qmail Digest 7 Oct 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 782
Topics (messages 31293 through 31333):
User Masquarading via pop
31293 by: Geoff Roberts
31295 by: Russell Nelson
31296 by: Geoff Roberts
31297 by: Russell Nelson
Re: POP3 locking
31294 by: Peeter Pirn
Re: Queue stalls
31298 by: Kevin Sawyer
Frontpage and Qmail?
31299 by: Jeff McNeil
31300 by: Markus Stumpf
Renaming SMTP server
31301 by: Robert
31306 by: Markus Stumpf
Too many hops??
31302 by: Robert
31303 by: Russell Nelson
31310 by: phil.ipal.net
31312 by: Russell Nelson
31314 by: phil.ipal.net
31320 by: Markus Stumpf
31322 by: phil.ipal.net
31329 by: Russ Allbery
upper limit
31304 by: Nagendra Mishr
31305 by: Robbie Walker
A second strange problem.
31307 by: Jeff McNeil
31308 by: Fred Lindberg
31309 by: Thomas M. Sasala
31311 by: Bruno Wolff III
31316 by: Thomas M. Sasala
31319 by: Markus Stumpf
31321 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
Forwarding
31313 by: Marek Narkiewicz
31315 by: Marek Narkiewicz
31317 by: Markus Stumpf
31318 by: Markus Stumpf
31331 by: harold.nb.com.sg ()
Beware when patching Solaris machines
31323 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
qmailanalog fatal:
31324 by: B. Engineer
31326 by: Russell Nelson
31328 by: B. Engineer
Suggestions requested
31325 by: Steve Philp
supervise and qmail
31327 by: phil.ipal.net
Supervise and qmail/tcpserver
31330 by: Robert Wojciechowski Jr.
Re: qmail as secondary MX
31332 by: Petr Novotny
Speed up qmail-smtpd
31333 by: Jorge Mota
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,
Under sendmail I can setup a genericsdomain and genericstable to allow
me to do user masquarading:
mehere [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can see how to do this when mailing from the Unix machine with qmail
on it (with the use of environment variables).
But I would like all mail that goes into the ppp alias Maildir to have
the from field modified from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a way for this to happen for those that are connecting to qmail
via pop or imap?
Thanks
Geoff
Geoff Roberts writes:
> Under sendmail I can setup a genericsdomain and genericstable to allow
> me to do user masquarading:
>
> mehere [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I can see how to do this when mailing from the Unix machine with qmail
> on it (with the use of environment variables).
>
> But I would like all mail that goes into the ppp alias Maildir to have
> the from field modified from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Is there a way for this to happen for those that are connecting to qmail
> via pop or imap?
I don't understand this question. Are you talking about outgoing mail
from a Unix client running qmail and serialmail? Or incoming mail
which will be downloaded by a client machine? I know of no pop3
client that cares what the incoming address is. How did the mail get
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 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,
> > But I would like all mail that goes into the ppp alias Maildir to have
> > the from field modified from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Is there a way for this to happen for those that are connecting to qmail
> > via pop or imap?
>
>I don't understand this question. Are you talking about outgoing mail
>from a Unix client running qmail and serialmail? Or incoming mail
>which will be downloaded by a client machine? I know of no pop3
>client that cares what the incoming address is. How did the mail get
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] on it?
Incoming mail is being fetched with fetchmail. As you mention, it is
only the outgoing mail that is being pushed out by serialmail. I would
like serialmail to look at the From: field of mail in the ppp Maildir and
replace the From field which contains my own local pretend domain name with
my username and the domain name of my ISP.
So - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
becomes - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
when the mail is passed on to my ISP. People can send mail in my
pretend domain to the qmail unix server by pop and imap (eg, from Eudora).
Geoff
Geoff Roberts writes:
> I would like serialmail to look at the From: field of mail in the
> ppp Maildir and replace the From field which contains my own local
> pretend domain name with my username and the domain name of my ISP.
>
> So - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> becomes - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ahhhh, I see. Wrong solution. Rewriting addresses is almost always
bad; avoid it if you can. Instead, create a list of local addresses:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Stuff those addresses into
virtualdomains like this:
cd /var/qmail/control
cat >>virtualdomains <<EOF
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:alias-locally
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:alias-locally
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:alias-locally
EOF
And then redirect those addresses to the local host.
echo '|forward "$EXT2@localhost"' >~alias/.qmail-locally-default
Also a few things more:
grep '^localhost$' locals || (echo 'localhost' >>locals)
echo 'my.isp.com' >defaulthost
rm defaultdomain
Depending on your email client, you may need to fiddle around with
qmail-inject environment variables to get @my.isp.com as the outgoing
hostname.
