qmail Digest 3 Feb 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 900
Topics (messages 36558 through 36661):
[stats on maillog files]
36558 by: Dewald Strauss
451 DNS temporary failure (#4.3.0)
36559 by: torben fjerdingstad
36560 by: petervd.vuurwerk.nl
36561 by: Sam
Re: pop3 start
36562 by: Joao Bordalo
36576 by: Dave Sill
36577 by: Dave Sill
36661 by: Bernat Ginard
hung qmail-smtpd's on solaris 7
36563 by: Anand Buddhdev
36571 by: Mark Delany
36595 by: Eric Huss
36642 by: Russ Allbery
Re: a Questing
36564 by: Md. Sifat Ullah Patwary
MIME
36565 by: Jeff Russell, AIT
36567 by: petervd.vuurwerk.nl
36568 by: Russell P. Sutherland
Re: Sending to an IP address
36566 by: Bruno Wolff III
36574 by: Scott D. Yelich
36620 by: Wilson Fletcher
Re: Bandwidth
36569 by: Alex Rubenstein
Re: Two smtpd/databytes?
36570 by: thomas.erskine-dated-12a473b4466811d7.crc.ca
36573 by: Mark Delany
Patch form ETRN
36572 by: Md. Sifat Ullah Patwary
Re: what makes ezmlm fast?
36575 by: Dave Sill
36578 by: petervd.vuurwerk.nl
36579 by: Mark Delany
36601 by: Fred Lindberg
Re: Logging information about each email.
36580 by: Bill Parker
36581 by: Chris Johnson
36582 by: Timothy L. Mayo
36605 by: Greg Owen
multilog datestamping
36583 by: A Hoffman
36587 by: Mads E Eilertsen
36590 by: Dave Sill
36596 by: A Hoffman
36597 by: Chris Johnson
36599 by: A Hoffman
36600 by: Chris Garrigues
36602 by: Dave Sill
36604 by: Robbie Honerkamp
36606 by: Tim Hunter
36635 by: Troy Morrison
36645 by: Russ Allbery
36646 by: Russ Allbery
36649 by: Russ Allbery
36650 by: Mark Delany
36655 by: Russ Allbery
Re: Red Hat sysV init rc.d script for qmail?
36584 by: Bruce Guenter
php3 mail()
36585 by: Andreas Altenburg
36647 by: Russ Allbery
36654 by: Andreas Altenburg
36656 by: Russ Allbery
"shell-init: could not get current directory"
36586 by: Mullen, Patrick
36617 by: Mullen, Patrick
Linux Patch for fsync of metdata
36588 by: Qmail
Re: Linux kernel turning for mail performance?
36589 by: Jeremy Hansen
36630 by: Len Budney
36632 by: Derek Callaway
36633 by: Derek Callaway
36653 by: petervd.vuurwerk.nl
Re: urgent: How start tcpsever with qmail using procmail as deliverer
36591 by: Dave Sill
Re: default to mailing list
36592 by: Dave Sill
36598 by: J.M. Roth \(iip\)
Re: Can it be done ?
36593 by: Dave Sill
Re: where is the mistake
36594 by: Dave Sill
virus scanning & lotus
36603 by: jyoung.helus.com
36608 by: Rainer Link
36652 by: Roland Pelzer
HELP:cannot telnet but deliver and not receive
36607 by: Bolmehag, Peter
36609 by: Chris Johnson
mqueue
36610 by: clifford thurber
36611 by: Chris Johnson
36612 by: Robbie Honerkamp
Retry Schedule and bounce time?
36613 by: smanjourides.corp.visto.com
36614 by: Mads E Eilertsen
36616 by: Racer X
HOw:very virtual domains - copy mail between domains
36615 by: Bolmehag, Peter
Broken tcp_wrappers (resulting in selective relaying not working)
36618 by: Stephen Mills
36619 by: Chris Johnson
36622 by: Stephen Mills
36623 by: Chris Johnson
36626 by: Stephen Mills
QMail SMTP Woes?
36621 by: Jose de Leon
36624 by: Chris Johnson
36625 by: Jose de Leon
36627 by: Stephen Mills
36628 by: Greg Owen
36629 by: Jose de Leon
36631 by: Stephen Mills
Re: mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] password protected
36634 by: Troy Morrison
Error in piping message contents
36636 by: Ryan Hughes
proxy authentication
36637 by: Muhammad Ali
delete mails in queue
36638 by: mail_manoj
load balancing
36639 by: Muhammad Ali
Error in sending mails
36640 by: Anthony Diaz
How to stop this from occuring?
36641 by: Bill Parker
36643 by: Faried Nawaz
36644 by: Mark Delany
36651 by: Mark Delany
auto-reply in qmail
36648 by: Alok Bhatt
36660 by: Marco Leeflang
New to Mailing List
36657 by: nsaravanan.md.in.dsqsoft.com
Re: SMTP problem
36658 by: Claus F�rber
complex user routing
36659 by: sachin
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi everybody, Does anyone know of a program that can analyze the qmail logfiles and supply the following stats: 1) output per domain? 2) domain that received/sent the most mail? 3) user that received/sent the most mail? I have been using qmail-analog, but it is not sufficient for what I need. regards Dewald
A customer at sbi.dk has no luck delivering mail to mail.k.tera-house.ac.jp through our mail relay, mail.net.uni-c.dk. Currently there are 875 letters queued for a user @mail.k.tera-house.ac.jp. It has no MX, but an A record. mail.net.uni-c.dk has no trouble resolving it. I just tried to generate a bounce by writing to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but after three hours it has not appeared here. I cannot figure out where the problem is. Here is a bounce our customer received. Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 22484 invoked by alias); 2 Feb 2000 10:48:14 -0000 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 22481 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2000 10:48:14 -0000 Received: from mail.net.uni-c.dk (130.226.1.3) by vahlfisk.uni-c.dk with SMTP; 2 Feb 2000 10:48:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 25536 invoked by alias); 2 Feb 2000 10:48:15 -0000 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 103068 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2000 10:48:14 -0000 Received: from sbi4back.sbi.dk (130.226.99.36) by mail.net.uni-c.dk with SMTP; 2 Feb 2000 10:48:14 -0000 Received: from SBI_4/SpoolDir by sbi4back.sbi.dk (Mercury 1.44); 2 Feb 00 11:48:15 +0100 Received: from SpoolDir by SBI_4 (Mercury 1.44); 2 Feb 00 11:48:08 +0100 Resent-from: "Lars Struwing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Resent-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 11:48:07 +0100 Received: from SpoolDir by SBI_4 (Mercury 1.44); 2 Feb 00 11:46:39 +0100 Received: from mail.net.uni-c.dk (130.226.1.3) by sbi4back.sbi.dk (Mercury +1.44); 2 Feb 00 11:46:35 +0100 Received: (qmail 92250 invoked for bounce); 2 Feb 2000 10:46:34 -0000 Date: 2 Feb 2000 10:46:34 -0000 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: failure notice Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.net.uni-c.dk. 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]>: Sorry, I couldn't find any host by that name. (#4.1.2) I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long. --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: (qmail 94262 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2000 09:45:11 -0000 Received: from sbi4back.sbi.dk (130.226.99.36) by mail.net.uni-c.dk with SMTP; 26 Jan 2000 09:45:11 -0000 Received: from SBI_4/SpoolDir by sbi4back.sbi.dk (Mercury 1.44); 26 Jan 00 10:45:03 +0100 Received: from SpoolDir by SBI_4 (Mercury 1.44); 26 Jan 00 10:43:17 +0100 From: Mail Delivery System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 10:43:08 +0100 Subject: Delivery failure notification MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary=Part_Boundary-133F9DD Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --Part_Boundary-133F9DD Content-type: Text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-description: Mail delivery failure report Content-disposition: Inline With reference to your message with the subject: "=?utf-8?B?44GL44Gq44KE44GY44KF44KT44GT?=" The local mail transport system has reported the following problems it encountered while trying to deliver your message: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 451 DNS temporary failure (#4.3.0) ------------------------------------------------------------------- Your mail message is being returned to you in the next part of this message. Should you need assistance, please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] --Part_Boundary-133F9DD Content-type: Message/RFC822 Content-description: Contents of original mail message Received: from SpoolDir by SBI_4 (Mercury 1.44); 26 Jan 00 10:00:03 +0100 Resent-from: "Shunsuke Itoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Resent-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 09:59:56 +0100 Received: from SpoolDir by SBI_4 (Mercury 1.44); 26 Jan 00 09:42:09 +0100 Received: from k.tera-house.ac.jp (210.227.137.35) by sbi4back.sbi.dk (Mercury +1.44) with ESMTP; 26 Jan 00 09:42:00 +0100 Received: (from bin@localhost) by k.tera-house.ac.jp (8.9.1a/3.7W) id RAA29110 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 17:33:52 +0900 (JST) X-Authentication-Warning: firewall.kunitachi: bin set sender to +<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> using -f Received: from proxy.kunitachi(172.29.0.15) by firewall.kunitachi via smap +(V2.0) id xma029107; Wed, 26 Jan 00 17:33:23 +0900 Received: from guest (99317003.kunitachi [172.29.10.18] (may be forged)) by proxy.kunitachi (8.9.1a/3.7W) with SMTP id RAA11266 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 17:34:36 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <000c01bf67da$4d68aba0$fa52fea9@guest> From: "=?utf-8?B?SnVua28gS2FuYXlhL+mHkeiwt+OAgOa3s+WtkA==?=" +<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Shunsuke Itoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: =?utf-8?B?44GL44Gq44KE44GY44KF44KT44GT?= Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 17:49:37 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to base64 by proxy.kunitachi id RAA11266 [ cut ] -- Med venlig hilsen / Regards Netdriftgruppen / Network Management Group UNI-C Tlf./Phone +45 35 87 89 41 Mail: UNI-C Fax. +45 35 87 89 90 Bygning 304 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK-2800 Lyngby
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 01:40:36PM +0100, torben fjerdingstad wrote: > A customer at sbi.dk has no luck delivering mail to > mail.k.tera-house.ac.jp through our mail relay, mail.net.uni-c.dk. > > Currently there are 875 letters queued for a user @mail.k.tera-house.ac.jp. > It has no MX, but an A record. mail.net.uni-c.dk has no trouble resolving > it. I just tried to generate a bounce by writing to > [EMAIL PROTECTED], but after three hours it has > not appeared here. It is not an A record, it's a CNAME. That's not quite allowed. When reporting problems to the qmail list, at least try to be exact in your info ;) Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, torben fjerdingstad wrote: > A customer at sbi.dk has no luck delivering mail to > mail.k.tera-house.ac.jp through our mail relay, mail.net.uni-c.dk. The DNS for mail.k.tera-house.ac.jp is broken. ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 4 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; mail.K.tera-house.ac.jp, type = MX, class = IN -- Sam
Andreas Altenburg wrote: > > i read "life with qmail" and set ip my server correctly. i did not find the > part how to start the pop3d automatically. so i entered the lines of the doc > ("tcpserver..." to my boot script of qmail. Now each transaction is logged > to the console. Does anybody have I working startup script for qmail-send, > qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3??? in qmail web page: (...)Ximenes Zalteca originally wrote some SysVinit scripts, and Mate Wierdl has improvements on them for 1.03 which are for use with RedHat Linux (and undoubtedly any other SysVinit-using OS). They control qmail and qmail-smtpd via the following tools: tcpserver, cyclog, setuser, supervise, svc, svcstat, accustamp, errosto.(...) You can get it from ftp://moni.msci.memphis.edu/pub/qmail/qmail-run/qmail-run-4.tar.gz -- Joao Bordalo
"Andreas Altenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >i read "life with qmail" and set ip my server correctly. i did not find the >part how to start the pop3d automatically. so i entered the lines of the doc >("tcpserver..." to my boot script of qmail. Now each transaction is logged >to the console. Does anybody have I working startup script for qmail-send, >qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3??? What you need to do is look at how the LWQ scripts run qmail-smtpd, and do the same thing for qmail-pop3d. I'll add details to a future rev of LWQ. -Dave
Joao Bordalo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Andreas Altenburg wrote: >> >> i read "life with qmail" and set ip my server correctly. i did not find the >> part how to start the pop3d automatically. so i entered the lines of the doc >> ("tcpserver..." to my boot script of qmail. Now each transaction is logged >> to the console. Does anybody have I working startup script for qmail-send, >> qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3??? > >(...)Ximenes Zalteca originally wrote some SysVinit scripts, and Mate >Wierdl has improvements on them for 1.03 which are for use with RedHat >Linux (and undoubtedly any other SysVinit-using OS). They control qmail >and qmail-smtpd via the following tools: tcpserver, cyclog, setuser, >supervise, svc, svcstat, accustamp, errosto.(...) PLEASE don't suggest that people who installed using LWQ install various other incompatible startup scripts. -Dave
