qmail Digest 5 Oct 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 780
Topics (messages 31203 through 31251):
Re: OT: Average Internet e-mail size
31203 by: Luis Campos de Carvalho
Re: Mail not being delivered to local users (was: Re: URGENT !! Strange Problem)
31204 by: James Smallacombe
Re: processes dissapearing
31205 by: Dave Sill
detour program
31206 by: John R Levine
Re: Why "virtual"domains?
31207 by: Dave Sill
31209 by: Claus F�rber
Limit TO+CC list
31208 by: B. Engineer
31210 by: Van Liedekerke Franky
31211 by: Russell Nelson
31215 by: Nguyen Dang Phuoc Dong
31216 by: Dave Sill
31218 by: Russell Nelson
Re: replacing binmail
31212 by: Glenn Crownover
Relaying after POP
31213 by: Paulo Jan
31214 by: Bruce Guenter
Re: OT: saturating a T1 with e-mail
31217 by: Markus Stumpf
QMTP forward program and maildir IMAP
31219 by: nascheme.enme.ucalgary.ca
Bandwidth usage, was [OT: saturating a T1..]
31220 by: Eric Dahnke
31221 by: Mark Delany
Queue stalls
31222 by: Kevin Sawyer
Re: Blocking large mails
31223 by: Strange
fetchmail, procmail, qmail combo
31224 by: Aris Mulyono
block domain
31225 by: Franklin A Hays
31226 by: Kevin Waterson
Sending all mail to a 3rd level domain to /dev/null
31227 by: The Green Avenger
31230 by: Russell Nelson
31242 by: Sending all mail to a 3rd level domain to /dev/null
RCPTHOSTS error
31228 by: courtney.whtz.com
31229 by: Chris Nelson
31231 by: Bernard Karmilowicz
31232 by: Russell Nelson
31235 by: RCPTHOSTS error
31236 by: RCPTHOSTS error
31237 by: RCPTHOSTS error
31238 by: RCPTHOSTS error
31239 by: RCPTHOSTS error
31241 by: incomplete glue records: what does qmail do?
31245 by: incomplete glue records: what does qmail do?
incomplete glue records: what does qmail do?
31233 by: phil.ipal.net
31234 by: Russell Nelson
31240 by: incomplete glue records: what does qmail do?
Re: autoturn
31243 by: autoturn
31249 by: autoturn
Question
31244 by: Question
31250 by: autoturn
qmail as on secondary MX
31246 by: qmail as on secondary MX
qmail as secondary MX
31247 by: qmail as on secondary MX
31248 by: qmail as secondary MX
Eudora? Outlook?
31251 by: Eudora? Outlook?
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
I have a lot more messages. My average is 25Mb a day. (i have a
lot of ms-windows users, too)
> I'm curious as to the average size of an Internet mail. I know this is
> very subjective, but would like to hear what people think is the average
> size.
>
> My calculations based on qmailanalog over a long run give me 64K, and
> that seems big.
>
> Looking at my inbox, the average seems more like 4K.
>
>
> Anyone?
>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Luis Campos de Carvalho
System Administrator at ECB -- Escola Paulista de Medicina
"In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots."
-- Kaa
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Rogerio Brito wrote:
> 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.
REally? Don't I wish. When one of my users hits quota, the 3MB gif's
his brother-in-law have been sending gets deferred delivery and sits in my
queue. Ugh.
Marek Narkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Why do the processes started by the qmail/rc script keep
>dissapearing?
Probably because the process that started them didn't disassociate
itself from the controlling tty, so it and its children received a HUP
signal when the startup process exited. Show us how you're starting
qmail and tell us what platform your on, and we can probably tell you
how to fix it.
>Also is using this script ok for a heavy load site? I call smtp and
>pop3 from tcpserver wrappers.
It should be OK, but I'd run everything under supervise if these
services absolutely, positively* had to be there.
-Dave
*Of course, there are ways to services to fail even under supervise.
Here are some diffs. Copy antirbl.c to detour.c before running these.
