Search Results

Search found 12925 results on 517 pages for 'email routing'.

Page 101/517 | < Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >

• Exchange out of office, sending an OoO reply for every email

  - by rodey

  We are running Exchange 2007 with a mix of Outlook 2003 and Outlook 2007. Is it possible to set the Out of Office Assistant so that when OoO is enabled, it sends a reply to every single email the user receives? Also, is there something I can reference that covers the options for OoO such as length of time between replies, etc.? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Exchange out of office, sending an OoO reply for every email

  - by rodey

  We are running Exchange 2007 with a mix of Outlook 2003 and Outlook 2007. Is it possible to set the Out of Office Assistant so that when OoO is enabled, it sends a reply to every single email the user receives? Also, is there something I can reference that covers the options for OoO such as length of time between replies, etc.? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Receive emails on Amazon EC2 Server

  - by Kartik

  I just got started with an EC2 instance and got my mail sending limit removed, allowing me to send emails from my instance. But due to lack of experience, I have no clue on how to enable receiving emails send to me on that server. The instance has an elastic IP and I have a domain name with an A record pointing to that IP. I cant seem to find better documentation on what steps need to be taken so if someone sends an email to [email protected] it either actually receives it or simply forwards it to my personal email. I know that it involves using postfix but cant find a guide to properly configure it after the installation. Thanks

  Read the article

• Forward email from exim to another mail server on different port

  - by jpartogi

  Hi all, Exim seems to be very flexible and configurable. What would be the best approach for me to forward an incoming email to exim to another mail server running on a different port like lamson? I am running exim and lamson on the same ubuntu machine. Thanks heaps.

  Read the article

• Mutt and msmtp interoperability

  - by illusionoflife

  I am working on configuring /mutt/ to send mail via /msmtp/. Strangely, if I user /msmtp/ from shell, all okay, that means, that .msmtprc is correct. However, mail sent with mutt do not come. I have this line in .muttrc. set sendmail="msmtp" How can I debug this problem? EDIT: I found, that if I send just text, like msmtp 'my-email' <<< "Hello", it works. But if I send fully builded email-header, it do not. Is it gmail politics or what?

  Read the article

• Blocking ports on the public IP assigned to lo interface in GNU/Linux

  - by nixnotwin

  I have setup my Ubuntu server as a router and webserver by following the answer given here. My ISP facing interface eth0 has a private 172.16.x.x/30 ip and my lo interface has a public IP as mentioned in the answer to the question linked above. The setup is working well. The only snag I have experienced is that I could not find a way to block the ports exposed by the public IP on the lo interface. I tried doing iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j DROP, and my server lost connectivity to the public network (internet). I could not ping any public ips. What I want is a way to block ports that are exposed by the public ip on the lo interface. And also I require iptables rules that can expose ports like 80 or openvpn port to the public network.

  Read the article

• URL redirect to a virtual server on a VLAN

  - by zeroFiG

  I have a production site, running off 10 servers. I've been given another virtual server on the same network as these 10 servers, to use for testing purposes. This server doesn't have it's own DNS entry. Therefore I need to do a redirect to the site hosted on this virtual server for a sub-domain of the site running on the 10 other servers. So Basically I was wondering how I would configure a sub domain of my production server to point at the Virtual server for testing. I'm guessing I need to modify my site file in /etc/apache2/sites-available and add another virtual host like the following and modify the redirect match: <VirtualHost *> ServerName SUBDOMAIN.DOMAIN.com RedirectMatch 301 (.*) **IP ADDRESS** CustomLog /var/log/apache2/SUBDOMAIN.DOMAIN.com.access.log combined </VirtualHost> Do I set the redirect match to just the IP on the Virtual server, and then configure another site file in the sites-available directory, which will recption this redirect and point the browser towards the HTML root? Thanks, I hope I made myself clear.