Andreas Altenburg wrote: > > i read "life with qmail" and set ip my server correctly. i did not find the > part how to start the pop3d automatically. so i entered the lines of the doc > ("tcpserver..." to my boot script of qmail. Now each transaction is logged > to the console. Does anybody have I working startup script for qmail-send, > qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3??? Hi for qmail-stmp and qmail-send I user the living with qmail script, and for pop3 I use a custom one I send attachet. It's intended to work with vpopmail instead of checkpassword and uses some SuSE defines for start-up scripts. -- Bernat Ginard Llad� mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kaos.es#! /bin/sh . /etc/rc.config PATH=/var/qmail/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin export PATH return=$rc_done case "$1" in start) echo "Starting POP3 server" env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ supervise /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 \ tcpserver 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup prova.es \ /var/qmail/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & echo -e $return ;; stop) echo "Stopping POP3 server" svc -dx /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 echo -e $return ;; stat) echo "Checking pop3" svstat /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 echo -e $return ;; pause) echo "Pausing pop3" svc -p /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 echo -e $return ;; cont) echo "Continuing pop3" svc -c /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 echo -e $return ;; restart) echo "Restarting pop3." svc -d /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 svc -u /var/supervise/qmail/pop3 echo -e $return ;; help) cat <<HELP stop -- stops pop service (pop connections refused, nothing goes out) start -- starts pop service (pop connection accepted, mail can go out) pause -- temporarily stops pop (connections accepted, nothing leaves) cont -- continues paused pop service stat -- displays status of pop service restart -- stops and restarts pop, sends pop a TERM & restarts it HELP ;; *) echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop|restart|stat|pause|cont|help}" exit 1 ;; esac test "$return" = "$rc_done" -o "$return" = "$rc_done_up" || exit 1 exit 0
I'm running qmail under Solaris 7 (aka solaris 2.7). I have a problem: I have many qmail-smtpd processes on the system which appear to have hung. Some of them are many days old, as old as Jan 17, 2000. I noticed them today when I saw that tcpserver's concurrency was quite high, yet there wasn't that much mail coming in. If I attach a truss to those processes, I see them "sleeping" on a read call: # truss -p 12270 read(0, 0x0002A420, 1024) (sleeping...) ^C # I would have thought that they would timeout after 1200 seconds. I searched the archives and Mark Delany mentioned in http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1999/02/msg00752.html that he had seen a similar thing on Solaris 2.6, but there was no further discussion on a solution. At the moment, the only thing I can do is to kill off the processes by hand, or worse, reboot. Has anyone else seen this, and if so, is there a known solution? Is there any Solaris guru out there, who might know of a kernel parameter that I can tune to reduce this problem? -- See complete headers for more info
Sorry to say - it never got resolved. I believe it's an OS bug as I've never seen it on other systems that I've run qmail on and the code looks completely correct. If you look at timeoutread.c you'll see that the code has issued the read() as a consequence of the previous select() call indicating that the fd can be read. So I think you're stuck with it. Possibly an alarm wrapper of maybe a script that sweeps for old qmail-smtpd processes might be a workaround. Regards. On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 04:38:53PM +0300, Anand Buddhdev wrote: > I'm running qmail under Solaris 7 (aka solaris 2.7). I have a problem: I > have many qmail-smtpd processes on the system which appear to have hung. > Some of them are many days old, as old as Jan 17, 2000. I noticed them > today when I saw that tcpserver's concurrency was quite high, yet there > wasn't that much mail coming in. If I attach a truss to those processes, > I see them "sleeping" on a read call: > > # truss -p 12270 > read(0, 0x0002A420, 1024) (sleeping...) > ^C > # > > I would have thought that they would timeout after 1200 seconds. I > searched the archives and Mark Delany mentioned in > > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1999/02/msg00752.html > > that he had seen a similar thing on Solaris 2.6, but there was no > further discussion on a solution. At the moment, the only thing I can do > is to kill off the processes by hand, or worse, reboot. Has anyone else > seen this, and if so, is there a known solution? Is there any Solaris > guru out there, who might know of a kernel parameter that I can tune to > reduce this problem? > > -- > See complete headers for more info
I've seen the same thing. After patching the machines with the latest recommended patch set, it seems to have cleared up. It is definitely an OS bug. I tried to determine if there was a specific bug ID or patch # that specifically affected this issue, but I was not successful. -Eric On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Anand Buddhdev wrote: > I'm running qmail under Solaris 7 (aka solaris 2.7). I have a problem: I > have many qmail-smtpd processes on the system which appear to have hung. > Some of them are many days old, as old as Jan 17, 2000. I noticed them > today when I saw that tcpserver's concurrency was quite high, yet there > wasn't that much mail coming in. If I attach a truss to those processes, > I see them "sleeping" on a read call: > > # truss -p 12270 > read(0, 0x0002A420, 1024) (sleeping...) > ^C > # > > I would have thought that they would timeout after 1200 seconds. I > searched the archives and Mark Delany mentioned in > > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1999/02/msg00752.html > > that he had seen a similar thing on Solaris 2.6, but there was no > further discussion on a solution. At the moment, the only thing I can do > is to kill off the processes by hand, or worse, reboot. Has anyone else > seen this, and if so, is there a known solution? Is there any Solaris > guru out there, who might know of a kernel parameter that I can tune to > reduce this problem? > > -- > See complete headers for more info >
Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry to say - it never got resolved. I believe it's an OS bug as I've > never seen it on other systems that I've run qmail on and the code looks > completely correct. > If you look at timeoutread.c you'll see that the code has issued the > read() as a consequence of the previous select() call indicating that > the fd can be read. The last time we analyzed this and tracked it down in INN, I added the following comment to the INN source code: i = read(cp->fd, &bp->Data[bp->Used], maxbyte-1); if (i < 0) { /* Solaris (at least 2.4 through 2.6) will occasionally return EAGAIN in response to a read even if the file descriptor already selected true for reading, apparently due to some internal resource exhaustion. In that case, return -2, which will drop back out to the main loop and go on to the next file descriptor, as if the descriptor never selected true. This check will probably never trigger on platforms other than Solaris. */ if (errno == EAGAIN) { return -2; } INN uses fully non-blocking sockets, so the read returns EAGAIN immediately. If the socket weren't set nonblocking, I'm not sure if the read would block or not; it might. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Where can I get the patch? At 04:27 PM 2/1/00 +1100, you wrote: >Sifat, > >> Does qmail support ETRN, then how? > >Not natively, you'll have to patch it. > >Regards, > >Marc-Adrian Napoli >Connect Infobahn Australia >+61 2 92811750 > > >
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 09:12:16AM -0500, Jeff Russell, AIT wrote: > Quick question? > > Does qmail support MIME? Why should it? Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
* Jeff Russell, AIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [ 2 Feb 2000 09:06]: > Quick question? > Does qmail support MIME? MIME is something that is supported (or not) by your MUA (Mail User Agent, e.g. Eudora or Outlook Express). Qmail is a MTA (Mail Transfer Agent) and does not really care whether the email messages it's tranporting are MIME encoded or not. So quick answer... yes. -- Quist Consulting Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 219 Donlea Drive Voice: +1.416.696.7600 Toronto ON M4G 2N1 Fax: +1.416.978.6620 CANADA WWW: http://www.quist.on.ca
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 12:29:03AM -0500, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Wilson Fletcher wrote: > > > I ried to send to wilson@[203.26.11.154] but it failed. Can someone tell me why ? > > Because this form of addressing is obsolete and deprecated. Once upon a > time MX records were few and far between. That is no longer the case, so > there's no need for this nonsense. Except when you are trying to get email through when DNS is broken. I remember getting ticked off at the people who wrote send mail, because it insisted on doing reverse lookups of IP addresses before sending email on to an address with a domain litteral. Trying to send the messages with telnet was a pain.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 12:29:03AM -0500, > Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Wilson Fletcher wrote: > > > I ried to send to wilson@[203.26.11.154] but it failed. Can someone tell me why ? > > Because this form of addressing is obsolete and deprecated. Once upon a > > time MX records were few and far between. That is no longer the case, so > > there's no need for this nonsense. I disagree. I find this very useful when forwarding email. Scott -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBOJhSmR4PLs9vCOqdAQE2ygQApy1LjtORSD/asso2wE1iL7lsO9uETg5w n8e/ApIxQwMaN0NcIrk2l5+uKcgsLo+SaW++De/uAeaifwSnWSc2SlVHVxZR+cGn 17LDnQeXsgnBmRPw24XXZtGsFI8AjhYAGwwFY9yfM55WaFxXVSqMF9rHyOBOlMFR O905dE2M4Do= =bhsV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I disagreed too but I couldn't be bothered replying. I'm using it at the moment for testing because our current domain is handled by another server I don't want to change the MX records until I've tested it a bit. Wilson ---------- From: Scott D. Yelich[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2000 2:51 To: Bruno Wolff III Cc: Sam; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Sending to an IP address -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 12:29:03AM -0500, > Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Wilson Fletcher wrote: > > > I ried to send to wilson@[203.26.11.154] but it failed. Can someone tell me why ? > > Because this form of addressing is obsolete and deprecated. Once upon a > > time MX records were few and far between. That is no longer the case, so > > there's no need for this nonsense. I disagree. I find this very useful when forwarding email. Scott -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBOJhSmR4PLs9vCOqdAQE2ygQApy1LjtORSD/asso2wE1iL7lsO9uETg5w n8e/ApIxQwMaN0NcIrk2l5+uKcgsLo+SaW++De/uAeaifwSnWSc2SlVHVxZR+cGn 17LDnQeXsgnBmRPw24XXZtGsFI8AjhYAGwwFY9yfM55WaFxXVSqMF9rHyOBOlMFR O905dE2M4Do= =bhsV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
http://netflow.nac.net/mrtg/switch1.oct.nac.net/469/switch1.oct.nac.net-469.html tempest.nac.net is a qmail box with ~18,000 pop boxes. As you can see, our weekly average is ~350 kb/s, with a peak at 1 mb/s. On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Russell P. Sutherland wrote: > * Marek Narkiewicz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [ 1 Feb 2000 23:02]: > > > I hate to ask such a general question, but hat sort of bandwidth is needed to >accomodate up to 10000 home > > dialup users for smtp and pop3 services? I just need some sort o rough estimate as >I have a budget to > > overcompensate somewhat. > > I help with an ISP that has a base of ~ 1500 users and 150 dialup > lines. We connect to the Internet with a full T1 line (1.5 Mbps). > The line gets close to saturation most evenings. > > -- > Quist Consulting Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 219 Donlea Drive Voice: +1.416.696.7600 > Toronto ON M4G 2N1 Fax: +1.416.978.6620 > CANADA WWW: http://www.quist.on.ca >
