I would think that a qpsmtpd system might not be able to handle as
much throughput as a stock qmail system, due to the amount of up front
processing that it does. Obviously, each qpsmtpd system is going to be
different, depending on what plugins admins choose to use with them.
I
On Sep 18, 2006, at 11:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am wondering if someone else has similar hardware, what kind of
a userbase they are supporting with it. Similarly, if someone is
supporting about 10,000 users, what hardware they are using.
What kind of users?Some users
On 9/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would think that a qpsmtpd system might not be able to handle as
much throughput as a stock qmail system, due to the amount of up front
processing that it does. Obviously, each qpsmtpd system is going to be
different, depending on
Lars, are you calling clam, SA kaspersky directly from qpsmtpd?Â
or using some other schema (like MailScanner or others?)
The forkserver didn't handle my traffic well.
Now I'm trying the preforking version (thanks Lars),
and it seems to work a lot better
--
Leonardo Helman
Pert Consultores
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Ask Bj?rn Hansen wrote:
On Sep 18, 2006, at 11:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am wondering if someone else has similar hardware, what kind of
a userbase they are supporting with it. Similarly, if someone is
supporting about 10,000 users, what hardware they are
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Lars Roland wrote:
On 9/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would think that a qpsmtpd system might not be able to handle as
much throughput as a stock qmail system, due to the amount of up front
processing that it does. Obviously, each qpsmtpd
Hello,
We're running 0.32 and experiencing a problem where the
require_resolvable_fromhost plugin appears to be rejecting domains
having an MX record with a numeric IP address instead of a host name.
I've taken a look at the bugs on rt.perl.org and done a few web
searches, and I can't seem to
On 2006-09-19 11:23:50 -0400, Richard Siddall wrote:
We're running 0.32 and experiencing a problem where the
require_resolvable_fromhost plugin appears to be rejecting domains
having an MX record with a numeric IP address instead of a host name.
That's not a bug, it's a feature :-).
It is
Richard Siddall wrote:
We're running 0.32 and experiencing a problem where the
require_resolvable_fromhost plugin appears to be rejecting domains
having an MX record with a numeric IP address instead of a host name.
MX records *must* return a [FQDN] host name, not an IP address or CNAME:
On 19-Sep-06, at 11:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I scan 1.2 million emails with qpsmtpd (using clamav, spamassassin
and
kaspersky) on a single ibm x336 with 2GB ram and two 3.0ghz xeons
(netburst based, not core 2) using Debian Sarge and a single 10K SCSI
disk. I have found that
Are you perhaps talking about domain literals? E.g. the format
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When I run this:
http://www.dnsreport.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=your.domain.here
against my domains it gives me this:
WARNING: One or more of your mailservers does not accept mail in the
domain literal
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Matt Sergeant wrote:
I seriously recommend you check out running under Apache. I suspect it's the
fastest way to run qpsmtpd (barring experimenting with the poll server). It's
how apache.org have been running qpsmtpd for a long time now.
I'll certainly consider
Hi Charles!
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Charles Butcher wrote:
Are you perhaps talking about domain literals? E.g. the format
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
somehost.somedom.net's [EMAIL PROTECTED] response:
RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
550 Relaying denied (#5.7.1)
But note that its not
On 19-Sep-06, at 6:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used to run an RBL, and do not trust them. Where I might
otherwise do a lot of things if it was just me, the requirements
frown on
false positives, and those lists are not to be used.
Modern DNSBLs aren't like their ugly parents.
Charlie Brady wrote:
[...]
If you wish to accept mail for domain literals you will need to
configure them in /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts and/or locals. I'd hope
that qpsmtpd will do the right thing if you do.
And in SME Server land, we only accept [EMAIL PROTECTED] (courtesy
of Gavin
15 matches
Mail list logo