  Read the article

• Force10 layer 3 switches

  - by ALQ

  We've been running Cisco and dell layer 3 switches. The former are expensive and reliable, the latter a lot cheaper and fraught with issues. Anyone has positive experience with the core Force10 switches (and edge switches as well)?

  Read the article

• Setting up mutt for gmail

  - by highBandWidth

  I am trying to set up mutt for gmail. I am following instructions at http://crunchbanglinux.org/wiki/howto/howto_setup_mutt_with_gmail_imap, however, after putting set from = "[email protected]" set realname = "Your Real Name" set imap_user = "[email protected]" set imap_pass = "yourpassword" (with my details, of course), I get $ mutt Error in $HOME/.muttrc, line 12: imap_user: unknown variable Error in $HOME/.muttrc, line 13: imap_pass: unknown variable source: errors in $HOME/.muttrc Press any key to continue... If I try to send an email, it doesn't work because instead of IMAP, it tries to send email directly from my localhost's mail system. Mutt says it is version Mutt 1.4.2.3i.

  Read the article

• How to configure remote access to multiple subnets behind a SonicWALL NSA 2400

  - by Kyle Noland

  I have a client that uses a SonicWALL NSA 2400 as their firewall. I need to setup a second LAN subnet for a handful of PC. Management has decided that there should be a second subnet even though intend to allow access across the two subnets - I know... I'm having trouble getting communication across the 2 subnets. I can ping each gateway, but I cannot ping or seem to route traffic fron subnet A to subnet B. Here is my current setup: X0 Interface: LAN zone with IP addres 192.168.1.1 X1 Interface: WAN zone with WAN IP address X2 Interface: LAN zone with IP address 192.168.75.1 I have configured ARP and routes for the secondar subnet (X2) according to this SonicWALL KB article: http://www.sonicwall.com/downloads/supporting_multiple_firewalled_subnets_on_sonicos_enhanced.pdf using "Example 1". At this point I don't minding if I have to throw the SonicWALL GVC software VPN client into the mix to make it work. It feel like I have an Access Rule issue, but for testing I made LAN LAN, WAN LAN and VPN LAN rules wide open with the same results.

  Read the article

• Persistent routes for DD-WRT PPTP VPN client

  - by Tim Kemp

  My home network in the USA is behind a Buffalo router (G300NH) running their version of DD-WRT. I use the built-in PPTP VPN client to connect to a VPN provider in the UK. I route certain traffic over the VPN (so it has a UK source address, for various entirely legal reasons) which I achieved by following the instructions in the DD-WRT docs and my VPN provider's own instructions. I placed two commands like this in the firewall script: route add -net xxx.xxx.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev ppp0 route add -net yyy.yyy.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev ppp0 I didn't put any of the iptables rules in since it my setup doesn't seem to need them. It works like a charm. Traffic to the xxx subnets goes over the VPN, everything else goes out over my ISPs own pipes. The problem comes when the VPN drops, which it does occasionally. DD-WRT does a fine job of reconnecting it automatically, but the routes are trashed every time that happens. How do I automate the process of re-establishing my routes? I thought about static routes, but the IP address of the VPN connection is dynamically assigned (which is why I'm using dev ppp0). Many thanks, Tim

  Read the article

• How to tell Windows 7 to ignore a default gateway

  - by zildjohn01

  I currently have 2 network cards in my PC -- one connected to an internal network on a router with a disconnected WAN port (10.x.x.x), and one connected to the internet through a consumer router (192.168.0.x). Windows seems to recognize them correctly (my "Network and Sharing Center" lists them as "No Internet" and "Internet" respectively), however when I try browsing the internet it always tries the internal network's default gateway, rather than the one with internet access. Trying to ping a website results in "Reply from 10.0.0.1: Destination net unreachable.". A simple "route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1" fixes the problems, but they return upon reboot, or upon renewing my IP. Is there any way to tell Windows to ignore one NIC's default gateway, or to at least give them priorities?

  Read the article

• RFC 1918 address on open internet?

