qmail Digest 23 Nov 1999 11:00:00 -0000 Issue 828
Topics (messages 33421 through 33486):
MX question related to diff. A and MX record
33421 by: Einar Bordewich
33423 by: Sam
33425 by: Einar Bordewich
33428 by: Russell Nelson
33461 by: Sam
Re: what _should_ I call our internal domain?
33422 by: olli
missing mail
33424 by: S�ddeutsche Krankenversicherung
33426 by: Petr Novotny
Re: Limiting incoming connections
33427 by: Mark Evans
33432 by: Rohit Khamkar
33434 by: H�ffelin Holger
33444 by: Steve Kapinos
Configuration problem
33429 by: Rohit Khamkar
33430 by: Steve Kapinos
Re: Sending Through other Mail Server !
33431 by: cmikk.uswest.net
New Config. problem
33433 by: Rohit Khamkar
33435 by: Dave Sill
Problems installing the package from moni.msci.memphis.edu
33436 by: Diego M. L�pez
33437 by: Diego M. L�pez
33443 by: Steve Kapinos
Re: Can anyone help with selective relaying/rcpthosts problem?
33438 by: Rob Havens
Relaying based on mail size !
33439 by: Seyyed Hamid Reza Hashemi Golpayegani
33449 by: H�ffelin Holger
33450 by: Jon Rust
deferral - how long ?
33440 by: John P. Looney
33441 by: John P. Looney
33446 by: James Raftery
33448 by: Bill Parker
Re: LWQ translators wanted
33442 by: Steve Vertigan
Outlook 5 and online check
33445 by: Jon Rust
33456 by: Russell Nelson
dot file question
33447 by: Tom Fishwick
33451 by: H�ffelin Holger
Qmail doc central??
33452 by: Subba Rao
33454 by: H�ffelin Holger
Mailbox and atime
33453 by: Phil Howard
problems with procmail
33455 by: Luis Bezerra
How to slash off really long body messages when bouncing and/or double-bouncing
33457 by: Daniel Mattos
Re: disk mirroring
33458 by: John White
33463 by: Florian G. Pflug
33466 by: Racer X
33467 by: Adam D . McKenna
33469 by: John White
33470 by: John White
Serialmail
33459 by: Jose de Leon
33460 by: Eric Dahnke
straynewline, patch found.
33462 by: Michael Boyiazis
Need advice...
33464 by: Barton Hodges
33468 by: m.wut.org
Remote users not able to send messages anywhere but here
33465 by: Cameron Arnott
33481 by: Chris Johnson
forwarding mails arlready in Maildirs
33471 by: Marlon Anthony Abao
33473 by: Benjamin de los Angeles Jr.
33474 by: Marlon Anthony Abao
33475 by: Andy Bradford
33476 by: mabrown.securepipe.com
33477 by: Marlon Anthony Abao
Help! I am still a open relay!!
33472 by: Michael Boman
33480 by: Chris Johnson
ANNOUNCE: Native Qmail-based virus scanner - scan4virus-0.1
33478 by: Jason Haar
33482 by: Jason Haar
LWQ qmail rc script addition
33479 by: Peter Cavender
Re: remote users sending mail prob
33483 by: Cameron Arnott
33484 by: Michael Boman
33485 by: H�ffelin Holger
33486 by: H�ffelin Holger
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does a mailserver always look at the MX record, and not the A record for a domain? Back a few years, I know we had a problem related to mail going to the webserver instead the mailserver, when the domain was set up with an A record that was different than the IP address of the hostname pointed to by MX. Does this still count, or is this a solved issue? ex. zone config where a http request will go to test.com/192.168.1.1 and mail to test.com will go to mail.test.com/10.10.10.10 ; Zone file for: test.com @ IN SOA ns.domain.com. hostmaster.domain.com. ( 1999112214 ; serial number 28800 ; refresh 7200 ; retry 604800 ; expire 86400 ) ; minimum TTL ; NS records @ IN NS ns.domain.com. @ IN NS ns1.domain.com. @ IN NS nn.domain.net. ; MX records @ IN MX 10 mail.test.com. @ IN MX 20 mail1.domain.com. ; Zone records @ IN A 192.168.1.1 mail IN A 10.10.10.10 www IN CNAME www.domain.com. BTW: test.com and domain.com in this example has nothing to do with the real domains out there. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- IDG New Media Einar Bordewich System Manager Phone: +47 2205 3034 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Einar Bordewich wrote: > Does a mailserver always look at the MX record, and not the A record > for a domain? Yes. > Back a few years, I know we had a problem related to mail going to the > webserver instead the mailserver, when the domain was set up with an A > record that was different than the IP address of the hostname pointed > to by MX. Does this still count, or is this a solved issue? This was never the case with Qmail. -- Sam
: > Back a few years, I know we had a problem related to mail going to the : > webserver instead the mailserver, when the domain was set up with an A : > record that was different than the IP address of the hostname pointed : > to by MX. Does this still count, or is this a solved issue? : : This was never the case with Qmail. Is there other mailservers out there, that this is the known case for? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- IDG New Media Einar Bordewich System Manager Phone: +47 2205 3034 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Qmail-mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 1:53 PM Subject: Re: MX question related to diff. A and MX record : On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Einar Bordewich wrote: : : > Does a mailserver always look at the MX record, and not the A record : > for a domain? : : Yes. : : > Back a few years, I know we had a problem related to mail going to the : > webserver instead the mailserver, when the domain was set up with an A : > record that was different than the IP address of the hostname pointed : > to by MX. Does this still count, or is this a solved issue? : : This was never the case with Qmail. : : : -- : Sam : :
Einar Bordewich writes: > : > Back a few years, I know we had a problem related to mail going to the > : > webserver instead the mailserver, when the domain was set up with an A > : > record that was different than the IP address of the hostname pointed > : > to by MX. Does this still count, or is this a solved issue? > : > : This was never the case with Qmail. > > Is there other mailservers out there, that this is the known case for? It's quite easy to configure smail so that it sends mail in the wrong order (where wrong is defined by the RFCs). -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Einar Bordewich wrote: > : > Back a few years, I know we had a problem related to mail going to the > : > webserver instead the mailserver, when the domain was set up with an A > : > record that was different than the IP address of the hostname pointed > : > to by MX. Does this still count, or is this a solved issue? > : > : This was never the case with Qmail. > > Is there other mailservers out there, that this is the known case for? Yes. Particularly, older versions of Microsoft Exchange. -- Sam
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Robbie Walker wrote: > Here's related question. What should internal domains be called and how > are they setup in DNS? I've always used a non-existant domain name that I > made up, but I know this is wrong. What's the correct solution? AFAIK there is NO rule forchoosing those domain names. Only one is that this domain shouldn't already resolve. Bye.Olli. //System administrator of "Russia Young" internet group. Any info around "Russia Young" & Boris Nemtsov: http://www.rosmol.ru , http://www.nemtsov.ru , http://www.boris.nemtsov.ru
Hi, by using the script - checkattach - from Noel G. Mistula to reject Emails with attachments i have a problem. i have made some modification because i want to reject all Emails with attachments. See the script below. The rejection works fine, the sender gets a daemon-message, but Emails without attachments disappears. The mail-log says the delivery was successfull. Have anyone an idea? Thanks for help Uli Butzer #!/bin/bash VV2=`grep "filename="|gawk '{split($ATTACHTYPE, results, "."); r=toupper(results[2]); print r}' | cut -c -3` if test -z $VV2 then #echo "leer" exit 0 else echo "Mails with attachment" exit 100 fi exit 0
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 22 Nov 99, at 14:52, Süddeutsche Krankenversicherung wrote: > i have made some modification because i want to reject all > Emails with attachments. See the script below. > > The rejection works fine, the sender gets a daemon-message, > but Emails without attachments disappears. The mail-log says > the delivery was successfull. > > Have anyone an idea? How does your .qmail file look like? Didn't you forget to put the delivery instruction like ./Maildir/ _after_ the invocation of the script? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60 Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBODlby1MwP8g7qbw/EQKSvgCfZFD+2Z68+PpNS9LxdhJJ5w9qtyUAoNWl mLXXfZEfDpGEF+jEx854ySAj =uhv3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01BF2F60.2C1988A0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you didn't have your mail software set in "bloat" mode your (limited) bandwidth would go further :) > > My boss would like me to find out if it is possible > to limit the number of incoming connections qmail will accept=20 > to a specific number? Bandwidth is a huge issue here and incoming > smtp connections are sucking a lot of it. Unfortunatly we dont have > a lot of bucks to upgrade right now.. thus we need to figure out how > we can control incoming smtp connections.=20 Check out the manual page for tcpserver. > > Any ideas?=20 > > Thanks.. Mike > > ------=_NextPart_000_0031_01BF2F60.2C1988A0 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -- Mark Evans St. Peter's CofE High School Phone: +44 1392 204764 X109 Fax: +44 1392 204763
