qmail Digest 14 Nov 1999 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 819
Topics (messages 32919 through 33006):
Message is looping .. why ?
32919 by: Puck
32930 by: Markus Stumpf
Re: Benchmark of Qmail SMTPD
32920 by: Stuart Harris
32921 by: Curtis Generous
32925 by: Russell Nelson
32944 by: Dave Sill
32947 by: David Dyer-Bennet
32993 by: Russ Allbery
Re: Maildrop samples
32922 by: Keith Burdis
32968 by: Jay Swackhamer
32991 by: Sam
Re: Stop Delivery of Incoming Mail Temporarily
32923 by: Russell Nelson
Re: pop3 How To
32924 by: Keith Burdis
32926 by: Benjamin de los Angeles Jr.
Re: Mail abuse in syslog
32927 by: Subba Rao
32929 by: Markus Stumpf
32932 by: Subba Rao
32951 by: Mark Evans
32952 by: Russell Nelson
32956 by: David Dyer-Bennet
32992 by: Andy Bradford
Re: Ricardo Cerqueira and qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch
32928 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
32934 by: Andres Mendez
32935 by: Peter Green
Qmail log message
32931 by: Subba Rao
Re: Large message killing system
32933 by: Matthew Callaway
32940 by: Dave Sill
qmail on Linux
32936 by: Joe Millay
32937 by: Thorkild Stray
32938 by: Peter Green
32939 by: Simon Rae
32941 by: Dave Sill
32942 by: Brian Estes
32943 by: Chris Garrigues
32969 by: Kevin Waterson
Re: vpopmail installation error
32945 by: Mark Evans
Re: Queuing question...
32946 by: Mark Evans
qmailanalog question
32948 by: jkk.techno-link.com
32967 by: Dave Sill
Re: RBL
32949 by: David Dyer-Bennet
32960 by: Noah Sutherland
log rotation
32950 by: Brian Estes
32953 by: waskita adijarto
32954 by: farber.admin.f-tech.net
32958 by: Russell Nelson
32985 by: Phil Howard
32986 by: Steve Kapinos
32987 by: Phil Howard
32994 by: waskita adijarto
thank you
32955 by: Nicole & Ron McIntosh
deliverable message header parsing
32957 by: Derek Callaway
32959 by: Markus Stumpf
32962 by: Derek Callaway
32970 by: Fred Lindberg
[Slightly OT] OSS & Best Practices
32961 by: Jeff Taylor
Re: delivery to a directory
32963 by: Phil Howard
Re: qmail tuning question
32964 by: Dave Sill
Re: Newbie (if u could not tell)
32965 by: Dave Sill
Re: logging confusion..
32966 by: Dave Sill
big todo patch
32971 by: Racer X
Sorting incoming mail.
32972 by: Tristan Hannover
32975 by: Sam
32990 by: Mark Weinem
Re: problems with multiple instances of qmail.
32973 by: Dongping Deng
32978 by: B. Engineer
32982 by: D. J. Bernstein
virtual domains without % in poplogin
32974 by: Marco Leeflang
32976 by: Peter Green
33000 by: Bruce Guenter
configure number of file descriptors and processes for each user on linux
32977 by: Dongping Deng
32981 by: Andy Bradford
rewriting headers for all outgoing messages
32979 by: Enrico Schiattarella
"Life with qmail" updated for daemontools 0.61
32980 by: Dave Sill
RTFM (was: Re: Mail abuse in syslog)
32983 by: Rogerio Brito
tcpserver starting problem
32984 by: john
33005 by: Chris Johnson
vchkpw messes up existing users
32988 by: Barry Smoke
Starting Qmail - with ls -al | more shows this ?
32989 by: john
Maildrop + fetchmail
32995 by: Subba Rao
Will qmail work with a dynamic ip address?
32996 by: Gregory Adams
RCPT aggregation
32997 by: Florent Guillaume
33001 by: Bruce Guenter
Qmail(SMTP) + Radius
32998 by: mail.shashee.wlink.com.np
Re: qmail remote delivery logic
32999 by: Bruce Guenter
33006 by: Fred Lindberg
Mail Server without password entry
33002 by: Shashi Dahal
33003 by: Shashi Dahal
550 cannot route to sender
33004 by: qmail.col7.metta.lk
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 there,
i have the following domains in control/virtualdomains :
4ofborg.net
just-kidding.de
n-online.net
in ~justkidding/.qmail-bs-klasse i have :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Everytime i send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] i get :
Message-ID: <md5:CD1D725D7232578BDB05104331CC14B9>
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 14114 invoked by uid 512); 8 Nov 1999 15:05:55 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 14111 invoked for bounce); 8 Nov 1999 15:05:55 -0000
Date: 8 Nov 1999 15:05:55 -0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mohawk.n-online.net.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
This message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line. (#5.4.6)
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
What's wrong ?
Thanx,
Thomas
On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 11:59:31AM +0100, Puck wrote:
> Everytime i send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] i get :
>
> Message-ID: <md5:CD1D725D7232578BDB05104331CC14B9>
> Return-Path: <>
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: (qmail 14114 invoked by uid 512); 8 Nov 1999 15:05:55 -0000
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: (qmail 14111 invoked for bounce); 8 Nov 1999 15:05:55 -0000
> Date: 8 Nov 1999 15:05:55 -0000
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: failure notice
> X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
>
> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mohawk.n-online.net.
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line. (#5.4.6)
>
> --- Below this line is a copy of the message.
And here would be the interesting part: the headers of the original
message. Take a look at the "Delivered-To: lines. These show the way
the deliveries went.
\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 |
> "qmail is a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer agent. It
> is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail system on typical
> Internet-connected UNIX hosts", yeah,yeah....but in my feeling, it is not
> so fast at all.(I have use qmail for nearly 1 year!)
>
> And following is the data of my test:
>
> Server MTA OS Time spend(1000 letters)
> Server Hardware Server status
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
> ----------------------
> 202.96.237.177 Qmail1.03 FreeBSD3.3 314 seconds K62
> 350,64MRam 4G IDE little load
> 202.96.210.242 Sendmail8.10 FreeBSD3.2 202 seconds
> PII450*2,1GRam 36G SCSI little load
> 202.101.18.155 Qmail1.03 FreeBSD3.2 555 seconds
> PII450*2,512MRam,36G SCSI heavy load
> 202.101.18.157 Qmail1.03 FreeBSD3.2 404 seconds
> PII450*2,512MRam,36G SCSI No any load
>
> (Average value of 3 tests.)
>
>
Yes but your tests are not accurate as you have used different computers
with different loads. also what is the net connection (if you sent mails
over the net..) if you look at the first test would quite probably
outperform sendmail if it had the same memory/cpu/disk speed, as it managed
todo it taking only 112 seconds longer with a _MUCH_ slower processor and a
_LOT_ less Ram. and IDE Disks.. if you want to send test results and say
'its not so fast at all' try running the tests (both sendmail & qmail on the
same machine, obv at different times ;p) and posting those.. I'd be
intersted to see them..
+--- -----+
| Stuart Harris - UNIX Systems Administrator ------------- |
| REDNET Networking & Internet Ltd ----------------------- |
| (t) + 44 (0)1494 751882 (e) stuart(@)red.net ----------- |
| (p) 19E4 12AD 8CD4 BA62 6FA3 9524 7595 0361 B933 E1F8 - |
+--- -----+
According to Hotdog:
>
> "qmail is a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer
> agent. It is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail
> system on typical Internet-connected UNIX hosts", yeah,yeah....but in
> my feeling, it is not so fast at all.(I have use qmail for nearly 1
> year!)
>
>
> And following is the data of my test:
>
> Server MTA OS Time spend(1000 letters) Server
>Hardware Server status
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 202.96.237.177 Qmail1.03 FreeBSD3.3 314 seconds K62 350,64MRam
>4G IDE little load
> 202.96.210.242 Sendmail8.10 FreeBSD3.2 202 seconds PII450*2,1GRam
>36G SCSI little load
> 202.101.18.155 Qmail1.03 FreeBSD3.2 555 seconds
>PII450*2,512MRam,36G SCSI heavy load
> 202.101.18.157 Qmail1.03 FreeBSD3.2 404 seconds
>PII450*2,512MRam,36G SCSI No any load
>
> (Average value of 3 tests.)
>
> All letters was sent to MTA by port 25,and to a local address.
>
> The data show:
> 1. Qmail is more slow than sendmail;
> 2. Qmail can run more fast in some worm-eaten computer. (Impossible? but it is
>really!)
>
> WHY ? WHY ?
We did some similar benchmarks on Qmail 1.03 (with and without LDAP,
with and without MAILDIR) and Sendmail 8.x (with mail.local) a few
weeks ago, all running on similarly configured SPARC Ultra 2's (2 x 300MHZ /
512MB / dual SCSI).
We used the postfix smtp-source.c and the Netscape MailBench tools to
measure, record, and plot the performance.
We too saw the same slower 'drain' rates on the inbound SMTP message traffic
associated with QMAIL. However some observations from our test:
0) QMAIL and SENDMAIL performed equally well at small msgs rates.
1) SENDMAIL was much faster at delivering mail into a users mailbox at moderate
msgs rate (2 x 4 times).
2) At high msg rates (msg/sec), the load on the SENDMAIL machine was very
high (load average routinely at above 90+). This of course put the
machine to it's knees. It stopped accepting inbound traffic. We had
the load control features on sendmail disabled (QueueLA and RefuseLA
options and Sendmail was configured to do synchronous delivery).
3) We never were able to get QMAIL-SMTPD to stop accepting inbound SMTP traffic.
Because of the asynchronous nature of the local delivery with QMAIL,
it did take much longer for QMAIL to finish delivering all of the
messages (at high msg rates) to the local user, but the load on the
machine never got high enough to cause any problems (peaked at 16 on
one occasion).
