qmail Digest 25 Aug 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 739
Topics (messages 29359 through 29420):
Creating aliases
29359 by: Joel Gatdula Pira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29360 by: "Bongo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29361 by: Chris McCarthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29362 by: Joel Gatdula Pira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29363 by: Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29364 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stop bouncing messages
29365 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newbies to qmail
29366 by: "Thomas M. Sasala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Squashing 20,000 rumors...
29367 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29368 by: Martin Ouwehand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29371 by: Jos Backus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29380 by: Magnus Bodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29382 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29389 by: Matthew Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SQWebMail
29369 by: Martin Paulucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Disconnected Qmail??? 3rd Try!
29370 by: Scott Sharkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29372 by: Asmodeus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29374 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29375 by: Chris McCarthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29378 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29379 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29381 by: Mirko Zeibig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29387 by: Asmodeus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail-remote
29373 by: "Daniluk, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail-ldap on gateway
29376 by: "Mark E. Drummond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29377 by: Van Liedekerke Franky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
bounce messages with .qmail / vchkpw
29383 by: "Stephen C. Comoletti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29386 by: Ken Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
fixcr left hanging
29384 by: Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
maildir patches to IMAP are wonky
29385 by: "David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Load balancing / qmqp / transferring messages
29388 by: Matthew Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pop3d child crashed
29390 by: Ken Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Case Sensitive
29391 by: "Daniluk, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29394 by: David Villeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29395 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29396 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29403 by: Magnus Bodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pop3d child crashed - Vchkpw 3.4.6 did it!
29392 by: Martin Paulucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
QMTP
29393 by: "Daniluk, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
new version of vchkpw available
29397 by: Ken Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[vmailmgr] Announcements on qmail mailing list?
29398 by: "Olivier M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
reverse DNS
29399 by: "Michael Boyiazis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29400 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29401 by: "Daniluk, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29404 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29405 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
POP authentication via radius.
29402 by: Mahlon Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29406 by: Mahlon Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
why does qmail eat my From headers?
29407 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29408 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29409 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29410 by: "Jay D. Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29411 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29412 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29413 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29414 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29415 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29416 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29417 by: Rogerio Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tcpserver and qmail-pop3d
29418 by: "Michael N. Boyiazis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
maildir2smtp
29419 by: Dimitri SZAJMAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sending mail
29420 by: Joel Gatdula Pira <[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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi! I am still new with qmail and I can't create an alias for an user. Say, the user name is ABC and I want him to have an alias of DEC. DEC is not a valid username. What i did was to echo ABC > .qmail-DEC. Is this right? When I sent an email to DEC@localhost, I get an error. Any help would be much appreciatted. Joel
----- Original Message ----- From: Joel Gatdula Pira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: QMail Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 11:17 AM Subject: Creating aliases > > Hi! > > I am still new with qmail and I can't create an alias for an user. > > Say, the user name is ABC and I want him to have an alias of DEC. > DEC is not a valid username. > > What i did was to echo ABC > .qmail-DEC. > > Is this right? When I sent an email to DEC@localhost, I get an error. > > Any help would be much appreciatted. > > > > Joel Joel, You want to install the Fastforward package - it allows you to use the /etc/aliases file again (as if using sendmail)
What I do is echo "&ABC" > .qmail-DEC This works for me. I think it supports the sendmail form of /etc/alias too. At the risk of being flamed, I think sendmail's method is neater. ..Chris. Joel Gatdula Pira wrote: > Hi! > > I am still new with qmail and I can't create an alias for an user. > > Say, the user name is ABC and I want him to have an alias of DEC. > DEC is not a valid username. > > What i did was to echo ABC > .qmail-DEC. > > Is this right? When I sent an email to DEC@localhost, I get an error. > > Any help would be much appreciatted. > > Joel
I was able to create an alias however it does not work when I use mutt when I use the alias. I get an error no such user. But with sqwebmail, I worked fine. Any ideas? Joel Gatdula Pira writes: > > Hi! > > I am still new with qmail and I can't create an alias for an user. > > Say, the user name is ABC and I want him to have an alias of DEC. > DEC is not a valid username. > > What i did was to echo ABC > .qmail-DEC. > > Is this right? When I sent an email to DEC@localhost, I get an error. > > Any help would be much appreciatted. > > > > Joel
Joel Gatdula Pira a �crit : > > What i did was to echo ABC > .qmail-DEC. > Hi, I think you should add the hostnome for the address since qmail is able to handle same usernames with different hostnames: echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > .qmail-DEC in the folder /var/qmail/aliases Daniel -- *�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�*�* Ctrl Alt Del, le site qui d�marre... http://www.ctrlaltdel.ch
Joel Gatdula Pira writes: > I am still new with qmail and I can't create an alias for an user. > > Say, the user name is ABC and I want him to have an alias of DEC. > DEC is not a valid username. > > What i did was to echo ABC > .qmail-DEC. When qmail is searching for a .qmail filename, it smashes all the letters to lowercase. Therefore, the above cannot work. It must be: echo ABC > .qmail-dec > Is this right? When I sent an email to DEC@localhost, I get an error. What error? Multiple errors are possible. Unless you tell us what actually happened, we cannot help you. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