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
---detour diffs---
*** detour.c.old Tue Aug 25 11:58:22 1998
--- detour.c Sun Oct 3 15:20:42 1999
***************
*** 8,17 ****
void usage()
{
! strerr_die1x(100,"antirbl: usage: antirbl domain program [ arg ... ]");
}
char *domain;
struct ip_address ip;
void check()
--- 8,18 ----
void usage()
{
! strerr_die1x(100,"detour: usage: detour domain relayclient program [ arg ... ]");
}
char *domain;
+ char *relayclient;
struct ip_address ip;
void check()
***************
*** 19,27 ****
char *x;
int numenv;
char **newenv;
int i;
! if (env_get("RBLSMTPD")) return;
x = env_get("TCPREMOTEIP");
if (!x) return;
--- 20,29 ----
char *x;
int numenv;
char **newenv;
+ char *newclient;
int i;
! if (env_get("RELAYCLIENT")) return;
x = env_get("TCPREMOTEIP");
if (!x) return;
***************
*** 43,50 ****
for (numenv = 0;environ[numenv];++numenv) ;
newenv = (char **) alloc((numenv + 2) * sizeof(char *));
if (!newenv) return;
for (i = 0;i < numenv;++i) newenv[i] = environ[i];
! newenv[numenv++] = "RBLSMTPD=";
newenv[numenv] = 0;
environ = newenv;
}
--- 45,56 ----
for (numenv = 0;environ[numenv];++numenv) ;
newenv = (char **) alloc((numenv + 2) * sizeof(char *));
if (!newenv) return;
+ newclient = alloc(str_len(relayclient)+13);
+ if (!newclient) return;
+ byte_copy(newclient, 12, "RELAYCLIENT=");
+ byte_copy(newclient+12, 1+str_len(relayclient), relayclient);
for (i = 0;i < numenv;++i) newenv[i] = environ[i];
! newenv[numenv++] = newclient;
newenv[numenv] = 0;
environ = newenv;
}
***************
*** 55,63 ****
{
if (!argv[1]) usage();
if (!argv[2]) usage();
domain = argv[1];
check();
! execvp(argv[2],argv + 2);
! strerr_die4sys(111,"antirbl: fatal: ","unable to run ",argv[2],": ");
}
--- 61,71 ----
{
if (!argv[1]) usage();
if (!argv[2]) usage();
+ if (!argv[3]) usage();
domain = argv[1];
+ relayclient = argv[2];
check();
! execvp(argv[3],argv + 3);
! strerr_die4sys(111,"detour: fatal: ","unable to run ",argv[3],": ");
}
*** Makefile.old Mon Oct 4 10:39:25 1999
--- Makefile Sun Oct 3 15:19:47 1999
***************
*** 88,93 ****
--- 88,110 ----
compile
chmod 755 compile
+ ## JRL
+ detour: \
+ load detour.o ip.o strerr.a substdio.a alloc.a error.a env.a str.a \
+ fs.a dns.lib socket.lib
+ ./load detour ip.o strerr.a substdio.a alloc.a error.a \
+ env.a str.a fs.a `cat dns.lib` `cat socket.lib`
+
+ #detour.0: \
+ #detour.8
+ # nroff -man detour.8 > detour.0
+
+ detour.o: \
+ compile detour.c alloc.h strerr.h fmt.h str.h ip.h env.h
+ ./compile detour.c
+
+
+
dns.lib: \
tryrsolv.c compile load socket.lib
( ( ./compile tryrsolv.c && ./load tryrsolv \
***************
*** 210,216 ****
./compile open_trunc.c
prog: \
! rblsmtpd antirbl
rblsmtpd: \
load rblsmtpd.o txt.o commands.o ip.o getopt.a strerr.a substdio.a \
--- 227,233 ----
./compile open_trunc.c
prog: \
! rblsmtpd antirbl detour
rblsmtpd: \
load rblsmtpd.o txt.o commands.o ip.o getopt.a strerr.a substdio.a \
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is "virtual" about a "virtualdomain"?
The namespace. Just like two processes on a virtual memory system can
own the same address, two virtual domains can own the same "local
part".
-Dave
Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> What is "virtual" about a "virtualdomain"?
That qmail does not handle it as a domain but maps it to a user.
--
Claus Andre Faerber <http://www.faerber.muc.de>
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Hello:
Is there a way to limit the number of people a message can go to.
i.e. the combination of To+cc+bcc be less then a given number that can be
controlled from a file in /var/qmail/control?
Thanks
Burzin
There's a patch on the qmail page for this: it limit's the number of rcpt
to's in the smtp protocol, which is what you want.
Franky
> ----------
> From: B. Engineer[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 5:37 PM
> To: qmail list
> Subject: Limit TO+CC list
>
> Hello:
> Is there a way to limit the number of people a message can go to.
> i.e. the combination of To+cc+bcc be less then a given number that can be
> controlled from a file in /var/qmail/control?
>
> Thanks
>
> Burzin
>
B. Engineer writes:
> Hello:
> Is there a way to limit the number of people a message can go to.
> i.e. the combination of To+cc+bcc be less then a given number that can be
> controlled from a file in /var/qmail/control?
Nope. There's very little value in doing this to prevent spam;
spammers will just split their messages up. Do you want to do it for
a different reason?
--
-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!
-----Original Message-----
From: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: qmail list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, October 04, 1999 11:02 PM
Subject: Re: Limit TO+CC list
>B. Engineer writes:
> > Hello:
> > Is there a way to limit the number of people a message can go to.
> > i.e. the combination of To+cc+bcc be less then a given number that can
be
> > controlled from a file in /var/qmail/control?
>
You can use tarpit patch to protect against those messages that contain a
long RCPT list.
>Nope. There's very little value in doing this to prevent spam;
>spammers will just split their messages up. Do you want to do it for
>a different reason?
>
So, what is the best way to prevent spam mail?
Thx,
Dong
"Nguyen Dang Phuoc Dong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So, what is the best way to prevent spam mail?
Don't give out your e-mail address to potential spammers.
-Dave
Nguyen Dang Phuoc Dong writes:
> >Nope. There's very little value in doing this to prevent spam;
> >spammers will just split their messages up. Do you want to do it for
> >a different reason?
>
> So, what is the best way to prevent spam mail?
I presume you mean outgoing, since the preceding question was about
rate-limiting outgoing email. The best solution is 1) to prohibit
outgoing SMTP connections from your dialups, and 2) to rate-limit the
amount of mail sent through your host. The best way to do that
doesn't exist yet. I've got a customer who has me writing a
qmail-queue wrapper which will reject "too much" email from the same
host. It'll be configurable to either bounce the mail, or simply
defer it. Deferring it is by far the better solution. It really
knocks a hole in the dialup spammers, since they lose their account so
quickly that re-sending deferred email simply isn't an option. And
when using it on internal outgoing mail (from your own users), it's
the only option, since you don't want to deny service, just ensure
that your users can't spam.