IMHO, QMAIL behaved more appropriately in environments where inbound
traffic loads cannot be anticipated (e.g. ISPs around 7:00pm local time
:-), QMAIL just kept accepting email.
--curtis
Hotdog writes:
> "qmail is a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer
> agent. It is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail
> system on typical Internet-connected UNIX hosts", yeah,yeah....but
> in my feeling, it is not so fast at all.(I have use qmail for
> nearly 1 year!)
>
> The data show:
> 1. Qmail is more slow than sendmail;
> 2. Qmail can run more fast in some worm-eaten computer. (Impossible? but it is
>really!)
>
> WHY ? WHY ?
Because sendmail is playing "fast and loose" with your email. Because
it runs as one monolithic program, it delivers straight to a user's
mailbox from the incoming SMTP stream. This is also why sendmail has
had so many security lapses, and is not likely to ever be as secure as
qmail. It's design is not trustworthy.
--
-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!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>"qmail is a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer
>agent. It is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail
>system on typical Internet-connected UNIX hosts", yeah,yeah....but in
>my feeling, it is not so fast at all.(I have use qmail for nearly 1
>year!)
>
>And following is the data of my test:
>
>[results deleted]
>
>All letters was sent to MTA by port 25,and to a local address.
Your test demonstrated that sendmail delivered a flood of messages to
a single local user faster than qmail. Big deal. Either MTA will
deliver messages to a user faster than they can read them, so who
cares? :-)
As Russ pointed out, sendmail might have been faster at this task, but
qmail was more reliable and secure. Reliability and security don't
come without cost. Did you verify that both MTA's actually delivered
all of the messages you sent?
Also, your test is highly dependent upon the local delivery mechanism,
and you gave no details about that whatsoever. Sendmail doesn't do
local delivery at all: it hands messages off to /bin/mail or procmail
or some other Message Delivery Agent (MDA). What did the sendmail in
your test use? qmail can do local delivery itself to either an mbox or
maildir mailbox, or it can use an external MDA like /bin/mail or
procmail. To be fair, your test should have used the same MDA sendmail
used. Did it?
Benchmarking is *very* hard to get right. I suggest you leave it to
experts until you know how to do it properly.
-Dave
Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 12 November 1999 at 10:02:55 -0500
> Benchmarking is *very* hard to get right. I suggest you leave it to
> experts until you know how to do it properly.
While I agree with the first sentence, I can't agree with the second.
Trying to do benchmarking is *very* educational. I do understand the
frustration of seeing incorrect benchmarks about something we care
about published.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Join the 20th century before it's too late! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ (photos) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b (sf) http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ Ouroboros Bookworms
Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Because sendmail is playing "fast and loose" with your email. Because
> it runs as one monolithic program, it delivers straight to a user's
> mailbox from the incoming SMTP stream.
I'm fairly sure that this hasn't been true by default for quite some time.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
On Thu 1999-11-11 (22:10), Subba Rao wrote:
>
> I know this question has been asked quite a few
> times on this list. Currently, I am using "deliver-maildir"
> MDA to get my email. I have installed "Maildrop", since
> for "Procmail" there is a lot of work around. I am not
> able to find any good sample Maildrop filters, from which
> I can learn.
There are some examples in the maildropex(5) man page.
- Keith
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa
IRC: Panthras JAPH QEFH
---
From: Keith Burdis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> There are some examples in the maildropex(5) man page.
There are dozens more examples in the qmail-uce anti-spam package on
Mr.Sam's page.
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/5799/qmail-uce.html
--
Jay Swackhamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
WCi system/network administrator
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Jay Swackhamer wrote:
> From: Keith Burdis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > There are some examples in the maildropex(5) man page.
>
> There are dozens more examples in the qmail-uce anti-spam package on
> Mr.Sam's page.
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/5799/qmail-uce.html
This sounds like a good time for me to mention that I'm not going to
maintain this code for much longer. If anyone wants to pick up the ball,
feel free to do so.
The simple reason is that I'm in the process of migrating away from Qmail,
so at some point around Y2K I will no longer need to use that code myself.
I should clarify that this is in regards to Qmail and the qmail-uce patch
only. I'm still actively using, maintaining, and developing maildrop.
Carl Perry writes:
> I'm having a problem with my NIS server dying now and then and all my
> user's are complaining of lost mail. qMail returns a "no mailbox here
> by that name" message.
Use users/assign (man qmail-users). It doesn't rely on stat'ing the
user's home directory. It'll try to switch to the homedir, it won't
exist, and the mail will be deferred as you desire.
--
-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 Fri 1999-11-12 (12:32), john wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there anyone who can clearly specify how to start pop3 and smtp
> services ?
>
> Does anyone have a clear document.
I'd suggest taking a look at Dave Sill's "Life With Qmail", specifically
sections "2.8. Start qmail" and "5.2. POP and IMAP servers".
You can find it at:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html
- Keith
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa
IRC: Panthras JAPH QEFH
---
The scripts are now in
http://members.surfshop.net.ph/~bench/qmail/
On Thu, 11 Nov 1999, Doug Lumpkin wrote:
> Please do post...
>
> --
> Doug Lumpkin
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Benjamin de los Angeles Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: john <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 8:43 PM
> Subject: Re: pop3 How To
>
>
> >
> > Install daemontools-0.61 and qmail's pop3d.
> > I have a modified qmail and pop3d init scripts derived from Dan Sill's
> > example which works with ucspi-tcp-0.84 and daemontools-0.61.
> > Message me if you want the scripts, and I will be post it on my
> > homepage.
> >
>
>
On 0, Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 10:53:45PM -0500, Subba Rao wrote:
> > Nov 11 22:43:51 starsys qmail: 942378231.489619 delivery 34: deferral:
>Connected_to_189.9.90.12_but_greeting_failed./Remote_host_said:_553-See_<URL:http://mail-abuse.org/dul/>/553-If_you_feel_we_mistreat_you,_do_contact_us./553_Ask_HELP_for_our_contact_information./
> >
> > Why am I getting this message? All the outbound/inbound mail is transfering fine.
>
> DUL (as you can read if you follow the above URL) is Dial-Up User List. It's
> an RBL type service that hold lists of dial-in IP adresses.
> Mailers participating in this initiative do not accept eMails from these
> IP addresses as they are typically used by SPAMmers.
> The IP address your mailer used/uses is in this list.
> This only affects outbound messages and only to mail servers using the
> DUL list.
>
> \Maex
How can my Qmail server relay to my ISP's mail server to avoid this
problem? I tried to set the environment variable like MAILHOST and MAILUSER
to point to my ISP account. It still doesn't work.
Subba Rao
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/
On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 07:56:14AM -0500, Subba Rao wrote:
> How can my Qmail server relay to my ISP's mail server to avoid this
> problem? I tried to set the environment variable like MAILHOST and MAILUSER
> to point to my ISP account. It still doesn't work.
create a file control/smtproutes containing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
:mail.your.isp
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This will route eMail for all hosts/domains not listed in
control/locals
control/virtualdomains
to host
mail.your.isp
\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 0, Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 07:56:14AM -0500, Subba Rao wrote:
> > How can my Qmail server relay to my ISP's mail server to avoid this
> > problem? I tried to set the environment variable like MAILHOST and MAILUSER
> > to point to my ISP account. It still doesn't work.
>
> create a file control/smtproutes containing
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> :mail.your.isp
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This will route eMail for all hosts/domains not listed in
> control/locals
> control/virtualdomains
> to host
> mail.your.isp
>
> \Maex
>
Thank you for replying. I did this what you suggested. Deos the mail
that is in the qmail use the smtproutes, to get delivered? The initial
mail, I sent out is still in the mailq. How do I flush it out?
Subba Rao
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I saw this in my syslog file.
>
> Nov 11 22:43:51 starsys qmail: 942378231.489619 delivery 34: deferral:
>Connected_to_189.9.90.12_but_greeting_failed./Remote_host_said:_553-See_<URL:http://mail-abuse.org/dul/>/553-If_you_feel_we_mistreat_you,_do_contact_us./553_Ask_HELP_for_our_contact_information./
Someone at mail-abuse.org came up with the idea of creating a list to enable
ISP's to "blacklist" their pools of dialups.
Apparently they assumed that the "stuff it all to a smarthost" is the correct
way to do SMTP email. Possibly because it's the only thing the likes of
Netscape and IE can handle. Even though this approach isn't, AFAIK, even
mentioned, let alone advised in any RFC.
The actual RFC complient way is to do an MX DNS lookup and attempt to
connect in the order of the preference field. Which the DUL will quite
happily break.
IIRC somewhere in the docs there are instructions on how to hack qmail
to send through a specific relay machine. Alternativly complain to your
ISP or change ISP's.
--
Mark Evans
St. Peter's CofE High School
Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109
Fax: +44 1392 204763
Mark Evans writes:
> > Nov 11 22:43:51 starsys qmail: 942378231.489619 delivery 34: deferral:
>Connected_to_189.9.90.12_but_greeting_failed./Remote_host_said:_553-See_<URL:http://mail-abuse.org/dul/>/553-If_you_feel_we_mistreat_you,_do_contact_us./553_Ask_HELP_for_our_contact_information./
> IIRC somewhere in the docs there are instructions on how to hack qmail
> to send through a specific relay machine.
Yes, he should have ibm.net's SMTP server listed in control/smtproutes
as the default entry.
> Alternativly complain to your
> ISP or change ISP's.
It's not his ISP. His ISP (ibm.net) has no control over this. It's
dialups are going to be listed in the DUL whether or not ibm.net
cooperates.
--
-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!
Mark Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 12 November 1999 at 16:22:40 +0000
> Someone at mail-abuse.org came up with the idea of creating a list to enable
> ISP's to "blacklist" their pools of dialups.
Um, no. ISPs aren't expected to report this themselves. And the idea
came about because they noticed more and more spam coming from dial-up
IPs.