--
-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!
Thanks for the suggestion! The following works great on my server:
tcpserver -c 70 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mailsrv.fwi.com \
/bin/checkpassword /usr/contrib/bin/setlock -nx Maildir/.poplock \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
The second and subsequent concurrent POP3 attempts will get a password
authentication error.
------------------------------------------------------
Peeter Pirn - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sys Admin - FWI Internet
> Kevin Sawyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You're seeing messages in the queue that qmail isn't attempting to
> deliver? I can think of two possible causes for that in a properly
> functioning installation:
>
> 1) concurrencyremote/local are being reached, or
> 2) the target host for a remote delivery is marked as timing-out
> in qmail-remote's list of nonresponding hosts. (see "man
> qmail-tcpto").
I'm not actually "seeing" messages really. Here's some more information.
If wait a day or so then run "du -s /var/qmail/queue" I'll see say 120MB in
that hierarchy. If I then run "/etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail restart" I can
immediately use "df" to watch my /var partition usage shrink. After 10
minutes or so it will level out and running "du -s /var/qmail/queue" will
show that the queue contents have dropped by about 50%. Next, I get dial-up
subscribers calling saying, "I just got about 40 messages that were three
days old. What's up with that?" So, it isn't just remote messages due to
non-responding hosts. It's local messages.
Before I do all of this, I notice that qmail-queue and qmail-send are
definitely running and a lot of local and remote deliveries are succeeding
according to the logs. My concurrencylocal/remote are both set to the
compiled maximum of 120 and this box is definitely mean enough to support
that. I have about 5,000 mailboxes. My local delivery agent is procmail
with Maildir patches.
It just doesn't make sense to me that only SOME messages don't get delivered
locally while others continue to get delivered just fine.
More ideas? Thanks...
--Kevin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
First off, my apologies if this has already been asked, I searched the
archives and checked the FAQ, but didn't see anything of this nature.
I seem to be having a bit of a problem with qmail, and some web based programs.
Frontpage 2000 is a prime example.
I can send mail though my qmail server without any problem using Netscape,
KMail, etc.. I've even got it set up as a smart relay on close to 70 Unix
Servers, and it's working fine. I also have about 150 NT Machines which are
running Front Page 2000 extentions.
The problem is, whenever somone submits a web form from one of these Front Page
NT machines, the form just hangs. Doesn't submit, doesn't error out, just
hangs. The Qmail server is not slammed, and has plenty of resources avalible.
Any help is appreciated, I need this fixed quickly.
Thanks,
Jeff
- --
Jeff McNeil
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key: http://cthulhu.interland.net/~jeff/public.pgp
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5
iQA/AwUBN/uCxgmkWankFCt3EQIsMQCghG8TH0TPfM3m2rnXv4NHx9Vhy4kAnj8g
KlRt4WWhRKu8FQ+I+if8FXZk
=r35j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 01:04:19PM -0400, Jeff McNeil wrote:
> The problem is, whenever somone submits a web form from one of these Front Page
> NT machines, the form just hangs. Doesn't submit, doesn't error out, just
> hangs. The Qmail server is not slammed, and has plenty of resources avalible.
Where and how are the emails from web forms (I assume they should really
create an email; FP also supports writing to a file, only) injected?
How do your frontpage config files look like?
Do you use your mailserver as a "smarthost" (i.e. config line like:
SMTPHost:mail.example.com
(this directive is FP98, haven't checked whether it changed for FP2000)
or do you inject them in some local MailThingy (which is probably broken
anyway) which should relay it to your mailserver.
Then:
- do you see connections from that host to you qmail server?
- is that host (IP) allowed to relay via your mailserver or are the
messages all to local recipients?
\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 |
Hello,
Is there a way to rename my qmail server without damaging the current file
structure? This is an excert from my maillog file:
Oct 6 03:16:00 mail qmail: 939197760.820006 new msg 310277
I'd like to change the name of that server if possible. Is there a way to
do that? I think I can recompile it, but I'm afraid of what that'll do to
the current directory structure.