On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Mark Delany wrote: > Sure. Just run two instances of qmail. Actually, you don't even have to run two instances. "man qmail-smtpd" and note that the DATABYTES environment variable overrides control/databytes, if the variable exists. Tcpserver will let you specify environment variables in your access-control file (created by tcprules). Add a DATABYTES=0 to the lines permitting your own IP blocks in and you're off. > In fact, why not mutlihome your system (or alias depending on which > term you prefer) and have them both on port 25. One listens to your > internally advertised address and one listens to your MX address. > > You can also control how many resources go to which service then, all > on the one machine. > > > Regards. > > > On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 09:30:44AM +0800, Brian Baquiran wrote: > > Is it possible to run two versions of qmail-smtpd (say, on different port #s), > > with different control/databytes files? Boss is asking whether we can set a > > limit on the size of incoming mail (easy, use databytes) but have no limit on > > the outgoing mail. Easiest way is to have 2 SMTP servers on separate machines, > > but would it be possible to this up on only one machine? > > > > I am running qmail-smtpd under tcpserver, if that is any help. > > > > TIA, > > Brian > > -- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.baquiran.com > > US Fax: (603) 908-0727 > > AIM: bbaquiran > -- "Life is much too important to be taken seriously." Thomas Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (613) 998-2836
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 10:12:24AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Mark Delany wrote: > > > Sure. Just run two instances of qmail. > > Actually, you don't even have to run two instances. "man qmail-smtpd" and > note that the DATABYTES environment variable overrides control/databytes, Quite right. I'd forgotten about that. I had to think for a second why I did tend to run two instances. The main reasons are for other benefits not relating to the DATABYTES requirement. Namely that a DOS or heavy load on your MX listener still allows your internal people access to SMTP. Regards. > if the variable exists. Tcpserver will let you specify environment > variables in your access-control file (created by tcprules). Add a > DATABYTES=0 to the lines permitting your own IP blocks in and you're off. > > > In fact, why not mutlihome your system (or alias depending on which > > term you prefer) and have them both on port 25. One listens to your > > internally advertised address and one listens to your MX address. > > > > You can also control how many resources go to which service then, all > > on the one machine. > > > > > > Regards. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 09:30:44AM +0800, Brian Baquiran wrote: > > > Is it possible to run two versions of qmail-smtpd (say, on different port #s), > > > with different control/databytes files? Boss is asking whether we can set a > > > limit on the size of incoming mail (easy, use databytes) but have no limit on > > > the outgoing mail. Easiest way is to have 2 SMTP servers on separate machines, > > > but would it be possible to this up on only one machine? > > > > > > I am running qmail-smtpd under tcpserver, if that is any help. > > > > > > TIA, > > > Brian > > > -- > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.baquiran.com > > > US Fax: (603) 908-0727 > > > AIM: bbaquiran > > > > -- > "Life is much too important to be taken seriously." > Thomas Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (613) 998-2836 >
Hi! Where can I get the ETRN patch for qmail patch? Sifat.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 03:03:22PM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: >> >> Can someone explain to me what exactly makes ezmlm fast? I >> would like to try to adapt some of its functionality and speed >> to a customized list processor. Thanks for any input. > >One word: qmail. Another word: cdb. MLM performance consists of two components: updating list databases, and sending message to subscribers. With ezmlm, the sending part is entirely the responsibility of the MTA (qmail). Maintaining the databases is ezmlm's job. Because ezmlm uses an indexed database format (cdb) it's able to do lookups much faster. -Dave
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:08:41AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 03:03:22PM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: > >> > >> Can someone explain to me what exactly makes ezmlm fast? I > >> would like to try to adapt some of its functionality and speed > >> to a customized list processor. Thanks for any input. > > > >One word: qmail. > > Another word: cdb. > > MLM performance consists of two components: updating list databases, > and sending message to subscribers. With ezmlm, the sending part is > entirely the responsibility of the MTA (qmail). Maintaining the > databases is ezmlm's job. Because ezmlm uses an indexed database > format (cdb) it's able to do lookups much faster. ezmlm doesn't use cdb. It uses a directory-based hashing which is indeed much better than a flat list like majordomo uses, so you do have a bit of a point. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
> > >> Can someone explain to me what exactly makes ezmlm fast? I > > >One word: qmail. > > > > Another word: cdb. > > > > MLM performance consists of two components: updating list databases, > > and sending message to subscribers. With ezmlm, the sending part is > > entirely the responsibility of the MTA (qmail). Maintaining the > > databases is ezmlm's job. Because ezmlm uses an indexed database > > format (cdb) it's able to do lookups much faster. > > ezmlm doesn't use cdb. > > It uses a directory-based hashing which is indeed much better than a > flat list like majordomo uses, so you do have a bit of a point. Furthermore, each of these files are pre-formatted so that they can be fed directly into qmail-queue without further manipulation. From memory, they are null terminated strings of recipients. The final point is the extensions to the submission process that qmail-send supports such that a single queue injection with multiple recipients can use VERP because the VERP generation is done by qmail-send. (It's hard finding this info, but it is documented in the addresses man page). So there are many components coming into play here that affect the performance of ezmlm. Which part of 'fast' were you asking about exactly? The main weakness I see with ezmlm is on large lists because the bounce handling uses a flat directory structure which eventually runs into OS performance issues on many forms of Unix. By large I mean 250,000+ Regards.
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 09:16:35 -0800, Mark Delany wrote: >Furthermore, each of these files are pre-formatted so that they can be fed >directly into qmail-queue without further manipulation. From memory, they are >null terminated strings of recipients. This is insignificant to list performance. Assume 30 msg/s and a list of 30,000 => 20 min or so. If ezmlm-send takes 20 ms or 40 ms to read the addresses and pipe them to qmail has not effect whatsoever. >VERP because the VERP generation is done by qmail-send. (It's hard finding This is key. Queueing the message in a crash-proof manner is the most expensive part. Doing it once instead of 30,000 times saves lots of time/space/money. The unique (qmail VERP) feature allows you to "label" each message with a custom envelope sender (not just recipient) for automated bounce handling. >The main weakness I see with ezmlm is on large lists because the bounce >handling uses a flat directory structure which eventually runs into OS >performance issues on many forms of Unix. By large I mean 250,000+ This and other inefficiencies in bounce handling (apparent only for large lists) have been addressed by ezmlm-idx since version 0.30. See http://www.ezmlm.org and ftp://ftp.ezmlm.org/pub/patches/ezmlm-idx-0.40.tar.gz (FAQ section on bounce handling) for more info. -Sincerely, Fred (Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
>> >> Any hints on where to start? >> > >> >Your maillogs. They contain all this information. >> >> Heh, true, but not when each mail was received or sent...now what? > >Yes they do, have another look :) > Ok, here is an sample from my current log file :) 949438248.678057 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 949438248.678087 end msg 51564 949439125.810556 new msg 51564 949439125.810586 info msg 51564: bytes 1030 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 27275 uid 779 1 949439125.814061 starting delivery 9709: msg 51564 to local xxxxxxx.com-kelly@d onbest.com 949439125.814123 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 949439125.814153 starting delivery 9710: msg 51564 to local xxxxxxx.com-sam@don best.com 949439125.814209 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 949439125.945242 delivery 9709: success: did_0+0+1/ 949439125.945282 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 949439125.949184 delivery 9710: success: did_0+0+1/ 949439125.949221 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 949439125.949251 end msg 51564 949439132.351102 new msg 51564 949439132.351131 info msg 51564: bytes 1545 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 27281 uid 7791 Do you see any time stamps in there, Peter (unless i'm blind, I sure don't) <smile> -Bill
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 09:33:50AM -0800, Bill Parker wrote: > Do you see any time stamps in there, Peter (unless i'm blind, > I sure don't) <smile> > 949439132.351131 info msg 51564: bytes 1545 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ That's a time stamp. Pipe this output into tailocal (from daemontools-0.53) and it'll be more recognizable. Chris
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Bill Parker wrote: > >> >> Any hints on where to start? > >> > > >> >Your maillogs. They contain all this information. > >> > >> Heh, true, but not when each mail was received or sent...now what? > > > >Yes they do, have another look :) > > > > Ok, here is an sample from my current log file :) > > 949438248.678057 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > 949438248.678087 end msg 51564 > 949439125.810556 new msg 51564 > 949439125.810586 info msg 51564: bytes 1030 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 27275 uid > 779 > 1 > 949439125.814061 starting delivery 9709: msg 51564 to local > xxxxxxx.com-kelly@d > onbest.com > 949439125.814123 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 > 949439125.814153 starting delivery 9710: msg 51564 to local > xxxxxxx.com-sam@don > best.com > 949439125.814209 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 > 949439125.945242 delivery 9709: success: did_0+0+1/ > 949439125.945282 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 > 949439125.949184 delivery 9710: success: did_0+0+1/ > 949439125.949221 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > 949439125.949251 end msg 51564 > 949439132.351102 new msg 51564 > 949439132.351131 info msg 51564: bytes 1545 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp > 27281 > uid 7791 > > Do you see any time stamps in there, Peter (unless i'm blind, > I sure don't) <smile> Those numbers at the beginning of each line ARE timestamps. :) They just don't make sense to humans. Pass the file through tailocal or tai64nlocal depending on which version of daemontools you are using. > > -Bill > > > --------------------------------- Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Administrator localconnect(sm) http://www.localconnect.net/ The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/ One Monroeville Center, Suite 850 Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 810-8888 Phone (412) 810-8886 Fax
>I'm wondering the best place/way to log details about each email to a >database of some sort. >Specifically I need to log, from address, to address, and email size. > >Any hints on where to start? Start with the following FAQ entry: ] How do I keep a copy of all incoming and outgoing mail messages? ] ] Answer: Set QUEUE_EXTRA to "Tlog\0" and QUEUE_EXTRALEN to 5 in ] extra.h. Recompile qmail. Put ./msg-log into ~alias/.qmail-log. ] ] You can also use QUEUE_EXTRA to, e.g., record the Message-ID of ] every message: run ] ] | awk '/^$/ { exit } /^[mM][eE][sS][sS][aA][gG][eE]-/ { print }' ] from ~alias/.qmail-log. Instead of piping through awk, for example, you could write a perl script which scans the message to get the appropriate info and then inserts that info into a database. Alternately, you can just use QUEUE_EXTRA to log full mail messages to a file, and have a script process it once an (hour, day, week, whatever). This is much more wasteful of disk space, but if your "database" doesn't like multiple concurrent access, it's a quick fix. Finally, the information you ask for may also be represented by the mail logs (although it will be envelope from/to, not header from/to). If that works for you, then they're already ripe for the picking with the right script. Good luck!