And at least on my system, it blocks far more spam than anything else
I use, AND blocks far fewer legitemate connections than RBL or ORBS
have. (Wow; just looked at the most recent stats, and for this
period I'm wrong; RSS blocked 75, DUL blocked 53, and RBL blocked 8.
I check them in that order.)
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Join the 20th century before it's too late! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ (photos) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b (sf) http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ Ouroboros Bookworms
Thus said Markus Stumpf on Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:58:47 +0100:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 07:56:14AM -0500, Subba Rao wrote:
> > How can my Qmail server relay to my ISP's mail server to avoid this
> > problem? I tried to set the environment variable like MAILHOST and MAILUSER
> > to point to my ISP account. It still doesn't work.
>
> create a file control/smtproutes containing
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> :mail.your.isp
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This will route eMail for all hosts/domains not listed in
> control/locals
> control/virtualdomains
> to host
> mail.your.isp
Just out of curiousity... where are options like this documented? I have
looked through a number of documents and never seen specifically addressed
configurations such as what you mention here. Thanks - especially if I'm
just blind. :)
Andy
--
+====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+
| Linux is about freedom of choice |
+== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 09:54:56PM +0100, Andres Mendez wrote:
> The patch 1.01 doesn't work if you have qmail 1.03.
>
> Ricardo Cerqueira posted a new one which worked with 1.03, but the file was
> corrupted or truncated.
>
I've just tried to use that patch (I extracted it from the mail, just to be sure) over
a clean source and it applied perfectly! Where does it fail you?
------------------
root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) # patch -p1 < ../qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch
patching file `qmail-smtpd.c'
root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) #
------------------
Anyway, here it goes again.
Regards;
Ricardo
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| FCCN/RCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional
| Av. Brasil, 101 / 1700-066 Lisboa / Portugal *** Tel: (+351) 218440100
diff -u qmail-1.03/qmail-smtpd.c qmail-1.03-maxrcpt/qmail-smtpd.c
--- qmail-1.03/qmail-smtpd.c Mon Jun 15 11:53:16 1998
+++ qmail-1.03-maxrcpt/qmail-smtpd.c Fri Nov 5 20:11:54 1999
@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@
#define MAXHOPS 100
unsigned int databytes = 0;
int timeout = 1200;
+int rcptcounter = 0;
+int maxrcpt = -1;
int safewrite(fd,buf,len) int fd; char *buf; int len;
{
@@ -58,6 +60,7 @@
void err_noop() { out("250 ok\r\n"); }
void err_vrfy() { out("252 send some mail, i'll try my best\r\n"); }
void err_qqt() { out("451 qqt failure (#4.3.0)\r\n"); }
+void err_excessrcpt() { out("666 Too many recipients specified (#5.5.4)\r\n"); }
stralloc greeting = {0};
@@ -109,6 +112,7 @@
if (liphostok == -1) die_control();
if (control_readint(&timeout,"control/timeoutsmtpd") == -1) die_control();
if (timeout <= 0) timeout = 1;
+ if (control_readint(&maxrcpt,"control/maxrcpt") == -1) die_control();
if (rcpthosts_init() == -1) die_control();
@@ -240,6 +244,7 @@
void smtp_mail(arg) char *arg;
{
if (!addrparse(arg)) { err_syntax(); return; }
+ rcptcounter = 0;
flagbarf = bmfcheck();
seenmail = 1;
if (!stralloc_copys(&rcptto,"")) die_nomem();
@@ -248,7 +253,9 @@
out("250 ok\r\n");
}
void smtp_rcpt(arg) char *arg; {
+ rcptcounter++;
if (!seenmail) { err_wantmail(); return; }
+ if (checkrcptcount() == 1) {err_excessrcpt(); }
if (!addrparse(arg)) { err_syntax(); return; }
if (flagbarf) { err_bmf(); return; }
if (relayclient) {
@@ -392,6 +399,12 @@
if (*qqx == 'D') out("554 "); else out("451 ");
out(qqx + 1);
out("\r\n");
+}
+
+int checkrcptcount() {
+ if (maxrcpt == -1) {return 0;}
+ else if (rcptcounter > maxrcpt) {return 1;}
+ else {return 0;}
}
struct commands smtpcommands[] = {
> I've just tried to use that patch (I extracted it from the mail, just to
be sure) over a clean source and it applied perfectly! Where does it fail
you?
>
> ------------------
> root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) # patch -p1 <
../qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch
> patching file `qmail-smtpd.c'
> root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) #
> ------------------
Haven't you seen that the file ends with "{". I don't know a lot about file
patching but a source code can't finish opening something "{".
I've done the same as you, and this is what happens:
root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) # patch -p1 <
../qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch
patching file `qmail-smtpd.c'
Hunk #1 FAILED at 27.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 60.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 112.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 244.
Hunk #5 FAILED at 253.
Hunk #6 FAILED at 399.
6 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to qmail-smtpd.c.rej
root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) #
And here I attach qmail-smtpd.c.rej
qmail-smtpd.c.rej
On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 02:23:09PM +0100, Andres Mendez wrote:
> > I've just tried to use that patch (I extracted it from the mail, just to
> > be sure) over a clean source and it applied perfectly! Where does it
> > fail you?
> >
> > ------------------
> > root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) # patch -p1 <
> ../qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch
> > patching file `qmail-smtpd.c'
> > root@avalon (/tmp/tests/qmail-1.03) #
> > ------------------
>
> Haven't you seen that the file ends with "{". I don't know a lot about file
> patching but a source code can't finish opening something "{".
File patching can end with whatever it wants, as it is not complete source
code. The line that ends with '{' is followed in the C source file by more
lines.
> I've done the same as you, and this is what happens:
Me too:
(pcg@micah) ~> lynx -source http://pobox.com/~djb/software/qmail-1.03.tar.gz >
qmail-1.03.tar.gz
(pcg@micah) ~> tar -xzf qmail-1.03.tar.gz
(pcg@micah) ~> cd qmail-1.03
/home/pcg/qmail-1.03
(pcg@micah) ~/qmail-1.03> patch -p1 < ../qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch
patching file `qmail-smtpd.c'
(pcg@micah) ~/qmail-1.03>
What other patches have you applied to your source?
/pg
--
Peter Green
Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello
I have one other question about relaying to my ISP's mail server.
Yesterday, while trying to send mail to a list, I found this in
my syslog.
Nov 12 07:58:17 caesar qmail: 942411497.876636 delivery 4: deferral:
Connected_to_128.6.190.2_but_greeting_failed./Remote_host_said:_553-See_<URL:http://mail-abuse.org/dul/>/553-If_you_feel_we_mistreat_you,_do_contact_us./553_Ask_HELP_for_our_contact_information./
This mail server is not allowing any mail to be relayed from a dial-up
mail server. I have defined the following environment variables
MAILHOST=ibm.net
MAILUSER=subb3
QMAILHOST=ibm.net
QMAILUSER=subb3
How can I relay my mail to my ISP's mail server? Makes me wonder, why I
had to put so much effort into setting up my Qmail server.
Subba Rao
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/
Dave Sill wrote:
> >It's obvious that 150 MB of mail is a lot to process on such a pokey
> >little machine, but it seems a bit odd for the machine to completely
> >choke and die.
>
> If you push an underpowered system running antiquated software to the
> breaking point, don't be surprised if it breaks.
>
> Is that 16 MB RAM parity, ECC (:-), or pot luck? Do you have adequate
> swap?
>
> If qmail croaks a system, either the hardware or the OS is buggy.
>
> -Dave
The swap space is 50 MB, which seems adequate to me.
I realize that the machine is old, and is running software that has
updates, but the point is that a heavily loaded mail program shouldn't
*kill* a machine. I would understand slow performance. How can you be
sure that the hardware or the OS is buggy, and not qmail? I'm not that
familiar with qmail. Could it be that qmail could be reconfigured to
handle mail without bringing the system to its knees?
MC
Matthew Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I realize that the machine is old, and is running software that has
>updates, but the point is that a heavily loaded mail program shouldn't
>*kill* a machine.
When you say "kill", do you mean the system actually crashes, or just
slows to a crawl? If it crashes, that either a kernel bug or a
hardware error. If it slows dramatically, that's just what happens
when a system is severely overloaded.
>I would understand slow performance. How can you be
>sure that the hardware or the OS is buggy, and not qmail?
Assuming your system is really crashing, that has to be due to a
hardware error or kernel bug because there's nothing an application
like qmail can do to cause a crash. The worst that an application can
do is kill itself. Or does your OS have a crash() system call?
>I'm not that
>familiar with qmail. Could it be that qmail could be reconfigured to
>handle mail without bringing the system to its knees?
Sure. Set concurrencylocal to 1, concurrencyremote to 1, and run
tcpserver with "-c1".
-Dave
Hello,
I have installed Red Hat Linux 6.1 and included sendmail. Now, I think I
want to go with qmail, and have read the installation FAQ and the
docuemtn the FAQ instructed me to read about stopping sendmail. My
question is:
Would it be better to re-install Linux without sendmail and then install
qmail? I have not configured sendmail, so suppose it is a wash. But, I
am new to this email-server thing and I don't want sendmail to interfere
with qmail.
Any thoughts would be appreciated. By the way, this list is great. I've
been on it for only one day, perused the archives, etc and have learned
so much.
Thank you,
Joe Millay
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Joe Millay wrote:
> Hello,
> I have installed Red Hat Linux 6.1 and included sendmail. Now, I think I
> want to go with qmail, and have read the installation FAQ and the
> docuemtn the FAQ instructed me to read about stopping sendmail. My
> question is:
> Would it be better to re-install Linux without sendmail and then install
> qmail? I have not configured sendmail, so suppose it is a wash. But, I
> am new to this email-server thing and I don't want sendmail to interfere
> with qmail.
A simple rpm-command will delete all references to sendmail.
rpm -e sendmail
If I recall correctly.
