qmail Digest 4 Oct 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 779
Topics (messages 31180 through 31202):
URGENT !! Strange Problem
31180 by: Shashi Dahal
31181 by: Markus Stumpf
31189 by: Marco Leeflang
Re: problem sending remote mail with tcpserver running
31182 by: Markus Stumpf
31186 by: The Philosopher
31193 by: Gordon Smith
31197 by: The Philosopher
Re: User masquerading on a server with multiple virtual domains
31183 by: Markus Stumpf
31187 by: Bernard Karmilowicz
31188 by: Brad Shelton
31202 by: Robert Varga
Smae problem
31184 by: Marek Narkiewicz
31185 by: Chris Johnson
new "detour" program for RBL use
31190 by: John R Levine
Mail not being delivered to local users (was: Re: URGENT !! Strange Problem)
31191 by: Rogerio Brito
Newbie
31192 by: Matt Mouser
Re: OT: saturating a T1 with e-mail
31194 by: Gordon Smith
31195 by: Eric Dahnke
31196 by: markd.mira.net
Problem with the vacation program!
31198 by: Jon Lur�s
Help: How to eamil of mailing-list forward into Mysql database
31199 by: x
Re: Blocking large mails
31200 by: Anand Buddhdev
replacing binmail
31201 by: phil.ipal.net
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,
Only to few users, When I send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get a failure
notice saying
no mailbox here by that name.I can finger as well as work on the home
directory.
Is this a problem with the settings. Everything looks normal to me.
TIA
Shashi
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 04:39:25PM -0700, Shashi Dahal wrote:
> Only to few users, When I send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get a failure
> notice saying
> no mailbox here by that name.I can finger as well as work on the home
> directory.
> Is this a problem with the settings. Everything looks normal to me.
How about you show us the contents of
control/*
users/assign (if you have any)
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Yeah, yo mama dresses
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | you funny and you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | a mouse to delete files
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 |
it look's like a problem i currently have.
a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] give the same failure but a message to a alias
of the user works fine.
This only by a few users.
marco leeflang
Shashi Dahal wrote:
> Hi,
> Only to few users, When I send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get a failure
> notice saying
> no mailbox here by that name.I can finger as well as work on the home
> directory.
> Is this a problem with the settings. Everything looks normal to me.
>
> TIA
>
> Shashi
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 09:22:58PM -0700, The Philosopher wrote:
> ISP is called bayarea.net (mailserver mail.bayarea.net). Local system is called
> friday.excalibur.net
>
> I thought I followed the installation by the letter. I used
> DL Vander Woude's article on mailqueue delivery (using alias/pppdir).
It looks like putting the mail in the pppdir works fine.
> Error message I get when running
> #/usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp ~alias/pppdir alias-ppp- mail.bayarea.net MyIP, where
> MyIP is the entry I get from ppp0 interface under
> inet addr (I also tried P-t-P without help):
> ###################
> serialsmtp: fatal: network read error: timed out
> serialsmtp: fatal: network read error: timed out
> serialsmtp: fatal: network read error: timed out
> maildirserial: fatal: making no progress, giving up
> ###################
>
> The mails get delivered to ~alias/pppdir/new (I can see them there), but I can
> send them to my ISP using the above command
you mean "can not" right?
Are you online, when you try to send the mails via maildirsmtp?
What happens if you simply try a
$ telnet mail.bayarea.net smtp
in parallel to the above command? Do you get a connect?
I would assume you have problems that your system is not online and
therefor maildirsmtp cannot establish a connection to the mailer of
bayarea.net
> Some files you might need to know about:
> ########## tcp-smtp.cdb ############
> 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
> 205.219.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
> :allow
> ##################################
This is only for eMails coming IN via smtp
> ########plusdomains################
> excalibur.net
> bayarea.net
> ##################################
remove the bayarea.net line. It doesn't belong there.
Also the name is "plusdomain" (not plusdomain*S*) and it may only
contain a single line.
> ########rcpthosts###################
> friday.excalibur.net
> friday
> mail.bayarea.net
> bayarea.net
> ##################################
remove bayarea.net lines. They don't belong there, unless you want to
receive emails for that domain.
> #######virtualdomains################
> :alias-ppp
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:alias-isp
> ###################################
What do you need the bayarea.net line for?