Thanks Steve on your earlier help. I have set up qmail on my machine which earlier had sendmail. Now with sendmail, I can send messages internally to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but when I have qmail installed I cannot send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I tried setting up the control/me file with buyerzone.com but that doesnt help either . I have to have www.buyerzone.com to have qmail working internally. And then I have to address the mails internally either only with the logins or [EMAIL PROTECTED] but not as [EMAIL PROTECTED] I want to have qmail working with [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any help on this ??? Thanks ROhit
Try putting buyerzone.com into control/locals . This should force Qmail to handle those mails to *@buyerzone.com as local an therefore handle your login@buyerzone the same way as [EMAIL PROTECTED] CU Holger > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Rohit Khamkar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet am: Montag, 22. November 1999 18:01 > An: Steve Kapinos > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: Limiting incoming connections > > Thanks Steve on your earlier help. > > I have set up qmail on my machine which earlier had sendmail. Now with > sendmail, I can send messages internally to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] but when I > have qmail installed I cannot send mails to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I tried > setting up the control/me file with buyerzone.com but that doesnt help > either . I have to have www.buyerzone.com to have qmail working > internally. And then I have to address the mails internally > either only > with the logins or [EMAIL PROTECTED] but not as > [EMAIL PROTECTED] I want to have qmail working with > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any help on this ??? > > Thanks > ROhit > >
What do you mean 'when you have qmail installed' ? Are you switching back and forth between qmail and another MTA? Do all your testing using the examples in TEST.deliever using qmail-inject, so that any other links to sendmail or the like are not involved. control/me is only used by qmail to identify what server it thinks its on. Don't mess with /me except to have it have one entry of the name of the machine its qmail is on. control/local and control/rcpthosts is where you will be editing to allow qmail to handle mail for. Your mx record shows mail.buyerzone.com as the mailhost for your domain, and buyerzone.com is another machine. Assuming you are running on mail.buyerzone.com and not another machine... put mail.buyerzone.com in control/me put mail.buyerzone.com, www.buyerzone.com, and buyerzone.com all in control/locals and in control/rcpthosts Do that, then test using the examples in TEST.deliever to addresses both as local, and with domain names. All should be treated locally and delievered local only. Check your log to see where qmail delievers the mail to. -Steve -----Original Message----- From: Rohit Khamkar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 12:01 PM To: Steve Kapinos Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Limiting incoming connections Thanks Steve on your earlier help. I have set up qmail on my machine which earlier had sendmail. Now with sendmail, I can send messages internally to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but when I have qmail installed I cannot send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I tried setting up the control/me file with buyerzone.com but that doesnt help either . I have to have www.buyerzone.com to have qmail working internally. And then I have to address the mails internally either only with the logins or [EMAIL PROTECTED] but not as [EMAIL PROTECTED] I want to have qmail working with [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any help on this ??? Thanks ROhit
I have a mail server set on my machine. When I run a ./config , the qmail script gives a hard error saying it could not find hosts name in canonical form. So the next thing I do is so set up the control files manually and after which qmail starts working. My mail server host is buyerzone.com but if I have this as the line in the control/me file qmail fails to deliver anything anywhere. When I make this www.buyerzone.com , only it works. I dont understand why this is happeneing. Also I can only send mails internally using the login ids and not the full addresses. Again this is what is confusing me. Any help in this would be helpful. Thanx Rohit
Do you have your domain names you want to use 'full names' with in control/locals ? Domains listed in locals will be treated as local only, so any mail you create on the system will not go out smtp, rather be delievered by qmail internally. You also have to have the domain names in control/rcpthosts if you want qmail to accept mail for that domain from smtp. Sounds like you hosed up the control files to me. -----Original Message----- From: Rohit Khamkar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 10:35 AM Cc: Qmail-mailing list Subject: Configuration problem I have a mail server set on my machine. When I run a ./config , the qmail script gives a hard error saying it could not find hosts name in canonical form. So the next thing I do is so set up the control files manually and after which qmail starts working. My mail server host is buyerzone.com but if I have this as the line in the control/me file qmail fails to deliver anything anywhere. When I make this www.buyerzone.com , only it works. I dont understand why this is happeneing. Also I can only send mails internally using the login ids and not the full addresses. Again this is what is confusing me. Any help in this would be helpful. Thanx Rohit
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 02:00:54 +0330 , "Seyyed Hamid Reza Hashemi Golpayegani" writes: > I have installed qmail 1.03 with Redhat Linux ! it is work perefectal . > Here a little problem . I wanna send my emails through an other mail server > that provide me to inernet . Put a line of the form :relay.isp.net in /var/qmail/control/smtproutes. This routes all remote deliveries through the relay.isp.net server. -- Chris Mikkelson | ... a pet peeve of mine is people who directly edit [EMAIL PROTECTED] | the .cf file instead of using the m4 configuration | files ... I treat the .cf file as a binary file | - you should too. --- Eric Allman
I have set up qmail on my machine which earlier had sendmail. Now with sendmail, I can send messages internally to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but when I have qmail installed I cannot send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I tried setting up the control/me file with buyerzone.com but that doesnt help either . I have to have www.buyerzone.com to have qmail working internally. And then I have to address the mails internally either only with the logins or [EMAIL PROTECTED] but not as [EMAIL PROTECTED] I want to have qmail working with [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any help on this ??? Thanks ROhit
Rohit Khamkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I have set up qmail on my machine which earlier had sendmail. Now with >sendmail, I can send messages internally to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but when I >have qmail installed I cannot send mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I tried >setting up the control/me file with buyerzone.com but that doesnt help >either . I have to have www.buyerzone.com to have qmail working >internally. And then I have to address the mails internally either only >with the logins or [EMAIL PROTECTED] but not as >[EMAIL PROTECTED] I want to have qmail working with >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Any help on this ??? Please stop posting this. This is the third copy you've sent to the list. Steve Kapinos has already replied, but in case you missed it, try adding "buyerzone.com" to control/locals and control/rcphosts. -Dave
I have been trying to install qmail using procmail and dot forward configuration. I have followed all the instructions but I'm still having problems. The qmail daemons are runing as I can see them with the ps ax command. The problem is that the clients can not get their email. As an example in the Netscape mail client appears a message like this: "unable to scan $HOME/Maildir" What I should do? As additional info should be noted that my system is running with this hardware: PIII 450 Mhz 256 Mb RAM 8 Gb total HDD About my software RedHat 6.0 Kernel 2.2.10 The software contained in the rpm's from moni.msci.memphis.edu for the 6.0 distribution. The pop3 daemon contained in that rpms. I don't have a copy of the rc scripts because I have deinstalled the packages, but, I have copied the scripts from /var/qmail/boot/ and /var/qmail/defaultdelivery for procmail vsm and dot forward configuration to the appropiate places (/var/qmail/ and /var/qmail/defaultdelivery, respectively). The scripts were used as they come from the package. Please send me instructions. I'm turning back to sendmail until you know what to do. Thanks Diego
I have been trying to install qmail using procmail and dot forward configuration. I have followed all the instructions but I'm still having problems. The qmail daemons are runing as I can see them with the ps ax command. The problem is that the clients can not get their email. As an example in the Netscape mail client appears a message like this: "unable to scan $HOME/Maildir" What I should do? As additional info should be noted that my system is running with this hardware: PIII 450 Mhz 256 Mb RAM 8 Gb total HDD About my software RedHat 6.0 Kernel 2.2.10 The software contained in the rpm's from moni.msci.memphis.edu for the 6.0 distribution. The pop3 daemon contained in that rpms. I don't have a copy of the rc scripts because I have deinstalled the packages, but, I have copied the scripts from /var/qmail/boot/ and /var/qmail/defaultdelivery for procmail vsm and dot forward configuration to the appropiate places (/var/qmail/ and /var/qmail/defaultdelivery, respectively). The scripts were used as they come from the package. Please send me instructions. I'm turning back to sendmail until you know what to do. Thanks Diego