There is no need to reinstall the rest.
--
Thorkild
On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 09:06:16AM -0500, Joe Millay wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have installed Red Hat Linux 6.1 and included sendmail. Now, I think I
> want to go with qmail, and have read the installation FAQ and the
> docuemtn the FAQ instructed me to read about stopping sendmail. My
> question is:
>
> Would it be better to re-install Linux without sendmail and then install
> qmail? I have not configured sendmail, so suppose it is a wash. But, I
> am new to this email-server thing and I don't want sendmail to interfere
> with qmail.
It really is a wash. You can simply:
/etc/rc.d/init.d/sendmail stop
rpm -e sendmail
You'll probably need to finagle some packages that require sendmail, but
it's usually not a big deal. I've --force'd and --nodeps'd many a package
without too much harm... :)
If you're reluctant to uninstall sendmail totally because you're unsure if
it might break something, just stop the sendmail service, remove
/usr/lib/sendmail and /usr/sbin/sendmail, and link both to
/var/qmail/bin/sendmail (once you have qmail installed).
/pg
--
Peter Green
Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out Dave Sill's excellent 'Life with qmail'. It fully explains how to
switch from sendmail.
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html
Si
Joe Millay wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have installed Red Hat Linux 6.1 and included sendmail. Now, I think I
> want to go with qmail, and have read the installation FAQ and the
> docuemtn the FAQ instructed me to read about stopping sendmail. My
> question is:
>
> Would it be better to re-install Linux without sendmail and then install
> qmail? I have not configured sendmail, so suppose it is a wash. But, I
> am new to this email-server thing and I don't want sendmail to interfere
> with qmail.
>
> Any thoughts would be appreciated. By the way, this list is great. I've
> been on it for only one day, perused the archives, etc and have learned
> so much.
>
> Thank you,
> Joe Millay
Joe Millay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Would it be better to re-install [Red Hat] Linux without sendmail and
>then install qmail?
That would be nice, but there are two problems with that approach: (1)
it's almost(?) impossible to install RHL without getting sendmail,
even if you don't select it, because it's a prerequisite for many
other packages, and (2) it's completely unnecessary: just do "rpm -e
--nodeps sendmail".
-Dave
I did this ...
rpm -e sendmail
BUT if you installed other rpms that rely on sendmail you must remove them
first.
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Millay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 9:06 AM
Subject: qmail on Linux
> Hello,
>
> I have installed Red Hat Linux 6.1 and included sendmail. Now, I think I
> want to go with qmail, and have read the installation FAQ and the
> docuemtn the FAQ instructed me to read about stopping sendmail. My
> question is:
>
> Would it be better to re-install Linux without sendmail and then install
> qmail? I have not configured sendmail, so suppose it is a wash. But, I
> am new to this email-server thing and I don't want sendmail to interfere
> with qmail.
>
>
> Any thoughts would be appreciated. By the way, this list is great. I've
> been on it for only one day, perused the archives, etc and have learned
> so much.
>
> Thank you,
> Joe Millay
>
>
> From: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:43:50 -0500 (EST)
>
> Joe Millay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Would it be better to re-install [Red Hat] Linux without sendmail and
> >then install qmail?
>
> That would be nice, but there are two problems with that approach: (1)
> it's almost(?) impossible to install RHL without getting sendmail,
> even if you don't select it, because it's a prerequisite for many
> other packages, and (2) it's completely unnecessary: just do "rpm -e
> --nodeps sendmail".
I use a modified version of the install image that includes qmail and excludes
sendmail. Works like a charm, but it's a bit of an effort to get it to that
point.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues virCIO
http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ http://www.virCIO.Com
+1 512 432 4046 +1 512 374 0500
4314 Avenue C
O- Austin, TX 78751-3709
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
Joe Millay wrote:
> Would it be better to re-install Linux without sendmail and then install
> qmail? I have not configured sendmail, so suppose it is a wash. But, I
> am new to this email-server thing and I don't want sendmail to interfere
> with qmail.
No need to re-install, infact it would make no difference as sendmail is
part of the base install of rh and will install no matter what you do.
( I have fixed this behaviour and removed sendmail from the RH distro and
put in qmail, along with some other goodies, will release it soon)
I have also made up a simple script to automate the process of installing
qmail on redhat using rpms.
The rpms and install script can be found on my ftp at
ftp.oceania.net
I think in the /pub/linux/qmail directory
WARNING.
The install script will stop and delete sendmail and any dependant
packages.
these include nmh, exmh, fetchmail
Enjoy
Kevin
>
> On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 08:44:50PM +0800, john wrote:
> > When I was installing VPOPMAIL in RH 6.1 i issued the command
> >
> > immediately I got an warning message saying :
> >
> > Warning : Clock skew detected. Your installation may be incomplete.
>
> This is a warning from 'make'. Whenever I see this message, it's because the
> system clock has somehow gotten offtrack. Usually not a good sign, might be
> a hardware (CMOS?) error.
You can also get this where the source is on an NFS mounted filesystem and
the server and *ALL* clients do not have their clocks in step.
--
Mark Evans
St. Peter's CofE High School
Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109
Fax: +44 1392 204763
> For some reason, qmail seems to be taking a long time (perhaps forever)
> to deliver certain mails. Some mails seem to sit in the queue for ages,
> and I can't work out how to discern why they are being delayed. It may
> be that the destination host isn't there - but I can't tell that.
> Sendmail was always nice enough to tell me if mails were being
> delayed...how can I get qmail to tell me what's up ?
Do something like "host -t MX <hostname>" then try traceroute and ping on
the MX hosts given. Also try telnet to port 25 on them.
This will tell you if
a) it's there
b) it's accepting SMTP mail.
> Second, when I run a fetchmail, to get mails from a very remote host,
> it dumps them in the local queue (fetchmail connects to port 25 locally,
> for delivery). qmail-qstat shows them sitting there, and they are never
> delivered - until I do something like "/etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail.init
> restart" - and then they are delivered inside a second.
What happens with mail sent using qmail-inject?
Have you tried the tests described in TEST.* (in the source directory)?
--
Mark Evans
St. Peter's CofE High School
Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109
Fax: +44 1392 204763
Hello,
qmail-1.03, qmailanalog-0.70
I'm truing to make two quieries for a user:
1. Who the user sends mail to (and how many)?
2. Who the user receives mail from (and how many)?
So, I do the folloing with my processed "mail.log":
cat mail.log | xsender [EMAIL PROTECTED] | zrecipients
cat mail.log | xrecipient [EMAIL PROTECTED] | zsenders
The first one works fine, but the second one doesn't.
May be I'm wrong somewhere ...
Thanks for help.
---------------------------------------------
| Georgi Kupenov, | |
| tel.: +359-2-9630641| ProLink Ltd. |
| +359-2-9630651| |
---------------------------------------------
Warning: egregious use of "cat" ahead.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>qmail-1.03, qmailanalog-0.70
>
>I'm truing to make two quieries for a user:
>
>1. Who the user sends mail to (and how many)?
>2. Who the user receives mail from (and how many)?
>
>So, I do the folloing with my processed "mail.log":
>
>cat mail.log | xsender [EMAIL PROTECTED] | zrecipients
>cat mail.log | xrecipient [EMAIL PROTECTED] | zsenders
>
>The first one works fine, but the second one doesn't.
>May be I'm wrong somewhere ...
Does "xrecipient [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mail.log" work?
Does "zsenders <mail.log" work?
How does "xrecipient [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mail.log | zsenders" fail?
-Dave
Noah Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 11 November 1999 at 14:43:25 -0800
> I am trying to set up the RBL for the first time. It just is *not*
> working. OK, first, here is the recommended startup line from the web
> site:
> tcpserver 0 25 tcpcontrol /etc/smtp.cdb /usr/local/bin/smtplog qmail-smtpd
> 2>&1 | logger -p mail.notice &
>
> Since I'm running ucspi 0.84, I believe I shouldn't use tcpcontrol
> (correct?) so here is my current startup line:
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c100 -u502 -g501 -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 25
> /var/qmail/bin/smtplog /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | logger -p
> mail.notice &
What method of RBL are you trying to use? The standard qmail method
requires running rblsmtpd, which I don't see you doing. There were
some old patches to integrate the functionality into qmail; were you
using those instead?
Anyway, here's what I do (sorry for the complexity; it doesn't need to
be this messy, but I'm afraid if I fake it I'll get something wrong):
rblzones="rbl.maps.vix.com relays.mail-abuse.org dul.maps.vix.com"
rblprog="/usr/bin/rblsmtpd"
rblcmd=""
for zn in $rblzones ; do
rblcmd="$rblcmd $rblprog -b -r $zn"
done
(this produces an rblcmd that looks something like "/usr/bin/rblsmtpd
-b -r dul.maps.vix.com /usr/bin/rblsmtpd -b -r relays.mail-abuse.org
/usr/bin/rbmsmtpd -b -r rbl.maps.fix.com", but with no line breaks in it)
/usr/local/bin/supervise /var/run/tcpserver-qmail /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -pR
-c50 -u70 -g70 -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 smtp $rblcmd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 |
/var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 2 &
What this ends up being is a big stack of programs which do their
thing, and then exec other programs to do another thing. The last one
invoked is the actual qmail-smtpd.
Here's what my tcp.smtp looks like:
# tcpcontrol(8) rules for qmail smtp daemon
#
# In general, anywhere I want to allow relaying from, I probably want
# to ignore spamblocks too.
# Allow relaying from my own addresses -- at gofast
206.147.220.161-165:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",RBLSMTPD=""
#
# Blaisdell poly USWest static address
63.224.10.78:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",RBLSMTPD=""
#
# Lydy at work (All of MultiLogic, really used just by Lydy)
206.144.140.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",RBLSMTPD=""
#
# Finally, allow anything else, but without relaying
# (Domains to refuse entirely would go above this)
:allow
And this has to be compiled into a cdb with a command like
tcprules tcp.smtp.cdb ddbfoobar < tcp.smtp
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Join the 20th century before it's too late! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ (photos) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b (sf) http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ Ouroboros Bookworms
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> What method of RBL are you trying to use? The standard qmail method
> requires running rblsmtpd, which I don't see you doing. There were
> some old patches to integrate the functionality into qmail; were you
> using those instead?