This is not a reliable design. I would bring all the mail into the permanently connected server, and forward it to the dialup. Then, when you're not connected or when the dynip.com dns fails, your email just sits in your queue. Chris McCarthy writes: > I have a dialup qmail server that is a higher MX preference than my > permanently connected qmail server. I am using a dynip.com dynamic DNS > name for the dialup. > > My problem is that this morning, it seems that the dynip.com name server > was down. The result of this is that the permanently connected qmail > server bounced all messages destined for the dialup machine with the > message: > > > Aug 24 07:42:55 www qmail: 935476975.745655 delivery 2136: failure: > Sorry._Altho > ugh_I'm_listed_as_a_best-preference_MX_or_A_for_that_host,/it_isn't_in_my_contro > > l/locals_file,_so_I_don't_treat_it_as_local._(#5.4.6)/ > > Is there a way to stop qmail from bouncing these messages, so that it > retries later. I presume qmail ignores the highest MX preference if it > cannot get an ip address for the name ?????? > > Any help much appreciated, > Thanks, ..Chris. >
Emmanuel: I have found Life With qmail to be the best source of information for a newbie. http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html Also, your host needs to be in a DNS table somewhere for qmail to work. If you are online, this could represent a problem for an unregistered domain. If you are not online yet, set up a primary DNS server first. If you installed RedHat from scratch, chances are that bind is already installed, along with sendmail and numerious other utilities that generally are not needed. -Tom http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html Emmanuel Nee wrote: > > Can someone give me advice on this. I tried setting up the system by > were in vain. Currently I do not have a registered domain yet and > running RedHat (2.2.9 kernel). > What I hope to hear from the guru is that what are the steps need to > setup a mail server for sending and recieving email. I do hope someone > would be kind to do so. > > Emmanuel -- +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Thomas M. Sasala, Electrical Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + MRJ Technology Solutions http://www.mrj.com + + 10461 White Granite Drive, Suite 102 (W)(703)277-1714 + + Oakton, VA 22124 (F)(703)277-1702 + +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Magnus Bodin writes: > On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Russell Nelson wrote: > > > Not AOL. Hotmail only uses it for outgoing. They tried using it for > > incoming, but ran into qmail-send's single-threaded processing of > > incoming email. I think they were the first party to ever run into > > this problem, and I didn't realize what was happening when they asked. > > Exactly what does this mean? That qmail-send just processes one email > at a time? And there is only one qmail-send that is master of and > handling the queue (i.e. spawning off new qmail-(remote|local)s? It means that qmail-send alternates between spawning jobs and processing incoming mail. If mail arrives too quickly, the todo section of the queue can create very large directories (because todo is not a hashed tree of directories). Once qmail-send gets more than 1,000 (or thereabouts -- it depends on what filesystem you're using) todo files, it can't recover, and the only help is to turn off incoming mail. > And the only remedy for this is load-balancing to several servers I > guess.. > > Did they really had to give up qmail? Just for incoming mail. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
] It means that qmail-send alternates between spawning jobs and ] processing incoming mail. If mail arrives too quickly, the todo ] section of the queue can create very large directories (because todo ] is not a hashed tree of directories). Once qmail-send gets more than ] 1,000 (or thereabouts -- it depends on what filesystem you're using) ] todo files, it can't recover, and the only help is to turn off ] incoming mail. Yes, I think this was part of my problem a few days ago (see the "Lots and lots of qmail-queue's" thread). Which makes me wonder: why aren't the todo and intd trees hashed like mess, info, remote and local ? On my busy Solaris server, it took *seconds* to do an "ls" in todo or intd, so I guess it also took seconds for qmail-send and its children to find files in there... -- | ~~~~~~~~ Martin Ouwehand ~ Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ~ Lausanne __|_________ Email/PGP: http://slwww.epfl.ch/SIC/SL/info/Martin.html __________ Proposition pour un onzi�me commandement: Tu n'invoqueras pas l'inconscient de ton prochain en vain [moi]
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 12:51:47PM -0000, Martin Ouwehand wrote: > Which makes me wonder: why aren't the todo and intd trees hashed like mess, > info, remote and local ? >From what I have heard, Dan's zeroseek technology, scheduled for incorporation in qmail 2.0, is supposed to address this problem in a generic fashion. -- Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never _/ _/ _/ having to say you're sorry." _/ _/_/_/ -- D. J. Bernstein _/ _/ _/ _/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] _/_/ _/_/_/ use Std::Disclaimer;
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Russell Nelson wrote: > Magnus Bodin writes: > > On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Russell Nelson wrote: > > > > > Not AOL. Hotmail only uses it for outgoing. They tried using it for > > > incoming, but ran into qmail-send's single-threaded processing of > > > incoming email. I think they were the first party to ever run into > > > this problem, and I didn't realize what was happening when they asked. > > > > Exactly what does this mean? That qmail-send just processes one email > > at a time? And there is only one qmail-send that is master of and > > handling the queue (i.e. spawning off new qmail-(remote|local)s? > > It means that qmail-send alternates between spawning jobs and > processing incoming mail. If mail arrives too quickly, the todo > section of the queue can create very large directories (because todo > is not a hashed tree of directories). Once qmail-send gets more than > 1,000 (or thereabouts -- it depends on what filesystem you're using) > todo files, it can't recover, and the only help is to turn off > incoming mail. And now the logical question follows. Doesn't your todo-patch fix this? (The "hashed tree of directories"-problem.) /magnus
Magnus Bodin writes: > Doesn't your todo-patch fix this? (The "hashed tree of > directories"-problem.) Yes. http://www.qmail.org/big-todo.103.patch . -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
: Yes, I think this was part of my problem a few days ago (see the "Lots : and lots of qmail-queue's" thread). Which makes me wonder: why aren't : the todo and intd trees hashed like mess, info, remote and local ? On my : busy Solaris server, it took *seconds* to do an "ls" in todo or intd, : so I guess it also took seconds for qmail-send and its children to find : files in there... I believe this is exactly what the big-todo patch does. Seemed to help on my systems when I have thousands of messages queued. -- Matthew Harrell I don't suffer from insanity - Bit Twiddlers, Inc. I enjoy every minute of it. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi again, I'm now configuring SQWebmail. I'm going to enter all the parameters for it in the ./configure [parameters] but I've found some of them confussing: 1) If I'm using vchkpw, should I also put --enable-webpass=yes ? or not?. 2) In with-maxformargsize=n (n is expressed in kilobytes?) 3) Where can I get a Banners program for SQWebmail 4) Is there any Spell checker for spanish?. Many thanks!
Hello All! This is the third time I've posted, without response. Either it's not getting out, or no one knows the answer, or I should be reading a FAQ somewhere. Can anyone please point me to the right FAQ? Message Follows: I've got a mail server on a private network (192.168.x.x) which I want to periodically pick up mail from my server that's co-located elsewhere. Both servers are running qmail. The public server has MX records for my domain, pointing to it. Mail to/from there seems to be working just fine. Right now, I'm just using a pop client to pick up the mail when I'm connected, but that's not a good solution. I want the private server to periodically dialin, pick up the messages, send any that are queued (this is already working), and deliver via POP (also already working). SO, do I switch the public server from handling the mail as a standard domain to a virtual domain? How do I get the private server (which has a DYNAMIC IP address) to pickup the mail? I've looked at both fetchmail and serialmail. I think I understand how to do this with fetchmail, but I cannot make heads or tails of the serialmail "docs". I would LOVE to do this via ssh tunnelling if I can. It seems that serialmail will only work if the dialin server has a static IP address (ie, there's no way to tell it to send to my dialup dynamic address?) Any advice, suggestions, etc?
