qmail Digest 22 May 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1009
Topics (messages 42131 through 42155):
Re: I want to leave this list
42131 by: Karsten Kaus
42133 by: Pavel Kankovsky
Re: The current status of IETF drafts concerning bare linefeeds
42132 by: Pavel Kankovsky
42134 by: Pavel Kankovsky
42137 by: Russ Allbery
Setting up qmail for university
42135 by: Suresh Kumar.R
42138 by: Russ Allbery
42140 by: Chin Fang
Mail queue
42136 by: System Administrator
42139 by: clemensF
42149 by: System Administrator
Re: Success with qmail, scan4virus and FreeBSD 4.0?
42141 by: Jason Haar
Re: Doing logging from qmail-pop3d without going thru syslog?
42142 by: Chin Fang
42144 by: Louis Theran
qmail and subdomain
42143 by: Barry Smoke
42145 by: Chris Johnson
42147 by: System Administrator
Forward to multiple people?
42146 by: Bob Rogers
42148 by: Ben Beuchler
42150 by: Hans Sandsdalen
42152 by: Ken Jones
Re: Share queue between servers and other questions.
42151 by: Jeroen ten Berge
Qmail on a firewall.
42153 by: Rajkumar S.
multilog: fatal:
42154 by: James
Update on multilog: fatal:
42155 by: James
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My vote: do nothing, I bet we will have this discussion again. Its very amusing.
However: I saved my subscription information, because it is faster fo find than
using
the webpages again to find unsubsbcribe-infos.
I think a trailer is best (2nd vote), because then we may *FLAME* back in our
beloved RTFM-style
:-)
Karsten Kaus
Lidia Marchioni schrieb:
> Paulo Jan wrote:
>
> > Based on my experience in other mailing lists, I can guarantee you
> > that, after adding unsubbing information in the footer of the message,
> > you will *still* receive mails from people asking "remove me" or "how do
> > I unsub".
>
> In our experience after adding a trailer the number of unsub requests went down
> from 3 a week to 1 every 2 weeks. But then, perhaps we have only smart users...
> :-)
> Lidia
>
> >
> >
> > Paulo Jan.
> > DDnet.
On Fri, 19 May 2000, Kai MacTane wrote:
> Actually, they won't. I've seen this kind of setup on a list devoted to
> Winamp skin creation; the overall intelligence level there was *much* lower
> than this list, and every single email had a footer saying "To unsubscribe,
> send a blank email to [some address I don't remember]."
>
> Roughly a half-dozen people *per day* sent in messages asking how to get
> off the list...
Lies, damned lies, statistics. :)
Do you know how many people read the footer and left without asking?
Do you know how many people would ask if the footer was not there?
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
On 19 May 2000, D. J. Bernstein wrote:
> The word ``accept'' in 822bis means that parsers won't die.
Hmm...a secure program should never ``die'' interpreting data (from an
untrusted source). Ergo, any data should be ``accepted''. :)
> No. RFCs are merely one source of information about the Internet, and
> not a particularly accurate source. We implementors decided years ago to
> allow non-MIME 8-bit mail, for example, even though the relevant RFCs
> specifically require that such mail be rejected.
Have you, implementors, done it deliberately (to provide extra
functionality (*)) or incidentally (as a side effect of making
your code simpler)?
(*) If yes, what extra functionality was provided? (Apparently, it was not
an ability to transfer non-English plaintexts because you do not know how
to interpret bytes you receive without MIME (or MIME-like) metadata.)
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
On Fri, 19 May 2000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> The problem with bare linefeeds is simple: their interpretation
> is ambiguous on a Unix machine.... Because some do [send them],
> qmail rejects them.
The interpretation of 8-bit characters with code >= 128 is even more
ambiguous (at least unless the charset is specified with MIME headers)
but qmail accepts these characters (as well as bare CRs)...because it can
transport them transparently.