  - by longneck

  In trying to diagnose a failover problem with my Cisco ASA 5520 firewalls, I ran a traceroute to www.btfl.com and, much to my surprise, some of the hops came back as RFC 1918 addresses. Just to be clear, this host is not behind my firewall and there is no VPN involved. I have to connect across the open internet to get there. How/why is this possible? asa# traceroute www.btfl.com Tracing the route to 157.56.176.94 1 <redacted> 2 <redacted> 3 <redacted> 4 <redacted> 5 nap-edge-04.inet.qwest.net (67.14.29.170) 0 msec 10 msec 10 msec 6 65.122.166.30 0 msec 0 msec 10 msec 7 207.46.34.23 10 msec 0 msec 10 msec 8 * * * 9 207.46.37.235 30 msec 30 msec 50 msec 10 10.22.112.221 30 msec 10.22.112.219 30 msec 10.22.112.223 30 msec 11 10.175.9.193 30 msec 30 msec 10.175.9.67 30 msec 12 100.94.68.79 40 msec 100.94.70.79 30 msec 100.94.71.73 30 msec 13 100.94.80.39 30 msec 100.94.80.205 40 msec 100.94.80.137 40 msec 14 10.215.80.2 30 msec 10.215.68.16 30 msec 10.175.244.2 30 msec 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * and it does the same thing from my FiOS connection at home: C:\>tracert www.btfl.com Tracing route to www.btfl.com [157.56.176.94] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms myrouter.home [192.168.1.1] 2 8 ms 7 ms 8 ms <redacted> 3 10 ms 13 ms 11 ms <redacted> 4 12 ms 10 ms 10 ms ae2-0.TPA01-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.199.82] 5 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 0.ae4.XL2.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.8.117] 6 14 ms 16 ms 16 ms 0.xe-11-0-0.GW1.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.85.94] 7 19 ms 16 ms 16 ms microsoft-gw.customer.alter.net [63.65.188.170] 8 27 ms 33 ms * ge-5-3-0-0.ash-64cb-1a.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.46.177] 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 44 ms 43 ms 43 ms 207.46.37.235 11 42 ms 41 ms 40 ms 10.22.112.225 12 42 ms 43 ms 43 ms 10.175.9.1 13 42 ms 41 ms 42 ms 100.94.68.79 14 40 ms 40 ms 41 ms 100.94.80.193 15 * * * Request timed out.

  Read the article

• Email postfix marked as spam by google

  - by Rodrigo Ferrari

  Hello friends, I searched about this question, found some few answers but no idea how to fix, the problem is that I realy dumb with all this! I configured the postfix and done everything how the install how to told. It send the email, but get marked as spam! The header is this one: Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: by 10.223.86.203 with SMTP id t11cs837410fal; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:02:21 -0800 (PST) X-pstn-nxpr: disp=neutral, [email protected] X-pstn-nxp: bodyHash=9c6d0c64fa3a4d663c9968e9545c47d77ae0242e, headerHash=1ab8726bd17a23218309165bd20fe6e0911627cd, keyName=4, rcptHash=178929be6ed8451d98a4df01a463784e6c59b3b4, sourceip=174.121.4.154, version=1 Received: by 10.100.190.13 with SMTP id n13mr537609anf.76.1294833740396; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:02:20 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from psmtp.com ([74.125.245.168]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id w2si1297960anw.132.2011.01.12.04.02.19; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:02:20 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 174.121.4.154 as permitted sender) client-ip=174.121.4.154; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 174.121.4.154 as permitted sender) [email protected] Received: from source ([174.121.4.154]) by na3sys010amx168.postini.com ([74.125.244.10]) with SMTP; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:02:19 GMT Received: from localhost (server [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by brasilyacht.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C121290142; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:50:29 -0200 (BRST) From: YachtBrasil <[email protected]> Reply-To: Vendas <[email protected]> Cc: YachtBrasil <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: teste Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:50:29 -0200 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <[email protected]> X-pstn-2strike: clear X-pstn-neptune: 0/0/0.00/0 X-pstn-levels: (S: 1.96218/99.81787 CV:99.9000 FC:95.5390 LC:95.5390 R:95.9108 P:95.9108 M:97.0282 C:98.6951 ) X-pstn-settings: 3 (1.0000:1.0000) s cv gt3 gt2 gt1 r p m c X-pstn-addresses: from <[email protected]> [db-null] I'm out of ideas on how to fix this, I think it's dns issue, but I have marked the spf inside my tinydns =( Is there anything I can check to know why this email is marked as spam? Any help will be appreciated! Thanks and sorry for my bad english.