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Scott Sharkey wrote: > I've got a mail server on a private network (192.168.x.x) which > I want to periodically pick up mail from my server that's > co-located elsewhere. Both servers are running qmail. > > The public server has MX records for my domain, pointing to > it. Mail to/from there seems to be working just fine. > Right now, I'm just using a pop client to pick up the mail > when I'm connected, but that's not a good solution. > > I want the private server to periodically dialin, pick up > the messages, send any that are queued (this is already > working), and deliver via POP (also already working). > > SO, do I switch the public server from handling the mail > as a standard domain to a virtual domain? How do I get > the private server (which has a DYNAMIC IP address) to > pickup the mail? > > I've looked at both fetchmail and serialmail. I think I > understand how to do this with fetchmail, but I cannot > make heads or tails of the serialmail "docs". I would > LOVE to do this via ssh tunnelling if I can. > > It seems that serialmail will only work if the dialin > server has a static IP address (ie, there's no way to > tell it to send to my dialup dynamic address?) I've done pretty much the same thing before (a while ago, so my remembered details are a bit sketchy, unfortunately). As long as you know your dynamic IP address, you can use serialmail. >From the dynamicIP'd box, I run a script periodically which runs the command ssh -C -c blowfish <public server> maildirsmtp <path to>/Maildir \ <domain in delivered-to-> <dynamic IP> `hostname` Where <public server> is the public server's hostname/IP <path to>/Maildir is the path to the Maildir which has the waiting mail <domain in delivered-to> is the domain part in the message's headers like: delivered-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have: onbenshaw- In the <domain in delivered-to-> place, (and it gets chopped off, so the mail is delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on the dynamic IP box --Yes, its a virtual domain on the public server (in control/virtualdomains: on.benshaw.com:onbenshaw ) The <dynamic IP> is the current dynamic IP of the dynIP'd box. and `hostname` is simply the hostname of the dynIP'd box. The script ssh's to the public server, and runs maildirsmtp, which goes through the Maildir where all of the received mail is, and tells the public server to push all that mail to <dynamic IP> via SMTP. The public server then connects to <dynamic IP>:SMTP and delivers the mail. The traffic isn't encrypted by ssh, because it just goes through SMTP, but its transparent to the box with the dynamic IP--its just incoming SMTP traffic to it (after it triggers the send). Hope this description helps in your setting-up of it. .Shawn
You're talking about batch processing of mail via dial-up. I believe your only options are fetchmail, UUCP, ETRN or serialmail. All of which will move the mail in one form or another. Look at the different features of each package and figure out which one to install. Personally I use fetchmail and serialmail. fetchmail is an increadibly convoluted piece of software. very buggy in my opinion. but once you get it set up and stop touching it it will work well. serialmail works very well. No complaits. check out ETRN and UUCP Scott Sharkey escribi�: > Hello All! > > This is the third time I've posted, without response. Either > it's not getting out, or no one knows the answer, or I should > be reading a FAQ somewhere. Can anyone please point me to the > right FAQ? > > Message Follows: > > I've got a mail server on a private network (192.168.x.x) which > I want to periodically pick up mail from my server that's > co-located elsewhere. Both servers are running qmail. > > The public server has MX records for my domain, pointing to > it. Mail to/from there seems to be working just fine. > Right now, I'm just using a pop client to pick up the mail > when I'm connected, but that's not a good solution. > > I want the private server to periodically dialin, pick up > the messages, send any that are queued (this is already > working), and deliver via POP (also already working). > > SO, do I switch the public server from handling the mail > as a standard domain to a virtual domain? How do I get > the private server (which has a DYNAMIC IP address) to > pickup the mail? > > I've looked at both fetchmail and serialmail. I think I > understand how to do this with fetchmail, but I cannot > make heads or tails of the serialmail "docs". I would > LOVE to do this via ssh tunnelling if I can. > > It seems that serialmail will only work if the dialin > server has a static IP address (ie, there's no way to > tell it to send to my dialup dynamic address?) > > Any advice, suggestions, etc? -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Spark Sistemas - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. Tel: 4702-1958 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
qmail doesn't support ETRN though does it ? [root@linux qmail-1.03]# grep -i etrn * [root@linux qmail-1.03]# [root@linux qmail-1.03]# telnet localhost 25 Trying 127.0.0.1... Connected to localhost. Escape character is '^]'. 220 fashion.dynip.com ESMTP etrn my.host.com 502 unimplemented (#5.5.1) Eric Dahnke wrote: > You're talking about batch processing of mail via dial-up. I believe > your only options are fetchmail, UUCP, ETRN or serialmail. All of which > will move the mail in one form or another. Look at the different > features of each package and figure out which one to install. Personally > I use fetchmail and serialmail. fetchmail is an increadibly convoluted > piece of software. very buggy in my opinion. but once you get it set up > and stop touching it it will work well. serialmail works very well. No > complaits. > > check out ETRN and UUCP > > Scott Sharkey escribi�: > > > Hello All! > > > > This is the third time I've posted, without response. Either > > it's not getting out, or no one knows the answer, or I should > > be reading a FAQ somewhere. Can anyone please point me to the > > right FAQ? > > > > Message Follows: > > > > I've got a mail server on a private network (192.168.x.x) which > > I want to periodically pick up mail from my server that's > > co-located elsewhere. Both servers are running qmail. > > > > The public server has MX records for my domain, pointing to > > it. Mail to/from there seems to be working just fine. > > Right now, I'm just using a pop client to pick up the mail > > when I'm connected, but that's not a good solution. > > > > I want the private server to periodically dialin, pick up > > the messages, send any that are queued (this is already > > working), and deliver via POP (also already working). > > > > SO, do I switch the public server from handling the mail > > as a standard domain to a virtual domain? How do I get > > the private server (which has a DYNAMIC IP address) to > > pickup the mail? > > > > I've looked at both fetchmail and serialmail. I think I > > understand how to do this with fetchmail, but I cannot > > make heads or tails of the serialmail "docs". I would > > LOVE to do this via ssh tunnelling if I can. > > > > It seems that serialmail will only work if the dialin > > server has a static IP address (ie, there's no way to > > tell it to send to my dialup dynamic address?) > > > > Any advice, suggestions, etc? > > -- > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > Spark Sistemas > - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. > Tel: 4702-1958 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 09:41:14AM -0400, Scott Sharkey wrote: > I've got a mail server on a private network (192.168.x.x) which > I want to periodically pick up mail from my server that's > co-located elsewhere. Both servers are running qmail. > > The public server has MX records for my domain, pointing to > it. Mail to/from there seems to be working just fine. > Right now, I'm just using a pop client to pick up the mail > when I'm connected, but that's not a good solution. > > I want the private server to periodically dialin, pick up > the messages, send any that are queued (this is already > working), and deliver via POP (also already working). Your goals aren't to deliver the messages by a specific service, are they? Using serialmail to solve your problem: 1) on connected server, set up mail for the virtualdomain to be stored in a Maildir. 2) remotely trigger maildirsmtp on the server to your dialin's dynamic IP. I can think of two ways to do this: a) do a pop-style authentication to a dedicated tcpserver instance. tcpserver can capture your dynamic IP and trigger maildirsmtp using it. b) remote call via ssh. Much more secure (no passwords in the clear), though to be honest, I can't think of a way to capture the hosts dynamic IP off the top of my head. I'm sure someone else can help you there... -- John White johnjohn at triceratops.com PGP Public Key: http://www.triceratops.com/john/public-key.pgp
Chris McCarthy writes: > qmail doesn't support ETRN though does it ? If you install the serialmail package, and set it up to do autoturn, then yes, qmail supports ETRN. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 09:41:14AM -0400, Scott Sharkey wrote: > It seems that serialmail will only work if the dialin > server has a static IP address (ie, there's no way to > tell it to send to my dialup dynamic address?) Hello Scott, there is a script on the qmail-page (http://qmail.mirrors.space.net/turnmail), which will do the trick "abusing" the POP-protocol. Regards Mirko
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > b) remote call via ssh. Much more secure (no passwords in the clear), > though to be honest, I can't think of a way to capture the hosts > dynamic IP off the top of my head. I'm sure someone else can help > you there... On my Linux box (Mandrake 6) which uses pppd to dial in: [root@fred /root]# /sbin/ifconfig --version net-tools 1.52 ifconfig 1.39 (1999-03-18) (I believe the ifconfig output is the same across any semi-current version, but just in case, that's what I'm using) This will work: echo `/sbin/ifconfig ppp0 | grep 'inet addr:' | cut -f 2 -d : | cut -f 1 -d ' '` Or, if you're a little less masochistic (shell scripting-wise), the /etc/ppp/ip-up script has the IP address given to it as $4, so you could just stick a: echo $4 > /root/current_ip in /etc/ppp/ip-up and then just do a `cat /root/current_ip` to get at it. (the parameters passed to ip_up and ip_down are documented in pppd's man page. Hope this helps, .Shawn
Title: qmail-remoteDoes qmail-remote have a way of telling qmail-send whether or not a message was delivered successfully? It appears that it does, but it is not clear since according to the "Big Picture" by Mr Opperman, qmail-rspawn calls qmail-remote, not qmail-send. Would it be possible for qmail-send to keep tabs on how many qmail-remotes are up and running and who they are communicating with *internally*...