Not knowing exactly what your setup is.. since even you don't seem to know. Where is your procmail delievering to? If you are using qmail-pop3d you need to use Maildir format. Does the user have a Maildir created with the proper permissions in their homedir? Reading more, you say you used the scripts for procmail as in INSTALL.vsm. Well, procmail is probably delievering to /var/spool/mail, which is fine, if thats where your daemons are looking for it. However, qmail-pop3d looks in $HOME/Maildir. You can switch to qpopper or another pop3d if you want to use /var/spool/mail, but if you want to use qmail's pop3d, you need to use Maildir format. Read INSTALL.maildir -Steve -----Original Message----- From: Diego M. L�pez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 11:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Problems installing the package from moni.msci.memphis.edu Importance: High I have been trying to install qmail using procmail and dot forward configuration. I have followed all the instructions but I'm still having problems. The qmail daemons are runing as I can see them with the ps ax command. The problem is that the clients can not get their email. As an example in the Netscape mail client appears a message like this: "unable to scan $HOME/Maildir" What I should do? As additional info should be noted that my system is running with this hardware: PIII 450 Mhz 256 Mb RAM 8 Gb total HDD About my software RedHat 6.0 Kernel 2.2.10 The software contained in the rpm's from moni.msci.memphis.edu for the 6.0 distribution. The pop3 daemon contained in that rpms. I don't have a copy of the rc scripts because I have deinstalled the packages, but, I have copied the scripts from /var/qmail/boot/ and /var/qmail/defaultdelivery for procmail vsm and dot forward configuration to the appropiate places (/var/qmail/ and /var/qmail/defaultdelivery, respectively). The scripts were used as they come from the package. Please send me instructions. I'm turning back to sendmail until you know what to do. Thanks Diego
I am a dolt. On the drive home Friday night, I realized that rblsmtpd was running looking for its own tcprules.cdb file. You nailed it Steve. Thanks to you and Holger H�ffelin for responding. -Rob Havens On 22 Nov 99, at 8:25, Steve Kapinos wrote: > If your tcprulescheck does show he gets the relayclient variable, then one > might assume you are not launching smtpd and tcpserver correctly. > > Paste the init script you are using to wrap smtpd with tcpserver. > > -Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Havens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 5:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Can anyone help with selective relaying/rcpthosts problem? > > > 1. Have testuser who has dialup account at provider.net, gets dynamic IP > address when dials in. > 2. Our company has domain newman.com. Want testuser to be able to > send/receive mail using our Linux 2.2.5-15 server (RedHat6.0) and > qmail1.03 running under tcpserver (uspci.tcp). > 3. Set up user account "outofstate" on newman mail server. Installed > Russell Nelson's checkpassword patch and Mirko Zeibig's script. > 4. outofstate dials up to provider.net, uses pop3 to retrieve his > mail...works. > 5. tcprulescheck qmail-smtpd.cdb (hisIPaddress) reports: > rule (hisIPaddress): > set environment variable RELAYCLIENT= > allow connection > 6. outofstate sends message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 7. outofstate sends message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Outlook express reports: > The message could not be sent because one of the recipients was rejected > by > the server. The rejected email address was [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject 'test 34th time', Account 'Testmail', Server: > 'mailserver.newman.com', Protocol: SMTP, Server Response: '553 sorry, > that domain isn't in my list of allowed > rcpthosts (#5.7.1)',Port 25, Secure (SSL);No, Server Error:553,Error > Number > 0x800CCC79 > 8. Any and all other users with newman.com subnet IP addresses can send > mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ok. Other entries in qmail-smtpd.cdb > are: > 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 9.9.9.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" (for our subnet IP address range) > > Help please. Any suggestions? > >
Hi , I have installed Redhat 6.1 and Qmail 1.03 on it ! works good :) Wanna have some relaying based on message size . For example wanna check messages if larger that 5000 KB don't send it to remote host and reject it . How can I do that ? Any man pages and document are usefull . Thanx Hamid Morva.net Admin
See http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html 3.1 Use the control/databytes file an write in the maximum message size in bytes CU Holger > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Seyyed Hamid Reza Hashemi Golpayegani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet am: Montag, 22. November 1999 17:50 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Relaying based on mail size ! > > Hi , > > I have installed Redhat 6.1 and Qmail 1.03 on it ! works good > :) Wanna have > some relaying based on message size . For example wanna check > messages if > larger that 5000 KB don't send it to remote host and reject > it . How can I > do that ? > Any man pages and document are usefull . > > Thanx > Hamid > Morva.net Admin >
control/databytes jon At 8:20 PM +0330 11/22/99, Seyyed Hamid Reza Hashemi Golpayegani wrote: >Hi , > >I have installed Redhat 6.1 and Qmail 1.03 on it ! works good :) Wanna have >some relaying based on message size . For example wanna check messages if >larger that 5000 KB don't send it to remote host and reject it . How can I >do that ? >Any man pages and document are usefull . > >Thanx >Hamid >Morva.net Admin
How long will an undeliverable mail be deferred, before it's returned to it's sender ? I've seen a few "Delivery deferred" mails in my queue for over a week now... Also, if I have my "offical domain name" set to "online.ie" (which isn't a host, just has an MX record), in an /etc/sendmail.cf (the line Djonline.ie) on a workstation, why does any mail from that host, that is to be delivered locally, get refused with an error like: "Sorry,_I_couldn't_find_any_host_by_that_name." ? (outbound mail is fine, and breaks if I don't have that line in, as internal hostnames aren't externally resolvable). Kate -- Microsoft. The best reason in the world to drink beer. http://www.redbrick.dcu.ie/~valen
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 04:48:59PM +0000, John P. Looney mentioned: > (outbound mail is fine, and breaks if I don't have that line in, as > internal hostnames aren't externally resolvable). Sorted this problem. Turns out I was reporting the wrong domainname in the workstations /etc/sendmail.cf - sorry... Kate -- Microsoft. The best reason in the world to drink beer. http://www.redbrick.dcu.ie/~valen
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 04:48:59PM +0000, John P. Looney wrote: > How long will an undeliverable mail be deferred, before it's returned to > it's sender ? I've seen a few "Delivery deferred" mails in my queue for > over a week now... 604800 seconds (a week) or the number of seconds in control/queuelifetime if it exists. 'man qmail-send' james -- James Raftery (JBR54) - Programmer Hostmaster IE Domain Registry Preferred Contact by Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UCD Computing Services Web: http://www.domainregistry.ie/ Computer Centre Tel: (+353 1) 7062375 Fax: (+353 1) 7062862 Belfield, Dublin 4, IE
At 05:50 PM 11/22/99 +0000, you wrote: >On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 04:48:59PM +0000, John P. Looney wrote: >> How long will an undeliverable mail be deferred, before it's returned to >> it's sender ? I've seen a few "Delivery deferred" mails in my queue for >> over a week now... > >604800 seconds (a week) or the number of seconds >in control/queuelifetime if it exists. 'man qmail-send' > I added the value of 3600 to queuelifetime under /var/qmail/control, and stop and started qmail...this should correct the deferral problem (at least on my system)...also, what is the best method of making manual pages visible in qmail, I added MANPATH /var/qmail/man to /etc/man.conf on my OpenLinux 2.x system...is this ok, or is a better method preferable? -Bill
dd wrote: > > > I'd really like to get some translations going, so if you're > > > interested, please let me know. I'll help any way I can. > > > > I can take the portuguese translation... > > errm and i can do my best for a turkish translation... QMAIL KISS YOU!!11!! --Steve(sorry couldn't resist)
M$ is trying to emulate an IMAP account with this feature called "online check." It basically checks the email, but just returns the headers. The user can then decide which emails to download to their system. With qmail-pop3d, mail is often lost. Anyone know of a work around? (Besides not ever using anything made by M$, which is my personal philosophy.) A patch? Thanks, jon
Jon Rust writes: > M$ is trying to emulate an IMAP account with this feature called > "online check." It basically checks the email, but just returns the > headers. The user can then decide which emails to download to their > system. With qmail-pop3d, mail is often lost. Anyone know of a work > around? I haven't seen anyone report this problem yet. Could you go into more details? -- -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!
