qmail Digest 1 Jan 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 867
Topics (messages 34939 through 34947):
Re: How to configure....?
34939 by: Toni Mueller
2 Problems SMTP and Virtual
34940 by: CDR Inc
34944 by: Uwe Ohse
34946 by: awasson.voyager.brawleyonline.com
Re: daemontools and qmailanalog
34941 by: Anand Buddhdev
34942 by: Jos Backus
Re: bouncing messages.. but still recieving mail
34943 by: Claus F�rber
new yp.to DNS software
34945 by: D. J. Bernstein
Re: UTC vs Local Time timestamps (Linux)
34947 by: Andy Bradford
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello!
On Fri, Dec 31, 1999 at 01:55:34PM +0900, Yong Dae Won wrote:
> My problem is that qmail is locking when I try to deliver large file
> (about over 1Mbyte) from my UNIX Mailbox to Windows messenger. So I
> could not see my email. Now my Mailbox size is 13M.. How I can see my
> large mail?? Can the qmail deliver large email to local mail user??
At least it can. I once received a mail sized 35meg, and our customers
regularly send and receive mails over 10megs w/o problems other than
hitting administratively installed size limits on the remote ends, and
using qmail of course.
Some items to check:
- How much space of that 13meg do you have left on that Unix server?
- Do you have a 1meg limit in your Windows messenger?
- Does your Unix administrator or so limit you in the size of individual
emails? (Why are you not said administrator?)
- Your email did get delivered on the Unix box into your (POP3?) mailbox,
to begin with?
- The Unix box has resources left over that could handle delivering such
a mail (eg. swap space, process limits)?
> My email is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Send me an email to here...
If you ask on a list, be prepared to pick up the answer there.
Regards,
Toni.
-------- NIC: TM2155
Oeko.neT Mueller & Brandt GbR sales: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
v: +49 2261 979364 f: +49 2261 979366 http://www.oeko.net
Unix, networking, administration, consulting, programming, Internet services
OK Trying to re-acquaint myself with linux, so bear with me.. :)
I just installed QMAIL on Redhat 6.1
I thought I had the install right. The POP3 seems to work OK.. And I can
telnet to the SMTP side and do the test. But it doesn't receive the test
SMTP mail, and when I try to send mail from an EMAIL Client (Outlook) I get
the following error:
THIS MESSAGE COULD NOT BE SENT BECAUSE ONE OF THE RECEPIENTS WAS REJECTED BY
THE SERVER
SERVER RESPONSE: '553: sorry, that domains isn't in my list of allowed
rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ( Account 'cdrinc.net', SMTP Server: 'cdrinc.net')
Anyone have any ideas???
Secondly, I want to set up this one LINUX box to act as different domains.
As far as email goes, keep everything completely seperate. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
checks mail.dom1.com for his mail.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] checks mail.dom2.com
for her mail. etc etc..
I found one web site that explains how to do this
(http://www.tibus.net/pgregg/projects/qmail/single-uid-howto.txt) I
followed this until it came to the users/assign and it lost me...
Any assistance on these issues would be most appreciated
Michale
M I S
> SERVER RESPONSE: '553: sorry, that domains isn't in my list of allowed
> rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ( Account 'cdrinc.net', SMTP Server: 'cdrinc.net')
"that domain".
/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts doesn't contain the domain name of the
recipient, and tcp-env or tcp-server (depending on how qmail-smtpd
is started) doesn't set the RELAYCLIENT variable.
I assume you need the later. Do not set it unconditionally, only
for client for which you do want to relay. See FAQ 5.4
> Secondly, I want to set up this one LINUX box to act as different domains.
> As far as email goes, keep everything completely seperate. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> checks mail.dom1.com for his mail.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] checks mail.dom2.com
> for her mail. etc etc..
> I found one web site that explains how to do this
> (http://www.tibus.net/pgregg/projects/qmail/single-uid-howto.txt) I
> followed this until it came to the users/assign and it lost me...
yeah, i felt the same the first time i saw it :-)
The solution depends on what you want and need. Easy one:
a) logins throw the normal UNIX services (/etc/passwd, shadow,
unmodified checkpassword). For example bob:
Create ~bob/.qmail-default containing a single line,
./Maildir/
chown that to bob,
and "maildirmake ~bob/Maildir".
Do the same for the other users (write a script for that).
Mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" will not work, you need to
create ~bob/.qmail for that.
b) /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:bob
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:bob
If all mails for domain.example are supposed to go to bob
then use:
domain.example:bob
c) add domain.example to rcpthosts
d) do not add domain.example to locals.
See FAQ 3.2 and 3.3. See the qmail-send manual page for a detailed
description of the virtualdomains file.
Using the users/assign mechnism isn't hard either, but somewhat more
complicated, and scales better. There are some packages available to
handle that for you, see www.qmail.org
Regards, Uwe
Is the domain you are trying to send to in the locals files?