Also the syntax is wrong. You may have only domains (or empty) in there
on the left side of the ":".
> qmail is starting using:
> qmail-start `|preline procmail` splogger qmail
>
> tcpserver is starting using:
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -u 502 -g 502 -c 100 -x /etc/tcp-smtp.cdb 0 smtp \
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
That looks ok. However all the config files have little to do with the
problems you have.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Yeah, yo mama dresses
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | you funny and you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | a mouse to delete files
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 |
Some more info I forgot (don't know if it makes any difference): my local user
is "john", remote user is called "jfjellst"
On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, you wrote:
> you mean "can not" right?
> Are you online, when you try to send the mails via maildirsmtp?
> What happens if you simply try a
> $ telnet mail.bayarea.net smtp
> in parallel to the above command? Do you get a connect?
Yes, I mean can not. I'm online when I try the maildirsmtp command.
I just tried telnet mail.bayarea.net smtp, and I did get connect, BUT it got
hung
$telnet mail.bayarea.net
Trying 205.219.84.13...
Connected to mail.bayarea.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 postman.bayarea.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.9.3/8.9.3; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 10:58:40 -0700
(PDT)
It hangs here, and won't go anywhere. Is that the problem?
> I would assume you have problems that your system is not online and
> therefor maildirsmtp cannot establish a connection to the mailer of
> bayarea.net
>
> > Some files you might need to know about:
> > ########## tcp-smtp.cdb ############
> > 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
> > 205.219.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
> > :allow
> > ##################################
>
> This is only for eMails coming IN via smtp
I'm confused. When you get mail through fetchmail, don't it pass it along to
qmail through smtp? And don't you also need it for local delivery?
> > ########plusdomains################
> > excalibur.net
> > bayarea.net
> > ##################################
>
> remove the bayarea.net line. It doesn't belong there.
> Also the name is "plusdomain" (not plusdomain*S*) and it may only
> contain a single line.
plusdomains was misspelled. I removed the second entry
> > ########rcpthosts###################
> > friday.excalibur.net
> > friday
> > mail.bayarea.net
> > bayarea.net
> > ##################################
>
> remove bayarea.net lines. They don't belong there, unless you want to
> receive emails for that domain.
Could you clarify this for me? If I send to a user [EMAIL PROTECTED], and I use
my ISP's smtp server. When I set up qmail correctly, don't receive email for
the bayarea.net domain? My local system receive the email from my local user
john, for a mail going to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Since I need to pass through
bayarea.net, don't I in a sense receiving email for that domain?
> > #######virtualdomains################
> > :alias-ppp
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:alias-isp
> > ###################################
>
> What do you need the bayarea.net line for?
> Also the syntax is wrong. You may have only domains (or empty) in there
> on the left side of the ":".
That's what the mailqueue documentation said I was supposed to put in there.
Wrong?
Thanks for all your help (and patience:-)
--
John______________________________________________________________________
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bayarea.net/~jfjellst/
work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 04 Oct 1999, The Philosopher wrote:
> Some more info I forgot (don't know if it makes any difference): my local user
> is "john", remote user is called "jfjellst"
>
> On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, you wrote:
>
> > you mean "can not" right?
> > Are you online, when you try to send the mails via maildirsmtp?
> > What happens if you simply try a
> > $ telnet mail.bayarea.net smtp
> > in parallel to the above command? Do you get a connect?
>
> Yes, I mean can not. I'm online when I try the maildirsmtp command.
> I just tried telnet mail.bayarea.net smtp, and I did get connect, BUT it got
> hung
>
> $telnet mail.bayarea.net
> Trying 205.219.84.13...
> Connected to mail.bayarea.net.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 postman.bayarea.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.9.3/8.9.3; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 10:58:40 -0700
>(PDT)
>
> It hangs here, and won't go anywhere. Is that the problem?
>
You do realise that you won't get a prompt? Have you tried using SMTP commands
from there? From your post, it looks as if the connection to the remote server
is working fine. It hasn't hung, its waiting for info from your end.
Cheers,
--
Gordon Smith, MCP, TCP
Network Administrator
Horticultural Automation Ltd.
On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, you wrote:
> > Yes, I mean can not. I'm online when I try the maildirsmtp command.