Thank you,
Robert
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 01:06:59PM -0500, Robert wrote:
> Is there a way to rename my qmail server without damaging the current file
> structure? This is an excert from my maillog file:
>
> Oct 6 03:16:00 mail qmail: 939197760.820006 new msg 310277
>
> I'd like to change the name of that server if possible. Is there a way to
> do that? I think I can recompile it, but I'm afraid of what that'll do to
> the current directory structure.
"mail" is not the name of the "qmail server" and has nothing to do with
"compiling". This is the name of the host/computer.
See your systems manual on how to set the hostname of your system,
change, adjust your system configuration files, qmail/control/* files
restart qmail and you're done.
\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 |
Hello again.. I have a second question now. Is there a way to increase the
maximum number of hops a message can take before qmail gives up?
Thanks
Robert writes:
> Hello again.. I have a second question now. Is there a way to increase the
> maximum number of hops a message can take before qmail gives up?
qmail doesn't count hops. What problem are you trying to solve?
--
-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:
> Robert writes:
> > Hello again.. I have a second question now. Is there a way to increase the
> > maximum number of hops a message can take before qmail gives up?
>
> qmail doesn't count hops. What problem are you trying to solve?
I would be led to believe by the man page that qmail-smtpd does:
NAME
qmail-smtpd - receive mail via SMTP
SYNOPSIS
qmail-smtpd
DESCRIPTION
qmail-smtpd receives mail messages via the Simple Mail
Transfer Protocol (SMTP) and invokes qmail-queue to
deposit them into the outgoing queue. qmail-smtpd must be
supplied several environment variables; see tcp-envi-
ron(5).
qmail-smtpd is responsible for counting hops. It rejects
any message with 100 or more Received or Delivered-To
header fields.
Maybe this is what he is referring to. Maybe he wants to increase
the number 100 to some higher value. Looking in qmail-smtpd.c I see:
#define MAXHOPS 100
Which suggests to me a place to apply the hack.
Now if he was referring to multiple local delivery attempts, then no,
there is no counting going on.
--
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:
> Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> > Robert writes:
> > > Hello again.. I have a second question now. Is there a way to increase the
> > > maximum number of hops a message can take before qmail gives up?
> >
> > qmail doesn't count hops. What problem are you trying to solve?
>
> qmail-smtpd is responsible for counting hops. It rejects
> any message with 100 or more Received or Delivered-To
> header fields.
Oh, well, LSNED. Still, no reasonable email system actually generates
100 Received or Delivered-to header fields. The problem must lie elsewhere.
--
-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:
> > Russell Nelson wrote:
> >
> > > Robert writes:
> > > > Hello again.. I have a second question now. Is there a way to increase the
> > > > maximum number of hops a message can take before qmail gives up?
> > >
> > > qmail doesn't count hops. What problem are you trying to solve?
> >
> > qmail-smtpd is responsible for counting hops. It rejects
> > any message with 100 or more Received or Delivered-To
> > header fields.
>
> Oh, well, LSNED. Still, no reasonable email system actually generates
> 100 Received or Delivered-to header fields. The problem must lie elsewhere.
Indeed. Once I get my little system going to collect and apply hacks to
qmail, I'll probably go ahead and hack the hop count limit DOWN to 16 or
so. If it has that many hops I don't want 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]
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 03:43:03PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Indeed. Once I get my little system going to collect and apply hacks to
> qmail, I'll probably go ahead and hack the hop count limit DOWN to 16 or
> so. If it has that many hops I don't want it.
16 Received lines are reached rather fast:
Some user deep in the mail hierarchy of a company network sends email to
a mailing list that delivers to another user also deep in the mail
hierarchy of an other company network that bounces the mail to some
user on your system. Not so uncommon, IMHO.
And: qmail e.g. adds usually two Received: lines to each message:
Received: (qmail 98445 invoked from network); 6 Oct 1999 20:57:27 -0000
Received: from mail.space.net (195.30.0.8)
by popmail.space.net with SMTP; 6 Oct 1999 20:57:27 -0000
\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 |
Markus Stumpf wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 03:43:03PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Indeed. Once I get my little system going to collect and apply hacks to
> > qmail, I'll probably go ahead and hack the hop count limit DOWN to 16 or
> > so. If it has that many hops I don't want it.
>
> 16 Received lines are reached rather fast:
> Some user deep in the mail hierarchy of a company network sends email to
> a mailing list that delivers to another user also deep in the mail
> hierarchy of an other company network that bounces the mail to some
> user on your system. Not so uncommon, IMHO.
