qmail Digest 29 May 1999 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 655
Topics (messages 26079 through 26108):
Extremely slow POP & SMTP
26079 by: Jere Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26080 by: Thomas Balle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Random Qmail Questions
26081 by: Jeff Hayward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26086 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Restricting Individual Users
26082 by: Amit Vadehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26085 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Competition to qmail ...
26083 by: Amit Vadehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26084 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
migrating to sendmail in a different way.
26087 by: Engineer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26088 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can you please point me the way?
26089 by: "Konstantin V." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Slight problem with Installation
26090 by: "Viral H. Shah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26092 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26093 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26105 by: "Viral H. Shah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mailing lists on dial-up box
26091 by: Doug Lumpkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26098 by: Frederik Lindberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26099 by: Doug Lumpkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26100 by: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26101 by: Doug Lumpkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26102 by: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26103 by: Doug Lumpkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26104 by: RaTao von J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ezmlm-manage acceping multiple domains in inhost
26094 by: Jay Soffian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26097 by: Frederik Lindberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26106 by: Jay Soffian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail appending domain?
26095 by: Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26096 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Security question wrt forwarding
26107 by: "Peter van der Landen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail??????
26108 by: "reconstrucde@d" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greetings,
This is a known problem when running nat/pat and qmail. It involves the identd
packets that the server sends out on port 113. I noticed these originally when
my IProute box firewall complained about intrusion attempts on that port. After
4 of them, my mail went through. The easiest way to solve this is use a NAT
proxy or passthrough to pass port113 on to any internal machine. The mail server
will get a connection refused message from the box instead of a timeout. The
other solution is to disable identd lookups on the mail server.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
// Jere Cassidy - System Administration - D&E SuperNet
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: (717)738-7054
web: http://www.desupernet.net/jere
pager/pcs: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (717)203-0042
~~~ "While sowing the seeds of Utopia,
you invoked a convenient amnesia" -BR ~~~
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Balle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For some time I have experienced a problem which may be a qmail problem but
> Im not sure.
>
> I have a number of dial in customers who uses ISDN routers with pat/nat
> translation some of them have great difficulties sending and checking mail,
> it often takes in excess of 20 sec. to establish a connection to my qmail
> server regardless of the client program (I also tried to telnet directly to
> port 25 and 110 it takes the same time)
>
> Other customers with the same/very similar hardware config connects without
> a problem.
> I have not experienced the problem with customers who has direct access to
> the internet ie via a modem dialup.
>
> For all I can see the pat/nat works fine and they connect rapidly to all
> other servers on my network including af test server I have running sendmail.
>
> What could make the connect time so extremely slow ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
Hi,
That makes sence.
And then again not. I have closed for all ident traffic on the firewall
inbound, but why does it only affect some of my customers ?
And then the stupid question how do I disable ident lookup ?
Thanks,
Thomas
>Greetings,
>This is a known problem when running nat/pat and qmail. It involves the
>identd
>packets that the server sends out on port 113. I noticed these originally
>when
>my IProute box firewall complained about intrusion attempts on that
>port. After
>4 of them, my mail went through. The easiest way to solve this is use a NAT
>proxy or passthrough to pass port113 on to any internal machine. The mail
>server
>will get a connection refused message from the box instead of a timeout. The
>other solution is to disable identd lookups on the mail server.
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>// Jere Cassidy - System Administration - D&E SuperNet
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: (717)738-7054
> web: http://www.desupernet.net/jere
> pager/pcs: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (717)203-0042
>~~~ "While sowing the seeds of Utopia,
> you invoked a convenient amnesia" -BR ~~~
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Thomas Balle wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > For some time I have experienced a problem which may be a qmail problem but
> > Im not sure.
> >
> > I have a number of dial in customers who uses ISDN routers with pat/nat
> > translation some of them have great difficulties sending and checking mail,
> > it often takes in excess of 20 sec. to establish a connection to my qmail
> > server regardless of the client program (I also tried to telnet directly to
> > port 25 and 110 it takes the same time)
> >
> > Other customers with the same/very similar hardware config connects without
> > a problem.
> > I have not experienced the problem with customers who has direct access to
> > the internet ie via a modem dialup.
> >
> > For all I can see the pat/nat works fine and they connect rapidly to all
> > other servers on my network including af test server I have running
> sendmail.