> > I just tried telnet mail.bayarea.net smtp, and I did get connect, BUT it got
> > hung
> >
> > $telnet mail.bayarea.net
> > Trying 205.219.84.13...
> > Connected to mail.bayarea.net.
> > Escape character is '^]'.
> > 220 postman.bayarea.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.9.3/8.9.3; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 10:58:40 -0700
>(PDT)
> >
> > It hangs here, and won't go anywhere. Is that the problem?
> >
>
> You do realise that you won't get a prompt? Have you tried using SMTP commands
> from there? From your post, it looks as if the connection to the remote server
> is working fine. It hasn't hung, its waiting for info from your end.
Should I get a > prompt? And shouldn't I be able to type something? (I'm unable
to type anything).
--
John______________________________________________________________________
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bayarea.net/~jfjellst/
work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 01:23:14AM -0400, Bernard Karmilowicz wrote:
> Does a user masquerading solution exist in which it is not necessary to
> add MAILHOST and MAILUSER environment variables for every user on a
> system hosting a half dozen virtual domains with hundreds of users? I
> have read FAQ sections 1.1 and 1.2:
Do all those users have shell logins on that machine? Are they injecting
the emails locally (vs. smtp ?)
If they all only have POP accounts, masquerading should not be an issue,
as the users typically have to provide user@domain information when
injecting eMails via SMTP.
Other than that you have to use the ENV vars, but you can set them at
login time of the user via e.g. /etc/profile or /etc/login.
Just check which domain the user belongs to and set the VARS
accordingly. This however does not guarantee the users doesn't change
those values.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Yeah, yo mama dresses
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | you funny and you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | a mouse to delete files
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 |
>> Does a user masquerading solution exist in which it is not
>> necessary to add MAILHOST and MAILUSER environment variables for
>> every user on a system hosting a half dozen virtual domains with
>> hundreds of users? I have read FAQ sections 1.1 and 1.2:
> Do all those users have shell logins on that machine? Are they
> injecting the emails locally (vs. smtp ?) If they all only have POP
> accounts, masquerading should not be an issue, as the users
> typically have to provide user@domain information when injecting
> eMails via SMTP.
>
> Other than that you have to use the ENV vars, but you can set them
> at login time of the user via e.g. /etc/profile or /etc/login.
> Just check which domain the user belongs to and set the VARS
> accordingly. This however does not guarantee the users doesn't
> change those values.
>
> \Maex
Thank you Maex for the speedy response to my qmail query! All users have shell
logins. Some users, particularly the pre-gui ones, prefer shell-based MUAs. Others
use POP together with gui MUAs. A few users alternate between the two, depending
on which way the wind is blowing.
I was hoping to avoid adding the extra ENV vars, since this complicates system
administration. It would be nice to have a central point for setting User and Host
names for members of virtual domains, thereby covering all users with one action.
Perhaps in qmail 1.2. {:~)
- Bernie
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 02:07:01PM -0400, Bernard Karmilowicz wrote:
> Thank you Maex for the speedy response to my qmail query! All users have shell
> logins. Some users, particularly the pre-gui ones, prefer shell-based MUAs. Others
> use POP together with gui MUAs. A few users alternate between the two, depending
> on which way the wind is blowing.
>
> I was hoping to avoid adding the extra ENV vars, since this complicates system
> administration. It would be nice to have a central point for setting User and Host
> names for members of virtual domains, thereby covering all users with one action.
> Perhaps in qmail 1.2. {:~)
For those using the shell, there are some MUAs that allow changing the
From/Reply-to. Mutt comes to mind. There are probably others that can be
configured to do so.
--
Brad Shelton On Line Exchange http://online-isp.com
On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Bernard Karmilowicz wrote:
> Does a user masquerading solution exist in which it is not necessary to
> add MAILHOST and MAILUSER environment variables for every user on a
> system hosting a half dozen virtual domains with hundreds of users? I
> have read FAQ sections 1.1 and 1.2:
If the mail sent by the users does not come via smtp, qmtp, qmqp, but via
qmail-inject then it is quite easy:
1. move qmail-inject to qmail-inject-bin
2. qmail-inject should contain the following script:
#!/bin/sh
<determine_if_user_should_be_masqueraded>
<if_he_should_be_masqueraded>
export QMAILINJECT="f$QMAILINJECT"
export QMAILNAME="name"
export QMAILHOST="host"
export QMAILUSER="localpart"
export QMAILDEFAULTHOST=$QMAILHOST
<path_to_qmail-inject-bin>/qmail-inject-bin $*
That's all. I am using it and it is working correctly.