>
> And: qmail e.g. adds usually two Received: lines to each message:
>
> Received: (qmail 98445 invoked from network); 6 Oct 1999 20:57:27 -0000
> Received: from mail.space.net (195.30.0.8)
> by popmail.space.net with SMTP; 6 Oct 1999 20:57:27 -0000
Well, OK, 20 it is.
What specific number would you recommend, without trying to go beyond the
imginable cases?
--
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]
phil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, OK, 20 it is.
> What specific number would you recommend, without trying to go beyond the
> imginable cases?
I've had reasonably good luck with 30.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Anyone know whats the upper limit in emails per hour that qmail can do?
I need to spec out a system and I need some numbers for high perf qmail
serves
Nagendra
That question has no answer. qmail's performance is ENTIRELY dependent on
system configuration. It can be safely said that qmail CAN be one of the
fastest MTA's out there.
At 02:52 PM 10/6/99 , you wrote:
>
>
>Anyone know whats the upper limit in emails per hour that qmail can do?
>
>I need to spec out a system and I need some numbers for high perf qmail
>serves
>
>Nagendra
______________________
NovaMetrix Development
Robbie Walker, AMWL
P.O. Box 635 or 910-653-4006
106-B S. Main St 800-773-5647
Tabor City, NC 28463 910-653-2052 FAX
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Sorry about all the list clutter, I just seem to be having a bad day ;-)
The company I'm with uses Webtrends professional suite for our website
reporting. Webtrends is supposed to send an email responce containing a
website report.
The software generates my report fine, connects to the qmail server, and says
it's successfully sent the message, but guess what? No Email. Email just never
shows up. I can send an email though the same server via netscape without
any delay or problem whatsoever.
I'm thinking this might actually be the CR-LF/Bare LF problem, but I'm not sure
seeing as there is no way to actually see what the mail server replies with via
WebTrends.
I'm positive it isn't a problem with tcpserver, as the webtrends software, and
NS Communicator are running on the same box, one works one doesn't.
Any insight would be appreciated,
Thanks,
Jeff
--
Jeff McNeil
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key: http://cthulhu.interland.net/~jeff/public.pgp
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5
iQA/AwUBN/ufrwmkWankFCt3EQIB6gCfbh9p1+halkCBkUqRuwxHnWpz3RYAnihO
h5VRh6uTMIH6MwFHyfqWsNPG
=HC+u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:08:02 -0400, Jeff McNeil wrote:
>The software generates my report fine, connects to the qmail server, and says
>it's successfully sent the message, but guess what? No Email. Email just never
>shows up. I can send an email though the same server via netscape without
>any delay or problem whatsoever.
2 possibilities:
1. Webtrends professional suite is lying and did not in fact
successfully send a message.
2. The message is not delivered to the intended recipients on your
system due to misconfiguration, wrong address, ...
The answer is in the mail log of your qmail system. If there is no
entry for the message, the answer is (1). Otherwise (2). If (1), which
I suspect, the "Webtrends professional suite" is defective at at least
2 points, and yes, one of them may be the bare-LF problem. See
http://www.qmail.org for info on that.
-Sincerely, Fred
(Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
Jeff McNeil wrote:
>
I had a CR/LF problem with a JavaMail implementation. I used
recordio to track down the problem. I first noticed the problem in
the logs, whem smtpd would exit with a status of 256. The remote
unit would think the mail was delivered because smtpd said OK when
quit was given, but the exit code indicates that something failed.
It wasn't until I recorded the whole session and saw the note about
cr/lf that I figured out what the problem was. Shouldn't smtpd
give an error back to the remote unit if it does not intend to
deliver the mail? All the 'bad' mails ended up in /dev/null -
fully delivered from the remote side, completely lost by qmail.
-Tom
>
> Sorry about all the list clutter, I just seem to be having a bad day ;-)
>
> The company I'm with uses Webtrends professional suite for our website
> reporting. Webtrends is supposed to send an email responce containing a
> website report.
>
> The software generates my report fine, connects to the qmail server, and says
> it's successfully sent the message, but guess what? No Email. Email just never
> shows up. I can send an email though the same server via netscape without
> any delay or problem whatsoever.
>
> I'm thinking this might actually be the CR-LF/Bare LF problem, but I'm not sure
> seeing as there is no way to actually see what the mail server replies with via
> WebTrends.