Hi, I'm moving over a web based mail to another server, before I make the change to internic I'd like to forward everything to the new server, so I won't have any problem with mail messages in two places, and will only have to defer messages for a few minutes while I transfer the mail boxes. So, with a dot qmail file in my home directory how would I forward everything ? Example: say my domain is mywebmail.com, I want to forward everything to mywebmail.newprovider.com until the domain actually gets switched. So I need to forward [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a dot-qmail file Do I do this with VERP(s) ? I found the explanation in man dot-qmail dificult to understand. If someone could point me to some other documentation or give me an example here that would be great, thanks, Tom -- Tom Fishwick web http://zworg.com e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You could go a much easier way by using control/smtproutes if you tell your new server to accept mails for mywebmail.com (if its also Qmail just put it in your locals or virtualdomains and rcpthosts). Here you tell your QMail to send all messages received for mywebmail.com to mywebmail.newprovider.com by putting a mywebmail.com:new.mail.server or mywebmail.com:[IP of new server] into control/smtproutes. Then give qmail-send a HUP and all mails are immediately redirected. If this is not possible you put .qmail-default file in the directory mail for mywebmail.com get delivered. Then you put �forward $[EMAIL PROTECTED] If this doesn't work, you'll have to choose another environment variable (depending on your installation). Just put a � env > ./env.dat in your .qmail-default file as first line. CU Holger > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Im Auftrag > von Tom Fishwick > Gesendet am: Montag, 22. November 1999 19:21 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: dot file question > > Hi, > > I'm moving over a web based mail to another server, before I make the > change to internic I'd like to forward everything to the new > server, so > I won't have any problem with mail messages in two places, > and will only > have to defer messages for a few minutes while I transfer the mail > boxes. > > So, with a dot qmail file in my home directory how would I forward > everything ? Example: > > say my domain is mywebmail.com, I want to forward everything to > mywebmail.newprovider.com until the domain actually gets > switched. So I > need to forward [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a dot-qmail file > > Do I do this with VERP(s) ? I found the explanation in man dot-qmail > dificult to understand. If someone could point me to some other > documentation or give me an example here that would be great, thanks, > > Tom > > -- > Tom Fishwick > web http://zworg.com > e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Is there one person, who is centrally managing the documentation for Qmail? If yes, who is this person? I remember seeing someone's name in one link, in the documentation section. The Qmail mirror sites do not seem to be identical. Some mirror sites have extra documentation links over others. Thank you. Subba Rao [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/
As far as I know, there's no one to manage the whole documantation. But is this not a reason to find someone? As I'm not at home at the moment (I'm away for an exercise term till feb 2000) I could not do this. But after feb 2000 ... CU Holger > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Subba Rao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet am: Montag, 22. November 1999 20:14 > An: Qmail Users > Betreff: Qmail doc central?? > > > Is there one person, who is centrally managing the > documentation for Qmail? > If yes, who is this person? I remember seeing someone's name > in one link, > in the documentation section. The Qmail mirror sites do not seem to be > identical. Some mirror sites have extra documentation links > over others. > > Thank you. > > Subba Rao > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/ >
I've found a small glitch between qmail and the way my system is tuned. The "noatime" feature is enabled for high volume filesystems, which has improved performance. Since going with qmail, this has also caused a problem with detecting new mail. The "noatime" was not used in /var/spool and I'd like to leave it turned on in /home. But obviously, it is needed wherever the mailbox files actually are. What is the feasibility of moving the mailboxes out of the home directory, maybe back to /var/spool, and just having a symlink in the home directory pointing to where the mail really goes? Would qmail have a problem with this for mailbox format? Would it be better to use .qmail files to point there instead? Is there a way to do this in the default specification so the path is formed in a way unrelated to the home directory, but formed from the username? -- 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]
Hello everyone,
I intalled procmail with maildir and I can't get run normally.
my .qmail file is:
|mailquotacheck
| /var/qmail/bin/preline procmail
and my .procmailrc is:
PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin
DEFAULT=$HOME/
LOGFILE=/dev/null
SHELL=/bin/sh
VERBOSE=ON:0
* ^FROM. *[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/nullanyone help me indicating the error in these files?