  Read the article

• OpenVPN with MacOS X Client and same subnets in local and remote net.

  - by Daniel

  I have a homenetwork 192.168.1.0/24 with gteway 192.168.1.1 and a remote network with the same parameters. Now I want to create a OpenVPN tunnel between those networks. I have no problems with Windows, because Windows routes everything to 192.168.1.0/24 except 192.168.1.1 throught the tunnel. On MacOS X however I see the folling line in the Details window: 2010-05-10 09:13:01 WARNING: potential route subnet conflict between local LAN [192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0] and remote VPN [192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0] When I list the routes I get the following: Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire default 192.168.1.1 UGSc 13 3 en1 127 localhost UCS 0 0 lo0 localhost localhost UH 12 3589 lo0 169.254 link#5 UCS 0 0 en1 192.168.1 link#5 UCS 1 0 en1 192.168.1.1 0:1e:e5:f4:ec:7f UHLW 13 17 en1 1103 192.168.1.101 localhost UHS 0 0 lo0 192.168.6 192.168.6.5 UGSc 0 0 tun0 192.168.6.5 192.168.6.6 UH 1 0 tun0 My Interfaces are en1 - My local Wifi network tun0 - The tunnel interface As can be seen from the routes above there is no entry for 192.168.1.0/24 that routes the traffic through the tunnel interface. When I manually route a single IP like 192.168.1.16 over the tunnel gateway 192.168.6.6, this works. Q: How do I set up my routes in MacOS X for the same behaviour as on windows, to route everything except 192.168.1.1 through the tunnel, but leave the default gateway to be my local 192.168.1.1 ?

  Read the article

• pfSense router on a LAN with two gateways

  - by JohnCC

  I have a LAN with an ADSL modem/router on it. We have just gained an alternative high-speed internet connection at our location, and I want to connect the LAN to it, eventually dropping the ADSL. I've chosen to use a small PFSense box to connect the LAN to the new WAN connection. Two servers on the LAN run services accessible to the outside via NAT using the single ADSL WAN IP. We have DNS records which point to this IP. I want to do the same via the new connection, using the WAN IP there. That connection permits multiple IPs, so I have configured pfSense using virtual IP's, 1:1 NAT and appropriate firewall rules. When I change the servers' default gateway settings to the pfSense box, I can access the services via the new WAN IPs without a problem. However, I can no longer access them via the old WAN IP. If I set the servers' default gateway back to the ADSL router, then the opposite is true - I can access the services via the ADSL IP, but not via the new one. In the first case, I believe this is because an incoming SYN packet arrives at the ADSL WAN IP, and is NAT'd and sent to the internal IP of the server. The server responds with a SYN/ACK which it sends via its default gateway, the pfSense box. The pfSense box sees a SYN/ACK that it saw no SYN for and drops the packet. Is there any sensible way around this? I would like the services to be accessible via both IPs for a short period at least, since once I change the DNS it will take a while before everyone picks up the new address.

  Read the article

• Does Exchange 2010 lift the restriction that DL addresses must be in Active Directory?