>
> I'm positive it isn't a problem with tcpserver, as the webtrends software, and
> NS Communicator are running on the same box, one works one doesn't.
>
> Any insight would be appreciated,
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ 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 +
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 03:51:19PM -0400,
"Thomas M. Sasala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeff McNeil wrote:
> >
>
> I had a CR/LF problem with a JavaMail implementation. I used
> recordio to track down the problem. I first noticed the problem in
> the logs, whem smtpd would exit with a status of 256. The remote
> unit would think the mail was delivered because smtpd said OK when
> quit was given, but the exit code indicates that something failed.
> It wasn't until I recorded the whole session and saw the note about
> cr/lf that I figured out what the problem was. Shouldn't smtpd
> give an error back to the remote unit if it does not intend to
> deliver the mail? All the 'bad' mails ended up in /dev/null -
> fully delivered from the remote side, completely lost by qmail.
You shouldn't be checking the status of the quit command. That is going
to succeed. You should be checking the status of the data command.
I wasn't checking the status of quit. As it turns out,
the transport implementation did not check the status of any of
command. It merely stuffed the whole message into the smtp
server and closed the connection. It never waited for a response
from the server. If the transport code hadn't been open source,
I would of never found the problem. Bad code is bad code - can't
help that.
In any case, why does smtpd return 256 and throw away the
mail? I have records of a good transaction (all commands get a +OK)
yet smtpd exits with 256 and the mail is eternally lost.
-Tom
> > I had a CR/LF problem with a JavaMail implementation. I used
> > recordio to track down the problem. I first noticed the problem in
> > the logs, whem smtpd would exit with a status of 256. The remote
> > unit would think the mail was delivered because smtpd said OK when
> > quit was given, but the exit code indicates that something failed.
> > It wasn't until I recorded the whole session and saw the note about
> > cr/lf that I figured out what the problem was. Shouldn't smtpd
> > give an error back to the remote unit if it does not intend to
> > deliver the mail? All the 'bad' mails ended up in /dev/null -
> > fully delivered from the remote side, completely lost by qmail.
>
> You shouldn't be checking the status of the quit command. That is going
> to succeed. You should be checking the status of the data command.
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ 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 +
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 04:48:21PM -0400, Thomas M. Sasala wrote:
> In any case, why does smtpd return 256 and throw away the
> mail? I have records of a good transaction (all commands get a +OK)
> yet smtpd exits with 256 and the mail is eternally lost.
What do you mean with "smtpd exits with 256".
If you mean the termination code of the smtpd process that is more or
less irrelevant, as that isn't seen by the remote system and you cannot
rely on that code. Why do you think you can? I cannot find any mention
of its significance in "man qmail-smtpd".
If I recall right, Dan posted some weeks ago on this list, he didn't
think people would rely on the exit code, but he will use informative
exit codes in the next release.
As with disappering messages:
smtpd simply accepts the email and hands it on to other processes (qmail-queue).
You probably have some misconfguration which makes the message go to
nowhere without notice.
\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 |
+ Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| As with disappering messages:
| smtpd simply accepts the email and hands it on to other processes
| (qmail-queue).
That statement may be a bit misleading. The cronology is the other
way around: qmail-smtpd hands the message to qmail-queue, and does not
give the final OK until qmail-queue has exited with a zero status
code. Any SMTP client that doesn't wait for that final OK is broken.
- Harald
I've just set up a web based mail forwarding for users. My question is, how do I
guard
agianst idiots setting up a forwarding loop? eg [EMAIL PROTECTED] forwards to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
which forwrds to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
--
Marek Narkiewicz, Webmaster Intercreations
Reply to <-marek @ intercreations . com->
"Ticking away, the moments that make up a dull day"
Pink Floyd
Time
On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:38:40 -0500, Ben Beuchler wrote:
>Can't you check for it in the CGI scripts? What are you using to store user
>information? I'm in the process of doing something similar, and I plan to
>store all user info in a MySQL database so I can check for just such
>problems.
>
>Although, I have to admit I hadn't thought of THAT particular problem.
>Thanks!
>
>Ben
>
>
>----------
>
>The phrasing, style, and content of this message are the sole property of
>Ben Beuchler, Inc. and may not be reproduced in any way, shape or form
>without the written consent Ben Beuchler Enterprises. All rights reserved.