--
-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!
Phil,
Many people have simply left /bin/mail alone and have reported that it works fine.
As far as I know, you can safely ignore step #3 in REMOVE.binmail.
Good luck!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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]
--
�.��.���`�. Glenn R. Crownover
�.��.���`�. Owner/CEO - Investor's Network Cafe
�.��.���`�. http://www.bluejava.com/inc/
�.��.���`�. reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all:
I've just installed Bruce Guenter's system to allow mail relaying after
checking mail (http://em.ca/~bruceg/relay-ctrl/), and it doesn't work.
Basically, what happens is:
1) The "relay-ctrl" file, that the program uses to cache the IPs of the
people who have checked their mail, doesn't get updated.
2) The instructions tell me to put an invocation to "relay-ctrl-age",
the program that has to update said file, in the crontab and run it
every 5 minutes. I put it, and after half an hour or so, I see several
zombie "relay-ctrl-age" processes with ps -auxw. Looking at the date of
the tcpserver CDB file, though, I see that it *does* get updated by
relay-ctrl-age. (And what does relay-ctrl-age write to it? Just the four
or five IP ranges that I have currently listed to allow relaying, but
not the IP from which I check mail, which is what it was supposed to
do).
3) I can check my mail without any problem.
I start my POP service with:
tcpserver 0 pop3 /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.ddnet.es
/bin/checkpassword \
/usr/local/bin/logpop /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d ./Maildir &
("logpop" is a shell script that I have to log POP connections to
syslog (yes, I know, I know, I still use syslog. That server needs a
major upgrade anyway...)).
Anything else...? Oh yes: qmail 1.03, Slackware Linux 3.5 with several
packages upgraded... Tell me if you need to know anything else.
Thanks in advance,
Paulo Jan.
DDnet.
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 06:28:02PM +0200, Paulo Jan wrote:
> I've just installed Bruce Guenter's system to allow mail relaying after
> checking mail (http://em.ca/~bruceg/relay-ctrl/), and it doesn't work.
> Basically, what happens is:
>
> 1) The "relay-ctrl" file, that the program uses to cache the IPs of the
> people who have checked their mail, doesn't get updated.
/var/spool/relay-ctrl is a directory, not a file. It should contain a
single entry for each host that successfully authenticates.
Unfortunately the makefile does not currently set this directory up.
You may need to do this yourself.
> 2) The instructions tell me to put an invocation to "relay-ctrl-age",
> the program that has to update said file, in the crontab and run it
> every 5 minutes. I put it, and after half an hour or so, I see several
> zombie "relay-ctrl-age" processes with ps -auxw.
Could you run "strace -o strace -ff relay-ctrl-age" and send me the
resulting strace files (there should be two).
> I start my POP service with:
>
> tcpserver 0 pop3 /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.ddnet.es
> /bin/checkpassword \
> /usr/local/bin/logpop /usr/local/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d ./Maildir &
You need to add relay-ctrl-allow before qmail-pop3d here, as stated in
the README file.
> Anything else...? Oh yes: qmail 1.03, Slackware Linux 3.5 with several
> packages upgraded... Tell me if you need to know anything else.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:40:08PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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.
We made some measurements (some time ago) and found out that if you have
an email that is to be sent/received via smtp you have a factor of about
1.6-1.8 overhead for raw IP traffic (i.e. retransmits, IP and TCP protocol
overhead, deferred deliveries, etc.)
That means a 10 KB email (size on filesystem) generates about 16-18 KB IP
traffic.
However that should depend on the type of mail server you run. If you have a
"forward to ISP relay" type over a nearly lossfree line this factor should
be smaller.
We did calculate that factor from the sizeinfo from the mailer logfiles vs.
the IP accounting records on our router (I did this "per hand" from the
logfiles of about one month and I did it some months ago, so I don't have
any scripts, nor the exact data available, sorry).
\Maex
P.S. This is about the same factor you get on HTTP daemons calculating
logfile size infos vs raw IP accounting.
--
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 |
The Problem:
I recently subscribed to a cable modem service. My home machine
is now online almost 100% of the time. I also got a free domain
name. I wanted by email to be forwarded to my home machine if
possible otherwise spooled normally. My university department
recently upgraded to qmail (from sendmail).
The Solution:
Write a small QMTP fowarding program (serialmail wasn't really
what I wanted). Add the following two lines to my .qmail file:
|if $HOME/bin/tcpclient my.domain 209 $HOME/bin/qmtp
$SENDER neil; then exit 99; else exit 0; fi >>$HOME/qmtp.log
2>&1
./Maildir/
The source for qmtp is here:
http://www.ucalgary.ca/~nascheme/qmtp.c
Please let me know if you find any security holes. So far things
are working great.
I also have a patch to add maildir support to the pine imap
server. I based it on Mattias Larsson's patch but fixed some
problems with multiple folders on the server.
http://www.ucalgary.ca/~nascheme/maildir-nas.diff
Perhaps someone will find this information useful. Thanks for
qmail, tcpclient, and QMTP Dan.
Neil
--
"The percentage of users running Windows NT Workstation 4.0 whose PCs stopped
working more than once a month was less than half that of Windows 95 users."
-- microsoft.com/ntworkstation/overview/Reliability/Highest.asp
Thanks for the responses. I think I've got it.