  - by Justin Grant

  We'd like to enable end-users to be able to create and maintain their own email distribution lists in Exchange 2010, where those lists may include users inside the company but also customers, partners, etc. who are outside the company. One of the limitations in Exchange 2007 (see this question) was that any member of a DL had to have an entry in active directory. You couldn't just take a group of email addresses (both inside and outside my company) and create an Exchange DL with those addresses without involving Active Directory admins to create entries for each external user. For a company creating hundreds of small mailing lists every month, this was an unacceptable IT expense. So we had to use a separate mailing list solution (GNU mailman) for DLs which included external users. Is this limitation relaxed in Exchange 2010 so we can throw away GNU mailman and use Exchange instead?

  Read the article

• Blocking ICMP outgoing requests only in eth1

  - by Raj

  I am creating a NAT with iptables: Computer A: eth0 (dhcp) + eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.1 - gateway) Computer B: eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.2, using Computer A as gateway) I know how to block ICMP outgoing requests (-A OUTPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j DROP), but that would block ICMP requests from Computer A, but not from Computer B (in fact, only for Computer A - Computer B can keep doing those). I tried with the same command, but adding -o eth1, but that does not block at all. Any idea?

  Read the article

• Isolate clients on same subnet?

  - by stefan.at.wpf

  Given n (e.g. 200) clients in a /24 subnet and the following network structure: client 1 \ . \ . switch -- firewall . / client n / (in words: all clients connected to one switch and the switch connected to the firewall) Now by default, e.g. client 1 and client n can communicate directly using the switch, without any packets ever arriving the firewall. Therefore none of those packets could be filtered. However I would like to filter the packets between the clients, therefore I want to disallow any direct communication between the clients. I know this is possible using vlans, but then - according to my understanding - I would have to put all clients in their own network. However I don't even have that much IP addresses: I have about 200 clients, only a /24 subnet and all clients shall have public ip addresses, therefore I can't just create a private network for each of them (well, maybe using some NAT, but I'd like to avoid that). So, is there any way to tell the switch: Forward all packets to the firewall, don't allow direct communication between clients? Thanks for any hint!

  Read the article

• Always use one slow connection in preference of a "faster" one

  - by billc.cn

  In Windows, there's this automatic metric thing where the metric is selected according to the declared speed of the link. I now have a gigabit LAN routed to a 2MB DSL service and a HSDPA mobile broadband connection. The former is always chosen for Internet packets even though the latter is actually faster. I tried setting the mobile broadband's interface metric to 1 and raising its priority in the advanced settings of the adapter settings, but this does not seem to affect the metric of the default route. The default route to the Ethernet interface always have a lower metric than the mobile broadband interface. Am I missing something here?

  Read the article

• Private IP getting routed over Internet

  - by WernerCD

  We are setting up an internal program, on an internal server that uses the private 172.30.x.x subnet... when we ping the address 172.30.138.2, it routes across the internet: C:\>tracert 172.30.138.2 Tracing route to 172.30.138.2 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 6 ms 1 ms 1 ms xxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.org [192.168.28.1] 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 12 ms 13 ms 9 ms xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xx.xxx.xxxxxxx.net [68.85.xx.xx] 4 15 ms 11 ms 55 ms te-7-3-ar01.salisbury.md.bad.comcast.net [68.87.xx.xx] 5 13 ms 14 ms 18 ms xe-11-0-3-0-ar04.capitolhghts.md.bad.comcast.net [68.85.xx.xx] 6 19 ms 18 ms 14 ms te-1-0-0-4-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 7 28 ms 30 ms 30 ms pos-4-12-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 8 30 ms 43 ms 30 ms 68.86.xx.xx 9 30 ms 29 ms 31 ms 172.30.138.2 Trace complete. This has a number of us confused. If we had a VPN setup, it wouldn't show up as being routed across the internet. If it hit an internet server, Private IP's (such as 192.168) shouldn't get routed. What would let a private IP address get routed across servers? would the fact that it's all comcast mean that they have their routers setup wrong?