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
Pavel Kankovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (*) If yes, what extra functionality was provided? (Apparently, it was
> not an ability to transfer non-English plaintexts because you do not
> know how to interpret bytes you receive without MIME (or MIME-like)
> metadata.)
It was, in fact, an ability to transfer non-English plaintext and your
contention is wrong in a lot of circumstances. There is a *lot* of mail
in the world, not written in English, sent between two people who are both
using the same language and encoding, which isn't marked with MIME
metadata but nonetheless is interpreted just fine by the affected parties.
This is particularly common with mail internal to organizations.
This is an ongoing argument; I've seen plenty of examples both in Europe
and in Asia where unlabelled 8-bit content, while not the best way of
doing things, is very common and doesn't cause problems.
Anyway, that's also a bit apart from what Dan was talking about, as I
would assume that Dan was talking about the 8BITMIME SMTP extension, not
the MIME conventions for body labelling. The former is even less
necessary than the latter.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Hi,
I am about to setup a internet mail server for my university. (First time
getting to internet) and I have decided to use qmail as the mta for my
server.
I already have a nis server running on my linux network. My questions are
1. I dont want all students having a valid nis account to have an email
address. The email addresses facility should be for a subset of the NIS
data base. How can it be done? I assume that the qmail server should be a
nis client/server and there is no other way.
2. Should the nis server and qmail be running on the same machine
physically?
Suresh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Suresh Kumar.R, Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dept of Electronics & Communication
College of Engineering, Trivandrum - 695 016, INDIA
Phone: (O) 91 471 414634/418379, (R) 91 471 443496
Suresh Kumar R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. I dont want all students having a valid nis account to have an email
> address. The email addresses facility should be for a subset of the NIS
> data base. How can it be done? I assume that the qmail server should be
> a nis client/server and there is no other way.
Read qmail-users; you can either explicitly list the users that should
receive mail or list the exceptions who shouldn't. Note that when running
qmail-pw2u, you'll want to replace < /etc/passwd with ypcat passwd | or
the like.
> 2. Should the nis server and qmail be running on the same machine
> physically?
Probably not. It's generally a good rule of thumb to run one major
service per machine if you can.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
>
> > 1. I dont want all students having a valid nis account to have an email
> > address. The email addresses facility should be for a subset of the NIS
> > data base. How can it be done? I assume that the qmail server should be
> > a nis client/server and there is no other way.
>
> Read qmail-users; you can either explicitly list the users that should
> receive mail or list the exceptions who shouldn't. Note that when running
> qmail-pw2u, you'll want to replace < /etc/passwd with ypcat passwd | or
> the like.
In fact, if you are looking at qmail-users, you might as well forget
about the NIS completely, and just use one single user id/group id for
the mail server setup. The assign and the cdb duo are far more
scalable than NIS. I don't think NIS is good for any site whose user
number may keep growing. NIS craps out around 30K users or so, owing
to a ndbm 1K buffer limitation. I
have been told by Sun's Enterprise Services (we have support contact)
that this "bug" is not going to be fixed :(
> > 2. Should the nis server and qmail be running on the same machine
> > physically?
>
> Probably not. It's generally a good rule of thumb to run one major
> service per machine if you can.
Agreed.
Regards,
Chin Fang
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
>
Hi
canany one tell me how do i clear the mail queue ?
Parag Mehta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
System Administrator.
Puretech Internet Pvt. Ltd. http://puretech.co.in/
77 Atlanta. Nariman Point.
Mumbai - 400021. India. Tel: +91-22-2833158
============================================================
Support is now available thru our Web Based Support System.
http://support.puretech.co.in
============================================================
> System Administrator:
> canany one tell me how do i clear the mail queue ?
it's in the fm. read it. "svc -a /service/qmail-send" or whatever is
appropriate for your system. if your setup is like your manual reading,
you might prefer "killall -alrm qmail-send".
--
clemens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi
i have actually around 1000 mails in the mail queue when seen from the
mailq command.there are mails from 1st may 2000 onwards. i do not
understand as to how should i clear this queue which has mails pending
from previous dates.