> >
> > What could make the connect time so extremely slow ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Thomas
>
On Thu, 27 May 1999, John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
You'll find this is pretty much normal. DJB's "beta" or even "alpha"
software is usually much higher quality then the normal "beta" package. I
have much faith in DJB's coding skill.
It isn't the coding. It is the very intense attention paid to
design and then *testing* (and redesign) which I believe gives Dan's
software such bedrock stability, even right out of the gate. The
first qmail beta, qmail-0.70, was more solid than most other mail
product's 'release' versions.
-- Jeff Hayward
John Gonzalez/netMDC admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>The pop daemon that DJB wrote for maildir works beautifully, is simple,
>fast, secure, and what more can you ask for?
Correction 1: Russ Nelson wrote it, DJB modified it.
Correction 2: regarding security, the qmail-popup man page says:
qmail-popup should be used only within a secure network.
Otherwise an eavesdropper can steal passwords. Even if
you use APOP, an active attacker can still take over the
connection and wreak havoc.
>http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#Aliases
Unfortunately, this is just a skeleton. It's next on my list, though,
so it should be there in a day or so.
-Dave
HI,
How can i restrict individual ids on send and receive size of mails.
Thanks
Amit
Amit Vadehra writes:
> How can i restrict individual ids on send and receive size of mails.
You can't -- not really. SMTP is a non-authenticated protocol. The
best you can do is hope to identify users by their IP address, and set
the DATABYTES environment variable appropriately.
For receiving mail, set control/databytes.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | Good parenting creates
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | an adult, not a perfect
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | child.
Hi,
I have to do some testing on qmail so that i can kill the
commpetition like exchange and lotus notes...
I have to implement qmail for multiple domains and sned mail meant
for the internet to an ISP WE are on a lease line...
I need to check how fast it is so that and show the same.
The PROBLEM that i face is that when qmail is trying to send a mail to
the internet through the relay server of my ISP , from the local machine
.. the queue of the mail being sent remains for as long as 3 min.
I need to flush the mails immediately so that the overall throughput
can be faster...
Please can you suggest a solution to flush these mails immediately.
Thanks in advance
Amit
Amit Vadehra writes:
> I need to check how fast it is so that and show the same.
> The PROBLEM that i face is that when qmail is trying to send a mail to
> the internet through the relay server of my ISP , from the local machine
> .. the queue of the mail being sent remains for as long as 3 min.
> I need to flush the mails immediately so that the overall throughput
> can be faster...
Perhaps your relay server is slow? Perhaps it's a DNS timeout? Try
running strace -ff (follow forks -- or your operating's system's
equivalent) to see what qmail-remote is doing.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | Good parenting creates
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | an adult, not a perfect
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | child.
I have a mail server on which currently I am running sendmail. The user
mailboxes are present under /usr/var/spool/mail. Now I am moving my mail
server to a new machine with Linux Slackware.I want to run qmail on my
new machine. All the mailboxes ,passwd and aliases file will transfer
with tape backup tar command to new machine.I have more than 24000
mailboxes. Can anybody tell me how can I move from sendmail to qmail?
Regards
Engineer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 20:17:19 +0500
Hmm, putting off y2k for a couple years? :-)
>I have a mail server on which currently I am running sendmail. The user
>mailboxes are present under /usr/var/spool/mail. Now I am moving my mail
>server to a new machine with Linux Slackware.I want to run qmail on my
>new machine. All the mailboxes ,passwd and aliases file will transfer
>with tape backup tar command to new machine.I have more than 24000
>mailboxes. Can anybody tell me how can I move from sendmail to qmail?
Install qmail+daemontools+ucspi-tcp+fast-forward+dot-forward on the
slackware box. Configure everything, including /var/spool/mail
delivery. Test it. When it's OK, shut down the sendmail system, copy
off the mailboxes, aliases, .forward files. Install them on the qmail
box. Configure the qmail box to accept mail intended for the sendmail
box (e.g., rcphosts, locals).
Alternatively, move the mailboxes from /var/spool/mail to the user's
home directory. You'll have to fix the MUA's to look for the mailbox
in the new location.
Is this the kind of info you were looking for?
-Dave
How can i unsubscribe and stop receiving messages from qmail list?
Hi!
I have recently converted myself to a Linux user and am trying to make
it my File & Print Server along with my Mail Server. Everyone whom I
asked, referred my to qmail as the best MTA for the Mail Server. So I
downloaded the source files and followed the instructions to remove
sendmail and install qmail.