Instead of ... you should put in code that extracts from a global
configuration file the appropriate values. This way mail will be
originated from:
name <localpart@host>
Robert Varga
Anyone got any info on the dissapearing processes problem?
I'm at my wits end here. I need this snwered urgently if anyone can.
Recap: I run the script /var/qmail/rc from a telnet login. When I logout the
processes
spwned die.
--
Marek Narkiewicz, Webmaster Intercreations
Reply to <-marek @ intercreations . com->
"Dogs are everywhere"
Pulp
Dogs are Everywhere
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 02:50:26PM +0100, Marek Narkiewicz wrote:
> Anyone got any info on the dissapearing processes problem?
> I'm at my wits end here. I need this snwered urgently if anyone can.
> Recap: I run the script /var/qmail/rc from a telnet login. When I logout the
>processes
> spwned die.
Did you run it this way?
csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
Chris
I have made a mutant version of antirbl called "detour" for people who'd like
to accept mail from hosts on an RBL-ish list, but treat it specially.
Syntax: detour domain relayclientstring program ...
The domain is the RBL-ish domain, e.g., dialups.mail-abuse.org, and the
relayclientstring is stuck into RELAYCLIENT in the environment if the
domain's in that RBL-ish domain and RELAYCLIENT isn't already set.
I use it to send stuff from dialups into a spam trap which looks up the IP
and if it's a domain it knows, fires off a complaint.
The program is the mutated from antirbl with about six lines of new code.
If anyone's interested, I can put it up on the web.
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner
Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47
On Oct 03 1999, Shashi Dahal wrote:
> Hi,
> Only to few users, When I send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get a
> failure notice saying no mailbox here by that name.I can finger as
> well as work on the home directory. Is this a problem with the
> settings. Everything looks normal to me.
Just to add something that I rarely see discussed in this
list, at least in some environments, I've seen qmail deliver a
bounce message saying that there was "no mailbox here by that
name" when the user (hard) quota limit is over.
But, of course, since you haven't provided any extra
information, people will have to have a hunch to help you
(there could be many, many causes to the problem you are
seeing).
[]s, Roger...
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/
Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hi,
I have never setup any mail server of any form in my entire life. I am only
15 and some of these concepts are hard to comprehend. I was wondering where
I could find info on basically setting up what I think is called a pop
toaster? I want to be able to recieve mail for all my domains and let their
users use pop3 to check it. I don't want my users to be able to send mail
through my server though. I want them to use their own isp for that. Does
anyone have any ideas where I can find info on setting this type of server
up? Please forgive me if this question was already answered or if it is off
topic.
Also one more question, how large is the file size of qmail? After the RPM's
are installed how much space does it take up? Reason I ask, is because I am
running a different distro of linux that runs all apps and os stuff from
ramdisk. This is killer for speed. I need to know how big to make my
ramdisk. Thanks for all your help.
Matt
On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
> Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
>
> A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
> size was 23K.
>
> Thx
You're not taking into account how the router will handle the traffic. You can
compress data at the router, which can give significant performance gains. e.g.
using stac compression on a Cisco
Cheers,
-- Gordon Smith, MCP, TCP
Network Administrator
Horticultural Automation Ltd.
> On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
> > Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
> >
> > A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
> > size was 23K.
> >
> > Thx
>
> You're not taking into account how the router will handle the traffic. You can
> compress data at the router, which can give significant performance gains. e.g.
> using stac compression on a Cisco
Thanks all for the responses. There was a wide variation in replies (due
to subjunctivity of the post), but there were a few replies which seemed
to say ya -- 23K, 22,000 msgs/hr = 80% T1 utilization -- that sounds
about right. Can I assume I was more or less on with my original
assumption.
Regards, Eric
At 11:01 PM 10/3/99 -0300, Eric Dahnke wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
>> > Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
>> >
>> > A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
>> > size was 23K.