Morning, I installed qmail and daemontools according to LWQ and the linked info on daemontools. As a result, I'm using multilog. QMail deliver works locally, and appears to stop and start normally. However, the logs are not working as expected. For some reason tai64nlocal does not appear to be kicking in. Instead of a readable datestap, I get: @4000000038986b631b585fb4 status: local 1/10 remote 1/20 @4000000038986b6320b690ac delivery 5: success: did_1+0+0/ @4000000038986b6320b6e69c status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 @4000000038986b6320b71964 end msg 188980 @4000000038986b6623cdb004 delivery 4: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ @4000000038986b6623ce2534 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Insight on what may not be configured would help. QMail is launched at startup by the rc file included with LWQ. # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/log/run #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail/smtpd If there is additional information what would help, please let me know. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-: Aodhan of Mountainview Internet Guy Ad Astra Per Aspera "A Rough Road Leads To The Stars" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, A Hoffman wrote: [...] For some reason tai64nlocal > does not appear to be kicking in. > # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t > /var/log/qmail > > # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/log/run > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t > /var/log/qmail/smtpd These scripts don't call tai64nlocal anywhere, that's why. :-) Mads
Mads E Eilertsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, A Hoffman wrote: > >[...] For some reason tai64nlocal >> does not appear to be kicking in. > >> # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run >> #!/bin/sh >> exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t >> /var/log/qmail >> >> # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/log/run >> #!/bin/sh >> exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t >> /var/log/qmail/smtpd > >These scripts don't call tai64nlocal anywhere, that's why. :-) Nor should they. -Dave
On that note, what is an example of a startup script that includes useful datestamping for multilog? I used the examples set forward in section 2.8.2. 'System start-up files' in LWQ, and it is not working as I had hoped. Thanks! - A On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Mads E Eilertsen wrote: > On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, A Hoffman wrote: > > [...] For some reason tai64nlocal > > does not appear to be kicking in. > > > # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run > > #!/bin/sh > > exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t > > /var/log/qmail > > > > # more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/log/run > > #!/bin/sh > > exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t > > /var/log/qmail/smtpd > > These scripts don't call tai64nlocal anywhere, that's why. :-) > > Mads > > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-: Aodhan of Mountainview Internet Guy Ad Astra Per Aspera "A Rough Road Leads To The Stars" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:20:30AM -0800, A Hoffman wrote: > On that note, what is an example of a startup script that includes useful > datestamping for multilog? I used the examples set forward in section 2.8.2. > 'System start-up files' in LWQ, and it is not working as I had hoped. Thanks! Don't try to do it from your startup file. When you want to look at the logs and see time stamps that mean something to you, pipe the log through tailocal or tai64nlocal (for cyclog and multilog files respectively). Chris
Thanks Chris. Now that begs the question of why I should use multilog instead of syslog which does datestamp if you tell it to. It doesn't seem beneficial to add a superflous step. I apologize if this point seems irrelevant. However if there is a better method, I would appreciate pointers to the documentation. - Aodhan On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Chris Johnson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:20:30AM -0800, A Hoffman wrote: > > On that note, what is an example of a startup script that includes useful > > datestamping for multilog? I used the examples set forward in section 2.8.2. > > 'System start-up files' in LWQ, and it is not working as I had hoped. Thanks! > > Don't try to do it from your startup file. When you want to look at the logs > and see time stamps that mean something to you, pipe the log through tailocal > or tai64nlocal (for cyclog and multilog files respectively). > > Chris > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-: Aodhan of Mountainview Internet Guy Ad Astra Per Aspera "A Rough Road Leads To The Stars" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-:
> From: A Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:30:26 -0800 (PST) > > > Thanks Chris. Now that begs the question of why I should use multilog > instead of syslog which does datestamp if you tell it to. It doesn't seem > beneficial to add a superflous step. I apologize if this point seems > irrelevant. The reasoning is that logging should be low-overheard. (I happen to be in the process of fighting with the fact that syslogd on my system likes to use 98% of the CPU and would much prefer if everything on my system used multilog.) 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
A Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Chris. Now that begs the question of why I should use multilog >instead of syslog which does datestamp if you tell it to. It doesn't seem >beneficial to add a superflous step. I apologize if this point seems >irrelevant. Syslog is a nightmare: insecure, performance hog, unreliable, low precision, and has no mechanism for limiting disk usage. Multilog is secure, reliable, high-performance, high precision, automatically limits disk usage, and includes filtering. Syslog's only "plus" is that the timestamps are human-readable. -Dave
Thus spake A Hoffman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Thanks Chris. Now that begs the question of why I should use multilog > instead of syslog which does datestamp if you tell it to. It doesn't seem > beneficial to add a superflous step. I apologize if this point seems > irrelevant. I knew syslog had it's problems- it can drop log entries under load and has been the source of security problems in the past. But until last week I didn't know just how bad it was. I'm working with a large ISP to convert their mail systems away from Sendmail over to QMail. While load testing the new mail servers under an extreme load (single messages with +60,000 local recipients, etc.) Qmail wasn't performing the way I thought it should. After looking around the servers I found the problem. I wasn't running mail servers, I was running syslog servers. Syslog was hogging well over 50% of CPU time on average, and sometimes shot up above 75%. As a test, I moved from syslog to multilog on one of the servers. The improvement in system performance was unbelieveable. I haven't finished re-running tests on the new configuration, but Qmail is performing just as well as I thought it should, and is now running rings around the old Sendmail servers. In short- you can get away with logging to syslogd on low volume servers, but if you want to get the best performance out of your server or if you're running high-volume mail services you need to drop syslogd and move to multilog. Robbie
Am I right in assuming that you can use a command such as #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t !tai64nlocal /var/log/qmail/smtpd for logging qmail-smtpd and this will process the log through tai64nlocal *after* completing the log? I got this from skimming the page http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/multilog.html and specifically the last section !processor on that page. -----Original Message----- From: A Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 3:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: multilog datestamping Thanks Chris. Now that begs the question of why I should use multilog instead of syslog which does datestamp if you tell it to. It doesn't seem beneficial to add a superflous step. I apologize if this point seems irrelevant. However if there is a better method, I would appreciate pointers to the documentation. - Aodhan On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Chris Johnson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:20:30AM -0800, A Hoffman wrote: > > On that note, what is an example of a startup script that includes useful > > datestamping for multilog? I used the examples set forward in section 2.8.2. > > 'System start-up files' in LWQ, and it is not working as I had hoped. Thanks! > > Don't try to do it from your startup file. When you want to look at the logs > and see time stamps that mean something to you, pipe the log through tailocal > or tai64nlocal (for cyclog and multilog files respectively). > > Chris > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-: Aodhan of Mountainview Internet Guy Ad Astra Per Aspera "A Rough Road Leads To The Stars" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-:
| In short- you can get away with logging to syslogd on low volume | servers, but if you want to get the best performance out of your | server or if you're running high-volume mail services you need to drop | syslogd and move to multilog. I might disagree with this. My mail server is fairly low-volume (average concurrency for the past 8.95 days is 0.4 :) ) and it benefitted greatly from installing cyclog, not to mention I think my hard disks will live longer now. I imagine the improvement between syslog and multilog is similar. Troy
A Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On that note, what is an example of a startup script that includes > useful datestamping for multilog? I used the examples set forward in > section 2.8.2. 'System start-up files' in LWQ, and it is not working as > I had hoped. Thanks! I'm slowly converting my various qmail systems over to the newest daemontools paradigm, and here's what I'm using on the latest system that I've set up: exec qmail-start ./Mailbox \ /usr/local/bin/multilog t s1004000 /var/log/qmail & (qmail's logging format is incredibly verbose. It's churning through 10MB of logs about every hour, hour and a half. The default multilog log size is way too small for even a marginally busy server.) The new daemontools is *much* nicer, although there are a few other features I'd like to see. I need to write that up and mail it to the relevant mailing list. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Robbie Honerkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I knew syslog had it's problems- it can drop log entries under load and > has been the source of security problems in the past. But until last > week I didn't know just how bad it was. To be fair, some of this is caused by the fact that qmail is considerably more verbose in its logging than what syslog really expects (and what programs like sendmail do). > In short- you can get away with logging to syslogd on low volume > servers, but if you want to get the best performance out of your server > or if you're running high-volume mail services you need to drop syslogd > and move to multilog. Unfortunately, multilog still lacks, so far as I can see, the ability to limit by both space *and* time so that you can create clear reporting boundaries for log summaries. I'd love to have it roll to a new log after either one day or the size limit, whichever it hits first. You can fake this up by having your log summarization script troll through older logs if the newest saved one doesn't contain everything, but it would be a lot cleaner for multilog to handle it directly, particularly since it now has timestamp information stored internally. (I could see the argument that cyclog didn't know anything about time, but that isn't true of multilog with the t instruction.) -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > To be fair, some of this is caused by the fact that qmail is > considerably more verbose in its logging than what syslog really expects > (and what programs like sendmail do). But, to follow up to myself and give some more firm numbers, here's an example of just how more resource-intensive syslog is than multilog (even with multilog appending timestamps). This is on a Solaris 2.6 machine whose sole and exclusive purpose in life is to bounce mail; mail sent to invalid addresses goes to this machine, which does a final LDAP lookup just in case the main mail routers had a hiccup and then does a fuzzy LDAP query to find possible approxmiate matches, then sends a bounce containing that information to the envelope sender. For each incoming message, therefore, a message is sent back out, so the qmail logs are pretty heavy. Additionally, the bounce script logs a single line to syslog ("unknown user <username>") and then sometimes a single additional line for unusual circumstances. It uses syslog since it's invoked separately for every incoming message and therefore can't easily use multilog. That's all that syslog is logging on this host. syslog and multilog have been running for about the same length of time on the system (syslog has been running for about 30 hours and multilog for about 25 hours): PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME CPU COMMAND 53 root 10 33 0 2636K 1200K sleep 2:08 0.05% syslogd 5444 qmaill 1 34 0 808K 528K sleep 0:52 0.04% multilog So syslogd has spawned 10 separate threads, is more than twice as large in its memory impact, and has used more than double the amount of system CPU time to handle about one-tenth of the log volume of multilog. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:17:36PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > To be fair, some of this is caused by the fact that qmail is considerably > more verbose in its logging than what syslog really expects (and what > programs like sendmail do). (Hmm. Russ is a pretty smart guy so I may be wrong here, but...) I just did a count of a couple of (smallish) log files and I found that on average, qmail-send is logging 469 bytes per delivery and sendmail is logging 430 bytes per delivery. FWIW, the qmail logging is piping into logger. My strawman conclusion? qmail and sendmail log similar amounts of data per delivery. (qmail 1.03, sendmail 8.9.3) Regards.
Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just did a count of a couple of (smallish) log files and I found that > on average, qmail-send is logging 469 bytes per delivery and sendmail is > logging 430 bytes per delivery. FWIW, the qmail logging is piping into > logger. > My strawman conclusion? qmail and sendmail log similar amounts of data > per delivery. It's not the bytes so much as the lines. I may be extremely confused, but I believe that logger and splogger both log each separate line to syslog as a separate syslog() call. Each one of these messages therefore requires separate handling by the syslogd daemon, a separate disk write, and (the part that particular hurts) a separate fsync() call on systems that don't support unsync'd syslog logs. The fact that sendmail embeds all of the information in two lines per message instead of seven therefore makes a big difference. But see my followup message. Even taking that into account doesn't explain how incredibly slow syslogd is. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 03:46:47AM -0000, John Conover wrote: > Does anyone have a URL for a Red Hat SysV init rc.d script for qmail? http://em.ca/~bruceg/qmail+patches/sources/qmail-rhinit.tar.gz Requires my supervise-scripts and daemontools RPMS to work. -- Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
after trying to send a mail with php3 mail() (the path to the sendmail wrapper is correct!) my logfile tells me:@4000000038987c19390ada14 new msg 26694
@4000000038987c19390b14ac info msg 26694: bytes 282 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 2576 uid 30
@4000000038987c193915ab9c end msg 26694
Why isn't the message send? The domain fup.de is listed in the rcpthost.
Andreas Altenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > after trying to send a mail with php3 mail() (the path to the sendmail > wrapper is correct!) my logfile tells me: > @4000000038987c19390ada14 new msg 26694 > @4000000038987c19390b14ac info msg 26694: bytes 282 from > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 2576 uid 30 > @4000000038987c193915ab9c end msg 26694 > Why isn't the message send? The domain fup.de is listed in the rcpthost. I normally see that behavior from qmail when the message doesn't have any recipients. My immediate suspicion would be that the message being fed to qmail is malformed. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
no, definitly the mail-function is right. the script works at another server. can there be a problem with the user rights?? @4000000038987c19390ada14 new msg 26694 @4000000038987c19390b14ac info msg 26694: bytes 282 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 2576 uid 30 @4000000038987c193915ab9c end msg 26694 This mail should be sent by the user wwwuser. If I send mails through a mail client, they are send with user "root". So i assume that there is maybe a problem with the rights. But I do not know exacty how to solve this... > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Russ Allbery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Februar 2000 08:21 > An: qmail Liste > Betreff: Re: php3 mail() > > > Andreas Altenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > after trying to send a mail with php3 mail() (the path to the sendmail > > wrapper is correct!) my logfile tells me: > > > @4000000038987c19390ada14 new msg 26694 > > > @4000000038987c19390b14ac info msg 26694: bytes 282 from > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 2576 uid 30 > > > @4000000038987c193915ab9c end msg 26694 > > > Why isn't the message send? The domain fup.de is listed in the rcpthost. > > I normally see that behavior from qmail when the message doesn't have any > recipients. My immediate suspicion would be that the message being fed to > qmail is malformed. > > -- > Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Andreas Altenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > no, definitly the mail-function is right. the script works at another > server. can there be a problem with the user rights?? qmail's sendmail emulation isn't absolutely completely compatible with everything that sendmail does. It's possible that the script is expecting some of the less standardized behavior. > @4000000038987c19390ada14 new msg 26694 > @4000000038987c19390b14ac info msg 26694: bytes 282 from > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 2576 uid 30 > @4000000038987c193915ab9c end msg 26694 > This mail should be sent by the user wwwuser. If I send mails through a > mail client, they are send with user "root". qmail-inject(8) says: The user name in the From header field is set by QMAILUSER, MAILUSER, USER, or LOGNAME, whichever comes first. [...] The default envelope sender address is the same as the default From address, but it can be overridden with QMAILSUSER and QMAILSHOST. It may also be modified by the r and m letters described below. Bounces will be sent to this address. The sendmail emulation invokes (I believe) qmail-inject. I know from experience that if none of QMAILUSER, MAILUSER, USER, or LOGNAME are set, qmail will set the envelope sender to anonymous@hostname. I'm not sure where this is documented (or if it is; the string "anonymous" appears nowhere in the qmail documentation). qmail-1.03/qmail-inject.c has the relevant code: mailuser = env_get("QMAILUSER"); if (!mailuser) mailuser = env_get("MAILUSER"); if (!mailuser) mailuser = env_get("USER"); if (!mailuser) mailuser = env_get("LOGNAME"); if (!mailuser) mailuser = "anonymous"; -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
[I'm not subscribed to the list, so please reply directly. Thanks. ~PM] Hello! I have this strange problem, and I can't seem to figure it out. I'm using qmail-1.03 (actually, this problem is with with qmail-pop3d) with tcpserver and the modifications for selective relay, ala open-smtpd. This is the same setup (as far as I can tell) as I use on another server, which works perfectly. My system is RedHat 6.1 (other is RH5.1). This is the line I'm using to start the pop3 demon is: tcpserver -v 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup myhost.net \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger qmail-pop3d 3 & This line works perfectly on my other server, but on this one I get the message from the subject line (shell-init: couldn't get current directory) after authenticating. I telnetted to port 110, and I can enter the lines "USER username" "PASS password" and get a valid login (with that error) but if I do "LIST" it lists the messages. This happens even after deleting and recreating my Maildir and with brand new accounts. Any ideas? Thanks, ~Patrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello! I have this strange problem, and I can't seem to figure it out. I'm using qmail-1.03 (actually, this problem is with with qmail-pop3d) with tcpserver and the modifications for selective relay, ala open-smtpd. This is the same setup (as far as I can tell) as I use on another server, which works perfectly. My system is RedHat 6.1 (other is RH5.1). This is the line I'm using to start the pop3 demon is: tcpserver -v 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup myhost.net \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger qmail-pop3d 3 & This line works perfectly on my other server, but on this one I get the message from the subject line (shell-init: couldn't get current directory) after authenticating. I telnetted to port 110, and I can enter the lines "USER username" "PASS password" and get a valid login (with that error) but if I do "LIST" it lists the messages. Unfortunately, at least two POP clients (spruce and Netscape) treat that message as fatal. This happens even after deleting and recreating my Maildir and with brand new accounts. Any ideas? Thanks, ~Patrick
Hi Folks, I'm curious if I need this patch on RH 6.1 or higher? Thanks, Lance
Hmm, Thanks. Is this a build outside of the distribution? I'll have a look. I'd like to know the specific patches so I can applied this to any kernel, which I'm sure I can extract from the SRPMS. -jeremy > On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 04:46:32PM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: > > > > Is there any kernel sysctl or otherwise parameters suggested for > > performance using qmail on Linux? Open file handle limits, share memory, > > whatever? I have a goal to send at least 1 million emails in a > > 24 hour period from a single machine. > > The qmail-server I built recently has been benchmarked at 2-3million a day, > with a stock redhat 1000fd kernel (it's on their ftp-site as an rpm). > > concurrencylocal/remote are both 255, machine hums along nicely. > > Most critical factor besides fd's is probably memory, and perhaps CPU. > I think I had 512mbyte in this one and something along the lines of a > PII-450. > > Greetz, Peter. > -- > Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder > | > | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; > | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' > | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++ > http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------
Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there any kernel sysctl or otherwise parameters suggested for > performance using qmail on Linux? Open file handle limits, share > memory, whatever? I have a goal to send at least 1 million emails in > a 24 hour period from a single machine. The main suggestion has already been made: raise concurrencyremote to 255 and buy lots of memory. If money is not an object, you can also install several SCSI drives and stripe /var/qmail/queue across those disks. (Mount the filesystems with the "sync" option, for reliability.) Disk I/O is a potential queue bottleneck, especially on one-disk Linux boxen. Also, you might want to look for faster filesystems than ext2--but what, I'm not sure. If money _is_ an object, then save memory every way you can. That includes, * Never running X on the qmail server. * Deactivating inetd. Turn on _critical_ services using tcpserver and supervise, with _very_ low connection limits (e.g., 2 simultaneous telnet connections). * Turn off all unused daemons. This probably includes lpd, nfsd, mountd, the portmapper and RPC daemons, Apache, ftpd, and most services run from /etc/inetd.conf. (For security's sake, you might turn on sshd and throw away telnetd entirely. Throw away sshd if remote admin is not an issue--not!) * Throw away or reconfigure ``locate''. The locate database is rebuilt daily, causing a several-minute spike in disk usage. I'd be surprised if _kernel_ tuning were an issue. The reason qmail smokes is that it is extremely thrifty of system resources. You might tinker with priorities, though. Re-nice-ing one or more of the qmail daemons may keep qmail running strong during times of system load. After all, that's what priority means! Good luck! Len. -- Huh? There are lots of packages with compiled-in pathnames. Ever tried moving X? -- Dan Bernstein
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Len Budney wrote: > Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Is there any kernel sysctl or otherwise parameters suggested for > > performance using qmail on Linux? Open file handle limits, share > > memory, whatever? I have a goal to send at least 1 million emails in > > a 24 hour period from a single machine. > <snip> > > If money _is_ an object, then save memory every way you can. That > includes, Another way to save memory is to terminate getty on all unnecessary terminals. The Linux Small-Memory mini-HOWTO describes many ways to conserve memory. <snip> -- /* Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> char *sites[]={"http://www.geekwise.com", Programmer; CE Net, Inc. "http://www.freezersearch.com/index.cfm?aff=dhc", (302) 854-5440 Ext. 206 "http://www.homeworkhelp.org",0}; */
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, [iso-8859-1] Mikko H�nninen wrote: > Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 02 Feb 2000: > > Another way to save memory is to terminate getty on all unnecessary > > terminals. The Linux Small-Memory mini-HOWTO describes many ways to > > conserve memory. > > I would imagine that normally these get swapped out, so wouldn't really > take up any actual memory at all on a running system. At least, that's > how it works on my computer. > Well, according to that mini-HOWTO: "Virtual Consoles VCs are a great way to free up memory. Most Linux distributions run about 6 of them out of the box. On average running 6 VCs requires about 4MB of memory. Removing a couple of them can free up a couple MBs of memory." <snip> -- /* Derek Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> char *sites[]={"http://www.geekwise.com", Programmer; CE Net, Inc. "http://www.freezersearch.com/index.cfm?aff=dhc", (302) 854-5440 Ext. 206 "http://www.homeworkhelp.org",0}; */