Well, during the installation, I had one slight problem after the
installation recognised my domain name - a soft error because the setup
could not resolve the domain name. It asked me set up the control/me
file manually. Everything else worked well.
I am able to see the daemons start up properly when I reboot. However,
when I try the TEST.deliver (test message to self), I am faced with the
problem. The mail does not reach me. In the log files it says something
like CNAME error.
I went through the FAQ and found out that this is happening becasue the
DNS server is down. This makes sense because my machine is not set up
for DNS. I was wondering whether DNS is really required if I am going to
send messages locally (on the intranet).
Basically, I have about 25 Win9x clients on this Linux server. I have
implemented SAMBA as the PDC to emulate NT. I also want this Linux
server to act as my mail server. Ideally, I would like the users to use
Netscape or similar packages to send and receive mails to other users in
the organisation (same domain name) and to the outside world (through a
dial-up connection to an ISP) - all through qmail.
Can I use qmail in this regard? If so, please help me go through the
steps required to install qmail. I have just started poking around with
Linux (Red Hat 5.2) and am not a UNIX guru, hence some elementary help
would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in anticipation of your
response.
===
Viral Shah
qmail REQUIRES DNS.
On Fri, 28 May 1999, Viral H. Shah wrote:
> Hi!
> I have recently converted myself to a Linux user and am trying to make
> it my File & Print Server along with my Mail Server. Everyone whom I
> asked, referred my to qmail as the best MTA for the Mail Server. So I
> downloaded the source files and followed the instructions to remove
> sendmail and install qmail.
>
> Well, during the installation, I had one slight problem after the
> installation recognised my domain name - a soft error because the setup
> could not resolve the domain name. It asked me set up the control/me
> file manually. Everything else worked well.
>
> I am able to see the daemons start up properly when I reboot. However,
> when I try the TEST.deliver (test message to self), I am faced with the
> problem. The mail does not reach me. In the log files it says something
> like CNAME error.
>
> I went through the FAQ and found out that this is happening becasue the
> DNS server is down. This makes sense because my machine is not set up
> for DNS. I was wondering whether DNS is really required if I am going to
>
> send messages locally (on the intranet).
>
> Basically, I have about 25 Win9x clients on this Linux server. I have
> implemented SAMBA as the PDC to emulate NT. I also want this Linux
> server to act as my mail server. Ideally, I would like the users to use
> Netscape or similar packages to send and receive mails to other users in
>
> the organisation (same domain name) and to the outside world (through a
> dial-up connection to an ISP) - all through qmail.
>
> Can I use qmail in this regard? If so, please help me go through the
> steps required to install qmail. I have just started poking around with
> Linux (Red Hat 5.2) and am not a UNIX guru, hence some elementary help
> would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in anticipation of your
> response.
>
> ===
> Viral Shah
>
>
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
"Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>qmail REQUIRES DNS.
No, I've run qmail on a few systems with no DNS using a wildcard
"smtproutes" entry that pointed to a smart host (by IP address).
-Dave
Could you please elaborate on this smtproutes that you have mentioned?
Or if you could point me to a proper MAN page or document, it would be
great. Thanks!
===
Viral Shah
Dave Sill wrote:
> "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >qmail REQUIRES DNS.
>
> No, I've run qmail on a few systems with no DNS using a wildcard
> "smtproutes" entry that pointed to a smart host (by IP address).
>
> -Dave
I have installed a dial-up box for a customer that is running qmail for
both inter-office and internet mail. Once a week one of the users in their
office sends a mailing list to upwards of 500 people. This causes big
problems over their 28.8 connection...
Is there an intelligent way for qmail to determine if a message contains
more than 30 recipients and then forward it off to our SMTP server (on a
T1) for delivery?
Any ideas or thoughts would be greatly appreciated...
--
Doug Lumpkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Doug Lumpkin writes:
> I have installed a dial-up box for a customer that is running qmail for
> both inter-office and internet mail. Once a week one of the users in their
> office sends a mailing list to upwards of 500 people. This causes big
> problems over their 28.8 connection...
>
> Is there an intelligent way for qmail to determine if a message contains
> more than 30 recipients and then forward it off to our SMTP server (on a
> T1) for delivery?
qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
-Sincerely, Fred
Frederik Lindberg, Inf. Dis, WashU, St. Louis, MO
It's a permanent connection... Just happens to be a dial-up...