>> >
>> > Thx
>>
>> You're not taking into account how the router will handle the traffic.
You can
>> compress data at the router, which can give significant performance
gains. e.g.
>> using stac compression on a Cisco
>
>Thanks all for the responses. There was a wide variation in replies (due
>to subjunctivity of the post), but there were a few replies which seemed
>to say ya -- 23K, 22,000 msgs/hr = 80% T1 utilization -- that sounds
>about right. Can I assume I was more or less on with my original
>assumption.
The discussion on peak vs average is worth understanding as is the fact that
a link that is 80% utilized will suffer a lot of latency and has no room for
significant down time.
80% average utilization is way high in my opinion. In fact, anything over
40-50% is risky.
Consider your T1 in the same light as a busy freeway. Now consider that
freeway to be at 80% utilization.
If a freeway has 80% of the number of cars it can hold, is it running
smoothly or is it pretty congested? Does any sort of hiccup on a busy
freeway total destroy the traffic flow? Does it take forever to recover once
there is a crash of some sort? Does any minor change in the flow create a
huge change in the time it takes to transit the freeway?
Note that at a certain point, any sort of comms link (nee queue) actually
degenerates with load. Consider what happens when a link gets so congested
that socket connections time out and packets get retransmitted due to
timeouts. That actually generates more traffic per message than a relatively
idle link.
Ignoring the latency induced traffic, any sort of down time is going to have
a serious effect on a highly utilized link. Eg, at 80% utilization, if your
link goes offline for, say, 5 hours, it'll take another 38 hours before your
link goes below 100% (assuming it can do 100% in the first place).
What that means is that if your link goes down at 1am and comes up at 6am
and someone injects an email later that day at 23:99pm, that email will be
delivered at 6pm the following day.
If your only concern is getting a certain volume out then that's probably
ok, if you have some delivery latency goals then it's almost certainly a
problem.
Mark.
Hello!
I recently setup qmail on a Redhat 6.0 system.
I am not able to get the Vacation 1.3 program to work correctly
with my system.
Description:
The program runs okay from the user prompts and generates a
".qmail" file. But there is no replies generatet when there arrives
new mails. When the user turn off the Vacation he get a messages
saying that there have been mails from the users who did send
mail to him.
I am quite sure that there is something with rights on the files, but I
can not find where!
I find the log line with 'delivery 559: success' strange. What is
happening there?
qmail.log
939016556.167904 new msg 71170
939016556.167958 info msg 71170: bytes 324 from<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qp 24511 uid 500
939016556.266235 starting delivery 559: msg 71170 to local
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
939016556.266360 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
939016560.523776 delivery 559: success: qmail-
inject:_fatal:_read_error/did_1+0+1/
939016560.539513 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
939016560.555990 end msg 71170
Vennlig hilsen
Jon Lur�s
|
hi, all
my system: redhat v6.0
my install packages:
ezmlm-idx-mysql , mysql , qmail
I use ezmlm-idx-mysql to setup a
mailing-list,
Please question: how to send to email of
mailing-list forward into Mysql database.
thanks
xww
|
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 10:55:44AM -0500, Strange wrote:
> AND/OR,
>
> 2. If you want to have some people be able to send huge mails (like up to
> 8MB), you can set MAXSIZE="8120000" either in your tcpserver control file
> on the line that will match their IP/IP range, like:
> 10.55.66.:allow,MAXSIZE="8120000",RELAYCLIENT=""
Oops. That should be DATABYTES, not MAXSIZE. man qmail-smtpd.
--
See complete headers for more info
In REMOVE.binmail:
3. If the binmail binary was /bin/mail, make sure that ``mail'' still
invokes a usable mailer. Under SVR4 you may want to link mail to
mailx.
What is the purpose of this?
I do know I have some scripts that invoke "mail" and there is no mailx
to use as an alternative. If the purpose is to inject mail, is there
something qithin qmail that can be used for such purposes?
The "mail" program has also be useful for cases of slightly corrupt
mailboxes which causes elm to croak. If I leave /bin/mail executeable
somewhere hidden, would it still work OK for users not switched to
maildir (as long as I don't try to send mail with it)?
--
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phil | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
at | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ipal | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dot | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
net | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