On Sun, 21 May 2000, clemensF wrote:
> > System Administrator:
>
> > canany one tell me how do i clear the mail queue ?
>
> it's in the fm. read it. "svc -a /service/qmail-send" or whatever is
> appropriate for your system. if your setup is like your manual reading,
> you might prefer "killall -alrm qmail-send".
>
> --
> clemens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Parag Mehta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
System Administrator.
Puretech Internet Pvt. Ltd. http://puretech.co.in/
77 Atlanta. Nariman Point.
Mumbai - 400021. India. Tel: +91-22-2833158
============================================================
Support is now available thru our Web Based Support System.
http://support.puretech.co.in
============================================================
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 10:34:13PM -0400, Martin Gignac wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Don't know if this is appropriate for the list, but here goes:
No it isn't - you should have subscribed to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :-)
> "Whoa there!
>
> It appears the perl installed on your system does not support setuid
> correctly."
>...
> I know next to nothing about Perl, so I'm kinda stumped. Has anybody run
> into this problem? If so, what did you do to fix it?
Looks like there's a few distributions out there that turn off setuid
support in perl by default.
To re-enable in as paranoid a mode as possible:
chown root:qmail /usr/bin/suidperl
chmod 4710 /usr/bin/suidperl
That will mean that only Qmail processes can take advantage of running
setuid perl scripts on your system. As it didn't support setuid perl scripts
before, this action won't break anything!
[Scan4Virus: GPL Qmail-based anti-virus harness. Supports most major
antivirus vendors and contains internal scanner implementation too.]
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Louis,
I tested your version late this morning. It worked as far as I could
tell. However, I felt that efficiency wise we could do better, so I
combined both yours and mine and formed another patch. Please let me
know whether it works for you.
I also spotted the reason why in my original, unfinished, patch, the
second strerr_warn1() stayed silent. It should. After pop3_quit(),
the program die()s, and I placed the strerr_warn1 after
commands(&ssin,pop3commands); in the main(). Thus it became a still
born :(
Thanks again for this fruitful exchange.
Best Regards,
Chin Fang
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** qmail-pop3d.c.orig Sun May 21 13:12:07 2000
--- qmail-pop3d.c Sun May 21 16:02:08 2000
***************
*** 16,21 ****
--- 16,33 ----
#include "readwrite.h"
#include "timeoutread.h"
#include "timeoutwrite.h"
+ #include "strerr.h"
+
+ /*
+ ** patched qmail-pop3d.c so that the downloaded bytes (including protocol
+ ** overhead) can be logged via multilog. To use this version, line 91 of
+ ** qmail-popup.c should be either deleted or commented out and then
+ ** rebuilt.
+ **
+ ** C. Fang 05/21/2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ */
+
+ unsigned long msgbytesread = 0;
void die() { _exit(0); }
***************
*** 35,40 ****
--- 47,64 ----
return r;
}
+ /* @@@ generating log messages */
+ char msgbytes_str[FMT_ULONG];
+ char pid_str[FMT_ULONG];
+
+ void log_bytes(msgbytesread) unsigned long msgbytesread;
+ {
+ msgbytes_str[fmt_ulong(msgbytes_str,msgbytesread)];
+ pid_str[fmt_uint(pid_str,getpid())];
+
+ strerr_warn5("qmail-pop3d ",pid_str,": ",msgbytes_str," message bytes read",
0);
+ }
+
char ssoutbuf[1024];
substdio ssout = SUBSTDIO_FDBUF(safewrite,1,ssoutbuf,sizeof ssoutbuf);
***************
*** 99,111 ****
if (!line.len)
inheaders = 0;
else
! if (line.s[0] == '.')