--
Doug Lumpkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frederik Lindberg wrote:
> Doug Lumpkin writes:
>
> > I have installed a dial-up box for a customer that is running qmail for
> > both inter-office and internet mail. Once a week one of the users in their
> > office sends a mailing list to upwards of 500 people. This causes big
> > problems over their 28.8 connection...
> >
> > Is there an intelligent way for qmail to determine if a message contains
> > more than 30 recipients and then forward it off to our SMTP server (on a
> > T1) for delivery?
>
> qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
> instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
> from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
>
> -Sincerely, Fred
> Frederik Lindberg, Inf. Dis, WashU, St. Louis, MO
On Fri, 28 May 1999, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
>qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
>instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
>from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
SMTP itself really isnt optimized for dialup, it's not just qmail.
There are tons of ways to run a more efficient mailer from a dialup box
without using SMTP or even serialmail.
qmtp is an option
Bruce Guenter has a nullmailer package that might be of some use.
_ __ _____ __ _________
______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
__ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
_ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
/_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
[---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
5:40pm up 113 days, 43 min, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.17, 0.18
I realize there might be better ways to do this, but none of their machines
are connected to the internet, only the gateway machine is. So it has to be
running SMTP to accept their messages and then direct them out onto the
net...
--
Doug Lumpkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
>
> >qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
> >instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
> >from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
>
> SMTP itself really isnt optimized for dialup, it's not just qmail.
>
> There are tons of ways to run a more efficient mailer from a dialup box
> without using SMTP or even serialmail.
>
> qmtp is an option
>
> Bruce Guenter has a nullmailer package that might be of some use.
>
> _ __ _____ __ _________
> ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
> __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
> _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
> /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
> [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
> 5:40pm up 113 days, 43 min, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.17, 0.18
--
Doug Lumpkin
PacInfo Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I dont see why this is necessary. Have you ever heard of virtual hosts?
Mail exchangers? POP boxes? Virtual Domains? etc, etc?
It might help us to better help you, if you explain the entire situation?
On Fri, 28 May 1999, Doug Lumpkin wrote:
>I realize there might be better ways to do this, but none of their machines
>are connected to the internet, only the gateway machine is. So it has to be
>running SMTP to accept their messages and then direct them out onto the
>net...
>--
>Doug Lumpkin
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
>>
>> >qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
>> >instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
>> >from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
>>
>> SMTP itself really isnt optimized for dialup, it's not just qmail.
>>
>> There are tons of ways to run a more efficient mailer from a dialup box
>> without using SMTP or even serialmail.
>>
>> qmtp is an option
>>
>> Bruce Guenter has a nullmailer package that might be of some use.
>>
>> _ __ _____ __ _________
>> ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
>> __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
>> _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
>> /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
>> [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
>> 5:40pm up 113 days, 43 min, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.17, 0.18
>
>--
>Doug Lumpkin
>PacInfo Internet
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
_ __ _____ __ _________
______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
__ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
_ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
/_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
[---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
6:00pm up 113 days, 1:03, 3 users, load average: 0.02, 0.09, 0.12
Ok... Entire situation. One linux box with internet access (28.8 modem), on a
network. They do not want employees to have internet access, so none of the
machines can reach anything other than what is on the local network. Qmail is
set-up as the SMTP server and processes both interoffice and internet mail. They
have small internet mail load and a large interoffice mail load, except when once
a week a large mailing list is distributed. The interoffice mail is distributed
locally and never has to traverse the internet. Importantly, This is what they
want!
What I would like to do is have qmail notice that the message it is processing is
to more than 30 bcc addresses and then decide to pass that to a different SMTP
server to be processed at the ISP. This way their dial-up line is not cruching
messages for hours non-stop.
I would appreciate any suggestions you might have...
--
Doug Lumpkin
PacInfo Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
> I dont see why this is necessary. Have you ever heard of virtual hosts?
> Mail exchangers? POP boxes? Virtual Domains? etc, etc?
>
> It might help us to better help you, if you explain the entire situation?
>
> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Doug Lumpkin wrote:
>
> >I realize there might be better ways to do this, but none of their machines
> >are connected to the internet, only the gateway machine is. So it has to be
> >running SMTP to accept their messages and then direct them out onto the
> >net...
> >--
> >Doug Lumpkin
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
> >>
> >> >qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
> >> >instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
> >> >from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
> >>
> >> SMTP itself really isnt optimized for dialup, it's not just qmail.