thanks in advance
--
-----------------------------
Luís Bezerra de A. Junior
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SecrelNet Informática LTDA
Fortaleza - Ceará - Brasil
Fone: 021852882090
-----------------------------
Dear qmail friends, I've looked at all the online documentation I could find but I didn't find anything related to this. I am thinking of setting up the policy of slashing off the body of messages whenever the body is too long for double-bouncing and/or bouncing messages. Does any one have a reason against that? I came up with that idea after I noticed 3.5 MB messages double-boucing to postmaster. after a web-based e-mail service refused to accept a message sent by one of its users. Did any in the list addressed this problem? How? Thanks for all considerations, daniel ---------------------------------- Daniel Mattos Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tiii.com -----------------
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 09:45:52AM +0000, John P . Looney wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 03:18:37PM -0800, John White mentioned: > > Slowing down the writes to the queue is a bad thing. The queue is > > constantly being sync'ed. > > But I thought that messages were all stored in separate files/directories. > With striping, we can get those spread over a load of disks. I know. That's why I reccomended RAID 1+0 with writeback cache for sites which need queue performance. > > > If he's using Disksuite, he's getting it free with Solaris. > > Actually, DS doesn't come "free" unless you buy the Server edition > > of Solaris, at a cost differential to the WS edition. > > And if he's running it as a mail server ... Sun are pretty lenient with > their workstation/server idea. It's supposed to be at odds with microsoft. > "Here is your $20,000 workstation. We'll be nice and let you use the Server > CD for free !" You don't understand. If you purchase a WS edition of Solaris, you don't get Disksuite. > > > Hmm. Tell that to Dell. We'ed a few Sun E10000s, some with 4TB+ of disks > > > hanging off them, one domain alone with 1600 live users, all using software > > > RAID. Those babies had to have 100% availibility, and a new CPU cost > > > $16000, so if there were real gains from hardware RAID, we would have used > > > it. There wasn't any. It was cheaper and faster. > > For a RAID 1 qmail queue? Or some other RAID topology for some other > > function? > > All the Sun boxes they have run on software RAID - everything from the > massive pan-European sales & support databases to the little 12 CPU credit > card authorisation system. To clarify, my question was: "Were any of the boxes you mention using software RAID 1 for a qmail queue?" Not: "Please mention some applications which these boxes supported." Waxing nostalgic about software raid in the general case doesn't make software raid 1 a good choice for /var/qmail/queue. It's a terrible choice. >>> Hardware raid is only of >>> great benefit for PCs that run NT, or mainframes whose real cost is mips, >>> so they want to move all processing off the processor. Or people that think >>> RAID 5 is a good idea :) >> Not at all. HW RAID is a good way to cache writes, and maximize >> CPU cycles. > How does it cache the writes ? Is this CPU cache, or disk cache. With > software RAID, aren't you just caching anything you write to the disk array > anyway ? I don't really mean to be a hardass here, but you need to know about how the qmail queue works. You have the qmail source right? Included with that source is an "INTERNALS" document which describes how the queue works. With qmail's insistance on fsync'ing, you can see how a writeback cache on the HW RAID controller can help. Or perhaps you don't know? HW RAID controllers can come with non-volitile RAM caches. When part of this cache is in "writeback" mode, scsi write commands are put in the cache, and the controller tells the OS that the command has been completed. Then the writes are committed to hard drive (which have their own caches). Thus, multiple small-block writes followed by fsync's should finish much quicker on a HW RAID with writeback cache. If you're relying on OS RAM to do the same thing for a filesystem, then the fsync will put an end to that. > > It sounds to me like you're abstracting benefits you've seen on software > > RAID to the qmail queue in a RAID 1. That's not a good thing to do, as > > qmail has a pretty unique I/O signature. > > More than likely :) No, I was more talking about using RAID1+0, so he'd > get as much benefit from straight striping as possible. You mentioned that RAID 1+0 would give the max performance, but advocated software -mirroring- as ok for the qmail queue. It isn't. I agree that RAID 1+0 or 10 gives the best protected performance. John
> I don't really mean to be a hardass here, but you need to know about > how the qmail queue works. You have the qmail source right? Included > with that source is an "INTERNALS" document which describes how the > queue works. With qmail's insistance on fsync'ing, you can see how > a writeback cache on the HW RAID controller can help. > > Or perhaps you don't know? HW RAID controllers can come with non-volitile > RAM caches. When part of this cache is in "writeback" mode, scsi write > commands are put in the cache, and the controller tells the OS that the > command has been completed. Then the writes are committed to hard drive > (which have their own caches). Thus, multiple small-block writes followed > by fsync's should finish much quicker on a HW RAID with writeback cache. > > If you're relying on OS RAM to do the same thing for a filesystem, then > the fsync will put an end to that. All this would make hw-cach *forbidden* for qmail queue dir, since then it is *not* guaranteed, that what is synced is writted on disk and will survive a power loss.... Anyway, what is noone mentioning raid 5? I just played with it under linux (software raid) until now - but it seems quite fast. Greetings, Florian Pflug
read the message again, specifically the part about "non-volatile." this is starting to get pretty far off topic for this list, but i'll offer a couple of observations: software raid is pretty much by definition slower than writing straight to disk for a single block at a time, because you still have to write the same data out but you also have to do the bookkeeping involved. as you start to write multiple blocks, you can start to see improved performance as you get rid of a single bottleneck, but at the low end it's a waste. since we're talking about the qmail queue dir here, software raid is pretty silly for the queue dir. messages tend to be small - on our isp mail servers, something like 70-80% of all messages are less than 10k. software raid is useful to lump multiple identical disks into a single large store that spreads the load evenly across spindles, but it's really more of an administrative enhancement than a performance enhancement. we use sw raid for the actual mail spool storage, and local uw scsi disk for the queues. hardware raid is a different beast entirely, particularly when you're talking about stuff that has battery backed caches. i still don't know that it would be a win for qmail unless you had a LARGE queue with lots of large messages. 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. ----- Original Message ----- From: Florian G. Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: John White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; qmail mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon 22 Nov 1999 18.04 Subject: Re: disk mirroring > > I don't really mean to be a hardass here, but you need to know about > > how the qmail queue works. You have the qmail source right? Included > > with that source is an "INTERNALS" document which describes how the > > queue works. With qmail's insistance on fsync'ing, you can see how > > a writeback cache on the HW RAID controller can help. > > > > Or perhaps you don't know? HW RAID controllers can come with non-volitile > > RAM caches. When part of this cache is in "writeback" mode, scsi write > > commands are put in the cache, and the controller tells the OS that the > > command has been completed. Then the writes are committed to hard drive > > (which have their own caches). Thus, multiple small-block writes followed > > by fsync's should finish much quicker on a HW RAID with writeback cache. > > > > If you're relying on OS RAM to do the same thing for a filesystem, then > > the fsync will put an end to that. > > All this would make hw-cach *forbidden* for qmail queue dir, since then it > is *not* guaranteed, that what is synced is writted on disk and will > survive a power loss.... > > Anyway, what is noone mentioning raid 5? I just played with it under linux > (software raid) until now - but it seems quite fast. > > Greetings, Florian Pflug >
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 02:04:50AM +0000, Florian G. Pflug wrote: > > I don't really mean to be a hardass here, but you need to know about > > how the qmail queue works. You have the qmail source right? Included > > with that source is an "INTERNALS" document which describes how the > > queue works. With qmail's insistance on fsync'ing, you can see how > > a writeback cache on the HW RAID controller can help. > > > > Or perhaps you don't know? HW RAID controllers can come with non-volitile > > RAM caches. When part of this cache is in "writeback" mode, scsi write > > commands are put in the cache, and the controller tells the OS that the > > command has been completed. Then the writes are committed to hard drive > > (which have their own caches). Thus, multiple small-block writes followed > > by fsync's should finish much quicker on a HW RAID with writeback cache. > > > > If you're relying on OS RAM to do the same thing for a filesystem, then > > the fsync will put an end to that. > > All this would make hw-cach *forbidden* for qmail queue dir, since then it > is *not* guaranteed, that what is synced is writted on disk and will > survive a power loss.... It depends on your raid card. Some cards/systems battery back-up their cache so that it is not lost in the event of a power failure. > Anyway, what is noone mentioning raid 5? I just played with it under linux > (software raid) until now - but it seems quite fast. What may seem fast to you could be nothing compared to the numbers people are looking for in large environments. --Adam > > Greetings, Florian Pflug >
