Search results

Ceph installed OK but it was during the configuration. Near immediately after nodes starting rebooting. Yes we use HA. Public interface is 95.x.x.x Ceph Public/Cluster is 10.0.0.0/24 (we also set a backup ring on the public) Ceph Internal is 192.168.0.0/24 There was no saturation of any link...

We've been using a traditional SAN with iscsi for over 10 years, it has been ultra reliable. Now looking at ceph and have built a 3-server ceph cluster with Dell R740xds. The device has six interfaces, three to one switch, three to another. One port is public internet One port is public ceph...

Are people still suffering this? Upgraded to the latest and got the 6.8 kernel and saw very poor I/O wait as described. We are using iSCSI.

Any further comment here on the last post as to the processing logic and wasting of valuable DNSBL queries on "virus" messages which will be caught either way.

Is this fixed. Still adding a IPv6 CIDR range in the Who > IP Network filter does not appear to work. IPv4 does.

Unfortunately, it's not a rule that is putting the mail in to quarantine, hence the post. It is a mail attachment, being classed as a virus, when it is not. It's happened to various users but maintaining rulesets for each domain/user and from or to address becomes a mammouth task and could...

A rule would be overkill as there are many domains so the admin of this would be problematic. I would expect, like others, that user whitelist is exactly that. It whitelists all messages from the sender, full stop, no exceptions?

Could Proxmox clarify if the user whitelist, specifically, will skip all content/virus checks when added? We have one user who has a message with an attachment constantly being classed as a virus incorrectly. We want to whitelist the sender so this is not checked. If not, could Proxmox...

Actaully, this is supported just not explicitly documented like the other options. You can delete the group at the lower level which affects the whole group, even if it contains items.

Thanks - that does. It may be an ideal to improve the documentation on this with some examples as that's pretty limited.

We're using the /config/ruledb/who/{ogroup}/domain api call but can create who objects but there seems to be no way to delete them. Is this an oversight? We need to be able to do this via the API in the same way they can be created.

The only thing i've been able to find as the possible cause is logging shows the From as the Return-Path: ```Jan 11 23:34:05 mxg2 postfix/smtpd[222092]: proxy-accept: END-OF-MESSAGE: 250 2.5.0 OK (4CB7963BF476BBCF83); from=<bounces+xxxx-6205-xxxx=xxxx.co.uk@em2614.xxxxx.co.uk>...

We've tried whitelisting some addresses against the whole system which always fail spam checks but are valid. We have a WHO record created trying to match the address in each way: Reg exp: "*.@domain.com" Email: "specificemail@domain.com" Domain: "domain.com" They are set within the filter...

Way ahead of you. https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3287 Raised in Feb 2021 so would nice to see this implemented. We catch a lot of messages in the Virus classification matching signatures for phishing and would be nice to expose this to customers as some messages do go astray.

Is there a reason both of the above do not have an option to select the email address they were sent to as a filter? When both have a lot of messages, sometimes incorrect, trying to find that one message is often impossible. The same for exposing it via the API. Clearly the To: is known as it...

I don't. The mail is being scored for Spam under SA. Our message headers have `X-Spam-Score: XX` added. This ads to those messages which are spam but also adds to those picked up as Viruses. It would indicate the message is going through SA then Virus checks or Virus, being caught but still...

Could Proxmox give some rationale behind placing the Virus checks after Spam? If a message is being caught as a virus, it really doesn't matter what the spam checks have scored. This eats up valuable DNSBL queries for messages that will always be caught regardless of the score. It would be...

I never head back on this but the problem still continues and I see others report the issue too. Any fix or work around Proxmox? A key problem is that the message is accepted and forwarded but then rejected at SMTP with a temporary failure, so it retries again, and again, and again. This is...

I understand although it was in ther before (as it had been updating just fine) and following the steps, to the letter, on four servers, the same issue happened on both. We've been through the history to confirm no steps were missed, so based on the guide alone, the outcome was not as expected.

Yes, it was the repo issue. It may be worth making clear note about the non-ent repo as unless you click a link, read fully, that step is going to be overlooked.