I was trying the patches. That's what I get for going to the qmail web
page and searching for rbl. ;)
Thanks. I think I have it working now.
Sincerely,
Noah Sutherland System Administrator - Internet On-Ramp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To get my PGP public key, please email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or you can get it at BAL's public key server at http://pgp.ai.mit.edu/
|
could someone post their log rotation script I can use.
The goal would be not to loose any data, short of shutding down the
server
Thanks
<><
Brian
|
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Brian Estes wrote:
> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:57:31 -0500
> From: Brian Estes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: log rotation
>
> could someone post their log rotation script I can use. The goal would be not to
>loose any data, short of shutding down the server
if you use cyclog, there's not much need for log rotation script.
-w-
Is there a way to make cyclog use a bit more intuitive file name?
@4937823749383 and @43948389393 just don't do it for me.
Paul Farber
Farber Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph 570-628-5303
Fax 570-628-5545
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, waskita adijarto wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Brian Estes wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:57:31 -0500
> > From: Brian Estes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: log rotation
> >
> > could someone post their log rotation script I can use. The goal would be not to
>loose any data, short of shutding down the server
>
> if you use cyclog, there's not much need for log rotation script.
>
> -w-
>
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Is there a way to make cyclog use a bit more intuitive file name?
> @4937823749383 and @43948389393 just don't do it for me.
No. Logfiles are rolled over based on their size, not their date.
Write a front-end.
--
-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!
I'd also kinda annoying for us cut&paste double clickers because the highlight
stops at characters not commonly found in file names.
When I get around to it, and I don't know how long that will be ... might be
a while ... my intent is to make my own version of cyclog that names files
by date/time or day/time, and cuts files on time frames instead of size.
It will also be able to launch a child to compress/archive the closed file.
Steve Kapinos wrote:
> How about using file names that I can actually type without having to use ''
> characters, etc? I'm confused why you'd pick a log name you can't easily
> input.
>
> -Steve
>
> ----------
> >From: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: log rotation
> >Date: Fri, Nov 12, 1999, 11:54 AM
> >
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > Is there a way to make cyclog use a bit more intuitive file name?
> > > @4937823749383 and @43948389393 just don't do it for me.
> >
> > No. Logfiles are rolled over based on their size, not their date.
> > Write a front-end.
> >
> > --
> > -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 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]
How about using file names that I can actually type without having to use ''
characters, etc? I'm confused why you'd pick a log name you can't easily
input.
-Steve
----------
>From: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: log rotation
>Date: Fri, Nov 12, 1999, 11:54 AM
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Is there a way to make cyclog use a bit more intuitive file name?
> > @4937823749383 and @43948389393 just don't do it for me.
>
> No. Logfiles are rolled over based on their size, not their date.
> Write a front-end.
>
> --
> -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!
>
waskita adijarto wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:48:09 -0500 (EST)
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: waskita adijarto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Estes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: log rotation
> >
> > Is there a way to make cyclog use a bit more intuitive file name?
> > @4937823749383 and @43948389393 just don't do it for me.
>
> from 'man cyclog':
> The name of a log file is the TAI timestamp when the file
> was started. The mode of the file is 444 if it has been
> safely written to disk, 644 otherwise. A log file that
> has not been written to disk is not guaranteed to survive
> a system crash.
>
> you can use 'tailocal' to make the filename a little bit more intuitive.
> don't forget to remove the '@' first.
Maybe what he really wanted was a different format of file name
such as 1999-1112-2200 or some such thing. That way he can archive
logs and go back and find a specific one by it's date and time.
--
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 Fri, 12 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:48:09 -0500 (EST)
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: waskita adijarto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Estes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: log rotation
>
> Is there a way to make cyclog use a bit more intuitive file name?
> @4937823749383 and @43948389393 just don't do it for me.
from 'man cyclog':
The name of a log file is the TAI timestamp when the file
was started. The mode of the file is 444 if it has been
safely written to disk, 644 otherwise. A log file that
has not been written to disk is not guaranteed to survive
a system crash.
you can use 'tailocal' to make the filename a little bit more intuitive.
don't forget to remove the '@' first.
-w-
|
I finally got Qmail up and running without errors,
thanx for all the help.
Nicole & Ron McIntosh
|
Is there a way I can pipe the headers of each incoming message that is
successfully delivered through a program? I wish to insert certain fields
from the headers (From, Subject, To, etc.) into a MySQL database.
--
Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Programmer; CE Net, Inc.
(302) 854-5440 Ext. 206
On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 11:56:19AM -0500, Derek Callaway wrote:
> Is there a way I can pipe the headers of each incoming message that is
> successfully delivered through a program? I wish to insert certain fields
> from the headers (From, Subject, To, etc.) into a MySQL database.
If "successfully" is an option and not a must, you can configure a
extra delivery in extra.h in the qmail source tree.
I use
#define QUEUE_EXTRA "Tlog\0"
#define QUEUE_EXTRALEN 5
wich causes a copy of *each* message to be delivered to user "log".
I have a small awk programm in ~alias/.qmail-log which does some
header processing and additional logging.
\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 Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Markus Stumpf wrote:
<snip>
>
> If "successfully" is an option and not a must, you can configure a
> extra delivery in extra.h in the qmail source tree.
> I use
> #define QUEUE_EXTRA "Tlog\0"
> #define QUEUE_EXTRALEN 5
> wich causes a copy of *each* message to be delivered to user "log".
>
> I have a small awk programm in ~alias/.qmail-log which does some
> header processing and additional logging.
>
> \Maex
Thanks, but I need something that's reliable. :\
--
Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Programmer; CE Net, Inc.
(302) 854-5440 Ext. 206
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:55:19 -0500 (EST), Derek Callaway wrote:
>Thanks, but I need something that's reliable. :\
The described option is 100% reliable if done right. I assume you mean
that you need to know with certainty if delivery was successful.
qmail-send knows both the message and what has succeeded/failed. For
local delivery only, qmail-local, for remote only qmail-remote. Modify
to add your logging.
I'd be leery adding that amount of overhead to qmail-remote, but if
it's for local only ... Size is less relevant for qmail-send (there is
only one) and done right it could be cheap.
If you run a single UID pop system, you can add a program delivery to
the relevant .qmail. 100% reliable if done right and simpler.
-Sincerely, Fred
(Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
Apologies to non-developers for a slightly off topic post. I am
writing on Open Source Software & Best Practices (e.g., peer review,
source code management, ego-less programming, and defect tracking).
The first draft is at muskrat.home.texas.net/oss_bp.html. I am
looking for other examples. If you have any comments, stories,
etc. please e-mail with them directly.
Thank you,
Jeffrey L. Taylor
Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> > I'm not sure I find this or not. I didn't find something literally that,
> > but I found many "virtual" things there. Part of the problem, I think, is
> > that there isn't a precise meaning for "virtual".
> Well.. you are right - but "virtualdomain" ist quite precise, if you stay in
> the qmail context ;-)
How about "virtualusers".
What I am looking at doing will include fuzzy matching of existing users
from a database, and optionally users don't need to exist to be delivered.
> > If it uses /var/qmail/users/assign then it's not what I want, and not what I
> > call virtual. To me, one of the attributes of virtual is that there is no
> > table of mapping between a user e-mail address and where to deliver, but
> > instead, the determination of where to deliver is a functional relation to
> > the e-mail address.
> It�s virtual, the same as you have "virtual" http-hosts...
There's virtual by IP, virtual by Host, and I've twisted both concepts
around using some CGI code, too.
> But I guess I know what you want - from the address [EMAIL PROTECTED], you
> want the mail to be stored in "/somepath/domain.com/user" - not a
> "static" mapping, "calculated" from the address? Then you could think about
> patching/rewriting qmail-local - altough maybe you should hink about writing
> you own smtp-server/mda for that purpose.
That's the point I want to start from. Then from there employ more ideas
to change it even further. It looks like maildir is so simple I can just
do the delivery right in my own code. I won't have to parse any headers.
And presumebly, what qmail-local pipes to my program is exactly what goes
in the file, so it should be trivial.
> jes - create /users/assign from the database.. ;-))
There will be a many-to-one relationship in the address to mailbox mapping.
So this is probably not scalable.
> > At the same time there may be a catch. The default delivery for the local
> > host (e.g. listed in locals, for users in /etc/passwd, with distinct uids),
> > is not maildir, but "./Mailbox". I need to be able to leave local users as
> > all "./Mailbox" by default (unless overridden in a .qmail file for each user
> > individually), yet have maildirs used for all the virtualdomains users without
> > creating zillions of .qmail files.
> you could make .qmail files for local users, overiding the Maildir default
> to Mailbox - or just take one machine for all those thousands of users and
> "virtual"domains, and another one for the shell accounts.
The shell accounts won't go through my delivery program. But if my program
does the actual maildir create/write/link/delete steps, then it won't matter
what the default is, which can stay Mailbox ... everything going through my
program will be maildir anyway. I just need to make sure I'm not going to
run into something unexpected.
> > We'll be doing the web interface for administration as an integral part of
> > the whole internet service administration, working through a central database
> > that records every service, not just e-mail. E-mail configuration will then
> > be derived from that database much like web configuration, DNS configuration,
> > and so forth. I will be able to add a new customer, specify domains, and
> > let them add their own users and subdomains, and it will automatically set
> > up their e-mail, radius for dialup, routing for dedicated DSL, web service,
> > and whatever else (the exact system hasn't been chosen, yet).
