner mailing list" <MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: 4.26- beta upgrade (was RE: Another MailScanner User!)


> Just had a thought about this - Wont it only
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Drew Marshall" <drew at THEMARSHALLS.CO.UK>
> To: <MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 10:20 AM
> Subject: Re: 4.26- beta upgrade (was RE: Another MailScanner User!)
>
>
> > Neil
> >
> > What I have done is below, as suggested by Peter Bates and forwarded to
me
> > from this list.
> >
> > > I'm using MS with Postfix in a slightly 'non-standard' way, but which
is
> > working fine for 13-15K messages we deal with (actually it might be
> > more, I never bothered counting our outgoing email!)...
> > > I'm using a 'header_check' like so:
> > > In main.cf -
> > > header_checks = pcre:/etc/postfix/header_checks
> > > In header_checks -
> > > /^Received:.*by .*\.your.domain.tld \(Postfix\)/ HOLD
> > > This puts the incoming mail in the 'hold' queue, and then
> > > I have in MailScanner.conf -
> > > Incoming Queue Dir = /var/spool/postfix/hold
> > > Outgoing Queue Dir = /var/spool/postfix/incoming
> >
> > With this, you will need to stop postfix.in and uncomment the smtp line
in
> > master.cf (Basically revert your set up to a non-MailScanner set up (It
> > may be easier if Postfix.in runs chrooted and postfix doesn't to just
> > alter postfix.in to become just postfix, what ever your mileage!)). Stop
> > all instances and restart just postfix and you now have one postfix
> > instance with MailScanner.
> >
> > Works great!
> >
> > Drew
> > --
> >
> >
> > Neil Robst said:
> > > Drew,
> > >
> > > Can you explain a bit more about how you've configured postfix,
please?
> > I'm using the suggested setup of two postfix instances - the first runs
> > everything in a chroot jail and smtp, local and virtual and deferred.
> > Mailscanner then picks everything out the deferred queue, does it's
> > stuff and drops it back into the incoming queue of the second postfix
> > instance. Seems to be working well, but you said you'd changed postfix
> > to bypass the duplicate problems...
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Neil
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 09:06, Drew Marshall wrote:
> > >> I've been running it now since the weekend without problem. I would
> > suggest that although marked as a beta and potentialy unstable, it's
> > about
> > >> as unstable as the production releases :-) The new patches seem to be
> > working well.
> > >> I have to admit, I changed my Postfix set up to by pass the duplicate
> > problems and haven't changed it back. I now use a rule in Postfix to
> > hold
> > >> all incoming mail, let MS collect from the hold queue (The queue
runner
> > doesn't ever run in there) and drop back into the incoming queue for
> > delivery. It just means that I only have to ever run just one Postfix
> > instance. I only ever use SMTP connection so don't have to worry about
> > direct queue injection by passing MailScanner.
> > >> Drew
> > >> Neil Robst said:
> > >> > Yes... fingers crossed!
> > >> >
> > >> > Any other issues known with the 4.26-4 beta currently? What's the
> > general feeling in the community of it's stability, etc?
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 22:07, Drew Marshall wrote:
> > >> >> Just for my 2p, my server doesn't have a high load but I suffered
> > duplicate mail. My old set up on Slackware didn't suffer, the new on
> > Gentoo did :-(  . I'm not quite sure why but it seemed that the
> > >> Postfix
> > >> >> queue runner and MailScanner got in each others way with the
result
> > >> that
> > >> >> MS picked up incomplete messages.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> <fingers crossed> Any way that's all in the past now </fingers
> > >> crossed>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Drew
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Neil Robst wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >Hi all,
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Just applied the 4.26-4 beta of MailScanner to my mail server,
> > >> though
> > >> >> I've
> > >> >> >been unable to replicate the problem with the duplicate mails
> > either
> > >> >> before
> > >> >> >or after (as expected) the upgrade. Do you know any details about
> > that -whether it only manifested itself when there were lots of
> > >> >> recepients
> > >> >> >on the message or a high load on the server or what?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >Regards,
> > >> >> >Neil
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >--
> > >> >> >This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > >> >> >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> > >> >> >believed to be clean.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> In line with our policy, this message has
> > >> >> been scanned for viruses and dangerous
> > >> >> content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> > >> >> www.themarshalls.co.uk/policy
> > >> >
> > >> --
> > >> In line with our policy, this message has
> > >> been scanned for viruses and dangerous
> > >> content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> > >> www.themarshalls.co.uk/policy
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > In line with our policy, this message has
> > been scanned for viruses and dangerous
> > content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> > www.themarshalls.co.uk/policy
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> > believed to be clean.
> >
> >
>