Basically my intentions are coming up with some way to intelligently decide who to send mail to next. Irrelevant in normal situations, but in a massive queue, it can be useful.
Also, aside from the code, is there a technical resource that would be a recommended read on how qmail's internals work...?
Cris Daniluk
MicroStratey
I run qmail on my MX host, relaying mail to my internal mailhub. Can I use qmail-ldap to verify rcpt addresses against our Netscape Directory Server? -- ___________________________________________________________________ Mark E Drummond [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kingston Linux Users Group http://signals.rmc.ca/klug/ KLUG Mailing List mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
yep > ---------- > From: Mark E. Drummond[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 4:16 PM > To: qmail Mailing List > Subject: qmail-ldap on gateway > > I run qmail on my MX host, relaying mail to my internal mailhub. > Can I use qmail-ldap to verify rcpt addresses against our Netscape > Directory Server? > > -- > ___________________________________________________________________ > Mark E Drummond [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Kingston Linux Users Group http://signals.rmc.ca/klug/ > KLUG Mailing List mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Can anyone provide the correct syntax for bouncing messages from a .qmail while using vchkpw? Right now, due to customers leaving, signing up for lists incorrectly, etc, we get a large amount of undeliverable email which gets dumped in postmaster. I'd rather it bounce back to the sender. I've tried the following, which worked on a domain I use for testing, but not on my primary domain. | fastforward -p -d /etc/aliases.cdb; | /export/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' warn "Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)\n"; exit 100; Like I said above, it worked fine for one domain, but not another. They were set up identical. On the failed domain, the result was 2 bounce messages for any message sent to a valid address, each failed bounce consisting of the warn message split up, as if it tried to interpret the warn as an address instead of a command. However, the message did get delivered correctly. The sender just got 2 fails regardless. Anyhow, any tips would be appreciated. -- Stephen Comoletti Systems Administrator Delanet, Inc. http://www.delanet.com ph: (302) 326-5800 fax: (302) 326-5802
"Stephen C. Comoletti" wrote: > > Can anyone provide the correct syntax for bouncing messages from a > .qmail while using vchkpw? Right now, due to customers leaving, signing > up for lists incorrectly, etc, we get a large amount of undeliverable > email which gets dumped in postmaster. I'd rather it bounce back to the > sender. I've tried the following, which worked on a domain I use for > testing, but not on my primary domain. > > | fastforward -p -d /etc/aliases.cdb; > | /export/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' warn "Sorry, no mailbox here by > that name. (#5.1.1)\n"; > exit 100; > > Like I said above, it worked fine for one domain, but not another. They > were set up identical. On the failed domain, the result was 2 bounce > messages for any message sent to a valid address, each failed bounce > consisting of the warn message split up, as if it tried to interpret the > warn as an address instead of a command. However, the message did get > delivered correctly. The sender just got 2 fails regardless. Anyhow, any > tips would be appreciated. > > -- > Stephen Comoletti > Systems Administrator > Delanet, Inc. http://www.delanet.com > ph: (302) 326-5800 fax: (302) 326-5802 >From vpopmail FAQ file: 3. How do I bounce all mail that doesn't match any pop users or .qmail files for a particular domain? Edit the ~vpopmail/domains/virtual_domain/.qmail-default file and change the last parameter to "bounce-no-mailbox" without the quotes. For example: [root@orbital testing.com]# pwd /home/vpopmail/domains/testing.com [root@orbital testing.com]# more .qmail-default | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/testing.com/postmaster change to: | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox -- Ken Jones mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
Greetings folks, Ever since I implemented the "fixcr" addition to "smtpd", I've noticed that over time my qmail servers accumulate a large number (several dozen) pairs of processes: "fixcr" and "sh -c fixcr | /usr/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd". ---------------------------------------------- ps -alxww UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND 1002 45088 88130 0 10 0 496 244 wait I ?? 0:00.00 sh -c fixcr | /usr/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 1002 45105 45088 0 2 0 752 380 sbwait S ?? 0:00.08 fixcr ... 88130 p1- S 2:06.75 tcpserver -c 600 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u 1002 -g 1001 0 smtp sh -c fixcr | /usr/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd ---------------------------------------------- When I kill -9 a "fixcr" process, it ends the corresponding "sh -c fixcr | /usr/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd" process, which makes it appear that for some reason "fixcr" is having trouble exiting cleanly. Other than an occasional "killall -9 fixcr" that I have to run, it doesn't seem to cause any problems except for concern by the mail administrator (me :) that something isn't configured properly. Speaking of configuration, here's what I use: tcpserver -c 600 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \ -u `id -u qmaild` -g `id -g qmaild` 0 smtp \ sh -c 'fixcr | /usr/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd' & Any suggestions? Thanks! Dave
Brian Reichert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > Also, where did you read that "~/Maildir/" was the proper mailbox prefix. I've > > got things working without any kind of mailbox prefix. > > I have to admit, I can't find out where I got that. I think what > threw me was this sentence WRT imap-4.5-qmail.patch: > > "The Maildir driver naturally looks in the standard qmail > location of ~/Maildir." > > I think I presumed to manually tell the client where to look, in > case the maildir root was named differently. Oh no.. what that sentence I was trying to say that the Maildir driver looks for the maildir at ~/Maildir in the unix filesystem. Which for you is really /home/<user>/Maildir. The "~" is a standard shell expansion that stands for the user's home directory. Perhaps if I change "~/Maildir" to "$HOME/Maildir" and say "in the unix filesystem" it might help clear up that sentence. > Irregardless of my apparent folly, supplying '~/Maildir/' as the > prefix allows people to read their mail, but they could not create > new folders, with the aforementioned symptoms. They should still be able to read their incoming mail even if you give the wrong prefix.. because incoming mail is read from the INBOX mailbox, which I don't think has prefixes applied. > I'll test tomorrow to see if not supplying that prefix clears the > problem up... Yeah, I think that will solve it. Please keep me updated on this. - David Harris Principal Engineer, DRH Internet Services
: If you think about it this needs a rather clever system to manage. I give you : the following scenario : you send 30,000 messages a day to mail servers in domain x. eg : bittwiddlers.com there is a catastrophic network failure in the network and : it is impossible to send mail to that domain. Your fast system passes all of : the mail during that day the network is out to the slow system all 30,000 : messages. The slow server now has to do the task. or worse your servers : start madly passing the mail around amongst themselves in the vain beleif : that one of the others will be able to get through. I can agree that that is possible but in this particular case this mail is very time dependant such that if it remains in the queue for more than six hours it is considered useless. So, in as case like you have outlined above we wouldn't worry about it much as long as the network came back up in time to send out the mail the next day. I'm just trying to figure out if I can push the delayed messages off somewhere else under the assumption that the recipient addresses will come up in the next few hours. I don't want to delay my fast servers by having all these possible bad messages in the queue. : I think what you need is a distributed processing version of qmail. : Any takers ??? Actually, I would love that. I have a distributed front end that parses the mail and through socket connections passes it to a series of qmail servers out there to push it out. It would be nice if I could just have a distributed qmail or a distributed queue that multiple qmails could operate on. -- Matthew Harrell Never raise your hand to your Bit Twiddlers, Inc. children - it leaves your [EMAIL PROTECTED] midsection unprotected.