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 02:04:50AM +0000, Florian G. Pflug wrote: > > Or perhaps you don't know? HW RAID controllers can come with non-volitile > > RAM caches. When part of this cache is in "writeback" mode, scsi write > > commands are put in the cache, and the controller tells the OS that the > > command has been completed. Then the writes are committed to hard drive > > (which have their own caches). Thus, multiple small-block writes followed > > by fsync's should finish much quicker on a HW RAID with writeback cache. > > > > If you're relying on OS RAM to do the same thing for a filesystem, then > > the fsync will put an end to that. > > All this would make hw-cach *forbidden* for qmail queue dir, since then it > is *not* guaranteed, that what is synced is writted on disk and will > survive a power loss.... Not true. It's important to have a NVRAM cache; NV as in non-volitile to survive a power outage. > Anyway, what is noone mentioning raid 5? I just played with it under linux > (software raid) until now - but it seems quite fast. RAID 5 write performance is either as bad or worse than RAID 1. John
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 03:47:47PM -0800, Racer X wrote: > read the message again, specifically the part about "non-volatile." Oh right. How he spelled it. > hardware raid is a different beast entirely, particularly when you're > talking about stuff that has battery backed caches. i still don't know that > it would be a win for qmail unless you had a LARGE queue with lots of large > messages. HW RAID 1+0 is generally a win -because- you don't need a lot of the space. Lop off a 2GB LUN for the qmail queue. Oh, your external firewall needs a high-performance qmail-queue too? There goes another 2GB LUN. That's right: EXTERNAL HW RAID generally can be configured for multiple hosts. Use the rest as protected mailbox storage or generic "network attached storage". Enjoy the praise you get for the high i/o performance. John
Would somebody kindly point me to a one page set of instructions on how to use SerialMail? The INSTALL that comes with serialmail simply says: 1. make 2. make setup check Now what am I supposed to do with the 2 files it apparrently creates, ./install and ./instcheck? I can pretty much guess what they do, but I don't want to make any assumptions. The man pages are nice, but there is no 'guide', nothing that gives a general overview on what needs to be done to get a simple serialmail session going. Much appreciated, Jose
Read the TOISP file. - Eric Jose de Leon escribi�: > > Would somebody kindly point me to a one page set of instructions on how to > use SerialMail? The INSTALL that comes with serialmail simply says: > > 1. make > 2. make setup check > > Now what am I supposed to do with the 2 files it apparrently creates, > ./install and ./instcheck? I can pretty much guess what they do, but I > don't want to make any assumptions. > > The man pages are nice, but there is no 'guide', nothing that gives a > general overview on what needs to be done to get a simple serialmail session > going. > > Much appreciated, > Jose
Just in case any of you decides to block those chattering bare/stray line feed MS SMTP servers until they are patched and want to give the patch home in addition to the explanatory link in the bounce message, qmail-smtpd.c:void straynewline() { out("451 See http://pobox.com/~djb/docs/smtplf.html.\r\n"); flush(); _exit(1); } we decided that the 451 becomes a 551... here is the link to MS's patch courtesy one of the people I blocked through tcpserver... http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q224/9/83.ASP mike. __________________________________________ NetZero - Defenders of the Free World Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Hi, I want to setup a server to dial into an ISP, download email from a single pop account, sort it, and deliver it to the server qmail accounts based upon subject, content, etc. Is a combination of Fetchmail and Procmail the best way to do this? Thanks a bunch! Barton
Barton, I won't take a lot of time to explain this, as this site does a good job: http://www.i2k.net/~dougvw/mailqueue.html Try it out, and let the list know if you have any troubles or further questions. -Martin On 22 Nov, Barton Hodges wrote: : Hi, : : I want to setup a server to dial into an ISP, download email : from a single pop account, sort it, and deliver it to the server : qmail accounts based upon subject, content, etc. : : Is a combination of Fetchmail and Procmail the best way to do this? : : Thanks a bunch! : : Barton -- Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe Communications --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, I need some help.. I have qmail setup with tcpserver and procmail with mail going successfully to /var/spool/mail/<user> I can send messages anywhere from the local machine and on the local network. However I wish to provide a service where i can have members access their email from their existing isp setup.. heres a map of how i want it to work member calls their isp member checks for email on their email account here member replys to email to external email source --- this isn't working. why? why is there different rules.. how do i fix the situation.. its bloomin frustrating i thought i had it all working.. everyone can get their mail.. but they can't send it to external sites but i can send from here to where they are trying to send it to.. Please help mebegin:vcard n:Arnott;Cameron tel;pager:N/A tel;cell:Alt Contact +61-7-4163-1832 tel;fax:+61-7-4163-3101 tel;home:+61-7-4171-0304 tel;work:+61-7-4163-3100 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:www.kat.net.au org:KATnet;Sales,Customer Relations,Enquiries,Customer Support,Accounts version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Webmaster,Postmaster,System Administrator,Manager adr;quoted-printable:;;Unit 5, 106 Brisbane Street=0D=0A;Nanango;Queensland;4615;Australia note;quoted-printable:Hi,=0D=0AI'd like to introduce you to my hobby.=0D=0AI'm setting up a new Internet service which will include=0D=0A. Web email (no banners) (under construction)=0D=0A. Web page hosting =0D=0A. Internet Dialup (still working on them) x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:Cameron Arnott end:vcard
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 09:31:47AM +1000, Cameron Arnott wrote: > Hi, > I need some help.. I have qmail setup with tcpserver and procmail > with mail going successfully to /var/spool/mail/<user> > > I can send messages anywhere from the local machine and on the local > network. > However I wish to provide a service where i can have members access > their email from their existing isp setup.. > heres a map of how i want it to work > > member calls their isp > member checks for email on their email account here > member replys to email to external email source --- this isn't > working. why? You're going to have to be a lot more specific than "this isn't working" if you want to get an answer. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that you read http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#relaying Chris
guys, is there a way for get the existing mails in the users' Maildirs and forward them to a remote address? i have a client who has a lot of mails and who wants to have these forwarded to his other ISP. i can forward any incoming mails but how do i forward his existing mails? especially those w/ encoded attachments (sigh...). thanks. -marlon
Use Mutt, it supports Maildir too. On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: > guys, > > is there a way for get the existing mails in the users' Maildirs and > forward them to a remote address? > > i have a client who has a lot of mails and who wants to have these > forwarded to his other ISP. i can forward any incoming mails but how do i > forward his existing mails? especially those w/ encoded attachments (sigh...). > > thanks. > > -marlon >
is there any command-line tool that i can use? mutt is too interactive for me. i was thinking along the lines of processing the entire maildir using a shell script. -marlon At 01:21 PM 11/23/99 +0800, Benjamin de los Angeles Jr. wrote: >Use Mutt, it supports Maildir too. > >On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: > > > guys, > > > > is there a way for get the existing mails in the users' Maildirs and > > forward them to a remote address? > > > > i have a client who has a lot of mails and who wants to have these > > forwarded to his other ISP. i can forward any incoming mails but how do i > > forward his existing mails? especially those w/ encoded attachments > (sigh...). > > > > thanks. > > > > -marlon > >
Thus said Marlon Anthony Abao on Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:27:17 +0800: > is there any command-line tool that i can use? mutt is too interactive for > me. > i was thinking along the lines of processing the entire maildir using a > shell script. You might have a look at this perl script... You can tweak it for your needs or use it as a model for a new script. http://www.mail-archive.com/contrib/bounce/ It is actually in another subdirectory, but I trust you will find it. :) Andy -- +====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+ | Linux is about freedom of choice | +== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
Marlon, I can't tell you how many times I've had to do: # for i in *; do qmail-inject -a [EMAIL PROTECTED] < $i; done You should `man qmail-inject` to grok why this works, but it'll get the messages all headed to the address "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" regardless of what's in the header. Very handy. The files that are sitting in the Maildir stay there, which is just fine with me...because usually my users are going to come back and get them later anyway. Good luck, -Martin On 23 Nov, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: : is there any command-line tool that i can use? mutt is too interactive for : me. : i was thinking along the lines of processing the entire maildir using a : shell script. : : -marlon : : At 01:21 PM 11/23/99 +0800, Benjamin de los Angeles Jr. wrote: : : >Use Mutt, it supports Maildir too. : > : >On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: : > : > > guys, : > > : > > is there a way for get the existing mails in the users' Maildirs and : > > forward them to a remote address? : > > : > > i have a client who has a lot of mails and who wants to have these : > > forwarded to his other ISP. i can forward any incoming mails but how do i : > > forward his existing mails? especially those w/ encoded attachments : > (sigh...). : > > : > > thanks. : > > : > > -marlon : > > : -- Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe Communications --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