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 09:44:02AM -0500, Len Budney wrote: > Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Is there any kernel sysctl or otherwise parameters suggested for > > performance using qmail on Linux? Open file handle limits, share > > memory, whatever? I have a goal to send at least 1 million emails in > > a 24 hour period from a single machine. > > The main suggestion has already been made: raise concurrencyremote to > 255 and buy lots of memory. > > If money is not an object, you can also install several SCSI drives > and stripe /var/qmail/queue across those disks. (Mount the filesystems > with the "sync" option, for reliability.) Disk I/O is a potential queue > bottleneck, especially on one-disk Linux boxen. Also, you might want to > look for faster filesystems than ext2--but what, I'm not sure. I strongly _dis_recommend mounting ext2fs filesystems sync. The system I described earlier had _terrible_ performance at first, it turned out this was because I followed the FAQ and mounted it sync. Yes, mounting it async is bad for reliability, so decide for yourself. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
"Bolmehag, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I�ve got mny qmail to work but then I stopped it and started it with >tcpserver again and it won�t work. Details? >When i read the FAQ and doc they only >give examples how to start qmail-smptd directly via tcpserver, but I need to >start it via the /var/qmail/rc which starts qmail with procmail as local >deliverer. Put the qmail-smtpd tcpserver command in /var/qmail/rc. -Dave
"J.M. Roth \(iip\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Ok, then try putting a forwarder inside a .qmail-default file and try the >mess ;) I do it all the time. It works fine. >If I simply put a forwarder instead of vdelivermail..... I don't grok "vdelivermail". >inside >.qmail-default all mail (to any account, even if it exists) is forwarded >twice, or something like this. Tried it a few days ago and it resulted in >chaos. Details? Log entries? -Dave
Ok, an example of what is working: tested this on a wholly new domain Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.764916 new msg 46207 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.765144 info msg 46207: bytes 2552 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 17605 uid 502 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.767795 starting delivery 4807: msg 46207 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.767871 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.805495 new msg 46211 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.805703 info msg 46211: bytes 2722 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[]> qp 17609 uid 538 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.809392 starting delivery 4808: msg 46211 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.809533 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.809603 starting delivery 4809: msg 46211 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.809657 status: local 2/10 remote 1/20 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.836753 delivery 4807: success: ezmlm-send:_info:_qp_17609/did_0+0+3/ Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.836895 status: local 1/10 remote 1/20 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.837959 end msg 46207 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.838153 delivery 4808: success: POP_user_does_not_exist,_but_will_deliver_to_/home/vpopmail/domains/roth.lu/ mail/did_0+0+1/ Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.838243 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.897739 delivery 4809: success: 212.24.194.7_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_Message_received:_20000 [EMAIL PROTECTED]@cents.intelligent.lu/ Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.897988 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:49:18 cents qmail: 949520958.898069 end msg 46211 And here what is not (same thing in fact): Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.338289 new msg 46208 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.338510 info msg 46208: bytes 2291 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 17685 uid 502 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.341068 starting delivery 4810: msg 46208 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.341154 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.420907 new msg 46211 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.421142 info msg 46211: bytes 2463 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[]> qp 17689 uid 538 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.424112 starting delivery 4811: msg 46211 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.424196 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.424284 starting delivery 4812: msg 46211 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.425207 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.443084 delivery 4810: success: ezmlm-send:_info:_qp_17689/did_0+0+3/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.443238 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.443303 end msg 46208 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.444438 new msg 46214 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.444611 info msg 46214: bytes 2577 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 17692 uid 538 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.448237 starting delivery 4813: msg 46214to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.448310 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.450387 delivery 4811: success: did_0+1+0/qp_17692/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.450464 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.456323 new msg 46213 ==>>Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.456509 info msg 46213: bytes 2580 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 17695 uid 538 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.459453 starting delivery 4814: msg 46213 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.459568 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.459633 delivery 4812: success: did_0+1+0/qp_17695/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.459698 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.459776 end msg 46211 ==>>Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.496735 delivery 4814: failure: ezmlm-send:_fatal:_this_message_is_looping:_it_already_has_my_Delivered-To_l ine_(#5.4.6)/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.497002 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.503673 bounce msg 46213 qp 17702 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.503815 end msg 46213 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.506284 new msg 46216 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.507170 info msg 46216: bytes 3248 from <> qp 17702 uid 507 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.509299 starting delivery 4815: msg 46216 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.509382 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 ==>>Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.530825 delivery 4813: failure: ezmlm-send:_fatal:_this_message_is_looping:_it_already_has_my_Delivered-To_l ine_(#5.4.6)/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.531994 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.538165 bounce msg 46214 qp 17710 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.538289 end msg 46214 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.540652 new msg 46212 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.540789 info msg 46212: bytes 3239 from <> qp 17710 uid 507 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.543577 starting delivery 4816: msg 46212 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.543666 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.568434 delivery 4815: success: did_0+0+3/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.569674 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.569830 end msg 46216 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.594562 delivery 4816: success: did_0+0+3/ Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.594722 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Feb 2 20:54:44 cents qmail: 949521284.594837 end msg 46212 See what's happening here? The mail is looping back to the default address (= the mailing list) because it seems it can't find the accounts specified for the mailing list subscribers... The problem seems to be that subscribers in the same domain do not seem to be accepted by ezmlm? If I put other users at other domains in the mailing list (even if local) it seems to work. Any idea? -- jmr ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Sill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 7:23 PM Subject: Re: default to mailing list > "J.M. Roth \(iip\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Ok, then try putting a forwarder inside a .qmail-default file and try the > >mess ;) > > I do it all the time. It works fine. > > >If I simply put a forwarder instead of vdelivermail..... > > I don't grok "vdelivermail". > > >inside > >.qmail-default all mail (to any account, even if it exists) is forwarded > >twice, or something like this. Tried it a few days ago and it resulted in > >chaos. > > Details? Log entries? > > -Dave >
"Adil Tahiri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is it possible to get a copy of messages a certain user sends and receives ? Sure. Use the FAQ method to capture all mail, then filter that for the user in question. -Dave
Paul Schinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Dave, you should make clear that 2000000 may need adjusting. This >would likely have failed on my new Sun Ultra 5's as well, although I >use my own scripts there, so I've never actually tried it. Thanks. Will do. -Dave
Hi everyone. question: I mentioned that there is open source virus scanning software for email to my manager, he responded who updates the signature files? I didn't have an answer. I did some searching in the archives and haven't found anything yet. I thought there was quite a discussion about a virus scanner for qmail several months ago on this list. But now I'm wondering if I may have spoken to soon. Was I wrong about this? If I was not wrong then who does update these files or how does one go about getting updates? We use lotus on NT. I know, I know... I'm trying to build up a argument for integrating more open source. What are the pros and cons of qmail vs. lotus in an NT house? Thanks john
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I mentioned that there is open source virus scanning software for email to > my manager, he responded who updates the signature files? I didn't have an > answer. > > I did some searching in the archives and haven't found anything yet. I > thought there was quite a discussion about a virus scanner for qmail > several months ago on this list. But now I'm wondering if I may have spoken > to soon. Was I wrong about this? If I was not wrong then who does update > these files or how does one go about getting updates? Well, AMaViS and scan4virus (and also IspMailGate or inflex) are not virus scanners per se. They are just some tools, which call(s) one or more virus scanners. AMaViS 0.2.0-pre6-clm-rl-5 supports: * Kaspersky Lab AVP / AvpDaemon + AvpDaemonClient * F-Secure Corp. F-Secure AV (formerly known as DataFellows) * Sophos Sweep * NAI VirusScan * H+B EDV AntiVir * Trend Micro FileScanner * CyberSoft VFIND (see also http://av-linux.w3.to) Well, to keep them up-to-date ... F-Secure comes with a tool for that (called imho fsavupdate) otherwise write a small script which uses e.g. wget and which is called via cron. An example script for Sophos Sweep can be found at http://www.seifried.org/articles/linuxemailprotection.htm HTH Sorry for off-topic best regards, Rainer Link -- Rainer Link, eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], WWW: http://rainer.w3.to/ Student of Communication Engineering/Computer Networking, University of Applied Sciences,Furtwangen,Germany,http://www.ce.is.fh-furtwangen.de/
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Datum: Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2000 22:10 Betreff: virus scanning & lotus >Hi everyone. > >question: > >I mentioned that there is open source virus scanning software for email to >my manager, he responded who updates the signature files? I didn't have an >answer. > >I did some searching in the archives and haven't found anything yet. I >thought there was quite a discussion about a virus scanner for qmail >several months ago on this list. But now I'm wondering if I may have spoken >to soon. Was I wrong about this? If I was not wrong then who does update >these files or how does one go about getting updates? > >We use lotus on NT. I know, I know... I'm trying to build up a argument for >integrating more open source. What are the pros and cons of qmail vs. >lotus in an NT house? In our company we are using both qmail and Notes (on NT). qmail checks all mail for viruses and handles relay/spam-control and some further stuff, then it forwards the mail using smtproutes to our Notes server. Works very well for our purposes. > >Thanks > >john > >