put(".",1);
put(line.s,line.len);
put("\r\n",2);
if (!match) break;
}
put("\r\n.\r\n",5);
flush();
}
--- 123,140 ----
if (!line.len)
inheaders = 0;
else
! if (line.s[0] == '.') {
put(".",1);
+ msgbytesread++;
+ }
put(line.s,line.len);
+ msgbytesread += line.len;
put("\r\n",2);
+ msgbytesread += 2;
if (!match) break;
}
put("\r\n.\r\n",5);
+ msgbytesread += 5;
flush();
}
***************
*** 193,198 ****
--- 222,228 ----
rename(m[i].fn,line.s); /* if it fails, bummer */
}
okay();
+ log_bytes(msgbytesread);
die();
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chin Fang) writes:
> I tested your version late this morning. It worked as far as I could
> tell. However, I felt that efficiency wise we could do better, so I
> combined both yours and mine and formed another patch. Please let me
> know whether it works for you.
With only a slight loss of portability, you could rewrite the logging
functions in assembly.
If you can demonstrate any noticable (even easily measurable) overhead
incurred by wrapping read() in a procedure call, I'd like to hear
about it. What's the reasoning behind your speculation (there's
locality and all that to consider)? This list is, after all, the land
of `Profile, don't speculate.' A companion slogan might be: `Don't
offer up dangerously misleading information in public.'
DJB has invested considerable effort in creating an I/O library that
provides a much better interface than stdio, and there's absolutely no
reason not to take advantage of it when extending his software.
The abysmal quality of most of the code floating around on the net is
largely due to programmers who feel that it's somehow `more efficient'
to avoid abstraction and modularity. The other common excuse is that
it's `easier,' but this cannot possibly be true when the necessary
abstractions have already been written and debugged.
> I also spotted the reason why in my original, unfinished, patch, the
> second strerr_warn1() stayed silent. It should. After pop3_quit(),
> the program die()s, and I placed the strerr_warn1 after
> commands(&ssin,pop3commands); in the main(). Thus it became a still
> born :(
That'll teach me to try to debug something based on a diff alone. :)
[ from a modified version of a function in the patch I posted ]
> + {
> + msgbytes_str[fmt_ulong(msgbytes_str,msgbytesread)];
> + pid_str[fmt_uint(pid_str,getpid())];
The `= 0's before the semicolons in the above two statements weren't
there for decorative purposes. You won't get bit in this case,
though, since C guarantees that global arrays are zero initialized.
For completeness' sake, I'm appending an enhanced version of my
original patch. It logs the the total network traffic in both
directions as well as the number of bytes slurped for RETR and TOP
commands. Along with a checkpassword that logs the user name and PID,
it gives you a reasonably good idea of how much bandwidth is being
used and who's using it.
As before, this is works-on-my-machine ware.
^L
--
Louis Theran
Nokia Research Center
(Not speaking for Nokia.)
*** qmail-pop3d.c.orig Sat May 20 19:54:14 2000
--- qmail-pop3d.c Sun May 21 21:06:37 2000
***************
*** 17,29 ****
#include "timeoutread.h"
#include "timeoutwrite.h"
! void die() { _exit(0); }
int saferead(fd,buf,len) int fd; char *buf; int len;
{
int r;
r = timeoutread(1200,fd,buf,len);
if (r <= 0) die();
return r;
}
--- 17,86 ----
#include "timeoutread.h"
#include "timeoutwrite.h"
! #include "strerr.h"
+ /* @@@ patched to log the number of bytes per connection.
+ *
+ * A simple patch to make qmail-pop3d emit log lines of the form:
+ *
+ * qmail-pop3d <pid>: <nbytes> bytes read --- bytes read from files in the
+Maildir
+ * qmail-pop3d <pid>: <nbytes> bytes in --- total bytes read from the network
+ * qmail-pop3d <pid>: <nbytes> bytes out --- total bytes written to the network
+ *
+ * to stderr, which is assumed to be pointed at multilog
+ *
+ * DON'T BLINDLY ASSUME THIS WORKS, it has undergone only cursory testing
+ *
+ * --Louis Theran, 2000-05-21
+ *
+ * Changes from the 05-20 version:
+ * -- Now logging all network traffic
+ * -- Moved the call to log_bytes() into die() so it always gets called
+ *
+ * Feel free to redistribute and use this.