>Void where prohibited by law. Do not remove under penalty of law. Do not
>spindle or fold. Not valid in Alaska, Hawaii, or Puerto Rico.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Marek Narkiewicz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 2:54 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Forwarding
>>
>>
>> I've just set up a web based mail forwarding for users. My
>> question is, how do I guard
>> agianst idiots setting up a forwarding loop? eg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> forwards to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> which forwrds to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Yeh I am doing the same using mysql to store user info etc but I was wondering if
qmail had any built in way to stop mail loops. THe same problem arrises with
autoresponder loops.
--
Marek Narkiewicz, Webmaster Intercreations
Reply to <-marek @ intercreations . com->
"Dogs are everywhere"
Pulp
Dogs are Everywhere
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 08:53:57PM +0100, Marek Narkiewicz wrote:
> I've just set up a web based mail forwarding for users. My question is, how do I
>guard
> agianst idiots setting up a forwarding loop? eg [EMAIL PROTECTED] forwards to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> which forwrds to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
You can't.
Same as you can't for users that can create their own .qmail files.
However qmail will reject messages as soon as it would add an identical
Delivered-To: line.
For your local system you could create a database with all known local
addresses and whether they deliver to mailboxes and/or forwards and then
construct a transitive graph (is this the name in english?) and deny
forwards if it would result in a loop.
[
if you have deliveries
a -> b
b -> c
c -> d
the graph would know that
a -> c
a -> d
b -> d
This is known to me as "Warshall algorithm", the compexity is n**3
where n is the number of addresses. This is, however, overhead for
your problem so it is easier to follow the nodes linear, node by node.
]
However that does not prevent loops with remote users that you don't
know about, so it's probably better to rely on qmail (and the users
complaining that they don't receive emails any longer ;-).
\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 |
On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 09:34:51PM +0100, Marek Narkiewicz wrote:
> Yeh I am doing the same using mysql to store user info etc but I was wondering if
> qmail had any built in way to stop mail loops.
As I said before, qmail has such a feature.
> THe same problem arrises with
> autoresponder loops.
Autoresponder loops are best broken by not replying to users that you
have sent the autoresponder message to, for some time (14 days?).
The "vacation" program that can found on the qmail website has this feature.
\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 |
Markus Stumpf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 08:53:57PM +0100, Marek Narkiewicz wrote:
: > I've just set up a web based mail forwarding for users. My question is, how do I
:guard
: > agianst idiots setting up a forwarding loop? eg [EMAIL PROTECTED] forwards to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: > which forwrds to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
: You can't.
But you can use the same strategy that ezmlm uses, more or less.
Allow any address to be forwarded to. If it loops, remove that
address and inform the user. Sometimes I have wished for an
"aliasprepend" parameter that always gets executed. This is one use
for it.
-harold
Our sysadmin installed a bunch of patches on our Solaris machines
today - basically, he just got a cluster of recommended patches and
installed them all.
Now, one or more of these patches "upgraded" /usr/lib/sendmail (was a
symlink to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail, became a "real" sendmail). But
not only that; the patch most helpfully installed the file
/etc/rc2.d/S88sendmail for us. Came time to reboot the machine, and
lo and behold, we now had a running sendmail daemon, which started
rejecting all kinds of incoming mail. (It got to the smtp port before
tcpserver+qmail-smtpd did.)
Argh...
- Harald
Hello:
I am running qmailanalog0.70.
It dies with the error
bin/matchup </tmp/q > qoo
matchup: fatal: unable to write fd 5: file descriptor not open
It dies at the same size everytime
rw-r--r-- 1 root other 36934041 Oct 6 16:13 qoo
I know I have enough space on the system and everything else appears to
be fine.
Any ideas
Burzin
B. Engineer writes:
> Hello:
> I am running qmailanalog0.70.
> Any ideas
Yup. Read the documentation for matchup.
--
-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 Wed, 6 Oct 1999, Russell Nelson wrote:
> B. Engineer writes:
> > Hello:
> > I am running qmailanalog0.70.
> > Any ideas
> Yup. Read the documentation for matchup.
Sorry!
I did read the doc/MATCHUP carefully but it looks like I should have read
the man page. It talks about opening descriptor 5.
Thanks!
We're currently using Qmail to host approximately 50 mailboxes for a
single domain. The accounts have been created as system accounts on a
Red Hat 6.0 machine. We're currently trying to find solutions to a
couple problems:
1) Something that will allow an administrator to quickly create a
forward file for a specific user. For the most part, the email accounts
are assigned to customer service personnel. If they're sick for a day,
we need a way to painlessly and transparently forward their mail to
another representative. While we currently do this by connecting to the
machine and hand-creating an appropriate line in ~/.qmail, it's not an
optimal solution as the other administrator is not familiar with Unix.