I'm seeing a strange problem with a tcpserver run qmail-pop3d. After authenticating via pop i get -ERR aack, child crashed This is only with virtualdomains and not with /etc/passwd users. None of the /etc/passwd users get this error. The machine information is: FreeBSD 3.2-RELEASE qmail-1.03 ucspi package vchkpw 3.4.6 Anyone have any clues how to track this down? I've checked file ownership and permissions for the maildirs and all the dirs up to it. I think it might be something with freebsd. Ken Jones mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
Title: RE: Case SensitiveThis is very inaccurate. I spent the last week reading over the SMTP RFC and here's a quote from page 3 section 2:
Commands and replies are not case sensitive. That is, a command or reply word may be upper case, lower case, or any mixture of upper and lower case. Note that this is not true of mailbox user names. For some hosts the user name is case sensitive, and SMTP implementations must take case to preserve the case of user names as they appear in mailbox arguments. Host names are not case sensitive.
This is reiterated several times throughout the RFC. It seems that anything that would claim full compliance would have to take care to preserve the case. This is vital.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of Magnus Bodin
> Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 1:50 PM
> To: Russell Nelson
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Case Sensitive
>
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > I have qmail working quite satisfactory
> > > with help from lwq and all of you.
> > >
> > > I have now made 2 accounts
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Don't. It confuses people, and qmail gives you no mechanism for
> > distinguishing between them.
>
> Not just qmail. The very SMTP protocol that every MTA should conform
> to is IN-casesensitive.
>
> /magnus
>
> --
> "MOST USELESS site of the year 1998"
> --> http://x42.com/urlcalc/
>
>
(your formating is really annoying). This issue has been explained already multiple times: qmail preserves the case during SMTP transaction, as it is specified in the RFC. However, the RFC leaves freedom to the final delivery agent to have its own case policy. so: - qmail doesn't violate any RFCs (on this issue) - SMTP commands are not case-sensitive - domain name parts are not case-sensitive - local parts are or aren't case-sensitive depending on the final (local) delivery mechanism and machine. - qmail local delivery mechanism is case insensitive. David. At 03:44 PM 8/24/99 -0400, Daniluk, Cris wrote: >>>> This is very inaccurate. I spent the last week reading over the SMTP RFC and here's a quote from page 3 section 2: Commands and replies are not case sensitive. That is, a command or reply word may be upper case, lower case, or any mixture of upper and lower case. Note that this is not true of mailbox user names. For some hosts the user name is case sensitive, and SMTP implementations must take case to preserve the case of user names as they appear in mailbox arguments. Host names are not case sensitive. This is reiterated several times throughout the RFC. It seems that anything that would claim full compliance would have to take care to preserve the case. This is vital. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf > Of Magnus Bodin > Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 1:50 PM > To: Russell Nelson > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Case Sensitive > > > On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Russell Nelson wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > I have qmail working quite satisfactory > > > with help from lwq and all of you. > > > > > > I have now made 2 accounts > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Don't. It confuses people, and qmail gives you no mechanism for > > distinguishing between them. > > Not just qmail. The very SMTP protocol that every MTA should conform > to is IN-casesensitive. > > /magnus > > -- > "MOST USELESS site of the year 1998" > --> <http://x42.com/urlcalc/>http://x42.com/urlcalc/ > > <<<<
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Daniluk, Cris wrote: > This is very inaccurate. I spent the last week reading over the SMTP RFC and > here's a quote from page 3 section 2: Magnus' statement was inaccurate. Russ' was not. > > Commands and replies are not case sensitive. That is, a command or reply > word may be upper case, lower case, or any mixture of upper and lower case. > Note that this is not true of mailbox user names. For some hosts the user > name is case sensitive, and SMTP implementations must take case to preserve > the case of user names as they appear in mailbox arguments. Host names are > not case sensitive. > > This is reiterated several times throughout the RFC. It seems that anything > that would claim full compliance would have to take care to preserve the > case. This is vital. > All MTAs are allowed to do what they want with the local part regarding case when they are the final delivery MTA (ie. the MTA running on the destination host). The intermediate MTAs are required to preserve the case of the local part because they don't know if it is significant to the actual delivery host. qmail works correctly. When qmail is NOT the delivery host, it perserves the case of the local part and sends it on. When qmail IS the delivery host, it squashes the case of the local part of the address to lower case because for qmail the case of the local part is irrelevant when determining the mailbox into which it must deliver the message. It was designed that way for the reason that Russ stated. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf > > Of Magnus Bodin > > Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 1:50 PM > > To: Russell Nelson > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Case Sensitive > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Russell Nelson wrote: > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > I have qmail working quite satisfactory > > > > with help from lwq and all of you. > > > > > > > > I have now made 2 accounts > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Don't. It confuses people, and qmail gives you no mechanism for > > > distinguishing between them. > > > > Not just qmail. The very SMTP protocol that every MTA should conform > > to is IN-casesensitive. > > > > /magnus > > > > -- > > "MOST USELESS site of the year 1998" > > --> http://x42.com/urlcalc/ > > > > > --------------------------------- 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
Daniluk, Cris writes: > This is very inaccurate. I spent the last week reading over the SMTP RFC and > here's a quote from page 3 section 2: > > Commands and replies are not case sensitive. That is, a command or reply > word may be upper case, lower case, or any mixture of upper and lower case. > Note that this is not true of mailbox user names. For some hosts the user > name is case sensitive, and SMTP implementations must take case to preserve > the case of user names as they appear in mailbox arguments. Host names are > not case sensitive. > > This is reiterated several times throughout the RFC. It seems that anything > that would claim full compliance would have to take care to preserve the > case. This is vital. Cris, qmail preserves the case for email which transits the host. Qmail even preserves the case everywhere internally. The only time it ignores the case is when it chooses a username to deliver the email to. *Then* it lowercases the email address while comparing it to a username. Oh, and if you use users/assign, then you can also persuade qmail to lowercase the username while comparing it to the lowercased copy of the email address. So the only time you'll have a problem is when you have usernames which differ only in the case of the letters. And that's a really, Really, REALLY bad idea anyway. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Daniluk, Cris wrote: > This is very inaccurate. I spent the last week reading over the SMTP RFC and > here's a quote from page 3 section 2: > > [quote from rfc822] You are rigtht. I was wrong. The SMTP is clear on the case sensitivity. But I hope that people don't draw false conclusions from this. Neither about me or how the should use the case-freedom the the SMTP protocol gives them ;-) /magnus -- http://x42.com/
Hi, I'm having that exact problem, I've just upgraded to vchkpw 3.4.6 and that started to show... Did you find any way to fix it??? It seems that the 3.4.6 version is the problem, not qmail-pop3d I'm running them in Solaris with Qmail 1.03 Please HELPPPP!!!:+) I'm going to go back to 3.4.5 I think... > I'm seeing a strange problem with a tcpserver run qmail-pop3d. > > After authenticating via pop i get > > -ERR aack, child crashed > > This is only with virtualdomains and not with /etc/passwd > users. None of the /etc/passwd users get this error. > > The machine information is: > > FreeBSD 3.2-RELEASE > qmail-1.03 > ucspi package > vchkpw 3.4.6 > > Anyone have any clues how to track this down? > I've checked file ownership and permissions for the maildirs and > all the dirs up to it. I think it might be something with freebsd. > > Ken Jones > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
Title: QMTPAre there any NT implementations of QMTP available? I'd like to drastically speed the time that it takes our MS SMTP Server to populate the qmail queue and this is one logical and probably most efficient way to do it. If there's no such thing available, are there any open source SMTP servers available for NT?