> Wow.. Zero Administration ISP - sounds quite cool.
Yeah ... put myself out of a job.
--
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]
"scott f. lanes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Stop qmail, delete queue files, restart qmail. There are tools on
>>www.qmail.org to make this easier.
>
>is this just as simple as deleting the files within each one of the
>numbered directories in /var/qmail/queue/remote and /var/qmail/queue/mess?
Yes. Well, all queue subdirectories, not just remote and mess--though
those are the most likely suspects.
-Dave
"Michael M. Honse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>?? if the error is not from qmail any idea where its from ?
Sendmail:
de5@sws5$ telnet 208.129.195.197 25
Trying 208.129.195.197...
Connected to 208.129.195.197.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail.ablecompor.com ESMTP Sendmail 8.8.8/8.8.8; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:35:49 -0800
(PST)
-Dave
"Marc-Adrian Napoli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm assuming that there aer two things coming up in my log:
>
>1. The incoming smtpd connections that qmail-smtpd is dealing with, and
>
>2. The qmail-send program which is deciding whether to spawn qmail-lspawn or
>qmail-rspawn for outgoing mails.
Correct.
>Now, if my assumption is right, can anyone else think of any other handy
>information to log?
Nope.
>And, can anyone suggest how i use qmail-analog to parse my mail.log file?
>Running matchup < /var/log/mail.log just cats the mail.log file and gives me
>no useful information :(
You're not running matchup right. You should feed it *only* the
qmail-send entries, and you have to strip the syslog gunk off.
-Dave
doh, meant to send this to the list instead of just to russ :)
disclaimer: some of what i'm talking about may be slightly off.
if i'm not mistaken, the point of the big-todo patch is to keep the
individual queue directories from containing a huge amount of files. the
default qmail install uses 23 directories, and if you have (say) 25000
messages queued up, each directory will probably have over 1000 files in it.
the problem with that is that there are some filesystems that get VERY slow
on readdir() calls with lots of files in the directory. i think this is a
well known problem with ext2fs on linux, i know i've seen it happen before
when i had 20000 postmaster messages in my maildir one morning. using
big-todo can alleviate this problem by reducing the number of files in each
queue directory to something that readdir() can cope with better.
however, it's probably only useful for a site that does a LOT of small
messages, each with different senders and recipients. if you're just
running a list server or something i doubt it will make much difference.
still, i doubt it will hurt anything in any case, but someone else might
want to comment on that.
shag
=====
Judd Bourgeois | CNM Network +1 (805) 520-7170
Software Architect | 1900 Los Angeles Avenue, 2nd Floor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Simi Valley, CA 93065
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Hello,
I was curious if anyone uses maildrop (or equivalents) to sort incoming
mail to various folders (depending on subject, from, to), or even
rewrite various headers on demand.
And if so, would anyone please show me the correct to integrate maildrop
into qmail? Maildrop's homepage shows its setup for sendmail, but makes
no references for qmail.
I tried to use the procmail startup files, and when replaced procmail
with maildrop string (for piping incoming messages to it), my qmail no
longer receives any mail.
Thanks,
Tris
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Tristan Hannover wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was curious if anyone uses maildrop (or equivalents) to sort incoming
> mail to various folders (depending on subject, from, to), or even
> rewrite various headers on demand.
> And if so, would anyone please show me the correct to integrate maildrop
> into qmail? Maildrop's homepage shows its setup for sendmail, but makes
> no references for qmail.
>
> I tried to use the procmail startup files, and when replaced procmail
> with maildrop string (for piping incoming messages to it), my qmail no
> longer receives any mail.
Use the startup command in Qmail's INSTALL, except replace ./Maildir with
'| /usr/local/bin/maildrop', including the single quotes.
Hi Tristan,
What are the outputs of
"cat /home/tristan/.qmail"
&
"cat /home/tristan/.mailfilter" (try to keep it short ;-) )
?
Mark Weinem
On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 05:15:14PM -0800, Dongping Deng wrote:
>> If I only inject to one of them (both qmail/qmail2 are running), it also
>> works fine. It seems the two instances start to do something funny. Any
>> ideas?
>You're running out of filedescriptors (either for that users (qmail*)
>or system wide). Increase the limits and it should work. For that you
>either have to use "ulimit" before starting qmail, configure some
>kernel limits or even build a new kernel.
Thanks, I did found the error message "VFS: file-max limit 4096 reached" in
dmesg.
It's still weird. I have concurencyremote=250 for each instance, and the
open files value obtained from ulimit is 1024 ( 1024 >> 2*250 + 5). It seems
to me there's enough margin for it. BTW, how is the requirement for
filedescriptor > 2*concurrencyremote + 5 working for mulitiple qmail
instances?
dp
On 13 Nov 1999, D. J. Bernstein wrote:
> Dongping Deng writes:
> > I have concurencyremote=250 for each instance, and the open files
> > value obtained from ulimit is 1024 ( 1024 >> 2*250 + 5). It seems to
> > me there's enough margin for it.
>
> Your problem has nothing to do with per-process limits. The kernel has a
> table of 4096 ofiles shared by the entire system. That table is full.
> Bump it up to size 16384.
Ahhh. maybe a stupid question...
How do you bump up the ofiles tables on solaris??
Dongping Deng writes:
> I have concurencyremote=250 for each instance, and the open files
> value obtained from ulimit is 1024 ( 1024 >> 2*250 + 5). It seems to
> me there's enough margin for it.
Your problem has nothing to do with per-process limits. The kernel has a
table of 4096 ofiles shared by the entire system. That table is full.
Bump it up to size 16384.
You should also try compiling qmail statically. This lowers memory use,
ofile use, and CPU use on most systems. (It's impossible under Solaris,
but Solaris will be slow no matter what you do.)
---Dan
is there a checkpassword program where a user can pop his mail without
user%domain/password but simple user/password.
marco leeflang
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 08:03:10PM +0100, Marco Leeflang wrote:
> is there a checkpassword program where a user can pop his mail without
> user%domain/password but simple user/password.
I believe vpopmail/vchkpw supports this with IP aliasing. Set
'customer.example.com' to a separate IP address, tell your mail server to
listen to that IP address, and properly setup reverse DNS. When a user logs
into the mailserver 'customer.example.com' vpopmail knows which domain it's
associated with, and only 'user' is required to authenticate.
At least, that's my understanding...(I don't use this feature)
/pg
--
Peter Green
Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 02:21:47PM -0500, Peter Green wrote:
> > is there a checkpassword program where a user can pop his mail without
> > user%domain/password but simple user/password.
> I believe vpopmail/vchkpw supports this with IP aliasing.
As does vmailmgr in the same way. See:
http://em.ca/~bruceg/vmailmgr/
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
It's time for us to tweek with the total number of file descriptor and the
number of user processes. I couldn't find anything in the archive, could any
one help on where I need to change to recompile a new kernel for that.
Thanks in advance
dp
Thus said Dongping Deng on Fri, 12 Nov 1999 18:07:37 PST:
> It's time for us to tweek with the total number of file descriptor and the
> number of user processes. I couldn't find anything in the archive, could any
> one help on where I need to change to recompile a new kernel for that.
No need to recompile really, but it is probably wise. Have a look at
/proc/sys/fs/*
and read /usr/src/linux/Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt
Andy
--
+====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+
| Linux is about freedom of choice |
+== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
Hi,
I have a large and geographically distributed intranet. Each remote group
of user has its own MS exchange server and each user has an address of the
type [EMAIL PROTECTED] (intranet address). Local mail is handled by the
local server.
All the exchange servers will pipe their outgoing (to the Internet)
messages through a qmail server.
I would like qmail to change for each messages all the headers containing a
"@domain.location" to "@company.com"
Is it possible ? Maybe using some additional qmail package ?
thank you very very much
Enrico Schiattarella
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've just updated LWQ for use with daemontools 0.61 and svscan.
Let me know if you find any problems.
-Dave
On Nov 13 1999, Andy Bradford wrote:
> Just out of curiousity... where are options like this documented? I
> have looked through a number of documents and never seen
> specifically addressed configurations such as what you mention here.
Well, the manpages document them all.
> Thanks - especially if I'm just blind. :)
I guess that you'll have to use your speech program for this
e-mail. :-)
[]s, Roger...
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/
Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|
Hi,
I tried putting this script in inetd.conf
file to start the tcpserver service
but I dont seem to be starting the service. I am
using Red Hat 6.1
tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
domainname \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
&
tcpserver -c 400 -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
2 >&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3
&
|
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 01:07:16PM +0800, john wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tried putting this script in inetd.conf file to start the tcpserver service
> but I dont seem to be starting the service. I am using Red Hat 6.1
>
>
> tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup domainname \
> /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
>
> tcpserver -c 400 -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
> 2 >&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
tcpserver should be started from a script that runs when your system boots.
inetd.conf is not a script that runs when your system boots. It is, as the name
suggests, the configuration file for inetd.
You use tcpserver *instead of* inetd to run your smtp and pop services.
Chris
|
I installed vpopmail, replaced the correct line in my init
script with the vchkpw program, and restarted the qmail pop3d, then I could
no-longer log in to check my mail on the server, it wouldn't authenticate.(kept
asking me for username/passwd)
I changed it back, restarted the pop3d, and it works
fine....Did I miss something?
Thanks,
Barry Smoke
p.s. The same thing happened when I tried to install
vmailmgr.
|
|
After starting qmail when I use the command ls -al
| more
shows the following for qmail
541 tty1
s 0.00 qmail-send
542
tty1 z 0.00
qmail-start <defunct>
543 tty1
s 0.00 qmail-lspawn 'cat
/var/qmail/control/defaultdomain/
544 tty1
s 0.00 qmail-rspawn
545 tty1
s 0.00 qmail-clean
The second line shows qmail-start <defunct> what does this mean
?
Does this means that qmail is not working properly or defunctioning ?