Here are my assumptions:
- qmail running as a relay
- peak concurrency of 200
- average msg size of 15K
- a 15K msg requires an average of 20 sec smtp transfer time
15,000 bytes * 200 msgs
----------------------- = 150,000 bytes/sec * 7 bits/byte = 1.0Mb/s
peak bandwidth usage.
20 secs transfer time
So, when qmail hits a peak (perhaps somewhat sustained - remember its a
relay, no spam would hit it) concurrency of 200, and the average msg
size is 15K, we are looking at coresponding peak bandwidth usage of
1.0Mb/s. Sound reasonable?
Regards, Eric Dahnke
PS: from previous posts, I'm assuming that the 1.6 fudge factor (bytes
transfered more than bytes the msg contains) washes with compression at
the router.
>So, when qmail hits a peak (perhaps somewhat sustained - remember its a
>relay, no spam would hit it) concurrency of 200, and the average msg
>size is 15K, we are looking at coresponding peak bandwidth usage of
>1.0Mb/s. Sound reasonable?
Unfortunately no. There is no real correspondence between your message
profile and your peak bandwidth.
Consider the simple situation of a, say, a single 1Mbyte email. If the
sending system can send at, say, 2Mbits per second and the receiving end can
accept at 2Mbits per second, then the transmission of that message will go
out at T1 speeds. In other words a single message can cause a 100%
utilization on your link, albeit for less than 8 seconds in this case.
Your peak bandwidth utilization will be a function of the aggregate transmit
demands and the aggregate receive capabilities. It may be that a single
1Mbyte email to a fast location saturates your link but 200 concurrent
emails to slow locations will not.
Now if you mean average, that's another story.
Mark.
I've noticed recently that my queue seems to be partially stalling. That
is, messages somehow make it into the outbound queue (for local and/or
remote delivery) and end up just sitting there until I stop and re-start
qmail (/etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail restart). The weird thing is that queue
processing does not die altogether. The vast majority of the mail traffic
still moves as it should. I have not been able to locate any errors in my
logs nor have I seen any patterns. I'm using qmail-1.01+patches under Red
Hat Linux 6.0 with kernel 2.2.5-22SMP on a dual PPro200Mhz system with a
very fast Ultra Wide SCSI RAID5 (hardware) subsystem. Any ideas? HELP!
--Kevin
---
Kevin Sawyer - President/CEO - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Applied Personal Computing, Inc. - APCiNet - http://www.apci.net
6001 Old Collinsville Road, Building #3, Fairview Heights, IL 62208
Office: (618) 632-7282 FAX: (618) 632-7287 Support: (618) 628-2Net
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Anand Buddhdev wrote:
> 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.
Oops is right. That MAXSIZE is a leftover from the old maxsize patch from
my qmail 1.01 days. Anand's right -- use DATABYTES where I have MAXSIZE
above if you want to set limits per IP.
-M, off to edit that site's tcpserver control file....
Michael Brian Scher (MS683/MS3213) Anthropologist, Attorney, Policy Analyst
Mainlining Internet Connectivity for Fun and Profit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Give me a compiler and a box to run it, and I can move the mail.
Hello,
I just converted my SMTP server to qmail and I'm having a problem
with setting up fetchmail, procmail and qmail to work together.
I already ran TEST.receive and TEST.deliver test suite and it
all worked fine for sending and receiving mail directly to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
via procmail recipes.
The problem arises when trying to get the mail from my ISP: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
via fetchmail.
The mail was lost, after fetchmail successfully fetched it.
Below is my qmail's configuration to have this accomplished:
Add myisp.com to control/locals and control/rcpthosts
Yes, I restarted qmail after changing these.
######### .qmail file ################
|/home/me/bin/qmail-procmail
###############################
######### qmail-procmail ##############
#!/bin/sh
/var/qmail/bin/preline /usr/bin/procmail && exit 0
# check if procmail returned EX_TEMPFAIL (75)
[ $? = 75 ] && exit 111
# otherwise return a permanent error
exit 100
####################################
############ .fetchmailrc #################
poll mail.myisp.com proto pop3 nodns
user me with password XXXXXXX
fetchall forcecr
#########################################
Please shed some lights on this.
Thanks in advance.
-Aris
I want to block a specific domain (att.net) that is spamming my server,
where/how can I set qmail up to block, or defer, anything originating
from them?
Thanks,
-frank
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
frank(at)spin.biochem.okstate.edu
http://spin.biochem.okstate.edu/~frank
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Franklin A Hays wrote:
> I want to block a specific domain (att.net) that is spamming my server,
> where/how can I set qmail up to block, or defer, anything originating
> from them?
badmailfrom
Kevin
Hello,
I am having trouble configuring qmail to sent all mail to a 3rd level
domain to /dev/null. After reading the FAQ and experimenting some, here's
what I've done:
/var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
some.otherdomain.com:user1
good.mydomain.com:user2
bad.mydomain.com:user2-bad
/home/user2/.qmail-bad-default
| cat >/dev/null
qmail's dotfile is owned by user1. What am I missing? Is there an easier
way to do this?
-Marc
==================================================================
Seen on /.:
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...
..oh wait, he does.