I'd like to take it and mutilate it into a QMTP server. It's not very practical for us to develop all the failsafe mechanisms of a good mail server and SMTP should only require modifications in the transmission of the message itself to turn it into a QMTP server.
Cris Daniluk
MicroStrategy
A fix has been found and tested for a "child crashed" error with vchkpw-3.4.6 on some platforms. The fix is in the new version vpopmail-3.4.7 (notice the easier to pronouce package name) The new code is available at http://www.inter7.com/vchkpw/ Everything is backwardly compatible with 3.4.5 and 3.4.6 (at least) -- Ken Jones mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 03:01:35PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote: > Do you think that announcements regarding vmailmgr should also go to the > qmail mailing list? I just noticed that the author of vchkpw (to which > I owe the inspiration for vmailmgr) posts announcements to that list. > Your thoughts? I think it would be nice. This way, people will know that vmailmgrd exists... Because to discover in the qmail.org homepage, you really have to be lucky. The vcheckpw part is much "noticable" than the vmailmgrd. And it says "virtual mail manager package which implements IP-based virtual domains." which isn't correct formulated : you can host so many virtual mail domain on one IP. Just my 0.02 Euro :) Olivier
I went through qmail-smtpd and added a bit of code to do a gethostbyaddr. If I don't get a value, I refuse the mail due to no reverse DNS. Now looking over some comments in this list and with a little closer look at the setup routine in qmail-smtpd.c it appears if the name cannot be resolved, remoteip and/or remotehost get set to 'unknown'. Would it make sense to deny mail if either of these is 'unknown'. and/or set tcpserver option -p? Thanks, mike. ________________________________________________________ NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you? Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Michael Boyiazis writes: > I went through qmail-smtpd and added a bit of code to > do a gethostbyaddr. Why? Tcpserver already does it for you. > set to 'unknown'. Would it make sense to deny mail if > either of these is 'unknown'. and/or set tcpserver > option -p? My personal experience is that the likelyhood of a given mail server lacking a proper functioning forward and reverse IP address resolution is directly proportional to the likelyhood of you receiving nothing but spam or mailbombs from that server. Chances are that if someone's not smart enough to implement DNS properly, they're not smart enough to configure their mail server as well. YMMV. -- Sam
Title: RE: reverse DNSThis happens in corporate situations with firewalled networks a lot. I speak from unfortunate experience :)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 10:41 PM
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: reverse DNS
>
>
> Michael Boyiazis writes:
>
> > I went through qmail-smtpd and added a bit of code to
> > do a gethostbyaddr.
>
> Why?
>
> Tcpserver already does it for you.
>
> > set to 'unknown'. Would it make sense to deny mail if
> > either of these is 'unknown'. and/or set tcpserver
> > option -p?
>
> My personal experience is that the likelyhood of a given mail server
> lacking a proper functioning forward and reverse IP address
> resolution is
> directly proportional to the likelyhood of you receiving
> nothing but spam
> or mailbombs from that server.
>
> Chances are that if someone's not smart enough to implement
> DNS properly,
> they're not smart enough to configure their mail server as
> well. YMMV.
>
> --
> Sam
>
>
Michael Boyiazis writes: > I went through qmail-smtpd and added a bit of code to > do a gethostbyaddr. If I don't get a value, I refuse the > mail due to no reverse DNS. Now looking over some > comments in this list and with a little closer look at the > setup routine in qmail-smtpd.c it appears if the name > cannot be resolved, remoteip and/or remotehost get > set to 'unknown'. Would it make sense to deny mail if > either of these is 'unknown'. and/or set tcpserver > option -p? Yes and no. You get too many false positives. Then again, AOL seems to get away with it. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Michael Boyiazis writes: >> I went through qmail-smtpd and added a bit of code to do a >> gethostbyaddr. If I don't get a value, I refuse the mail due to no >> reverse DNS. Now looking over some comments in this list and with a >> little closer look at the setup routine in qmail-smtpd.c it appears if >> the name cannot be resolved, remoteip and/or remotehost get set to >> 'unknown'. Would it make sense to deny mail if either of these is >> 'unknown'. and/or set tcpserver option -p? > Yes and no. You get too many false positives. Then again, AOL seems > to get away with it. This practice is so widespread that I think it's reaching the point where it's pointless. The spammers use valid addresses now because they know people do this, and the legitimate folks have been forced to fix their DNS. I still see some rejections from our mail servers that do this (mostly spam), but it's slowing a lot. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
I've seen the radius perl script on the qmail home page that acts as a checkpassword replacement - However, I was wondering if anyone has put together POP radius authentication using the pam_radius libs, in FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE. I've tossed together the pam.conf and radius.conf file - and now am at a loss as to where to go next. Anyone give this a shot yet? Tips/advice/suggestions welcomed. Mahlon -- Mahlon Smith InternetCDS http://www.internetcds.com
Oh - I forgot to mention that I did see the PAM checkpassword diff on the qmail home page... it appears to be linux specific. (Using libs that FreeBSD disagrees with.) -- Mahlon Smith InternetCDS http://www.internetcds.com On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Mahlon Smith wrote: > > > I've seen the radius perl script on the qmail home page that acts as a > checkpassword replacement - > > However, I was wondering if anyone has put together POP radius > authentication using the pam_radius libs, in FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE. > > I've tossed together the pam.conf and radius.conf file - and now am at a > loss as to where to go next. > > Anyone give this a shot yet? > > Tips/advice/suggestions welcomed. > > > > Mahlon > > -- > Mahlon Smith > InternetCDS > http://www.internetcds.com >
Does anyone know why qmail would replace the From: field in my outgoing mail (which should be "From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>") with just my email address? Is there some way I can stop qmail from doing this? (NB: as far as I can tell, it is qmail's fault, as it happens when I inject a message directly as well as through my MUA). -- J. Uckelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/
qmail DOESN'T touch From: headers. qmail-inject expects you to supply the From: header in the message you send to its standard input. If you don't supply one it builds one based on the name of the user invoking qmail-inject. On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Does anyone know why qmail would replace the From: field in my outgoing mail > (which should be "From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>") with just my > email address? Is there some way I can stop qmail from doing this? > > (NB: as far as I can tell, it is qmail's fault, as it happens when I inject a > message directly as well as through my MUA). > -- > J. Uckelman > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > --------------------------------- 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
If I do "cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" and test is: From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I get back: "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead. I've also tried sending this to a friend, with the same results. Is there any way I can force qmail to send out a specified From: header? > qmail DOESN'T touch From: headers. qmail-inject expects you to supply the > From: header in the message you send to its standard input. If you don't > supply one it builds one based on the name of the user invoking > qmail-inject. > > On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Does anyone know why qmail would replace the From: field in my outgoing mail > > (which should be "From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>") with just my > > email address? Is there some way I can stop qmail from doing this? > > > > (NB: as far as I can tell, it is qmail's fault, as it happens when I inject a > > message directly as well as through my MUA). > > -- > > J. Uckelman > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > 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 -- J. Uckelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If I do "cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" and test is: > > From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I get back: "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead. I've also tried sending this > to a friend, with the same results. Is there any way I can force qmail to send > out a specified From: header? Hm. I did an identical test here and qmail behaved normally. It kept the "From:" field data just fine. I did two tests to rule out any fault on your formatting: test1: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jay Dyson) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: test1 test2: From: Jay Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: test2 Both tests showed up with the "User Name <email@address>" format just fine. Not sure what the deal is with your version. I'm using v1.03 here. - -Jay ( ______ )) .--- "There's always time for a good cup of coffee" ---. >===<--. C|~~| (>--- Jay D. Dyson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---<) | = |-' `--' `-- Encrypt as if your life depends on it. It does. --' `-----' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBN8Nukc2OVDpaKXD9AQFX6wP/ZrM2C9JyCb9tC+EzURH5RvgC9I5uuVju K/aflqBsXaZ8xlBQ4MsHh0ggaMVZDFS3dqKSpcumpzAlkkIFo5OYtusfVxR/aU7F b0KTITo1oEytKEyUGBqgGHlBHO6GX9bi3IFGAhwJ8m4/wE2Cr+AP514AZfCFVe/Q Xn3heNU2od4= =s720 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