John
|
Hello
Anyone on the list using Maildrop (MDA) with fetchmail?
I would like to know how you are invoking the Maildrop program?
When I have invoked maildrop, I have explicitly mentioned the
$HOME/.mailfilter file. It did not work. Guess I am invoking it
wrong. The following is the line in my .fetchmailrc
mda "/usr/local/bin/maildrop .mailfilter"
Is this the way the maildrop program is invoked?
Thank you.
Subba Rao
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/
Will qmail work with a dynamic ip address? I have an almost always on connection and
a "dynip.com" like host name that always points to my machine.
One of my friends has a mail server running with his NT machine using a similar setup.
It must be doable on linux.
With all the recent discussion about aggregating RCPTs for the same MX,
I took a look at qmail's code.
It became clear quite fast that general aggregation was quite impossible
given the architecture.
What is feasible is this : for a given message, aggregate by
domain. I.e, a mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
can be dispatched as three mails,
one to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
one to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and one to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As it stands, most of qmail's architecture happily keeps all the
recipients together. qmail-smtpd, qmail-inject and qmail-queue deal with
a multi-RCPT message as one entity ; qmail-remote can send a single mail
to multiple recipients on the same mailhost. Only qmail-send and
qmail-rspawn are special-cased : qmail-rspawn is designed to only accept
one recipient, and of course qmail-send actually does the breaking up.
So I set out to write a patch, which I'll talk about below. However in
the middle of writing the patch, I realized that it would work okay, but
that it wouldn't solve things for all cases : if the incoming mail makes
a round-trip through some local .qmail-file, all aggregation will be
irremediably lost (because local messages are delivered to individual
recipients). It means that if you have any kind of rewriting rule, even
simple forwarding, you would gain nothing.
As my setup involves some such address rewriting, the patch wouldn't
benefit me at all, so I stopped all development. I could be persuaded
into finishing it, but for now I see no huge incentive.
======
Let's talk about what I've got though. First, remember that the patch is
NOT FINISHED. Some parts are NOT TESTED and COULD BE BUGGY.
Now. I must stress again that qmail was not designed for everything I
make it do, most notably its memory allocation is really designed for
not-dynamic very small stuff (see alloc.c for a good laugh), so if you
give it long To: lines I'm not sure memory usage will be optimal. Also
realloc is not really good, I'd probaly have to rethink a bit alloc_re.c
(which always does a byte copy).
Also, I still have debug stuff (dolog()) in the code.
Now, how I do it : basically, at the right spot, I aggregate recipients
by domain name (this part is not finished) and I collapse them into a
single recipient, for instance I collapse [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into [EMAIL PROTECTED]\[EMAIL PROTECTED] where \1 is
the character '\1' in C. This I do only for remote dispatches. Then in
qmail-rspawn, I split things back up. This part is written but has not
be tested (at all), there may be some faults in my code (for instance
offset-by-one bugs). Note that qmail-rspawn is also a long-standing
daemon so we've got to be pretty carefull about memory allocation, I
special-cased the case where we had less than 10 recipients to use
non-malloced memory, but this is probably misguided.
Yeah, I know, collapsing with \1 is dirty, uggly, not clean, etc. But it
should work.
You'll have to make extra-sure that you're not fed recipients that
already contain a \1, though. I haven't looked where to put the check.
The main part of the code that's not written is going through the list
(in variable rcpts, which has been sorted by rcptsort(), I only did a
pseudo-sorting here while testing), and collapsing successive entries
that have the same domain name (routine rcptcollaps()).
Well, that's it. All comments welcome of course. I'm sure that some
sites do simple in-out through qmail and could benefit from a finished
version, but not me.
Florent Guillaume
Index: qmail-send.c
--- origsrc/qmail-send.c Mon Jun 15 12:53:16 1998
+++ src/qmail-send.c Fri Nov 12 01:35:12 1999
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
+#include <stdlib.h> /* for qsort */
#include "readwrite.h"
#include "sig.h"
#include "direntry.h"
@@ -14,6 +15,8 @@
#include "getln.h"
#include "substdio.h"
#include "alloc.h"
+#include "gen_alloc.h"
+#include "gen_allocdefs.h"
#include "error.h"
#include "stralloc.h"
#include "str.h"
@@ -60,6 +63,7 @@
char strnum3[FMT_ULONG];
#define CHANNELS 2
+/* channel 1 must be the remote one */
char *chanaddr[CHANNELS] = { "local/", "remote/" };
char *chanstatusmsg[CHANNELS] = { " local ", " remote " };
char *tochan[CHANNELS] = { " to local ", " to remote " };
@@ -1240,6 +1244,116 @@
if (*wakeup > nexttodorun) *wakeup = nexttodorun;
}
+void dolog (head,s,len)
+char *head;
+char *s;
+int len;
+{
+ int myfd;
+ char mybuf[256];
+ substdio ssmy;
+ myfd = open_append("/tmp/qqlog");
+ substdio_fdbuf(&ssmy,write,myfd,mybuf,sizeof(mybuf));
+ substdio_bputs(&ssmy,head);
+ substdio_bput(&ssmy,s,len);
+ substdio_bputs(&ssmy,"\n");
+ substdio_flush(&ssmy);
+ fsync(myfd);
+ close(myfd);
+}
+
+
+GEN_ALLOC_typedef(sapa,stralloc*,sap,len,a)
+GEN_ALLOC_ready(sapa,stralloc*,sap,len,a,i,n,x,10,sapa_ready)
+GEN_ALLOC_readyplus(sapa,stralloc*,sap,len,a,i,n,x,30,sapa_readyplus)
+
+sapa rcpts = {0};
+
+void rcptinit()
+{
+ while (!sapa_ready(&rcpts,1)) nomem();
+ rcpts.len = 0;
+}
+
+stralloc *sapnew()
+{
+ stralloc *sap = (stralloc *) alloc(sizeof(stralloc));
+ if (!sap) return 0;
+ sap->s = 0;
+ return sap;
+}
+
+void sapfree(sap)
+stralloc *sap;
+{
+ if (sap->s) alloc_free(sap->s);
+ alloc_free(sap);
+}
+
+
+/* returns 0 if couldn't find memory */
+/* r is of the form Trecip\0 but only recip\0 is stored */
+int rcptappend(r)
+stralloc *r;
+{
+ /* readyplus could slow things down given how djb implements alloc_re */
+ if (!sapa_readyplus(&rcpts,1)) return 0;
+ if (rcpts.len >= 10000) return 0; /* don't eat all memory */
+ rcpts.sap[rcpts.len] = sapnew();
+ if (!rcpts.sap[rcpts.len]) return 0; /* couldn't alloc */
+ if (!stralloc_copyb(rcpts.sap[rcpts.len],r->s+1,r->len-1)) return 0;
+ ++rcpts.len;
+ return 1;
+}
+
+void rcptfree()
+{
+ int i;
+ for (i=rcpts.len-1; i>=0; i--)
+ sapfree (rcpts.sap[i]);
+ rcpts.len = 0;
+}
+
+
+void dumpit(s)
+char *s;
+{
+ int i;
+ dolog(s,"",0);
+ for (i=0; i<rcpts.len; i++) {
+ dolog(" ",rcpts.sap[i]->s,rcpts.sap[i]->len);
+ }
+}
+
+int rcptcomp(/*const*/void *aa, /*const*/void *bb)
+{
+ stralloc **a = (stralloc **) aa;
+ stralloc **b = (stralloc **) bb;
+
+ if ((*a)->s[0] < (*b)->s[0]) return -1; /* dummy sorting for debug */
+ if ((*a)->s[0] == (*b)->s[0]) return 0;
+ return 1;
+}
+
+void rcptsort()
+{
+ dumpit("before sort:");
+ if (rcpts.len >= 2) {
+ qsort(rcpts.sap, rcpts.len, sizeof(stralloc *), rcptcomp);
+ } else {
+ dolog("after sort","",0);
+ }
+ dumpit("apres tri:");
+}
+
+void rcptcollapse()
+{
+ if (rcpts.len >= 2) {
+
+ }
+ dumpit("after collapse:");
+}
+
void todo_do(rfds)
fd_set *rfds;
{
@@ -1328,6 +1442,8 @@
uid = 0;
pid = 0;
+ rcptinit();
+
for (;;)
{
if (getln(&ss,&todoline,&match,'\0') == -1)
@@ -1347,6 +1463,9 @@
scan_ulong(todoline.s + 1,&pid);
break;
case 'F':
+ /*debug*/
+ dolog("----------Got from ",todoline.s,todoline.len);
+ /*debug*/
if (substdio_putflush(&ssinfo,todoline.s,todoline.len) == -1)
{
fnmake_info(id);
@@ -1369,27 +1488,64 @@
case 2: c = 1; break;
default: c = 0; break;
}
- if (fdchan[c] == -1)
- {
- fnmake_chanaddr(id,c);
- fdchan[c] = open_excl(fn.s);
- if (fdchan[c] == -1)
- { log3("warning: unable to create ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail; }
- substdio_fdbuf(&sschan[c]
- ,write,fdchan[c],todobufchan[c],sizeof(todobufchan[c]));
- flagchan[c] = 1;
- }
- if (substdio_bput(&sschan[c],rwline.s,rwline.len) == -1)
- {
- fnmake_chanaddr(id,c);
- log3("warning: trouble writing to ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail;
- }
+ dolog("Got rcpt ",rwline.s,rwline.len);
+ /* for remote, try to append, output to channel if impossible */
+ if (c != 1 || !rcptappend(&rwline)) { /* only for remote channel */
+ dolog(" not appened, direct","",0);
+ if (fdchan[c] == -1)
+ {
+ fnmake_chanaddr(id,c);
+ fdchan[c] = open_excl(fn.s);
+ if (fdchan[c] == -1)
+ { log3("warning: unable to create ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail; }
+ substdio_fdbuf(&sschan[c]
+ ,write,fdchan[c],todobufchan[c],sizeof(todobufchan[c]));
+ flagchan[c] = 1;
+ }
+ if (substdio_bput(&sschan[c],rwline.s,rwline.len) == -1)
+ {
+ fnmake_chanaddr(id,c);
+ log3("warning: trouble writing to ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail;
+ }
+ }
break;
default:
fnmake_todo(id);
log3("warning: unknown record type in ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail;
}
}
+
+ /* sort the recipients by domain */
+ rcptsort();
+ /* collapse recipients with compatible domains */
+ rcptcollapse();
+ /* add recipients to output channel */
+ if (rcpts.len) {
+ int i;
+ if (fdchan[c] == -1)
+ {
+ fnmake_chanaddr(id,c);
+ fdchan[c] = open_excl(fn.s);
+ if (fdchan[c] == -1)