==================================================================
The Green Avenger writes:
> I am having trouble configuring qmail to sent all mail to a 3rd level
> domain to /dev/null. After reading the FAQ and experimenting some, here's
> what I've done:
>
> /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
>
> some.otherdomain.com:user1
> good.mydomain.com:user2
> bad.mydomain.com:user2-bad
>
> /home/user2/.qmail-bad-default
>
> | cat >/dev/null
>
> qmail's dotfile is owned by user1. What am I missing? Is there an easier
> way to do this?
Yes: echo '#' >/home/user2/.qmail-bad-default
No reason to invoke cat, or write anything to /dev/null.
Oh, wait, you say this *doesn't* work? What "trouble" are you having?
You're doing everything right, unless you haven't told us something.
--
-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 Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 07:55:01PM -0700, The Green Avenger wrote:
> I am having trouble configuring qmail to sent all mail to a 3rd level
> domain to /dev/null. After reading the FAQ and experimenting some, here's
> what I've done:
>
> /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
>
> some.otherdomain.com:user1
> good.mydomain.com:user2
> bad.mydomain.com:user2-bad
>
> /home/user2/.qmail-bad-default
>
> | cat >/dev/null
>
> qmail's dotfile is owned by user1. What am I missing? Is there an easier
> way to do this?
How do the corresponding lines in your users/assign file look like?
Ownership of a users2 file by user1 smells problematic ...
And you should probably have a /home/users2/.qmail-default (without the
"bad-") file (however that depends on the assign file).
\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 |
Hey all I just put a new Qmail server online at Z100 Radio in New York city
for all of ou listener e-mail (about 500,000 mails/day) and I have
everything working except one little thing- when I try and send mail to
addresses outside my domain (eg aol.com, mindspring.com, etc. I get an
error saying "sorry, that domain is not in my list of allowed rcpt hosts
#5.7.1" anyone have any ideas as to why this is happening???
Thanks in advance,
Bernie Courtney
Z100 New Yok Engineering
PS: fist person to help me solve the problem gets a station T-Shirt :-)))
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Check the FAQ
ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/qmail/faq/servers.html#authorized-relay
- -Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 8:07 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RCPTHOSTS error
>
>
>
>
> Hey all I just put a new Qmail server online at Z100 Radio in
> New York city
> for all of ou listener e-mail (about 500,000 mails/day) and I have
> everything working except one little thing- when I try and
> send mail to
> addresses outside my domain (eg aol.com, mindspring.com, etc. I get
> an error saying "sorry, that domain is not in my list of allowed
> rcpt hosts #5.7.1" anyone have any ideas as to why this is
> happening???
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Bernie Courtney
> Z100 New Yok Engineering
>
> PS: fist person to help me solve the problem gets a station
> T-Shirt :-)))
>
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBN/lsyZudIvOxcSM4EQLpzgCdHtesMBNmgrEPVn7u9ayB8Lm2HJ0AoPn0
NUatGZg6fsMa1F79dye69BAi
=KGuN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi Bernie:
Read: http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html
Please let me know if it is not clear.
- Bernie
> Hey all I just put a new Qmail server online at Z100 Radio in New York city
> for all of ou listener e-mail (about 500,000 mails/day) and I have
> everything working except one little thing- when I try and send mail to
> addresses outside my domain (eg aol.com, mindspring.com, etc. I get an error
> saying "sorry, that domain is not in my list of allowed rcpt hosts #5.7.1"
> anyone have any ideas as to why this is happening???
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Bernie Courtney
> Z100 New Yok Engineering
>
> PS: fist person to help me solve the problem gets a station T-Shirt :-)))
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>
> Hey all I just put a new Qmail server online at Z100 Radio in New York city
> for all of ou listener e-mail (about 500,000 mails/day) and I have
> everything working except one little thing- when I try and send mail to
> addresses outside my domain (eg aol.com, mindspring.com, etc. I get an
> error saying "sorry, that domain is not in my list of allowed rcpt hosts
> #5.7.1" anyone have any ideas as to why this is happening???
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Bernie Courtney
> Z100 New Yok Engineering
>
> PS: fist person to help me solve the problem gets a station T-Shirt :-)))
Not the fifth caller? :)
You don't say, but very likely you're getting this problem when you
"try and send mail" from a client machine. You have to tell the
server that the client machine is authorized to relay. Most often
this is done by listing the IP address subnet (or range of addresses)
in /etc/smtp.txt, followed by ":allow,RELAYCLIENT=//", and then
compiled into /etc/smtp.cdb.
You know, just like it says in FAQ 5.4.
--
-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!
and if I am not using TCPSERVER? I just need to get this runing ASAP so an
open relay would be fine for the time being, how do I do that?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
you really should be running tcpserver, it takes about 10 minutes (or
less) to setup and is much more reliable than inetd.
- -Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 9:23 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: RCPTHOSTS error
>
>
>
>
> and if I am not using TCPSERVER? I just need to get this
> runing ASAP so an
> open relay would be fine for the time being, how do I do that?
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBN/l/DJudIvOxcSM4EQIbOQCfXiI61KVJ65QJpJWuAkcuyJQO7W4An3Ju
+CxaARusrROoWWj9kctskIZ6
=GezP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> and if I am not using TCPSERVER? I just need to get this runing ASAP so an
> open relay would be fine for the time being, how do I do that?
Install tcpserver. It's faster than dealing with inetd.
--
-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!
let me also add that if I remove the RCPTHOSTS file, that I can no longer
recieve e-mails sent to my local domain. The machine just refuses
everything.
any more ideas??