does this one-liner handle offsets of MIME-encoded attachments. its actually these attachements that are giving me a headache. -marlon At 12:00 AM 11/23/99 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Marlon, > >I can't tell you how many times I've had to do: > ># for i in *; do qmail-inject -a [EMAIL PROTECTED] < $i; done > >You should `man qmail-inject` to grok why this works, but it'll get the >messages all headed to the address "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" regardless of >what's in the header. Very handy. > >The files that are sitting in the Maildir stay there, which is just >fine with me...because usually my users are going to come back and get >them later anyway. > >Good luck, > >-Martin > >On 23 Nov, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: > : is there any command-line tool that i can use? mutt is too > interactive for > : me. > : i was thinking along the lines of processing the entire maildir using a > : shell script. > : > : -marlon > : > : At 01:21 PM 11/23/99 +0800, Benjamin de los Angeles Jr. wrote: > : > : >Use Mutt, it supports Maildir too. > : > > : >On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: > : > > : > > guys, > : > > > : > > is there a way for get the existing mails in the users' Maildirs and > : > > forward them to a remote address? > : > > > : > > i have a client who has a lot of mails and who wants to have these > : > > forwarded to his other ISP. i can forward any incoming mails but > how do i > : > > forward his existing mails? especially those w/ encoded attachments > : > (sigh...). > : > > > : > > thanks. > : > > > : > > -marlon > : > > > : > >-- >Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe Communications --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have been following the instructions in http://qmail-docs.surfdirect.com.au/docs/qmail-antirelay.html but it seems like I am still an open relay! What is wrong?! What I want to do is allow any user on my C-net / LAN to send mail thru the SMTP server without any limitations, and the world only send/recive mails either to or from a @company address. LOCALHOST: can send as who-ever@what-ever to anyone@anyhost LAN: can send as who-ever@what-ever to anyone@anyhost OUR C-NET: can send as who-ever@what-ever to anyone@anyhost WORLD: can send as user@company to anyone@anyhost Best regards, Michael Boman PS The files: # cat /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts intsys.wizoffice.com intsys.wizoffice.com.sg localhost webmail.intsys.wizoffice.com webmail.intsys.wizoffice.com.sg webmail.wizoffice.com webmail.wizoffice.com.sg wizoffice.com wizoffice.com.sg # cat /etc/tcp.smtp 192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" 10.1.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" 127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" 203.117.18.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" :allow I made the /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb file using following command: # cat /etc/tcp.smtp | tcprules /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb ~/tcp.smtp.tmp I am running tcpserver with following syntrax: tcpserver -v -H -R -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c 100 -u 1001 -g 101 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 & DS -- Michael Boman, Systems Engineer WizOffice.Com Pte Ltd - 16 Tannery Lane, #06-00 Crystal Time Building, Singapore. 347778 Your Online Office Wizard - http://www.wizoffice.com/
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 11:23:26AM +0800, Michael Boman wrote: > I have been following the instructions in > http://qmail-docs.surfdirect.com.au/docs/qmail-antirelay.html but it seems > like I am still an open relay! What is wrong?! > > What I want to do is allow any user on my C-net / LAN to send mail thru the > SMTP server without any limitations, and the world only send/recive mails > either to or from a @company address. > > LOCALHOST: can send as who-ever@what-ever to anyone@anyhost > LAN: can send as who-ever@what-ever to anyone@anyhost > OUR C-NET: can send as who-ever@what-ever to anyone@anyhost > WORLD: can send as user@company to anyone@anyhost > > Best regards, > Michael Boman > > PS > The files: > > # cat /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts > intsys.wizoffice.com > intsys.wizoffice.com.sg > localhost > webmail.intsys.wizoffice.com > webmail.intsys.wizoffice.com.sg > webmail.wizoffice.com > webmail.wizoffice.com.sg > wizoffice.com > wizoffice.com.sg > > # cat /etc/tcp.smtp > 192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 10.1.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 203.117.18.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > :allow If those are really your files and you haven't patched qmail-smtpd in some weird way, then your relay isn't open. Are you sure that it is? Chris
As I don't have anywhere to put this up - I'll post the package to the list (it's only 15K). If anyone else is interested in cleaning up my code - please do - but please be gentle :-) As usual, it works for me but I'll give no guarantees how it'll work for you. I'll include the README below for details. -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 3391 377 Fax: +64 3 3391 417 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- This is the README for scan4virus v0.1 -------------------------------------------------- The scan4virus package can be inserted into a (currently) patched qmail-1.03 system to provide virus protection for all incoming SMTP traffic. Required Packages Qmail-1.03 Perl 5.005_03+ Maildrop-0.73 <URL:http://www.flounder.net/~mrsam/maildrop/> Bruce Guenter's QMAILQUEUE patch <URL:http://www.qmail.org/qmailqueue-patch> Perl module Time::HiRes (if debugging enabled) So-far tested Virus scanners: Trend's Virus scanner for Linux MacAfee's (NAI's) virus scanner for Linux The QMAILQUEUE patch allows you to tell qmail to use an alternate qmail-queue program - in this case antivirus-qmail-queue.pl. It unpacks the message into its MIME components, decides whether or not it has a virus (by running file scanners over it) and then either: a) resends it to the end destination (by unsetting QMAILQUEUE) or b) notifies sender (and optionally CC's to local admin) that message has a virus, stores it, and exits. *** TODO *** Currently due to my lack of in-depth knowledge of programming anything, I don't know how to handle the fact that there are multiple processes accessing both STDIN and STDOUT. This leads to problems with locally generated Emails that are piped straight into Email, and means that I can't do the proper job of getting antivirus-qmail-queue.pl to call /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue directly after it's finished. IF SOMEONE COULD HELP ME OUT THAT'D BE APPRECIATED. If we get that working, then Bruce's patch wouldn't be needed. I've been using it for over a month here - just on my own Email. It takes on average 0.4 seconds to scan with TWO scanners an average sized message, and around a minute for a 20Mb mixed tar and zip file message - not bad... ;-) If the STDIN/STDOUT issue could be rectified, this could become a general release for us at least... Anyway, to install: * edit antivirus-qmail-queue.pl setting PATHs/etc accordingly. Configure which scanners you have (currently either MacAfee's or Trends) - check out subroutines uvscan_scanner and iscan_scanner to ensure directories/etc are correct. Also it's up to you to install all that and download/keep up-to-date virus DAT files/etc ;-) * cp antivirus-qmail-queue.pl /var/qmail/bin/antivirus-qmail-queue.pl * chown qmailq:qmail /var/qmail/bin/antivirus-qmail-queue.pl * mkdir -p /var/spool/qmailscan/failed/new /var/spool/qmailscan/viruses/new \ /var/spool/qmailscan/working/new * chown -R qmailq:qmail /var/spool/qmailscan/ then alter qmail startup to the following: echo -n "qmail-smtpd, " QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/antivirus-qmail-queue" export QMAILQUEUE (ulimit -d 2048 -m 2048 && tcpserver -l`hostname -f` -c20 -b40 -P -h -R -t10 -O -Q -v -x/var/qmail/control/tcprules.cdb -g505 -u400 0 25 qmail-smtpd 2>&1) | splogger tcpserver & ..or whatever yours is like. Basically set QMAILQUEUE just before you invoke qmail-smtpd - that way only it runs with a different qmail-queue - everything else carries on running the standard qmail-queue. BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THAT - YOU DON'T WANT AN INFINITE LOOP FORMING!!! To ensure you keep an eye on Emails that fail due to the STDIN/OUT problem, just run something like the following from crontab once a day: find /var/spool/qmailscan/*/new -type f I find it only catches a couple of my workstations nightly jobs. Converting them to writing to a file and then sending that file fixes that problem... ****************** Contacting Me ****************** This software is released under the GPL as found in the COPYING file enclosed. Any Questions etc to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jason Haar 23/Nov/1999
scan4virus-0.1.tgz
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 05:04:41PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote: > As I don't have anywhere to put this up - I'll post the package to the list > (it's only 15K). If anyone else is interested in cleaning up my code - > please do - but please be gentle :-) Sigh - munted it on the first attempt :-( Forgot to mention it needs to be setuid qmailq - just like qmail-queue/etc. Find attached a patch - it's now v0.11... -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 3391 377 Fax: +64 3 3391 417
I just discovered that if you are using the LWQ qmail rc script with RHL 6.1, you need to add the following lines: to the "start" section: touch /var/lock/subsys/qmail to the "stop" section: rm -f /var/lock/subsys/qmail Otherwise, qmail will not be properly shut down; the main rc script looks for the lock file before it cans a "subsystem". Note that I arbitrarily chose "qmail" as the name of the lock file, but it seems a logical choice. I dunno how this relates, if at all, to other Linux distros. Pete Cavender ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Curt Cobain understood gun control: He hit exactly where he was aiming.