> >>
> >> There are tons of ways to run a more efficient mailer from a dialup box
> >> without using SMTP or even serialmail.
> >>
> >> qmtp is an option
> >>
> >> Bruce Guenter has a nullmailer package that might be of some use.
> >>
> >> _ __ _____ __ _________
> >> ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
> >> __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
> >> _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
> >> /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
> >> [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
> >> 5:40pm up 113 days, 43 min, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.17, 0.18
> >
> >--
> >Doug Lumpkin
> >PacInfo Internet
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
>
> _ __ _____ __ _________
> ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
> __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
> _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
> /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
> [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
> 6:00pm up 113 days, 1:03, 3 users, load average: 0.02, 0.09, 0.12
so, if you have a ISP machine (with a T1) that will relay mail for you (with a 2
8.8k) I think that you should use it always! it's better to connect to the machi
ne that is 2 hop's away than machines 200 hops away :)
you should have your domain in locals, so the only step left is adding:
:relay.some.isp.net
to your control/smtproutes file
that will create a "default" smtproute to the relay.
regards,
ratao
On 29-May-99 Doug Lumpkin wrote:
> Ok... Entire situation. One linux box with internet access (28.8 modem), on
> a
> network. They do not want employees to have internet access, so none of the
> machines can reach anything other than what is on the local network. Qmail
> is
> set-up as the SMTP server and processes both interoffice and internet mail.
> They
> have small internet mail load and a large interoffice mail load, except when
> once
> a week a large mailing list is distributed. The interoffice mail is
> distributed
> locally and never has to traverse the internet. Importantly, This is what
> they
> want!
>
> What I would like to do is have qmail notice that the message it is
> processing is
> to more than 30 bcc addresses and then decide to pass that to a different
> SMTP
> server to be processed at the ISP. This way their dial-up line is not
> cruching
> messages for hours non-stop.
>
> I would appreciate any suggestions you might have...
> --
> Doug Lumpkin
> PacInfo Internet
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
>
>> I dont see why this is necessary. Have you ever heard of virtual hosts?
>> Mail exchangers? POP boxes? Virtual Domains? etc, etc?
>>
>> It might help us to better help you, if you explain the entire situation?
>>
>> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Doug Lumpkin wrote:
>>
>> >I realize there might be better ways to do this, but none of their machines
>> >are connected to the internet, only the gateway machine is. So it has to
>> >be
>> >running SMTP to accept their messages and then direct them out onto the
>> >net...
>> >--
>> >Doug Lumpkin
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >qmail isn't made for dialups. Use the serialmail package for remote mail
>> >> >instead. Local delivery with qmail and all remote mail goes to a Maildir
>> >> >from where it is sent to the smarthost via serialmail.
>> >>
>> >> SMTP itself really isnt optimized for dialup, it's not just qmail.
>> >>
>> >> There are tons of ways to run a more efficient mailer from a dialup box
>> >> without using SMTP or even serialmail.
>> >>
>> >> qmtp is an option
>> >>
>> >> Bruce Guenter has a nullmailer package that might be of some use.
>> >>
>> >> _ __ _____ __ _________
>> >> ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
>> >> __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
>> >> _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
>> >> /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
>> >> [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
>> >> 5:40pm up 113 days, 43 min, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.17, 0.18
>> >
>> >--
>> >Doug Lumpkin
>> >PacInfo Internet
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _ __ _____ __ _________
>> ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
>> __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
>> _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
>> /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
>> [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
>> 6:00pm up 113 days, 1:03, 3 users, load average: 0.02, 0.09, 0.12
----------------------------------
E-Mail: RaTao von J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 29-May-99 Time: 01:56:40
----------------------------------
I have a list that was recently moved to a new hostname and I'd like
ezmlm-manage to be able to accept messages at either address. That is,
I'd like to be able to put multiple domains into inhost, but
ezmlm-manage doesn't support this. So I can either patch ezmlm-manage
or rewrite the incoming messages using new-inject from the mess822
package.
Does this sound correct, or am I missing another option? Does anyone
have any suggestions / pitfalls about doing this? My idea is to use
virtualdomains to deliver to an alternate address that runs new-inject
to rewrite the To address and then deliver to the canonical list
address.
Thoughts?
j.