HI Well I can use: echo to: me@wherever | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject to send to an outside adress. I can use: echo to: peter| /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject to send directly to a local user id. But I cant telnet to port 25, it just hangs up without any message, not even if I telnet to localhost instead of the real IP-adress. I am not receving any mail from the outside either (no surprise). I don�t understand this. It seems like it is not listening to port 25 at all.. Peter
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 10:25:11PM +0100, Bolmehag, Peter wrote: > HI > > Well I can use: > > echo to: me@wherever | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > to send to an outside adress. > > I can use: > > echo to: peter| /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > to send directly to a local user id. > > > But I cant telnet to port 25, it just hangs up without any message, not even > if I telnet to localhost instead of the real IP-adress. > > I am not receving any mail from the outside either (no surprise). > > I don�t understand this. It seems like it is not listening to port 25 at > all.. Well, is anything listening to port 25? Did you configure anything to listen to it? If so, how? Chris
Hello, What is the equivalent of /usr/bin/mailq in qmail. I need to check the queue and also run it manually so I am also wondering what the equivalent of /usr/lib/sendmail -q is. Thanks in advance. Cliff Clifford Thurber Web Systems Administrator LiveUniverse.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 565 5th Ave. 29th Fl. New York, NY 10017 Ph:212 883 6940 (131) Fax:212 856 9134
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 05:07:52PM -0500, clifford thurber wrote: > What is the equivalent of /usr/bin/mailq in qmail. > I need to check the queue and also run it manually so I am also wondering > what the equivalent of /usr/lib/sendmail -q is. /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qread. I symlink /usr/bin/mailq to it. To run it manually, send qmail-send an ALRM signal. Chris
Thus spake clifford thurber ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > What is the equivalent of /usr/bin/mailq in qmail. qmail-qread > I need to check the queue and also run it manually so I am also wondering > what the equivalent of /usr/lib/sendmail -q is. Send an ALRM signal to qmail-send. Robbie
Hello all qmailers! I'm new to qmail, so I'm still getting my sea legs. One question that has come up is how does qmail handle delivery problems and what schedule does it use? I think I've found the retry schedule... t(0) = start time [secs] t(i) = t(0) + (sqrt(t(i - 1) - t(0)) + 10)^2 [Local] t(i) = t(0) + (sqrt(t(i - 1) - t(0)) + 20)^2 [Remote] But I can't seem to find how qmail decides to give up on delivering a msg. My experience is that it's around 3 days, but I'd like to know exactly. Anyone know where/how this is handled ? Thanks, - Scott
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [...] the retry schedule... See http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#retry-schedule > But I can't seem to find how qmail decides to give up on delivering a msg. > My experience is that it's around 3 days, but I'd like to know exactly. Try /var/qmail/bin/qmail-showctl | grep queuelifetime If you want to change this to 3 days ( 3 x 86400 secs), try echo 259200 > /var/qmail/control/queuelifetime kill -HUP <PID of qmail-send> Mads
man qmail-send, search for queuelifetime, or see http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#retry-schedule qmail follows the quadratic retry schedule until the message is older than the max lifetime for the queue. at that point, it tries one more delivery and then bounces the message if it still fails. one thing i'm curious about - whether or not you could set queuelifetime to, say, 2 billion, and if that would essentially force qmail to retry forever at longer and longer intervals. is there any hardcoded queue lifetime limit, or will qmail retry "forever" if queuelifetime is set high enough? shag ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wed 2 Feb 2000 14.48 Subject: Retry Schedule and bounce time? Hello all qmailers! I'm new to qmail, so I'm still getting my sea legs. One question that has come up is how does qmail handle delivery problems and what schedule does it use? I think I've found the retry schedule... t(0) = start time [secs] t(i) = t(0) + (sqrt(t(i - 1) - t(0)) + 10)^2 [Local] t(i) = t(0) + (sqrt(t(i - 1) - t(0)) + 20)^2 [Remote] But I can't seem to find how qmail decides to give up on delivering a msg. My experience is that it's around 3 days, but I'd like to know exactly. Anyone know where/how this is handled ? Thanks, - Scott
Hi I just moved from sendmail to qmail. Now I have domainaliases in the sendmail configuratio that looks like this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail is received for [EMAIL PROTECTED] and is copied and sent out to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . I have lots of these pairs where mail comes in to one domain and leaves for another directly. HOw do I do that with qmail? /peter
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 11:24:41AM +1100, Stephen Mills wrote: > Im running Redhat 5.1 on our main server here, and I read an article on the > front page of qmail.org about hosts_options not compiled into tcp_wrappers > which results in tcpserver not working properly and looking up the remote > hosts IP address...It seems Redhat 5.1 and under has a broken tcp_wrappers > > Ive been using qmail for over 2 years now, and Ive gotten selective relaying > to work on Redhat 5.2/6.0/6.1 and Slackware boxes... > > I have tried to recompile tcp_wrappers 7.6 with hosts_options installed but > selective relaying still does not work, im copying the new "tcpd" file to > inetd but it still doesnt work, ive also tried copying tcpd file from a > Redhat 5.2 box that is working with selective relaying fine and no luck..... > > My last resort is "upgrading" to Redhat 6.1 on the main server, but before > doing so, maybe there is something Im not sure about. > > So, can anyone identify what Im doing wrong with tcp_wrappers ? This has > been an ongoing problem and Im yet to resolve it. The standard answer to any question in which "inetd" appears is "use tcpserver instead." So here's my suggestion: use tcpserver instead. You get it as part of Dan's ucspi-tcp-0.84 package, available at http://cr.yp.to. To configure it for selective relaying, see http://www.palomine.net/selectiverelay.html. It's easy to set up--certainly a lot easier than upgrading your whole OS. See the archives for all the reasons why tcpserver is better. Chris
I am using tcpserver, what I dont understand is that tcp_wrappers _makes_ (contains) tcpd. [root@proxy tcp_wrappers_7.6]# ls tcpd* -al -rwxrwxr-x 1 root root 18933 Jan 17 14:57 tcpd This is why Im puzzled as to why the suggestion on the qmail.org page suggests to recompile tcp_wrappers --Stephen -----Original Message----- From: Chris Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 11:32 AM To: Stephen Mills Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Broken tcp_wrappers (resulting in selective relaying not working) On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 11:24:41AM +1100, Stephen Mills wrote: > Im running Redhat 5.1 on our main server here, and I read an article on the > front page of qmail.org about hosts_options not compiled into tcp_wrappers > which results in tcpserver not working properly and looking up the remote > hosts IP address...It seems Redhat 5.1 and under has a broken tcp_wrappers > > Ive been using qmail for over 2 years now, and Ive gotten selective relaying > to work on Redhat 5.2/6.0/6.1 and Slackware boxes... > > I have tried to recompile tcp_wrappers 7.6 with hosts_options installed but > selective relaying still does not work, im copying the new "tcpd" file to > inetd but it still doesnt work, ive also tried copying tcpd file from a > Redhat 5.2 box that is working with selective relaying fine and no luck..... > > My last resort is "upgrading" to Redhat 6.1 on the main server, but before > doing so, maybe there is something Im not sure about. > > So, can anyone identify what Im doing wrong with tcp_wrappers ? This has > been an ongoing problem and Im yet to resolve it. The standard answer to any question in which "inetd" appears is "use tcpserver instead." So here's my suggestion: use tcpserver instead. You get it as part of Dan's ucspi-tcp-0.84 package, available at http://cr.yp.to. To configure it for selective relaying, see http://www.palomine.net/selectiverelay.html. It's easy to set up--certainly a lot easier than upgrading your whole OS. See the archives for all the reasons why tcpserver is better. Chris
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 12:44:25PM +1100, Stephen Mills wrote: > I am using tcpserver, what I dont understand is that tcp_wrappers _makes_ > (contains) tcpd. > > [root@proxy tcp_wrappers_7.6]# ls tcpd* -al > -rwxrwxr-x 1 root root 18933 Jan 17 14:57 tcpd > > This is why Im puzzled as to why the suggestion on the qmail.org page > suggests to recompile tcp_wrappers Don't worry about tcp_wrappers if you're using tcpserver. tcpd never enters into the picture with tcpserver. Chris
Well ive installed about 8 servers with selective relaying with tcpserver and they all work fine, but this one isnt, Ive went through everything I know and still can't resolve it :) the only mention is on that page about a problem with rh5.1 - its quite strange. I might just upgrade and trust (argh) redhats upgrade tool.... --Stephen On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 12:44:25PM +1100, Stephen Mills wrote: > I am using tcpserver, what I dont understand is that tcp_wrappers _makes_ > (contains) tcpd. > > [root@proxy tcp_wrappers_7.6]# ls tcpd* -al > -rwxrwxr-x 1 root root 18933 Jan 17 14:57 tcpd > > This is why Im puzzled as to why the suggestion on the qmail.org page > suggests to recompile tcp_wrappers Don't worry about tcp_wrappers if you're using tcpserver. tcpd never enters into the picture with tcpserver. Chris
A user has reported a problem receiving attachments from anybody outside our network. At first I brushed him off as crazy. But the problem can be duplicated on other pop3 accounts. Some people not in our network (AOL is one) trying to send email to users on our network will receive an error message while trying to send an attachment. But, I discovered if the user resends right away, then the message with attachment will be accepted about 75% of the time. Could this be related to maximum allowed SMTP connections? I'm using qmail smtp with tcpserver. Or is this a problem with SMTP server from the sending system? I have noticed that one of the SMTP server was sendmail 8.9.3
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 05:45:57PM -0800, Jose de Leon wrote: > A user has reported a problem receiving attachments from anybody outside our > network. At first I brushed him off as crazy. But the problem can be > duplicated on other pop3 accounts. > > Some people not in our network (AOL is one) trying to send email to users on > our network will receive an error message while trying to send an > attachment. And that error message is? Chris
Thats part of the problem. There is no error message. Just a popup in Outlook express or any other email client that says: "Error sending message" Period. Nothing, nada, not even a bounce message. ----- Original Message ----- From: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jose de Leon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 5:48 PM Subject: Re: QMail SMTP Woes? On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 05:45:57PM -0800, Jose de Leon wrote: > A user has reported a problem receiving attachments from anybody outside our > network. At first I brushed him off as crazy. But the problem can be > duplicated on other pop3 accounts. > > Some people not in our network (AOL is one) trying to send email to users on > our network will receive an error message while trying to send an > attachment. And that error message is? Chris
Title: RE: QMail SMTP Woes?I had a similiar issue on a customers site were the user had an attachment, it would strip the attachment and turn in into a small file size and rename it (mssometing.dat), it turned out to be Outlook on the clients machine, i think I changed the MIME encoding from memory to fix it....