> and if I am not using TCPSERVER? I just need to get this runing ASAP so an
> open relay would be fine for the time being, how do I do that?
Running an open relay is discouraged. You should install tcpserver ASAP (It is
not painful. Trust me. I have done it myself).
If your really, really, really, absolutely, must, without a doubt, run an open
relay (and _please_ only for a few minutes until you get tcpserver installed),
you may be able to by deleting the control/rcpthosts file.
Beware. Your station management and sponsors may not look favorably if a
spammer sees your open relay and uses it to distribute garbage throughout the
world.
- Bernie
Russell Nelson wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > and if I am not using TCPSERVER? I just need to get this runing ASAP so an
> > open relay would be fine for the time being, how do I do that?
>
> Install tcpserver. It's faster than dealing with inetd.
Can it be said that tcpserver can run concurrently with inetd? I would
think so. But maybe because it is said to be better than inetd, people
see it as a replacement for inetd (why not, right?), and then they
hesitate to make the move because they haven't blocked enough time to
be sure there is no impact on all the other inetd stuff (ya never know
when dealing with new stuff). The simple scenario should be to just
put tcpserver on and fire it up configured to do qmail and nothing else
for now (to get going) and migrate things from inetd to tcpserver later
on.
I take it if you have any UDP stuff on inetd you have to leave it on there?
OTOH, some of my servers are so tight there's not even inetd running (ssh
runs standalone). So my first though is most of the UDP isn't needed.
--
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]
Bernard Karmilowicz wrote:
> > and if I am not using TCPSERVER? I just need to get this runing ASAP so an
> > open relay would be fine for the time being, how do I do that?
>
> Running an open relay is discouraged. You should install tcpserver ASAP (It is
> not painful. Trust me. I have done it myself).
>
> If your really, really, really, absolutely, must, without a doubt, run an open
> relay (and _please_ only for a few minutes until you get tcpserver installed),
> you may be able to by deleting the control/rcpthosts file.
Since I'm in the (slower) process of putting up qmail on a new server that
has nothing on it so far, I decided to go ahead and install tcpserver now
since I will be doing so anyway, and because of this thread, just to see
how long it would take. It will take longer for me because instead of just
installing things like most people do, I follow a process if "documenting"
what I do by writing a script that does the whole thing. I can thus use
the script in the future for a new version, or let it "document" what I did.
It was easy, actually.
Since I'm still going through all the qmail documentation I haven't yet come
across how to exactly set up qmail and tcpserver together. No, don't tell
me; I'll figure it out.
But what I am curious about is why installing ucspi (the package tcpserver
comes in) put sgid bits in some of my directories:
before:
d 00755 00000.00000 usr/local
d 00775 00000.00000 usr/local/bin
d 00775 00000.00000 usr/local/man
d 00755 00000.00000 usr/local/man/man1
d 00755 00000.00000 usr/local/man/man5
after:
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local/bin
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local/man
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local/man/cat1
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local/man/cat5
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local/man/man1
d 02755 00000.00000 usr/local/man/man5
--
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]
BIND can return incomplete glue records in some cases, possibly many fewer
than the threshold of overflowing the packet. A scenario I've been testing
is with 2 MX hosts and 12 A records for each. The whole mess won't fit in
one packet. BIND then decides to not include all of the A records for the
2nd MX host. Will qmail go back for those A records if it needs them? And
what if the glue A records sent were for the higher of the two MX hosts?
Will it handle that (yes, BIND decides which MX records get glue records
after it does order cyclic, so order fixed is apparently going to be
appropriate here).
--
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]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> BIND can return incomplete glue records in some cases, possibly many fewer
> than the threshold of overflowing the packet. A scenario I've been testing
> is with 2 MX hosts and 12 A records for each. The whole mess won't fit in
> one packet. BIND then decides to not include all of the A records for the
> 2nd MX host. Will qmail go back for those A records if it needs them? And
> what if the glue A records sent were for the higher of the two MX hosts?
> Will it handle that (yes, BIND decides which MX records get glue records
> after it does order cyclic, so order fixed is apparently going to be
> appropriate here).
qmail's dns algorithms are exposed in the dns* programs. They're not
documented, nor are they installed in /var/qmail/bin, but they're
there in the source directory and you can play with them to see what
results you get from various queries. In the absence of an smtproute,
qmail uses the results returned by dnsmxip, in the order returned.
Oh, interesting! ipal.net has a useless MX record at priority ten.
desk:~$ src/qmail-1.03/dnsmxip ipal.net
206.97.151.200 0
206.97.151.200 10
206.97.151.14 20
206.97.151.8 20
--
-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 wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > BIND can return incomplete glue records in some cases, possibly many fewer
> > than the threshold of overflowing the packet. A scenario I've been testing
> > is with 2 MX hosts and 12 A records for each. The whole mess won't fit in
> > one packet. BIND then decides to not include all of the A records for the
> > 2nd MX host. Will qmail go back for those A records if it needs them? And
> > what if the glue A records sent were for the higher of the two MX hosts?
> > Will it handle that (yes, BIND decides which MX records get glue records
> > after it does order cyclic, so order fixed is apparently going to be
> > appropriate here).
>
> qmail's dns algorithms are exposed in the dns* programs. They're not
> documented, nor are they installed in /var/qmail/bin, but they're
> there in the source directory and you can play with them to see what
> results you get from various queries. In the absence of an smtproute,
> qmail uses the results returned by dnsmxip, in the order returned.