Tony Wasson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 31 Dec 1999, CDR Inc wrote:
> OK Trying to re-acquaint myself with linux, so bear with me.. :)
>
> I just installed QMAIL on Redhat 6.1
>
> I thought I had the install right. The POP3 seems to work OK.. And I can
> telnet to the SMTP side and do the test. But it doesn't receive the test
> SMTP mail, and when I try to send mail from an EMAIL Client (Outlook) I get
> the following error:
>
> THIS MESSAGE COULD NOT BE SENT BECAUSE ONE OF THE RECEPIENTS WAS REJECTED BY
> THE SERVER
> SERVER RESPONSE: '553: sorry, that domains isn't in my list of allowed
> rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ( Account 'cdrinc.net', SMTP Server: 'cdrinc.net')
>
>
> Anyone have any ideas???
>
>
>
> Secondly, I want to set up this one LINUX box to act as different domains.
> As far as email goes, keep everything completely seperate. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> checks mail.dom1.com for his mail.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] checks mail.dom2.com
> for her mail. etc etc..
> I found one web site that explains how to do this
> (http://www.tibus.net/pgregg/projects/qmail/single-uid-howto.txt) I
> followed this until it came to the users/assign and it lost me...
>
> Any assistance on these issues would be most appreciated
>
>
> Michale
> M I S
>
On Fri, Dec 31, 1999 at 10:37:43AM +0100, Van Liedekerke Franky wrote:
No. You have to pass the logs through some type of filter which converts
the hex timestamps into decimal. Strip out the leading "@4" from the
timestamp, then convert the next 15 digits into decimal, and it'll give
you the seconds since 1st Jan 1970, and then the next 8 digits,
converted to decimal, will give you the nanoseconds. You can strip out
the last 3 digits of that figure to give you only the microseconds. The
resulting set of strings is the format daemontools-0.53's accustamp
uses.
> Hi,
>
> just a quickie: does qmailanalog handle the timestamps from the new
> daemontools package?
--
See complete headers for more info
Here's a quick hack:
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
while (<>) {
if (my($s,$t,$rest)=/^\@.(\w{15})(\w{8})(.*)/) {
$s = hex($s);
$t = hex($t); $t =~ s/500$//;
$_ = "$s.$t$rest\n";
}
} continue {
print;
}
exit 0;
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never
_/ _/ _/ having to say you're sorry."
_/ _/_/_/ -- D. J. Bernstein
_/ _/ _/ _/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _/_/ _/_/_/ use Std::Disclaimer;
Cameron Arnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu([131.193.178.181]) by
> 21cn.com(JetMail 2.3.2.1)
> with SMTP id /aimcque/jmail.rcv/0/jm1b3860678d; Wed, 22 Dec 1999
> 00:00:34 -0000
> Received: (qmail 210 invoked by uid 1002); 21 Dec 1999 23:59:56 -0000
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Precedence: bulk
> Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
These lines mean that 21.com is malconfigured and forwards messages to
the address in the To header (which is the list address) instead of
correctly handling the envelope addresses.
Obviously, a user at 21.com is subscribed to the list, but the broken
mailer forwards the messages back to the list instead, which detects the
loop and bounces the message.
Useful for spammers: Just send the messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
actual recipients in the To header.
I already informed [EMAIL PROTECTED] and qmail-owner, but 21.com's
admins did not react.
Did I say I hate those ***** domain POP3 systems?
Hm, maybe in the future, ezmlm should check for such brokenness and
refuse to subscribe users of such broken systems.
> also.. i'm getting and reading mail right.. then i'm also getting mail
> saying that qmail couldn't deliver my mail
...
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 203.87.57.227 does not like recipient.
> Remote host said: 550 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Relay access denied
> Giving up on 203.87.57.227.
But this is really strange.
Is it possible that qmail already sends a bounce message if the primary
MX fails and before it tries to send messages to the secondary.
Anyway, whatever 203.87.57.227 is, it does not accept messages for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Claus Andre Faerber <http://www.faerber.muc.de>
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Starting later today, all yp.to DNS records will be provided by the same
DNS software that has been handling list.cr.yp.to for the past week.
Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you encounter any DNS problems
with http://cr.yp.to or with mailing lists at list.cr.yp.to.
Beware that UIC will be disconnected from the network tonight from 0400
GMT to 0800 GMT. This is a PHB problem, not a DNS problem.
---Dan
Thus said Peter Cavender on Fri, 31 Dec 1999 01:50:05 EST:
> Has anyone noticed that if you have your hardware clock set to UTC
> but the Linux clock to local time, that regular messages have the
> local time time-stamp, but bounce messages are dated in UTC?
The hardware clock should probably be in UTC and then linux will simply
display your local time according to the TZ variable or whatever
timezone you are in. This behaviour seems normal to me.
> After messing with this a while, I decided to just just put my HW
> clock on local time, to heck with UTC and DST. Comments?
I believe that most UNIX boxes that I have used have the hardware clock
set to GMT/UTC---I guess this could be considered a standard. At any
rate, you should probably be using something like NTP anyway just to be
safe. :)
Andy
p.s. Happy New Year
--
+====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+
| Linux is about freedom of choice |
+== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