It just worked for me. Contents of test: ======== start of test ========== From: Tim Mayo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is a test. ======== end of test ============ Command to inject message: cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject Resulting mail message: ================ start of message =================== Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 15985 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:55 -0000 Received: from uranium.nb.net (209.161.64.33) by plutonium.mayod.nb.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:16:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 5175 invoked by uid 1318); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 6340 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 Received: from plutonium.mayod.nb.net (209.161.64.93) by uranium.nb.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 15982 invoked by uid 501); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:48 -0000 Date: 25 Aug 1999 04:16:48 -0000 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Tim Mayo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is a test. ================ end of message ================ Are you running a patched version of qmail? Mine is not. On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If I do "cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" and test is: > > From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I get back: "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead. I've also tried sending this > to a friend, with the same results. Is there any way I can force qmail to send > out a specified From: header? > > > qmail DOESN'T touch From: headers. qmail-inject expects you to supply the > > From: header in the message you send to its standard input. If you don't > > supply one it builds one based on the name of the user invoking > > qmail-inject. > > > > On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Does anyone know why qmail would replace the From: field in my outgoing mail > > > (which should be "From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>") with just my > > > email address? Is there some way I can stop qmail from doing this? > > > > > > (NB: as far as I can tell, it is qmail's fault, as it happens when I inject a > > > message directly as well as through my MUA). > > > -- > > > J. Uckelman > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > 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 > > -- > J. Uckelman > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > --------------------------------- 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
Hmm. That is curious. I'm running 1.03, no patches. Is there any way I could have configured qmail to cause this? If not, do you have any suggestions about what could be happening here? > It just worked for me. > > Contents of test: > > ======== start of test ========== > From: Tim Mayo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This is a test. > ======== end of test ============ > > Command to inject message: > > cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > Resulting mail message: > > ================ start of message =================== > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: (qmail 15985 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:55 -0000 > Received: from uranium.nb.net (209.161.64.33) > by plutonium.mayod.nb.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:16:55 -0000 > Received: (qmail 5175 invoked by uid 1318); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: (qmail 6340 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 > Received: from plutonium.mayod.nb.net (209.161.64.93) > by uranium.nb.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 > Received: (qmail 15982 invoked by uid 501); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:48 -0000 > Date: 25 Aug 1999 04:16:48 -0000 > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: Tim Mayo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This is a test. > ================ end of message ================ > > Are you running a patched version of qmail? Mine is not. > > On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > If I do "cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" and test is: > > > > From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I get back: "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead. I've also tried sending this > > to a friend, with the same results. Is there any way I can force qmail to send > > out a specified From: header? > > > > > qmail DOESN'T touch From: headers. qmail-inject expects you to supply the > > > From: header in the message you send to its standard input. If you don't > > > supply one it builds one based on the name of the user invoking > > > qmail-inject. > > > > > > On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > Does anyone know why qmail would replace the From: field in my outgoing mail > > > > (which should be "From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>") with just my > > > > email address? Is there some way I can stop qmail from doing this? > > > > > > > > (NB: as far as I can tell, it is qmail's fault, as it happens when I inject a > > > > message directly as well as through my MUA). > > > > -- > > > > J. Uckelman > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > -- > > J. Uckelman > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > 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 -- J. Uckelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > If I do "cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" and test is: > > From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I get back: "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead. I've also tried sending this > to a friend, with the same results. Is there any way I can force qmail to send > out a specified From: header? Yes. The manual page for qmail-inject clearly explains how header rewriting is being done. -- Sam
Are you running ofmipd or new-inject? Is there a sendmail server in the middle somewhere? qmail in and of itself will NOT touch any of the existing headers in your email. It will add Received:, Delivered-To: and Return-Path: headers but that is all. Please send a copy of your complete test message with all headers intact so we can check them. Something else is getting a hold of your message or you are NOT sending what you think you are sending. On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hmm. That is curious. I'm running 1.03, no patches. Is there any way I could > have configured qmail to cause this? If not, do you have any suggestions about > what could be happening here? > > > It just worked for me. > > > > Contents of test: > > > > ======== start of test ========== > > From: Tim Mayo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > This is a test. > > ======== end of test ============ > > > > Command to inject message: > > > > cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > > > Resulting mail message: > > > > ================ start of message =================== > > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Received: (qmail 15985 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:55 -0000 > > Received: from uranium.nb.net (209.161.64.33) > > by plutonium.mayod.nb.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:16:55 -0000 > > Received: (qmail 5175 invoked by uid 1318); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 > > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Received: (qmail 6340 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 > > Received: from plutonium.mayod.nb.net (209.161.64.93) > > by uranium.nb.