+ */
+
+
+
+ /* @@@ keep track of bytes slurped for RETR/TOP, and total network traffic in both
+ directions */
+ static unsigned long msgbytes = 0;
+ static unsigned long netinbytes = 0;
+ static unsigned long netoutbytes = 0;
+
+ /* @@@ generating log messages */
+ #define log(msg) \
+ strerr_warn6("qmail-pop3d ",pid,": ",bytes," ",(msg),0)
+
+ static void log_bytes()
+ {
+ char bytes[FMT_ULONG];
+ char pid[FMT_ULONG];
+
+ pid[fmt_uint(pid,getpid())] = 0;
+
+ bytes[fmt_ulong(bytes,msgbytes)] = 0;
+ log("bytes read");
+
+ bytes[fmt_ulong(bytes,netinbytes)] = 0;
+ log("bytes in");
+
+ bytes[fmt_ulong(bytes,netoutbytes)] = 0;
+ log("bytes out");
+ }
+
+ #undef log
+
+ void die() { log_bytes(); _exit(0); }
+
+ /* @@@ saferead() and safewrite() are attached to the streams reading and writing
+ to the network */
int saferead(fd,buf,len) int fd; char *buf; int len;
{
int r;
r = timeoutread(1200,fd,buf,len);
if (r <= 0) die();
+ netinbytes += r;
return r;
}
***************
*** 32,40 ****
--- 89,108 ----
int r;
r = timeoutwrite(1200,fd,buf,len);
if (r <= 0) die();
+ netoutbytes += r;
return r;
}
+ /* @@@ we'll use counted_read() whenever we open a message in pop3_top() */
+ static int counted_read(fd,buf,len) int fd; char *buf; int len;
+ {
+ int rv;
+
+ rv = read(fd,buf,len);
+ if (rv > 0) msgbytes += rv;
+ return rv;
+ }
+
char ssoutbuf[1024];
substdio ssout = SUBSTDIO_FDBUF(safewrite,1,ssoutbuf,sizeof ssoutbuf);
***************
*** 268,274 ****
fd = open_read(m[i].fn);
if (fd == -1) { err_nosuch(); return; }
okay();
! substdio_fdbuf(&ssmsg,read,fd,ssmsgbuf,sizeof(ssmsgbuf));
blast(&ssmsg,limit);
close(fd);
}
--- 336,342 ----
fd = open_read(m[i].fn);
if (fd == -1) { err_nosuch(); return; }
okay();
! substdio_fdbuf(&ssmsg,counted_read,fd,ssmsgbuf,sizeof(ssmsgbuf));
blast(&ssmsg,limit);
close(fd);
}
did anyone have any ideas on this?
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Smoke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:26 PM
Subject: Bruce's latest qmail rpm and subdomain
>
> I am running Bruce's latest RPM, and I love it...easy setup...works great.
> I am also using his virtual domain package vmailmgr.
>
> I don't know how many of you are familiar with his vmailmgr package, but
it
> works great.
>
> I put out this question on the vmailmgr mailing list, and he said the
> problem i am having is not vmailmgr related, it is qmail related. So here
> goes:
>
> I have a virtual domain for example domain.com.
> I have a subdomain called test.domain.com
> I have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and i have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> my /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains file reads:
> domain.com:domain.com
> test.domain.com:test.domain.com
>
> If I send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the message is being
delivered
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> qmail should parse this by looking for
> test.domain.com
> then .domain.com
> then .com
>
> Anyone know what might cause the MUA to send the mail to the wrong place?
