Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's exactly what I meant. *Mounting* the license plate on the roof is
bad, but *looking* for the license plate on the roof isn't -- if it's not
significantly more effort.
If it looks like a license plate it must be a license plate, huh? What
happens
But this license-plate analogy only applies to the faulty MX record.
According to the original poster, that site had _two_ MX records:
MX 8 n.n.n.n. (faulty)
MX 10 mail.foobar.com. (correct)
Why couldn't Courier try the correct MX record after the faulty one
fails? I
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 12:47 AM
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's exactly what I meant. *Mounting* the license plate
on the roof
is bad, but *looking* for the license plate on the roof isn't -- if
it's not
Hello,
Is there any way of forcing courier esmtp to authenticate itself to a remote
esmtp server using PLAIN, even when the remote server advertises CRAM-MD5 as
one of the possible authentication methods? Setting ESMTPAUTH=PLAIN in esmtpd
didn't seem to do the trick even after restarting courier
Title: User defined SMTP Auth ?
Does Courier allow for having different SMTP Auth configurations so that
- one user is allowed to relay based on his IP address in /etc/courier/smtpaccess/*
- another user is required to provide username/password for being allowed to relay
Best
On Tue, 4 May 2004, [iso-8859-1] Holmstrm Lars wrote:
Does Courier allow for having different SMTP Auth configurations so that
- one user is allowed to relay based on his IP address in /etc/courier/smtpaccess/*
- another user is required to provide username/password for being allowed to relay
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cars have two registration plates, one on the front, and one on the
back. The police stop you if either is missing.
So these setups would be illegal:
i)MX 10 mail.example.com.
...because there's no license plate on the back?
ii) MX
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But this license-plate analogy only applies to the faulty MX record.
According to the original poster, that site had _two_ MX records:
MX 8 n.n.n.n. (faulty)
MX 10 mail.foobar.com. (correct)
Why couldn't Courier try the
On Tue, 4 May 2004 13:10:19 +0200
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cars have two registration plates, one on the front, and one on the
back. The police stop you if either is missing.
So these setups would be illegal:
i)MX 10
Correction interspersed below ...
Lloyd Zusman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But this license-plate analogy only applies to the faulty MX record.
According to the original poster, that site had _two_ MX records:
MX 8 n.n.n.n.
Stefan Hornburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 4 May 2004 13:10:19 +0200
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
Please stop these b0rken analogies, this is ridiculous.
The point is the standard is the standard
But as I mentioned
How ?
-Original Message-
From: Grzegorz Janoszka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 04 May 2004 13:06
To: Holmström Lars
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [courier-users] User defined SMTP Auth ?
On Tue, 4 May 2004, [iso-8859-1] Holmström Lars wrote:
Does Courier allow for having
Hi all!
On a Red-Hat 7.2 I tried to configure Courier ver. 0.45.4 with MySQL 3.22.32.
I wrote and executed the following script:
--
#!/bin/ksh
CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/local/mysql/include
LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/mysql/lib
export CPPFLAGS
export LDFLAGS
Adding to configure:
--with-authmysql --with-mysql-libs=/usr/local/mysql/lib --with-mysql-include
s=/usr
/local/mysql/include \
--
#!/bin/ksh
CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/local/mysql/include
LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/mysql/lib
export CPPFLAGS
export LDFLAGS
On Tue, 4 May 2004, [iso-8859-1] Holmstrm Lars wrote:
How ?
First: answer UNDER the text and CUT unnecessary lines.
Second: A make everything as mentioned in manuals, no special things.
What definetely do you need to do?
--
Grzegorz Janoszka
Holmström Lars wrote:
How ?
Set up any IP addresses or networks that you want to relay for, without
authentication, in the smtpaccess/default file. Any mail sent from an
address not listed therein must be authenticated in order to relay.
Sam,
Is it possible to have an administration feature, alike
wu-imap's mailadm, where all members of tech. support
group can login to any account and troublshoot e-mail for users.
maidir format seems a lot more reliable, when it comes to message
corruption,
but the users still do stupid things
I have a number of aliases files for some virtual domains they do things
like:
@domain.com:domain
Then I have virtual users like domain-user1, domain-user2
However, I noticed that this means that since I have to domain-postmaster
user I do not accept mail to postmaster for that domain.
Is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
hey joe, list.
However, I noticed that this means that since I have to
domain-postmaster
user I do not accept mail to postmaster for that domain.
Is there some way to set this up globally? Or do I have to add a
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 4/05/2004, at 11:10 PM, Julian Mehnle wrote:
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cars have two registration plates, one on the front, and one on the
back. The police stop you if either is missing.
So these setups would be illegal:
i)MX 10 mail.example.com.
...because
Just started today. Haven't made changes to the system in a week or more...
Some messages TO THE SAME ACCOUNTS are deliver.
Some are deferred.
What am I missing? Can I do something to maildrop to make it more explicit?
I'm using it for default delivery
Here is an example log (stripped of
Further confusion...
It seems that this error is generated in :
int FormatMbox::DeliverTo(class Mio mio) from formatmbox.C
which would imply that for some reason my Maildir is being recognized as an
mbox?!?!?
Here is a directory listing:
drwx-- 6 sys sys512 May 4 19:53 .Old
Solved.
Was a problem with a piped command terminatng...
I added -V 1 to the maildrop call which then displayed WHICH iped command
was terminating... For future reference, command pipes are treated as mbox
deliveries.
thanks!
m/
-Original Message-
From: Mitch (WebCob)
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 4/05/2004, at 11:10 PM, Julian Mehnle wrote:
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
and if nobody enforces it all hell breaks loose.
You mean, hell breaks loose in about the same way as when some people
have
one of their MX
Mitch (WebCob) wrote:
which would imply that for some reason my Maildir is being recognized as an
mbox?!?!?
Or that your maildroprc or .mailfilter file has a to or cc which is
directing mail to a mailbox file rather than the Maildir. It could be a
malformed to or cc which the user intended to
Is there any RFC that says this is an invalid format for email address?
(don't confuse with POSIX usernames, I'm talking straight email
addresses)
--
Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key
Thanks Gord...
A pipe | is considered a mailbox delivery.
Didn't realize that. Should have - screwed up in a similar way before. The
program was puking, and as a result, the delivery was failing, but for some
reason wasn't seeing errors... when I added -V 1 to the maildrop, the name
of the
Is there any RFC that says this is an invalid format for email address?
(don't confuse with POSIX usernames, I'm talking straight email
addresses)
Why would you want to block this format? Many companies use this
format, so I'd think that it's not likely.
On Tuesday 04 May 2004 17:41, Matthew Wilson wrote:
Why would you want to block this format? Many companies use this
format, so I'd think that it's not likely.
I don't want to block it at all. I am planning on deploying such a
naming scheme for the company I work for, and I wanted to make
Is there any RFC that says this is an invalid format for email address?
(don't confuse with POSIX usernames, I'm talking straight email
addresses)
it's somewhat cryptic, but the following regex will match the RFC 822
(with the TLD's manually added by me, since the rfc isn't that
specific):
Approximately 20-22 hours ago the hard disk in my gateway/router crashed.
It's going to be a few days before things will return to normal, and I'll
catch up on my mail then.
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On May 4, 2004, at 1:21 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
Is there any RFC that says this is an invalid format for email address?
To answer your question...
No.
There is an RFC that says it is perfectly legal, however.
Two of them in all likelihood.
822 and 2822.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc822.html
32 matches
Mail list logo