>
> Oh, interesting! ipal.net has a useless MX record at priority ten.
>
> desk:~$ src/qmail-1.03/dnsmxip ipal.net
> 206.97.151.200 0
> 206.97.151.200 10
> 206.97.151.14 20
> 206.97.151.8 20
<verbositywarning>
Yup. When you look at it as IPs only, it's certainly useless with no obvious
reason. It's actually from an older script that generated simplistic DNS zone
data using pseudonym hosts. There are 2 pseudo-hosts, mx1 and mx2. If the
destination host is one of those in the A records for mx1 or mx2, then it
comes out that way. But mx1 is just one host (for now) and the script that
generated it didn't look far enough to realize it. If mx1 were 2 hosts
then there would still be a useless 10 but one that is useable, too.
The basic principle was that for all hosts in domain.xxx then mx1.domain.xxx
would be priority 10 and mx2.domain.xxx would be priority 20. Those names
would then have their own A records. They would happen to point to the same
IP as some hosts (such as rigel.ipal.net). It gets complicated when this
is happening over a couple dozen domains. But as you see, the overlap case
looks ugly.
As I migrate to a better database I'll be rewriting those scripts. I have
yet to put thought into a better way to approach this; that will begin with
I get the new servers fully configured and loaded (sendmail-free, this time).
My initial quick thought is to allow a per-host override in the database
for the MX list. That solves the problem if I think to manually configure
it different in the database. I'd like some intelligence in the script to
do it different. Just OTTOMH, the script could build an IP list much like
dnsmxip does (but from the database, not DNS, since it's building zone data)
and detect the condition. If so, it will fall back to treating the host as
a whole domain. So for host.domain.xxx instead of using mx1.domain.xxx and
mx2.domain.xxx it will use mx1.host.domain.xxx and mx2.host.domain.xxx and
delete the redundancy (and the whole name if the IP list becomes empty).
The old script worked from a file that was generated from /etc/hosts, which
basically gave it a list of FQDNs. It took the SLD part and blindly generated
the MX records for each one. Because I need to generate new files for qmail
control, I'm going to be addressing that issue RSN. And for many other
reasons a new database has been considered, although I'm still undecided on
whether to use SQL, LDAP, or hierarchical property files. I tend to favor
the latter two, but still have some issues on interpreting LDAP.
</verbositywarning>
--
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]
Hi all,
I had a small mishap with a hacker
who played a bit with my mail server. the result was a full reinstall,
the best I could do to get rid of any programs installed
In my setup I have 2 machines which use AutoTURN to send mail to my
subdomain.
I have done the setup using Dave's advice and his "lwq"
but this time when I install I must have missed something in the serial
setup as the AutoTURN will not work
Help is much appriciated.
Jacob
--------------------metta.lk-----------Internet
204.143.107.46
|
ppp link
|
col7.metta.lk
172.16.1.1
when I invoke the ppp connection from the subdomain then mail goes out to
"metta.lk" for delivery.
but the AutoTURN connection is not made
I see mail in /var/qmail/autoturn/new/
I see a connection made from col7.metta.lk
/var/log/qmail/smtpd/
---------------------
939108968.281973 tcpserver: pid 19679 from 172.16.1.1
939108968.821487 tcpserver: ok 19679 metta.lk:204.143.107.46:25
col7.metta.lk:172.16.1.1:root:1025
939108971.651536 tcpserver: end 19679 status 0
939108971.651798 tcpserver: status: 1/40
939109599.374155 tcpserver: end 19597 status 0
939109599.374190 tcpserver: status: 0/40
I see the PPP connection is up.
[root@dhamma qmail]# pppstats
IN PACK VJCOMP VJUNC VJERR | OUT PACK VJCOMP VJUNC NON-VJ
3098 26 1 11 0 | 1276 27 2 11 14
when I manually execute the command on in the
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd-wrapper
after having got the connection from
the subdomain "col7.metta.lk" the I get the error
[root@dhamma autoturn]# /var/local/bin/setlock -nx $TCPREMOTEIP/seriallock
/usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp $TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP-
$TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN
bash: /var/local/bin/setlock: No such file or directory
what is the file missing (setlock is there)
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 10128 Oct 1 23:40 setlock
my /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd-wrapper looks like this
--------------------------------------
#!/bin/bash
PATH=$PATH:/var/qmail/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin
export PATH
ulimit -d 1024
exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd ${1+"$@"}
cd /var/qmail/autoturn
exec /usr/local/bin/setlock -nx $TCPREMOTEIP/seriallock \
/usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp $TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP- \
$TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN
--------------------------------------
I can ping the local subdomain from main domain
[root@dhamma qmail]# ping 172.16.1.1
PING 172.16.1.1 (172.16.1.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=240.6 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=220.0 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=210.0 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=210.0 ms
64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=210.0 ms
--- 172.16.1.1 ping statistics ---
6 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 16% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 210.0/218.1/240.6 ms
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 02:04:56PM +0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok. There are a number of things you're doing wrong. See below; I've
answered in context.
> Hi all,
>
> I had a small mishap with a hacker
> who played a bit with my mail server. the result was a full reinstall,
> the best I could do to get rid of any programs installed
>
> In my setup I have 2 machines which use AutoTURN to send mail to my
> subdomain.
>
> I have done the setup using Dave's advice and his "lwq"
> but this time when I install I must have missed something in the serial
> setup as the AutoTURN will not work
>
> Help is much appriciated.