--
Jay Soffian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> UNIX Systems Administrator
404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media
Jay Soffian writes:
>
> I have a list that was recently moved to a new hostname and I'd like
> ezmlm-manage to be able to accept messages at either address. That is,
> I'd like to be able to put multiple domains into inhost, but
> ezmlm-manage doesn't support this. So I can either patch ezmlm-manage
> or rewrite the incoming messages using new-inject from the mess822
> package.
>
> Does this sound correct, or am I missing another option? Does anyone
> have any suggestions / pitfalls about doing this? My idea is to use
> virtualdomains to deliver to an alternate address that runs new-inject
> to rewrite the To address and then deliver to the canonical list
> address.
You could install ezmlm-idx-0.322 (www.ezmlm.org) and not worry about it
any more. By default (as spam counter-measure), ezmlm+idx requires the list
name in To/Cc, so for moving lists you need to disable this (ezmlm-reject
-T in DIR/editor).
You could also forward messages: ~/.qmail -> newlist@newhost,
~/.qmail-default -> newlist-$DEFAULT@newhost.
-Sincerely, Fred
Frederik Lindberg, Inf. Dis, WashU, St. Louis, MO
"Frederik" == Frederik Lindberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Frederik> You could install ezmlm-idx-0.322 (www.ezmlm.org) and
Frederik> not worry about it any more. By default (as spam
Frederik> counter-measure), ezmlm+idx requires the list name in
Frederik> To/Cc, so for moving lists you need to disable this
Frederik> (ezmlm-reject -T in DIR/editor).
Cool, I'll look into that. Disabling the spam counter-measure is a
non-issue since this is a moderated list.
Frederik> You could also forward messages: ~/.qmail ->
Frederik> newlist@newhost, ~/.qmail-default ->
Frederik> newlist-$DEFAULT@newhost.
I thought about that, but wouldn't that then change the envelope
sender?
I ended up installing mess822. The original list was
[EMAIL PROTECTED], new list is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I run this list under the alias user.
I set things up like so:
/var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
lists.storm98.com:storm98
/var/qmail/control/rewrite
=lists.storm98.com:lists.storm99.com
/var/qmail/alias/.qmail-/storm98-default
|/var/qmail/bin/new-inject "-f$SENDER"
Seems to work properly.
It would have been easier to just use ofmipd, but ofmipd is an open
relay.
j.
--
Jay Soffian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> UNIX Systems Administrator
404.572.1941 Cox Interactive Media
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I've got a question regarding qmail. Whenever I send a message qmail appends
"scodebox" to it ("scodebox" is the contents of all the files in
/var/qmail/control).
So, if I do "echo to: scode@scodebox | qmail-inject" qmail tries to deliver to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], and can't resolve the hostname. Likewise, if I just
send to scode (echo to: scode | qmail-inject) it does the same thing.
What am I missing?
If this is a FAQ or just generally an incredibly stupid question, I'd be happy
to RTFM, if you'll point me to the FM :)
Thanks!
/ Peter Schuller
- ---
PGP userID: 0x5584BD98 or 'Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://hem.passagen.se/petersch
Help create a free Java based operating system - www.jos.org.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBN07O/sBfJ1FVhL2YEQL7gwCg/pNE4IhHz+em02vf/FDDG4iugs8AoKI2
HezH3x9zOCFpltYQRD3/uQ8i
=cQ6Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
+ Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| I've got a question regarding qmail. Whenever I send a message qmail
| appends "scodebox" to it ("scodebox" is the contents of all the
| files in /var/qmail/control).
|
| What am I missing?
|
| I'd be happy to RTFM, if you'll point me to the FM :)
How about RTFM qmail-inject?
Look for defaultdomain under CONTROL FILES.
- Harald
I am planning to forward mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the
address [EMAIL PROTECTED] This seems easily accomplished by creating a
forward in /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-service-default. But I want to have the
same .qmail file forward mail for service-test, service-gueydg, etc...
To achieve this I put the following in
/var/qmail/alias/.qmail-service-default:
| forward $[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unfortunately the $EXT2 variable is under control of whoever is sending the
mail. I am worried that this setup creates a security hole because the
sender could insert special shell characters. Is there any way to avoid this
risk? Is quoting the forward argument with "" characters sufficient
protection?
Or am I overly paranoid?
Regards,
Peter
- well; as long as i consider myself a newbie, i don't think there's
things like "stupid questions"....
- so: what is qmail, and what can u' do with it????? - i'm in need of a
really fantastic mailklient; i downloaded "mahogany", but it will not be
rpm'ed on my system; i have no idea why......
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