--Stephen
-----Original Message-----
From: Jose de Leon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 12:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: QMail SMTP Woes?
A user has reported a problem receiving attachments from anybody outside our
network. At first I brushed him off as crazy. But the problem can be
duplicated on other pop3 accounts.Some people not in our network (AOL is one) trying to send email to users on
our network will receive an error message while trying to send an
attachment. But, I discovered if the user resends right away, then the
message with attachment will be accepted about 75% of the time.Could this be related to maximum allowed SMTP connections? I'm using qmail
smtp with tcpserver. Or is this a problem with SMTP server from the sending
system? I have noticed that one of the SMTP server was sendmail 8.9.3
>Thats part of the problem. There is no error message. Just a popup in >Outlook express or any other email client that says: "Error sending >message" Period. Nothing, nada, not even a bounce message. Somewhere on that popup for Outlook Express, there's a way to get more info (either a button marked "More Info" or a little question mark in the lower right hand corner). If you click on that, you'll get the text of either what the server said (i.e., "550 relaying denied") or of what the client thought ("Unable to resolve mailhost.wherever.net"). You need to find something like that. Or you need to reproduce it in a way that lets you correlate with your server log files. Outlook and OE are both pretty bad about this - if there's a problem (like incorrect local user names) in the mail message, they'll leave it in the outbox and keep trying rather than bounce it. You need to find that "more info" to get further.
The problem here is that it happens on any client. Even from some of the web based email clients. Yahoo email is where one of the sites is that this occurs. I'm just confused because I am getting and sending email attachments up the wazoo all over the net. Except from certain domains that this user pointed out to me. Another domain that comes to mind is softcom.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 5:58 PM Subject: RE: QMail SMTP Woes? I had a similiar issue on a customers site were the user had an attachment, it would strip the attachment and turn in into a small file size and rename it (mssometing.dat), it turned out to be Outlook on the clients machine, i think I changed the MIME encoding from memory to fix it.... --Stephen -----Original Message----- From: Jose de Leon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 12:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: QMail SMTP Woes? A user has reported a problem receiving attachments from anybody outside our network. At first I brushed him off as crazy. But the problem can be duplicated on other pop3 accounts. Some people not in our network (AOL is one) trying to send email to users on our network will receive an error message while trying to send an attachment. But, I discovered if the user resends right away, then the message with attachment will be accepted about 75% of the time. Could this be related to maximum allowed SMTP connections? I'm using qmail smtp with tcpserver. Or is this a problem with SMTP server from the sending system? I have noticed that one of the SMTP server was sendmail 8.9.3
If your using IE5 you can actually activate a logfile on POP3 and SMTP and IMAP connections which might be helpful. (there is an option in Tools-Options-Maintenence) It might also be helpful to check the Maildir or Mailbox file to see if it made it correctly to the filesystem without corruption --Stephen -----Original Message----- From: Greg Owen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 12:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: QMail SMTP Woes? >Thats part of the problem. There is no error message. Just a popup in >Outlook express or any other email client that says: "Error sending >message" Period. Nothing, nada, not even a bounce message. Somewhere on that popup for Outlook Express, there's a way to get more info (either a button marked "More Info" or a little question mark in the lower right hand corner). If you click on that, you'll get the text of either what the server said (i.e., "550 relaying denied") or of what the client thought ("Unable to resolve mailhost.wherever.net"). You need to find something like that. Or you need to reproduce it in a way that lets you correlate with your server log files. Outlook and OE are both pretty bad about this - if there's a problem (like incorrect local user names) in the mail message, they'll leave it in the outbox and keep trying rather than bounce it. You need to find that "more info" to get further.
| i don't want everyone to send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], just selected people. | mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will be delivered to all popboxen in this domain. | so thats why I could be missing something obvious (as the accepted answer seemed to be ezmlm), but would it work to do something like (caveats that I usually have to try my .qmail stuff about 3 times before it works, so this may not be *exactly* right, but you get the idea): In ~alias/.qmail-all: # bounce if it wasn't from the right person |if [ "$SENDER" != "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ]; then bouncesaying "Access denied -- this alias is restricted"; fi [...contents of your current ~alias/.qmail-all...] Am I way off base? Troy
Hello, I am using qmail as my MTA on a RedHat Linux 5.2 server. I have setup majordomo on the machine, but can't get it to work right. Here is what my .qmail-majordomo file looks like: |/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper majordomo When ever I send a message to majordomo requesting help, for instance, a core file is dumped in /usr/local/majordomo. The problem is that when I issue this command: cat testmail | /usr/local/majordomo/wrapper majordomo which sends the exact same message to majordomo via standard input, I get a response from majordomo. I've read through qmail-control in man8 and emulated the method which qmail issues the command, and it still worked through a shell. Why woult it work through a .qmail file? Thanks, -Ryan Hughes
Hello! I want to delete mails that's in queue for the last four days. Does it effect on qmail-send because few days ago I deleted mails in queue that's caused qmail stop, and I had to restart the qmail. So, I want to know the safest way to delete it. Thanks. manoj
Hi! I sometimes encounter errors like "error writing to network, error reading from network, connection reset by remote side 10054, etc" even without attachments.Do I need to adjust something? How is that. Thanks. ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Hello All, I'm getting wierd messages in my /var/log/qmail area, specifically: 949561301.842459 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 949561301.842489 starting delivery 784: msg 668402 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.842543 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 949561301.842573 starting delivery 785: msg 668364 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.842627 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20 949561301.843709 starting delivery 786: msg 668403 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.843769 status: local 4/10 remote 0/20 949561301.845374 starting delivery 787: msg 668355 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.845431 status: local 5/10 remote 0/20 949561301.869715 starting delivery 788: msg 668336 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.869776 status: local 6/10 remote 0/20 949561301.894123 starting delivery 789: msg 668385 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.894183 status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 949561301.929936 starting delivery 790: msg 668398 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.929998 status: local 8/10 remote 0/20 949561301.942294 starting delivery 791: msg 668318 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 949561301.942355 status: local 9/10 remote 0/20 949561301.966293 delivery 783: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561301.966353 status: local 8/10 remote 0/20 949561301.989782 delivery 784: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561301.989841 status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 949561302.013713 delivery 785: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.013772 status: local 6/10 remote 0/20 949561302.015279 delivery 786: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.015332 status: local 5/10 remote 0/20 949561302.050902 delivery 787: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.050961 status: local 4/10 remote 0/20 949561302.051487 delivery 788: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.051537 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20 949561302.060431 delivery 789: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.060487 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 949561302.062361 delivery 790: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.062416 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 949561302.063635 delivery 791: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 949561302.063689 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 [root@nermal qmail]# How can I stop this from occurring, or remove the messages? -Bill
Bill Parker wrote: How can I stop this from occurring, or remove the messages? Create the maildir properly, or change the .qmail file to write to a mailbox file. What's in your /var/qmail/rc?
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:06:13PM -0800, Bill Parker wrote: > Hello All, > > I'm getting wierd messages in my /var/log/qmail area, specifically: > > 949561301.842459 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 > 949561301.842489 starting delivery 784: msg 668402 to local > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 949561301.989782 delivery 784: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ What's so wierd about it exactly? It's saying that it cannot cd into a directory called Maildir. My guess is that it cannot cd into that directory because it doesn't exist or the permissions are wrong. > How can I stop this from occurring, or remove the messages? My guess is that you should create a Maildir (preferably using maildirmake) in ~alias, but knowing what is in ~alias/.qmail-root would be instructive. Regards.
So, you have asked qmail to deliver mail for root@ to the instructions in the file ~alias/.qmail-root Since they are empty it uses the instructions supplied as part of the start up, which in your case appear to be to deliver into the Maildir directory called ~alias/Maildir Therefore your log message is saying that ~alias/Maildir does not exist. So my guess is still that you should create a Maildir in ~alias (preferably using maildirmake). Regards. On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:21:32PM -0800, Bill Parker wrote: > At 11:12 PM 2/2/00 -0800, you wrote: > >On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 11:06:13PM -0800, Bill Parker wrote: > >> Hello All, > >> > >> I'm getting wierd messages in my /var/log/qmail area, specifically: > > >What's so wierd about it exactly? It's saying that it cannot cd into a > >directory called Maildir. > > > >My guess is that it cannot cd into that directory because it doesn't exist or > >the permissions are wrong. > > > >> How can I stop this from occurring, or remove the messages? > > > >My guess is that you should create a Maildir (preferably using > maildirmake) in > >~alias, but knowing what is in ~alias/.qmail-root would be instructive. > > under /var/qmail/alias I have three .qmail files > > .qmail-mailer-daemon > .qmail-root > .qmail-postmaster > > all are empty when I "cat" them... > > -Bill > > > > > >Regards. > > > > >
Hi all, i m using qmail 1.03 on rhl -6.1 and want auto reply with meaningful text (say "message recieved, will reply soon"), when mail is delivered to a user. I tried using qreciept in .qmail, but that was not much of a help. Even log file do not show any thing useful. Also there is another problem, i manually ran splogger to make some entries in /var/log/maillog file, but from that time onwards, mail info is not getting logged. Thanks Alok
Alok Bhatt wrote: > Hi all, > i m using qmail 1.03 on rhl -6.1 and want auto reply with meaningful > text (say "message recieved, will reply soon"), when mail is delivered > to a user. > I tried using qreciept in .qmail, but that was not much of a help. Even > log file do not show any thing useful. look at qmails homepage www.qmail.org and search for autoresponder on this page. several autoresponders excist. marco leeflang
Hi every one We are planning to start ISP with basic service like Mailing,CHAT,NEWS and WEB based on Linux Redhat 6.1 . We have decided to go for Qmail Mailing system. Our setup will have 5 centres (Initially) and each centre will have a minimum of 25,000 users and can grow up to 1,00,000 users. ( not concurrent ) . We need information on scalling in terms of Hardware. What is the hardware recommended? What storage solution is recoommended? Is it a good idea to link qmail with LDAP ? if so what LDAP? (We came to know that OpenLDAP can handle 50 requests per sec , We require Powerful LDAP) Please suggest us regarding the above Thanks in advance N.Saravanan Unix System Administrator DSQ Software Limited Nandhanam Chennai 600 035
Andreas Altenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote: > Why is the connection refused? Do I have to configuer tecpserver?? Yes. (Or any other server that accepts connections and starts qmail- smtpd.) -- 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
