Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
arch ? # uname -a On 06/09/2011 05:13 AM, ron wrote: OS is Centos 5.6 Linux kernel is 2.6.18-238.9.1.el5 Server is a DL380 G4 Centos runs under VMWare ESXi 4.0 Here is the run file. #!/bin/sh QMAILDUID=`id -u vpopmail` NOFILESGID=`id -g vpopmail` MAXSMTPD=`cat

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Linux mail2.nsii.net 2.6.18-238.9.1.el5 #1 SMP Tue Apr 12 18:10:56 EDT 2011 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux ** On 6/9/2011 10:04 AM, Eric Shubert wrote: arch ? # uname -a On 06/09/2011 05:13 AM, ron wrote: OS is Centos 5.6 Linux kernel is 2.6.18-238.9.1.el5 Server is a DL380 G4 Centos runs under

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Sam Clippinger
20M seems kinda low for softlimit. Try increasing the number to see if that makes a difference -- for example, add another zero (200M) and retest. On my own server, softlimit is set to 80M. Don't forget to restart the service after making the change. :) -- Sam Clippinger On 6/9/11 7:13 AM,

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Ok, That seems to have done the trick. I received an email from the client. I bumped it up to 128M. Thanks Ron On 6/9/2011 10:12 AM, Sam Clippinger wrote: 20M seems kinda low for softlimit. Try increasing the number to see if that makes a difference -- for example, add another zero (200M) and

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
Ron, Can you do a little testing and see what's adequate? I expect that 128M is a bit overkill. We'll need to get the QMT defaults bumped up a bit depending on your results. Thanks. On 06/09/2011 07:42 AM, ron wrote: Ok, That seems to have done the trick. I received an email from the client.

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Dossy Shiobara
Don't forget that softlimit not only prevents misbehaving software from running away and degrading the system's performance, but it ALSO prevents resource starvation denial of service attacks. On 6/9/11 11:45 AM, Sam Clippinger wrote: Remember that the softlimit program only limits the

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Right after I said everything was ok, I went to lunch all fat dumb happy thinking it was all fixed. While out to lunch I remembered that I left all the TLS stuff commented out, so I uncommented them and had her send me another test, it didnt go. So its not fixed. *Ron Olds * *National Service

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Ok, I went in and extended the idle time out to 5mins and had her send me another email. Following is the log file that I got from that test: 06/09/2011 12:46:52 STARTED: VERSION = 4.2.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG, PID = 15900 06/09/2011 12:46:52 CURRENT ENVIRONMENT

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Dossy Shiobara
I'm not concerned about the former, either. I pretty much exclusively use softlimit to prevent the latter - DoS attacks. The concern isn't about the NUMBER of concurrent connections - a resource starvation attack can be done with very few, even 1 single connection, depending on the

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
So instead of hitting the spamdyke timeout, it hit a timeout on the i/o operation. Still doesn't point to the root cause. :( Why softlimit doesn't issue some sort of error message is beyond me. I'm still inclined to ditch it. Thanks Ron. -- -Eric 'shubes' On 06/09/2011 09:52 AM, ron wrote:

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Dossy Shiobara
Can you please share your daemontools run file with us? Also, Sam - could this be related to the change in 4.2.0 that's described by: [4.2.0] fixes a number of bugs, including an TLS/SSL issue that can cause spamdyke to hang forever. From Ron's logs, it seems like after TLS/SSL has been

[spamdyke-users] Olds guy

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
Here's the name/address of a real guy I'm doing a little troubleshooting with: Ron Olds National Service Information 145 Baker St Marion, Ohio 43302 Made me think of you, twice. (Your work address is Baker street, right?) -- -Eric 'shubes' ___

Re: [spamdyke-users] Olds guy

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
On 06/09/2011 10:04 AM, Eric Shubert wrote: Here's the name/address of a real guy I'm doing a little troubleshooting with: Ron Olds National Service Information 145 Baker St Marion, Ohio 43302 Made me think of you, twice. (Your work address is Baker street, right?) (Sorry for this post

Re: [spamdyke-users] Olds guy

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Yes it is. On 6/9/2011 1:04 PM, Eric Shubert wrote: Here's the name/address of a real guy I'm doing a little troubleshooting with: Ron Olds National Service Information 145 Baker St Marion, Ohio 43302 Made me think of you, twice. (Your work address is Baker street, right?)

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Ok, I removed softlimit completely and here is the log file: Doesnt appear to be any changes 06/09/2011 13:42:34 STARTED: VERSION = 4.2.0+TLS+CONFIGTEST+DEBUG, PID = 18709 06/09/2011 13:42:34 CURRENT ENVIRONMENT PATH=/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin PWD=/var/qmail/supervise/smtp

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Does anyone else have a spamdyke setup? I can try to get her to send an email to see if there are the same issues as what I am getting? *Ron Olds * *National Service Information * 145 Baker St Marion, Ohio 43302 _ron@nsii.net_ 800-235-0337 X122 On 6/9/2011 11:45 AM, Sam Clippinger wrote:

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread ron
Where would I find the file if its not the one I already posted? Can you please share your daemontools run file with us? Also, Sam - could this be related to the change in 4.2.0 that's described by: [4.2.0] fixes a number of bugs, including an TLS/SSL issue that can cause spamdyke to

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
I'd say that eliminates softlimit as being involved then. ;) Everything seems to point to a bug in spamdyke. Dossy's post appears to have a few clues. Sam? -- -Eric 'shubes' On 06/09/2011 10:55 AM, ron wrote: Ok, I removed softlimit completely and here is the log file: Doesnt appear to be

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Dossy Shiobara
Could you downgrade back to Spamdyke 4.1.0 from 4.2.0, and see if the problem persists? On 6/9/11 1:55 PM, ron wrote: Ok, I removed softlimit completely and here is the log file: Doesnt appear to be any changes -- Dossy Shiobara | He realized the fastest way to change

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Eric Shubert
You can have her send something to me. e...@shubes.net My setup (current QMT) appears to be pretty close to yours. -- -Eric 'shubes' On 06/09/2011 11:09 AM, ron wrote: Does anyone else have a spamdyke setup? I can try to get her to send an email to see if there are the same issues as what I

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Dossy Shiobara
Just confirmed that the SSL interop problem that Ron's seeing is also a problem in Spamdyke 4.1.0. Going to turn all knobs to 11 and see what's really going on, here ... On 6/9/11 2:29 PM, Eric Shubert wrote: I'd say that eliminates softlimit as being involved then. ;) Everything seems to

Re: [spamdyke-users] Help with spamdyke...

2011-06-09 Thread Dossy Shiobara
With EXCESSIVE logging turned on, the SMTP session looks like this -- 06/09/2011 16:59:09 LOG OUTPUT EXCESSIVE(middleman()@spamdyke.c:2398): read 10 bytes from network input file descriptor 0, buffer contains 10 bytes, current position is 0 06/09/2011 16:59:09 FROM REMOTE TO CHILD: 10 bytes