I've read the docs on relaying but still can't get it to work My members can be anywhere in the world.. and use various isp's , but they have an email account here. I want them (the people who have email accounts here) to be able to send email through here as this is their mailserver and block everyone else.. example: member calls their isp.. (they don't have a perminent isp.. they have multiple internet accountsmove around..) their mail account here is [EMAIL PROTECTED] they have my mailserver as their mail server <mail.kat.net.au> they can pick up their mail but when they try to send mail their mailer reports that : the message could not be sent because the recipient was rejected by the server ...... protocol smtp server responce 553 sorry that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) port 25 secure (ssl) no server error 553 error number Ox800ccc79 however i can send a message to the same account which they are trying to send to from here (local machine) without any problemsbegin:vcard n:Arnott;Cameron tel;pager:N/A tel;cell:Alt Contact +61-7-4163-1832 tel;fax:+61-7-4163-3101 tel;home:+61-7-4171-0304 tel;work:+61-7-4163-3100 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:www.kat.net.au org:KATnet;Sales,Customer Relations,Enquiries,Customer Support,Accounts version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Webmaster,Postmaster,System Administrator,Manager adr;quoted-printable:;;Unit 5, 106 Brisbane Street=0D=0A;Nanango;Queensland;4615;Australia note;quoted-printable:Hi,=0D=0AI'd like to introduce you to my hobby.=0D=0AI'm setting up a new Internet service which will include=0D=0A. Web email (no banners) (under construction)=0D=0A. Web page hosting =0D=0A. Internet Dialup (still working on them) x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:Cameron Arnott end:vcard
This is EXACTLY what I want to do too! But right now my mailserver is STILL an OPEN RELAY. Can someone please help me fix it? /Michael Boman > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, 23 November, 1999 17:18 PM > To: Qmail List > Subject: re: remote users sending mail prob > > > > I've read the docs on relaying but still can't get it to work > > My members can be anywhere in the world.. and use various isp's , but > they have an email account here. > > I want them (the people who have email accounts here) to be able to send > email through here as this is their mailserver and block everyone else.. > > example: > > member calls their isp.. (they don't have a perminent isp.. they have > multiple internet accountsmove around..) > > their mail account here is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > they have my mailserver as their mail server <mail.kat.net.au> > > they can pick up their mail but when they try to send mail > > their mailer reports that : > > the message could not be sent because the recipient was rejected by the > server > ...... > protocol smtp server responce 553 sorry that domain isn't in my list of > allowed > rcpthosts (#5.7.1) port 25 secure (ssl) no server error 553 error > number Ox800ccc79 > > however i can send a message to the same account which they are trying > to send to from here (local machine) without any problems > > >
So you have two ways: First the bad way: Kill your rcpthosts which will cause your server to be an open relay. A variation of this is checking the sender address (see qmail.org for this patch) which is easy to fake, so your an open relay again. Second the good way: Apply one of the packages on qmail.org which allow smtp-connections after an authentication over pop3. That's the way most mass providers like gmx go. The pop3-connection saves the ip and you're allowed to send mails for a certain time. Third the other good way: Patch your qmail-smtpd to allow authentication over esmtp. There's a package on qmail.org you'll have to use in combination with a checkpassword program. If you use this, you need to use a MUA which supports this smtp-authentication (like outlook, netscape). Just have a look on www.qmail.org CU Holger > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet am: Dienstag, 23. November 1999 10:18 > An: Qmail List > Betreff: re: remote users sending mail prob > > > I've read the docs on relaying but still can't get it to work > > My members can be anywhere in the world.. and use various isp's , but > they have an email account here. > > I want them (the people who have email accounts here) to be > able to send > email through here as this is their mailserver and block > everyone else.. > > example: > > member calls their isp.. (they don't have a perminent isp.. they have > multiple internet accountsmove around..) > > their mail account here is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > they have my mailserver as their mail server <mail.kat.net.au> > > they can pick up their mail but when they try to send mail > > their mailer reports that : > > the message could not be sent because the recipient was > rejected by the > server > ...... > protocol smtp server responce 553 sorry that domain isn't in > my list of > allowed > rcpthosts (#5.7.1) port 25 secure (ssl) no server error 553 error > number Ox800ccc79 > > however i can send a message to the same account which they are trying > to send to from here (local machine) without any problems > > >
Just look on www.qmail.org for Mrs. Brisby has written a user/password based authentication mechanism for qmail-smtpd. This lets your microsoft's outlook express supports (outgoing mail server user name) and netscape 4.5 (and above-betas) users securely roam. Users can use a slightly modified version of their own checkpassword.c program as outlined in my own vchkpw.c that I use. Also, two very simple perl scripts to perform pop3-based authentication for qmail. or see my last mail CU Holger > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Michael Boman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet am: Dienstag, 23. November 1999 10:30 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Qmail List > Betreff: RE: remote users sending mail prob > > This is EXACTLY what I want to do too! But right now my > mailserver is STILL > an OPEN RELAY. Can someone please help me fix it? > > /Michael Boman > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, 23 November, 1999 17:18 PM > > To: Qmail List > > Subject: re: remote users sending mail prob > > > > > > > > I've read the docs on relaying but still can't get it to work > > > > My members can be anywhere in the world.. and use various > isp's , but > > they have an email account here. > > > > I want them (the people who have email accounts here) to be > able to send > > email through here as this is their mailserver and block > everyone else.. > > > > example: > > > > member calls their isp.. (they don't have a perminent > isp.. they have > > multiple internet accountsmove around..) > > > > their mail account here is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > they have my mailserver as their mail server <mail.kat.net.au> > > > > they can pick up their mail but when they try to send mail > > > > their mailer reports that : > > > > the message could not be sent because the recipient was > rejected by the > > server > > ...... > > protocol smtp server responce 553 sorry that domain isn't > in my list of > > allowed > > rcpthosts (#5.7.1) port 25 secure (ssl) no server error 553 error > > number Ox800ccc79 > > > > however i can send a message to the same account which they > are trying > > to send to from here (local machine) without any problems > > > > > > >