>
> ##################
> here is my log file entry...the real domain is yourprospects.com:
> ##################
>
> May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.263598 status: local 2/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.268567 delivery 13: success:
> did_0+0+0/
> May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.310099 status: local 1/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.334021 delivery 14: success:
> did_1+0+0/
> May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.440181 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.440263 end msg 41396
> May 17 14:53:47 dns1 qmail: 958593227.888630 new msg 41396
> May 17 14:53:47 dns1 qmail: 958593227.888764 info msg 41396: bytes 907
from
> <bsm
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 6852 uid 112
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.097990 starting delivery 15: msg
41396
> to
> local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098097 status: local 1/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098155 starting delivery 16: msg
41396
> to
> local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098203 status: local 2/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.102911 delivery 15: success:
> did_0+0+0/
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.144389 status: local 1/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.144493 delivery 16: success:
> did_0+0+1/
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.232967 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
> May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.233045 end msg 41396
>
>
>
>
On Sun, May 21, 2000 at 08:18:31PM -0500, Barry Smoke wrote:
> did anyone have any ideas on this?
I'm guessing that your question was ignored because you gave fake domain names,
which makes any DNS problems impossible to troubleshoot.
Providing phony information is like telling the doctor that you're experiencing
pain, and then asking him to diagnose the problem by examining a surrogate
rather than examining you.
Try your question again, and tell us the real domain names in question, and the
real contents of your virtualdomains file.
Chris
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Barry Smoke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:26 PM
> Subject: Bruce's latest qmail rpm and subdomain
>
>
> >
> > I am running Bruce's latest RPM, and I love it...easy setup...works great.
> > I am also using his virtual domain package vmailmgr.
> >
> > I don't know how many of you are familiar with his vmailmgr package, but
> it
> > works great.
> >
> > I put out this question on the vmailmgr mailing list, and he said the
> > problem i am having is not vmailmgr related, it is qmail related. So here
> > goes:
> >
> > I have a virtual domain for example domain.com.
> > I have a subdomain called test.domain.com
> > I have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > and i have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > my /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains file reads:
> > domain.com:domain.com
> > test.domain.com:test.domain.com
> >
> > If I send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the message is being
> delivered
> > to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > qmail should parse this by looking for
> > test.domain.com
> > then .domain.com
> > then .com
> >
> > Anyone know what might cause the MUA to send the mail to the wrong place?
> >
> > ##################
> > here is my log file entry...the real domain is yourprospects.com:
> > ##################
> >
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.263598 status: local 2/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.268567 delivery 13: success:
> > did_0+0+0/
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.310099 status: local 1/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.334021 delivery 14: success:
> > did_1+0+0/
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.440181 status: local 0/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.440263 end msg 41396
> > May 17 14:53:47 dns1 qmail: 958593227.888630 new msg 41396
> > May 17 14:53:47 dns1 qmail: 958593227.888764 info msg 41396: bytes 907
> from
> > <bsm
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 6852 uid 112
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.097990 starting delivery 15: msg
> 41396
> > to
> > local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098097 status: local 1/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098155 starting delivery 16: msg
> 41396
> > to
> > local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098203 status: local 2/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.102911 delivery 15: success:
> > did_0+0+0/
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.144389 status: local 1/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.144493 delivery 16: success:
> > did_0+0+1/
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.232967 status: local 0/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.233045 end msg 41396
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Hi
change your cname entry in the dns to point to an ip instead of the cname
entry. i think this will solveyour problem.
On Sun, 21 May 2000, Barry Smoke wrote:
> did anyone have any ideas on this?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Barry Smoke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 1:26 PM
> Subject: Bruce's latest qmail rpm and subdomain
>
>
> >
> > I am running Bruce's latest RPM, and I love it...easy setup...works great.
> > I am also using his virtual domain package vmailmgr.
> >
> > I don't know how many of you are familiar with his vmailmgr package, but
> it
> > works great.
> >
> > I put out this question on the vmailmgr mailing list, and he said the
> > problem i am having is not vmailmgr related, it is qmail related. So here
> > goes:
> >
> > I have a virtual domain for example domain.com.