We'd also like to be able to delegate the responsibility for creating
these forwards to the department head to relieve the IS department of a
bit of work.
2) A utility that will silently migrate user passwords from /etc/shadow
to another (more easily dealt with) storage scheme. We currently
utilize MD5 hashing in the file. Right now, we're using checkpassword
to authenticate POP3 retrievals and chpasswd.cgi to allow web-based
password changes. Apart from boldly breaking email retrieval in moving
to other methods, I'm not sure how to approach this. Ideally, I'd like
to be able to move to something that allows easy mail management via web
interfaces (much easier for my coworker to deal with). That would
include addition and removal of users, the above mentioned forwarding
and other items.
I've looked at qmailadmin, but it seems to require the use of virtual
domains and user setup outside of system files. I'd love to move to
POP3 service that doesn't require system accounts, but I think I've
backed myself into a corner using system accounts (and not making note
of passwords). Any hints in making changes that are invisble to users
would be greatly appreciated.
Any ideas from other readers?
--
Steve Philp
Network Administrator
Advance Packaging Corporation
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Would there be any reason not to use supervise for qmail-start?
I notice that much documentation (I'm still working on merging
the various sources of documentation and resolving apparent
conflicts) shows starting qmail-smtpd with supervise and tcpserver
but just starts qmail-start by itself.
What I want is a clean way to shut qmail down, either smtp side
(because I don't want anything coming in on the network) or the
local side (because I might be messing with delivery targets) or
both (because I'm shutting the whole system down).
--
Phil Howard KA9WGN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am having a problem with supervise and tcpserver with the qmail-smtpd and
qmail-popup modules.
I start supervise like so:
> /usr/local/bin/supervise /var/supervise/qmail/qmail-smtpd &
and /var/supervise/qmail/qmail-smtpd/run contains:
> #!/bin/sh
>
> QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
> NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
>
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver \
> -x/etc/tcprules.d/qmail-smtpd.cdb \
> -u$QMAILDUID -g$NOFILESGID \
> 0 smtp \
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
Everything starts fine, but trying to kill it with:
> # svc -dx /var/supervise/qmail/qmail-smtpd
doesn't kill the tcpserver process, but supervise does die. Why?
Thanks in advance,
Robert S. Wojciechowski Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP: 0xF2CA68F2 - http://www.wojo.com/pgpkeys/robertw.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Oct 99, at 15:29, deden purnamahadi wrote:
> I am still confused on what is wrong my my system.
> I hope you could help me .
>
> A user of mine send this error message (which he got from his friend
> trying to send him an e-mail):
>
> note : gemini is a DNS server and also the 3rd mail server running
> sendmail. the 1st and 2nd mail server run qmail.
>
> -------
>
>
> The original message was received at Thu, 7 Oct 1999 11:36:29 +0700 (JAVT)
> from mdn-liv01-01.idola.net.id [202.152.10.33]
>
> ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ----- Transcript of session follows -----
> ... while talking to gemini.uninet.net.id.:
> >>>RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <<< 571 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... we do not relay
> 554 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Service unavailable
> Reporting-MTA: dns; mailserver.idola.net.id
This is the problem. The sendmail machine at gemini thinks it
should not relay mails to uninet.net.id. Fix that one, or remove it's
MX entry for the domain. (Hell, who needs four MX entries
anyway?) It's not qmail-related at all; it's sendmail-related. Go to
www.sendmail.org to learn how to fix sendmail.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBN/xweFMwP8g7qbw/EQI6bwCgsPn1PO1mDdCM/CowZ0Z11IMk+hYAoIii
KI4JDeErPh8PeWvXXyFbGfVp
=AG26
-----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]
|
Hello,
I have a problem with the qmail-smtp daemon because is very
slow to receive mail from a host in the network, and the mail client always
display a message to tell me: "the smtp server do not respond, wait another
60 seconds". I don't now how can I solve this problem and improve the
response of the server.
Note: Qmail is install in a Pentium 100 Linux machine and the
email client is Outlook Express
Tia,
Jorge Mota
Sociedade Torreense de Informática,
Lda.
Av. Tenente Valadim 10 C
2560 Torres Vedras
Tel:351 61 316245
Fax:351 61 316239
|