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:16:49 -0000 > > Received: (qmail 15982 invoked by uid 501); 25 Aug 1999 04:16:48 -0000 > > Date: 25 Aug 1999 04:16:48 -0000 > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From: Tim Mayo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > This is a test. > > ================ end of message ================ > > > > Are you running a patched version of qmail? Mine is not. > > > > On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > If I do "cat test | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" and test is: > > > > > > From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > I get back: "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead. I've also tried sending this > > > to a friend, with the same results. Is there any way I can force qmail to send > > > out a specified From: header? > > > > > > > qmail DOESN'T touch From: headers. qmail-inject expects you to supply the > > > > From: header in the message you send to its standard input. If you don't > > > > supply one it builds one based on the name of the user invoking > > > > qmail-inject. > > > > > > > > On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know why qmail would replace the From: field in my outgoing mail > > > > > (which should be "From: Joel Uckelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>") with just my > > > > > email address? Is there some way I can stop qmail from doing this? > > > > > > > > > > (NB: as far as I can tell, it is qmail's fault, as it happens when I inject >a > > > > > message directly as well as through my MUA). > > > > > -- > > > > > J. Uckelman > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > > 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 > > > > > > -- > > > J. Uckelman > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > 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 > > -- > J. Uckelman > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > --------------------------------- 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
Here's the entire message as it comes back to me: ========= start of message ========= Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivery-Date: Wed Aug 25 04:51:01 1999 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 12860 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:51:01 -0000 Received: from lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:51:01 -0000 Received: from pop-2.iastate.edu by lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu with POP3 (fetchmail-5.0.5) for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop); Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:51:01 -0500 (CDT) Received: from vladimir.iastate.edu (lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu [129.186.183.134]) by pop-2.iastate.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA17901 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:50:52 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 12851 invoked by uid 0); 25 Aug 1999 04:50:42 -0000 Date: 25 Aug 1999 04:50:42 -0000 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-UIDL: c9145b0842c615664d7a693ebe66b61e ========= end of message ========= Does this help? -- J. Uckelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Received: from pop-2.iastate.edu > by lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu with POP3 (fetchmail-5.0.5) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, there's one possible source of corruption. > Received: from vladimir.iastate.edu (lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu > [129.186.183.134]) > by pop-2.iastate.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA17901 ^^^^^^^^^^^ And there's another. Can you check your pop mailbox by hand? telnet pop-2.iastate.edu 110 user uckelman pass <you know what to put here; I don't> list retr 1 retr 2 retr 3 etc. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Aug 24 1999, Timothy L. Mayo wrote: > qmail DOESN'T touch From: headers. qmail-inject expects you to supply the > From: header in the message you send to its standard input. If you don't > supply one it builds one based on the name of the user invoking > qmail-inject. Well, that's not actually 100% correct, for qmail-inject _will_ rewrite the headers, depending on the contents of the environment variable QMAILINJECT, independently of the message having a given field or not. For instance, I'm using QMAILINJECT=s with all my messages, so I can correctly set up the envelope sender to be my address (I'm using "user masquerade", of course). []s, Roger... -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/ Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Is there a reason why I have the check of the rules.cdb in my pop3d line of tcpserver other than to slow everything down? Theoretically we allow pop from anywhere (and the rules call on the pop3d line doesn't seem to be preventing anything [but maybe quicker downloads])... /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 2050 -x /etc/security/tcprules/rules.cdb 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup pop.netzero.net /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popbull /var/spool/bulletins /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & the above all being on one line of course... Thanks, -- mike b. --------------------------------------------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.sprynet.com/~boyiazis/mikehome.htm "I propose we leave math to the machines and go play outside." Calvin ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________ NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you? Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
First, thank you for your help ! Look what I did : [root@mumbly bin]# ./maildirmake /home/user1toto [root@mumbly bin]# echo "/home/user1toto/" > /home/toto/.qmail-toto [root@mumbly bin]# killall -HUP qmail-send The "owner" in /var/qmail/control/virtusertable is : toto.fr:toto So the email adress is : [EMAIL PROTECTED] right ?! (the DNS is OK with MX..) Now : $ echo "test" |mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Then, /var/log/maillog says : Aug 25 09:39:14 mumbly qmail: 935566754.995717 new msg 340129 Aug 25 09:39:14 mumbly qmail: 935566754.996055 info msg 340129: bytes 213 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 8593 uid 500 Aug 25 09:39:15 mumbly qmail: 935566755.262452 delivery 98578: deferral: Uh-oh:_home_directory_is_writable._(#4.7.0)/ Aug 25 09:39:15 mumbly qmail: 935566755.262791 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Aug 25 09:39:15 mumbly qmail: 935566755.263037 starting delivery 98579: msg 340129 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aug 25 09:39:15 mumbly qmail: 935566755.263263 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Aug 25 09:39:15 mumbly qmail: 935566755.426084 delivery 98579: deferral: Uh-oh:_home_directory_is_writable._(#4.7.0)/ Aug 25 09:39:15 mumbly qmail: 935566755.426414 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Is "Uh-oh:_home_directory_is_writable._" a problem ?! I never had that. After, I do : # maildirsmtp /home/user1toto/ toto- another.local.smtp.for.test But on this other SMTP, I have not any connection, even a simple telnet on port 25.. The problem might be : [root@mumbly bin]# ls -la /home/user1toto/* /home/user1toto/cur: total 2 drwx------ 2 root root 1024 ao 25 09:35 . drwx------ 5 root root 1024 ao 25 09:35 .. /home/user1toto/new: total 2 drwx------ 2 root root 1024 ao 25 09:35 . drwx------ 5 root root 1024 ao 25 09:35 .. /home/user1toto/tmp: total 2 drwx------ 2 root root 1024 ao 25 09:35 . drwx------ 5 root root 1024 ao 25 09:35 .. So where is he's mail ? Normally, I configure qmail like that : useradd user passwd user touch /home/$uzer/Mailbox ln -s --force /home/$uzer/Mailbox /var/spool/mail/$uzer So users mailboxes are in ~/Mailbox Any idea ? Please I really need help ... Thanks !! _______________ Dimitri SZAJMAN [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xon-xoff.fr On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 03:17:13PM +0200, Dimitri SZAJMAN wrote: > > What is needed for maildirsmtp ? I have tryied a lot of thing but no > > success :-/ > > you need qmail to deliver into maildir, e.q. > > $ maildirmake /path/to/Maildir/ > $ echo "/path/to/Maildir/" > /path/toyour/.qmail-something > > now qmail will deliver into this new and fresh maildir. now, you may send > this maildir using maildirsmtp to a smtp-server of your choice: > > $ maildirsmtp /path/to/Maildir/ something- smtp.somewhere.com > > this "something-" thing is dependant on your installation. > > -- > gru�, > mike gerber >
I was able to set up pop3 and my students can get and read their email using their POP client. However, they can not send to other host but mine. Below is the error message: The message can not be sent because one of the recipient was rejected by the server .... Protocol SMTP, server response 553 sorry that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ......... Is it due to the fact that I don't do relay? Or is it something else? -- Joel Gatdula Pira Faculty Institute of IT Studies University of Asia and the Pacific Pearl Drive, Ortigas Center, Pasig City