> Jacob
>
>
> --------------------metta.lk-----------Internet
> 204.143.107.46
> |
> ppp link
> |
> col7.metta.lk
> 172.16.1.1
>
> when I invoke the ppp connection from the subdomain then mail goes out to
> "metta.lk" for delivery.
> but the AutoTURN connection is not made
>
> I see mail in /var/qmail/autoturn/new/
>
> I see a connection made from col7.metta.lk
> /var/log/qmail/smtpd/
> ---------------------
> 939108968.281973 tcpserver: pid 19679 from 172.16.1.1
> 939108968.821487 tcpserver: ok 19679 metta.lk:204.143.107.46:25
> col7.metta.lk:172.16.1.1:root:1025
> 939108971.651536 tcpserver: end 19679 status 0
> 939108971.651798 tcpserver: status: 1/40
> 939109599.374155 tcpserver: end 19597 status 0
> 939109599.374190 tcpserver: status: 0/40
>
> I see the PPP connection is up.
>
> [root@dhamma qmail]# pppstats
> IN PACK VJCOMP VJUNC VJERR | OUT PACK VJCOMP VJUNC NON-VJ
> 3098 26 1 11 0 | 1276 27 2 11 14
>
> when I manually execute the command on in the
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd-wrapper
> after having got the connection from
> the subdomain "col7.metta.lk" the I get the error
>
> [root@dhamma autoturn]# /var/local/bin/setlock -nx $TCPREMOTEIP/seriallock
> /usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp $TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP-
> $TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN
> bash: /var/local/bin/setlock: No such file or directory
That's a mistake. "setlock" is in /usr/local/bin, not /var/local/bin.
That's why you get a "No such file" error. However, this is not your
actual problem. See further.
> what is the file missing (setlock is there)
>
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 10128 Oct 1 23:40 setlock
>
>
> my /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd-wrapper looks like this
> --------------------------------------
> #!/bin/bash
> PATH=$PATH:/var/qmail/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin
> export PATH
> ulimit -d 1024
> exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd ${1+"$@"}
^^^^^^^
This exec is the mistake. exec replaces the current program with
the new program on the command line. In your case, your entire
smtpd-wrapper script is being replaced by an invocation of qmail-smtpd,
so the program never gets to the maildirsmtp part. Exec should
normally only be the last part of your program or script, if you
chosse to use it. To fix this, remove the exec, and then after
qmail-smtpd finishes an SMTP conversation, the wrapper will go on
to run maildirsmtp.
> cd /var/qmail/autoturn
> exec /usr/local/bin/setlock -nx $TCPREMOTEIP/seriallock \
> /usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp $TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP- \
> $TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN
> --------------------------------------
>
> I can ping the local subdomain from main domain
>
> [root@dhamma qmail]# ping 172.16.1.1
> PING 172.16.1.1 (172.16.1.1): 56 data bytes
> 64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=240.6 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=220.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=210.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=210.0 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.16.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=210.0 ms
>
> --- 172.16.1.1 ping statistics ---
> 6 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 16% packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max = 210.0/218.1/240.6 ms
>
--
See complete headers for more info
Hi all,
in an alias .qmail-ticket i have the following
|/usr/lib/sendmail -f ticket-owner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does Qmail know how to handle this. If not what would i use ?
Thank You
Tony Wade
The Internet Solution
Tel: (+27 11) 283 5483
Fax: (+27 11) 283 5401
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.is.co.za
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
-- Dave Olson
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:29:35AM +0200, Tony Wade wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> in an alias .qmail-ticket i have the following
>
> |/usr/lib/sendmail -f ticket-owner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Does Qmail know how to handle this. If not what would i use ?
As long as /usr/lib/sendmail is a link to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail, that
will be fine.
--
See complete headers for more info
Dear all,
If I have two mail server which both I defined in DNS server as Primary and
Secondary MX record,
do I have to put ALL users in /etc/passwd from the Primary mail server to
/etc/passwd in secondary one ?
TIA
deden
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Dear all,
If I have two mail server which both I defined in DNS server as Primary and
Secondary MX record,
do I have to put ALL users in /etc/passwd from the Primary mail server to
/etc/passwd in secondary one ?
TIA
deden
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 5 Oct 99, at 16:03, deden purnamahadi wrote:
> If I have two mail server which both I defined in DNS server as Primary
> and Secondary MX record, do I have to put ALL users in /etc/passwd from
> the Primary mail server to /etc/passwd in secondary one ?
That's not what secondary is for. You don't deliver on secondary -
you just keep it in queue till primary comes up. On the secondary,
put the domain in rcpthosts and NOT in locals nor virtualdomains.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBN/nN6lMwP8g7qbw/EQIWwgCglUYL0OeEGTrV53W9lg5UwqMf/9MAn1/B
lmBf2yQe2UJDPx0YQRjNp5RE
=c5sU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
[Tom Waits]
Hi,
In one of my mail server, I am using radchkpasswd. One thing strange to me
is that only Eudora can collect mails from that pop server whereas Outlook
and Netscape mails cannot.
I can telnet in at port 110 and use the normal user, pass, uidl, and dele
commands.
Is it a problem with radchkpasswd or with some settings with outlook ??
Does it makes a difference to these programs if the home directory is
something other than
/home/userhome ??
Thanks in Advance ,
Shashi