> > I have a subdomain called test.domain.com
> > I have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > and i have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > my /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains file reads:
> > domain.com:domain.com
> > test.domain.com:test.domain.com
> >
> > If I send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the message is being
> delivered
> > to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > qmail should parse this by looking for
> > test.domain.com
> > then .domain.com
> > then .com
> >
> > Anyone know what might cause the MUA to send the mail to the wrong place?
> >
> > ##################
> > here is my log file entry...the real domain is yourprospects.com:
> > ##################
> >
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.263598 status: local 2/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.268567 delivery 13: success:
> > did_0+0+0/
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.310099 status: local 1/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.334021 delivery 14: success:
> > did_1+0+0/
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.440181 status: local 0/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:42:20 dns1 qmail: 958592540.440263 end msg 41396
> > May 17 14:53:47 dns1 qmail: 958593227.888630 new msg 41396
> > May 17 14:53:47 dns1 qmail: 958593227.888764 info msg 41396: bytes 907
> from
> > <bsm
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 6852 uid 112
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.097990 starting delivery 15: msg
> 41396
> > to
> > local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098097 status: local 1/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098155 starting delivery 16: msg
> 41396
> > to
> > local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.098203 status: local 2/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.102911 delivery 15: success:
> > did_0+0+0/
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.144389 status: local 1/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.144493 delivery 16: success:
> > did_0+0+1/
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.232967 status: local 0/10 remote
> 0/20
> > May 17 14:53:48 dns1 qmail: 958593228.233045 end msg 41396
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Parag Mehta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
System Administrator.
Puretech Internet Pvt. Ltd. http://puretech.co.in/
77 Atlanta. Nariman Point.
Mumbai - 400021. India. Tel: +91-22-2833158
============================================================
Support is now available thru our Web Based Support System.
http://support.puretech.co.in
============================================================
From: "Snowcrash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 19:23:01 -0500
I'm running Qmail with Vpopmail from inter7.com and I'd like to know
how I would forward one e-mail address to mutiple people. For example
messgaes sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Probably an easy question but I'm just not getting it...
Thanks in advance,
Daniel Daley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In ~alias/.qmail-support:
----------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------
-- Bob Rogers
On Mon, May 22, 2000 at 12:14:57AM -0400, Bob Rogers wrote:
> From: "Snowcrash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 19:23:01 -0500
>
> I'm running Qmail with Vpopmail from inter7.com and I'd like to know
> how I would forward one e-mail address to mutiple people. For example
> messgaes sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Probably an easy question but I'm just not getting it...
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Daniel Daley
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> In ~alias/.qmail-support:
> ----------------
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----------------
>From my understanding of vpop, that won't work. The alias user is not
seen, as the .qmail-default file for the foo.com domain will send the mail
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it can't find a box for it. The solution is to
put the .qmail-support file in the subdirectory for the foo.com domain,
usually /home/vpopmail/domains/foo.com.
Ben
--
The spectre of a polity controlled by the fads and whims of voters who
actually believe that there are significant differences between Bud Lite
and Miller Lite, and who think that professional wrestling is for real, is
naturally alarming to people who don't.
-- Neal Stephenson
Snowcrash wrote:
>
> I'm running Qmail with Vpopmail from inter7.com and I'd like to know
> how I would forward one e-mail address to mutiple people. For example
> messgaes sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Probably an easy question but I'm just not getting it...
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Daniel Daley
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Make yourself a file /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-support witch includes the
names
of all people you want to receive the mail. Se man dot-qmail
--
/hans
Bob Rogers wrote:
>
> From: "Snowcrash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 19:23:01 -0500
>
> I'm running Qmail with Vpopmail from inter7.com and I'd like to know
> how I would forward one e-mail address to mutiple people. For example
> messgaes sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Probably an easy question but I'm just not getting it...
