ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Topics
    2. pattonb
    3. Topics
    P
    • Profile
    • Following 1
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 28
    • Posts 99
    • Groups 0

    Topics

    • P

      rfc 2821 + postmaster

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
      9
      0 Votes
      9 Posts
      810 Views
      scottalanmillerS

      @Dashrender said in rfc 2821 + postmaster:

      @scottalanmiller said in rfc 2821 + postmaster:

      @Dashrender said in rfc 2821 + postmaster:

      @scottalanmiller said in rfc 2821 + postmaster:

      @Dashrender said in rfc 2821 + postmaster:

      It could be an alias - so it wouldn't have to be a paid account.

      That's correct, but the actual postmaster isn't normally someone at the final company, but at the email provider.

      Think about some small sewing business with two old ladies. They order email from Office 365. Which one of them should get the postmaster emails? Neither of them can do anything about them. Should their nephew, the IT guy get it? He's not responsible for their email or any of their decisions. Only Microsoft has any reasonable hope of using that info. So an alias would break the postmaster and send the emails to the wrong place.

      OK sure, but in those cases, there really isn't a true cost to the hosting provider - they could build the system in such a way to not show the account to the account holder yet get the emails to the hosting provider. Yes this would take coding... but it's not impossible.

      Right, and maybe they do. But I think that the issue is... no one does and it is unclear who is responsible for conforming to the "rule".

      yeah - is the hosting provider or the client? both will/could say it's the other, and then it's simply never done.

      And I think it shows that the concept might not be valid any longer. Neither is likely capable of doing anything valuable with that email.

    • P

      spf include option

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
      4
      0 Votes
      4 Posts
      552 Views
      dbeatoD

      @pattonb said in spf include option:

      se cidr notation for an include record in a SPF record, or is a fqdn acceptable ? or both ?

      Both are acceptable.

    • P

      DNS PTR Record with 2 FQDN Entries with SPAM Check

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion dns email spam ptr record zimbra
      37
      1 Votes
      37 Posts
      4k Views
      JaredBuschJ

      @pattonb said in DNS PTR Record with 2 FQDN Entries with SPAM Check:

      @JaredBusch incorrect, Scott has summarized succinctly

      That is what you asked. But going with that is not what you actually wanted, then the answer to your original post is that you don't fix anything.

      You whitelist the domain in question and move on.

      The sender's ISP is in charge of setting the PTR record and there is not a damned thing you can do about it.

    • P

      deleted/corrupt partition

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
      7
      1 Votes
      7 Posts
      637 Views
      hobbit666H

      @PhlipElder said in deleted/corrupt partition:

      @pattonb GetDataBack by Run Time Software. Used it recently to recover data from an Apple MacBook Air SSD

      Yeah I've used GetDataBack several times with different levels of recovery.

    • P

      syncing zimbra calendar with google calendar

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
      9
      0 Votes
      9 Posts
      872 Views
      P

      @dbeato looks like I need version 8.8.9 (or newer) in order to use the 2.0 Oauth to sync google calendar.
      thanks everybody

    • P

      server 2019 + elevated cli in a script

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
      8
      1 Votes
      8 Posts
      974 Views
      J

      We prepend our bat and cmd batch files with this code to ensure we are elevated. This code will allow a batch file to elevate itself!

      Credit and a newer version here:
      https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7044985/how-can-i-auto-elevate-my-batch-file-so-that-it-requests-from-uac-administrator/25238418

      :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: Automatically check & get admin rights V2 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: @echo off CLS ECHO. ECHO ============================= ECHO Running Admin shell ECHO ============================= :init setlocal DisableDelayedExpansion set "batchPath=%~0" for %%k in (%0) do set batchName=%%~nk set "vbsGetPrivileges=%temp%\OEgetPriv_%batchName%.vbs" setlocal EnableDelayedExpansion :checkPrivileges NET FILE 1>NUL 2>NUL if '%errorlevel%' == '0' ( goto gotPrivileges ) else ( goto getPrivileges ) :getPrivileges if '%1'=='ELEV' (echo ELEV & shift /1 & goto gotPrivileges) ECHO. ECHO ************************************** ECHO Invoking UAC for Privilege Escalation ECHO ************************************** ECHO Set UAC = CreateObject^("Shell.Application"^) > "%vbsGetPrivileges%" ECHO args = "ELEV " >> "%vbsGetPrivileges%" ECHO For Each strArg in WScript.Arguments >> "%vbsGetPrivileges%" ECHO args = args ^& strArg ^& " " >> "%vbsGetPrivileges%" ECHO Next >> "%vbsGetPrivileges%" ECHO UAC.ShellExecute "!batchPath!", args, "", "runas", 1 >> "%vbsGetPrivileges%" "%SystemRoot%\System32\WScript.exe" "%vbsGetPrivileges%" %* exit /B :gotPrivileges setlocal & pushd . cd /d %~dp0 if '%1'=='ELEV' (del "%vbsGetPrivileges%" 1>nul 2>nul & shift /1) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::START :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: REM Run shell as admin (example) - put here code as you like ECHO %batchName% Arguments: %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::Begin Your Code here ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
    • P

      KVM & bridging

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
      5
      0 Votes
      5 Posts
      368 Views
      JaredBuschJ

      Define “bridged”

    • P

      KVM & Networking

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion kvm virtualization
      16
      0 Votes
      16 Posts
      1k Views
      ObsolesceO

      @scottalanmiller said in KVM & Networking:

      I have currently maybe 65 VMs on my KVM host, they each have their own IPs and are bridged. But there is a firewall and NAT sitting in front of all of it.

      This is really how it is most cases regardless of hypervisor.

      The only exception is in non-production when dealing with KVM + Wireless NIC... I haven't had time to see if I could get it to bridge somehow, so I'm stuck with NAT on my laptop. But, this is not an issue with servers, as they don't use wireless and this seems to be specific to wireless.

    • 1 / 1