+ { log3("warning: unable to create ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail; }
+ substdio_fdbuf(&sschan[c]
+ ,write,fdchan[c],todobufchan[c],sizeof(todobufchan[c]));
+ flagchan[c] = 1;
+ }
+ for (i=0; i<rcpts.len; i++) {
+ dolog("Write to channel ",rcpts.sap[i]->s,rcpts.sap[i]->len);
+ if (substdio_bputs(&sschan[c],"T") == -1 ||
+ substdio_bput(&sschan[c],rcpts.sap[i]->s,rcpts.sap[i]->len) == -1)
+ {
+ fnmake_chanaddr(id,c);
+ log3("warning: trouble writing to ",fn.s,"\n"); goto fail;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ /* cleanup */
+ dolog("Doing cleanup","",0);
+ rcptfree();
+ /*end mods*/
close(fd); fd = -1;
Index: qmail-rspawn.c
--- origsrc/qmail-rspawn.c Mon Jun 15 12:53:16 1998
+++ src/qmail-rspawn.c Fri Nov 12 02:18:41 1999
@@ -82,13 +82,43 @@
char *s; char *r; int at;
{
int f;
- char *(args[5]);
+/* char *(args[5]);*/
+#define NBSTARGS 10
+ char *stargs[NBSTARGS];
+ char **args;
+ int len;
+ int nb;
+ int i;
+ int j;
+
+
+ len = str_len(r);
+ nb = 0;
+ j = 0;
+ do {
+ nb++;
+ j += byte_chr(r+j,len-j,'\1') + 1;
+ } while (j<len);
+
+ if (nb+4 <= NBSTARGS) {
+ args = stargs;
+ } else {
+ args = (char **) alloc ((nb+4) * sizeof(char*));
+ if (!args) return -1; /* XXX */
+ }
args[0] = "qmail-remote";
args[1] = r + at + 1;
args[2] = s;
- args[3] = r;
- args[4] = 0;
+ i = 3;
+ j = 0;
+ while (nb--) {
+ args[i++] = r+j;
+ j += byte_chr(r+j,len-j,'\1');
+ if (j<len) r[j++] = '\0';
+ }
+ args[i] = 0;
+
if (!(f = vfork()))
{
@@ -99,5 +129,6 @@
if (error_temp(errno)) _exit(111);
_exit(100);
}
+ if (args != stargs) alloc_free(args);
return f;
}
On Sun, Nov 14, 1999 at 01:08:20AM +0100, Florent Guillaume wrote:
> With all the recent discussion about aggregating RCPTs for the same MX,
> I took a look at qmail's code.
>
> It became clear quite fast that general aggregation was quite impossible
> given the architecture.
Note that this is due to the architecture of both qmail and SMTP. One
of the problems with aggregation when using qmail is VERPs which change
the envelope sender based on the destination address. This requires
that each recipient be delivered seperately when using SMTP, and I am
aware of no protocol that can deal with this adequately, never mind a
MTA that can handle it.
> Now, how I do it : basically, at the right spot, I aggregate recipients
> by domain name (this part is not finished) and I collapse them into a
> single recipient, for instance I collapse [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] into [EMAIL PROTECTED]\[EMAIL PROTECTED] where \1 is
> the character '\1' in C. This I do only for remote dispatches. Then in
> qmail-rspawn, I split things back up. This part is written but has not
> be tested (at all), there may be some faults in my code (for instance
> offset-by-one bugs). Note that qmail-rspawn is also a long-standing
> daemon so we've got to be pretty carefull about memory allocation, I
> special-cased the case where we had less than 10 recipients to use
> non-malloced memory, but this is probably misguided.
>
> Yeah, I know, collapsing with \1 is dirty, uggly, not clean, etc. But it
> should work.
I'm not aware of how qmail handles things internally, but the on-disk
structure prefixes each recipient address with 'T' and suffixes them
with '\0'. Perhaps an idea might be to prefix all but the final
recipient in a group with 't' or suffix the last recipient with '\0\0'.
This double NUL could potentially be used internally but would be
somewhat more complex to parse -- it would cause modification to much
more qmail code.
If you determine that you need to use '\1', I would suggest you escape
it -- '\1\1' translates to a literal '\1', while '\1\2' translates to
your separator. Messier to code, but cleaner in the end since you don't
have to refuse any messages based on the use of this character in a
recipient address.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
Dear All,
I use Qmail with RedHat 6. My POP3 is set to authenticate
from another RADIUS server, and I want something similar in case of
SMTP also. Is it possible ? Can I completely bypass the need of password
file on the mail server , something like :
Computer A: POP3 + SMTP ( without password file)
Computer B: RADIUS (main password file )
Any Link, refrencces, documentations will be highly appretiated.
TIA
Shashi
On Mon, Nov 08, 1999 at 04:50:32AM +0000, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
> > Hard, but not impossible. How would you envision such hooks?
>
> How about a simplified scheme: All mail with recipient host matching the
> local host is passed to an external program for delivery. The external
> program takes arguments as qmail-local (which is what I'd use).
>
> Default should still be to forward everything.
>
> Thus:
>
> 1. message queued.
> 2a. if -l: compare host name of envelope recipients. If same as local host
> name, deliver locally with qmail-local.
> 2b. deliver multi-recipient message remotely (concurrent with 2a). If -l:
> remove all recipients with host part matching the local host (me).
> 3. Generate one bounce message per local recipient. Generate pre-VERP
> bounce if one of more remote recipients are not accepted.
>
> -l controls local delivery.
Good idea, but basically doubles the complexity of the nullmailer
system. It requires concurrent deliveries, bounce generation, local vs
remote host determination. One of the real big problems (in my mind) is
that it requires that to local/remote protocol agents be able to handle
a subset of the recipient addresses, presumably through a pipe, while
one of the existing agents requires that the message be a file to allow
it to rewind (either that or suck the whole message into core which
could be deadly). I guess one could do this by splitting up the message
queue into a message body queue, and one queue for each destination
class (local, remote-1, remote-2, etc.) but if you need this, why not
use qmail?
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> > 1. message queued.
> > 2a. if -l: compare host name of envelope recipients. If same as local host
> > name, deliver locally with qmail-local.
> > 2b. deliver multi-recipient message remotely (concurrent with 2a). If -l:
> > remove all recipients with host part matching the local host (me).
> > 3. Generate one bounce message per local recipient. Generate pre-VERP
> > bounce if one of more remote recipients are not accepted.
> >
> > -l controls local delivery.
> Good idea, but basically doubles the complexity of the nullmailer
> system. It requires concurrent deliveries, bounce generation, local vs
> remote host determination. One of the real big problems (in my mind) is
> that it requires that to local/remote protocol agents be able to handle
> a subset of the recipient addresses, presumably through a pipe, while
> one of the existing agents requires that the message be a file to allow
> it to rewind (either that or suck the whole message into core which
> could be deadly). I guess one could do this by splitting up the message
> queue into a message body queue, and one queue for each destination
> class (local, remote-1, remote-2, etc.) but if you need this, why not
> use qmail?
Was looking for something optimized to low bandwidth settings. QMTP when
fully used it (well, once could add compression). The discussion was
multi-recipient messages, where qmail isn't optimal under these
conditions.
Yes, starting with a qmail queue would be one way. Maybe waiting for
qmail-2.0 is another ;-)
-Sincerely, Fred
Fred Lindberg, Inf. Dis., WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA
What steps must I take in order to set up a qmail mail server
(smpt and pop3) that resides on a Linux box that doesn't contain all of
the users in the local passwd file? I believe I can authenticate the
POP
users remotely via RADIUS and checkpasswd, but will the same be true for
the smtp connections and deliveries?
I apoligize if this seems like a novice question.
Thanks in advance.
Shashi
|
What steps must I take in
order to set up a qmail mail server
(smtp and pop3) that resides on a Linux
box that doesn't contain all of
the users in the local passwd file? I
believe I can authenticate the
POP users remotely via RADIUS and checkpasswd,
but will the same be true for
the smtp connections and
deliveries?
I apoligize if this
seems like a novice question.
Thanks in
advance.
Shashi
|
Hi all,
I have set up Qmail on "metta.lk" (204.143.107.46)
and use autoturn to get my mail to "col7.metta.lk" (172.16.1.1)
Everything works quite well.
To some domains I get messages like the below returned by Mailer Daemon.
Is this a DNS problem on my machine
or is it because I am on local IPs
If you have the time please do a "dig" at my server
to see it I have anything wrong in the DNS.
it works all well from my side, but perhaps not from outside.
A suggestion on how to overcome it would be much appreciated
Jacob
-----------------------------------------------------
130.88.200.93 failed after I sent the message.
Remote host said: 550 rejected: cannot route to sender
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
can one route to 172.16.1.1 (col7.metta.lk) as a local IP
131.111.8.70 failed after I sent the message.
Remote host said: 550 rejected: cannot route to sender
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Connected to 128.135.12.12 but sender was rejected.
Remote host said: 501 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Sender domain must exist