  Read the article

• pix 501, static route to d-link router (different subnet)

  - by ra170

  I have pix 501 cisco firewall with internal ip 192.168.10.1. I have connected d-link router (dir-655) to pix 501. The d-link router has internal ip 192.168.0.1 The picture would like something like that: |pix 501| has 192.168.10.1 ip |DIR-655| has 192.168.0.1 ip 1. |cable modem|----|pix 501|-------|DIR-655|-----PC 2. PC--------|pix 501|---------|DIR-655| | | |cable modem| When I'm on the wireless network (dir-655) with assigned ip of 192.168.0.x I can cross the subnet and connect to my firewall 192.168.10.1. (pic. 1) The problem is that if I'm on the 192.168.10.x network I can't connect to anything over at 192.168.0.x network. (pic.2) I've tried entering a static route like this: `route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1` I also tried assigning static ip to wan interface on DIR-655 to 192.168.10.30 and then tried this: route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1 But still, can't connect to 192.168.0.1 or anything on that subnet. Is there a way to setup a static route? Would adding a separate router between PIX 501 and DIR-655 help? I would think that static route like this should take care of it, but it doesn't. This is my route config and nat: (config)# sh route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 (outside_IP) 1 DHCP static outside (outside_IP) 255.255.248.0 (outside_IP) 1 CONNECT static inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 OTHER static inside 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 CONNECT static or (route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1) (config)# sh nat nat (inside) 1 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 I ended up turning DIR-655 into an Access Point (turning off DHCP and pluging cable from PIX lan interface into one of the LAN interfaces on DIR-655, and leaving WAN port empty), that works as far as DIR-655 being on the same subnet now, and I can access every machine. However the question is, why can't I simply route between those two? would router between these two help? One of the reasons is, that the PIX 501 has only 10 licences, so now I'm using almost all of them. (I have few computers, iphones, ps3, print server, etc.) I would really appreciate some help! Thanks.

  Read the article

• Amazon AWS VPN how to open a port?

  - by Victor Piousbox

  I have a VPN with public and private subnets; I am considering only public subnet for now. The node 10.0.0.23, I can ssh into it. Let's say I want to connect to MySQL on the node using its private address: ubuntu@ip-10-0-0-23:/$ mysql -u root -h 10.0.0.23 ERROR 2003 (HY000): Can't connect to MySQL server on '10.0.0.23' (111) ubuntu@ip-10-0-0-23:/$ mysql -u root -h localhost Welcome to the MySQL monitor. Commands end with ; or \g. --- 8< --- snip --- 8< --- mysql> The port 3306 is not reachable if I use the private IP? My security group allows port 3306 inbound from 0.0.0.0/0 AND from 10.0.0.0/24. Outbound, allowed all. The generic setup done by Amazon through their wizard does not work... I add ACL that allows everything for everybody, still does not work. What am I missing?

  Read the article

• Multicast in private LAN with different subnets

  - by Gobliins

  after i read Multicast IP Addresses and Multicast accross the subnets I am confused. Configuration: I have two devices in the same network. They may not be in the same Subnet, but always in the same physical network (beyond the same router, switch etc.) I want to communicate across IP multicast either 224.x.x.x or 239.x.x.x may be more fitting because we want it local, not beyond of forward through the router. Can one machine be the receiver and the other machine sender of the same multicast address? and can the receiving machine send an answer to the sending machine?

  Read the article

• Outgoing mail from linux not being delivered

  - by Jason

  I can't seem to send mail through my php scripts or through the linux console on my Centos 5.5 LAMP server, when the email is addressed to go to a domain that is hosted by my box. I think it is something to do with the email routing internally, or the DNS servers that the box uses not reporting the correct MX records. Basically my box doesn't host any mail, it's all hosted on google apps. My name servers are hosted by a 3rd party provider and I am using webmin. Webmin doesn't recognise the settings on the 3rd party provider. I'm unsure how to fix this. Previously when I had this problem on a cpanel server, I would edit the remotedomains and localdomains files, moving domains from one file to another and it would fix the problem. What information do I need to provide for anyone to work out what the issue is? Thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108  | Next Page >