In the ~vpopmail/domains/<virtual domain> directory place
a .qmail-support file.
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > .qmail-support
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" >> .qmail-support
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" >> .qmail-support
Those are forwards processed by qmail-local. Which causes
the email to be sent into the qmail queue again, one for
each user.
The alternative is to place the path "full or relative" to
tom, dick and harry's Maildirs. For example, on a newly
created virtual domain foo.com
echo "./tom/Maildir/" > .qmail-support
echo "./dick/Maildir/" >> .qmail-support
echo "./harry/Maildir/" >> .qmail-support
This causes qmail-local to place a copy of the email in
each of these users Maildirs. More efficent than a forward.
However, this only works for vpopmail uid/gid dirs.
Ken Jones
inter7
One thing that could be convenient to is make a hostname that map's to multiple
IP's, if you have for instance smtp.mydomain.com which has IP 192.168.1.1 and IP
192.168.1.2 in DNS, the machine that send's to smtp.mydomain.com would send it
to the first given IP unless it's not availlable end sends it to the other IP,
another way is to have some cisco router having this smtp.mydomain.com name and
forwards the received packets for the smtp port to a list of IP's, if one isn't
availlable it simply forwards to the other queue;
One disadvantage is that you'll end up with message's for the same user on
multiple machine's, however i'm sure that there is some kind of method for that
(Maildir's via NFS for instance...)
Regards,
Jeroen.
Greg Owen wrote:
> I'm on the list, no need to Cc me.
>
> Michael Boman wrote:
> > What I want is to be able to share the queue between n+2
> > servers on each loocation
>
> Qmail's design specifically precludes putting the queue on a network
> filesystem, so you can't share it that way. One alternative is to set up
> something like N+1 host PCs connected to a SCSI disk array that allows
> multiple hosts, and to somehow configure all but one of the hosts as a
> failover. Perhaps even a NAS technology like GFS
> (http://www.globalfilesystem.org/) would work (but not definitely).
> However, I've never heard of anyone doing so, so you'd be forging into new
> ground. Note that in particular, you'd have to have the 2nd to Nth servers
> lying dormant until the 1st server is believed to be dead, because multiple
> instances of qmail can't be processing one queue at the same time.
>
> No mail system I know of supports this kind of setup by design, and
> I'm not sure it is easily possible under any of them. There's a reason for
> that. It isn't worth the trouble. Most people who are concerned about
> reliability and losing mail run N+1 independent servers, put the mail queue
> on RAID, and if one machine dies try to manually recover the mail on their
> second server.
>
> Your problem seems to be that you don't have local resources that
> can administer these machines if something goes wrong. If that's your
> problem, what you should do is buy a server with serious redundancy. Compaq
> (among others, I'm sure) makes servers with redundant power, disk, memory,
> and CPU. You're safe from pretty much anything except a fried motherboard.
> You can go a lot further with seriously redundant server hardware than you
> will with some homegrown shared server approach, especially where it looks
> like load is not your reason for multiple servers. Then just make sure you
> get notified when a power supply dies so you can get a new one out while the
> second is still working.
>
> > as well as be able to split a single domain's mailstorage
> > so each users doesn't need to download his/hers email from
> > the other end of the world.
>
> One way is to break down users into subdomains for delivery. I.e.,
> given the email domain "bigdomain.com," with a primary MX server physically
> located in Singapore, and users in Singapore, Tokyo, and Hong Kong:
>
> You would need to set up forwarding on a user-by-user basis. User
> joe lives in Singapore? Then [EMAIL PROTECTED] should be forwarded to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delivered locally there. User jane lives
> in Tokyo? [EMAIL PROTECTED] User josh lives in Hong Kong?
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] As long as their mail clients correctly send
> as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]," the illusion of a single domain is retained. You
> may or may not have to do some header rewriting on final delivery so that
> they don't end including [EMAIL PROTECTED] in their "Reply
> to..." mail messages.
>
> This is not a hard problem, it just doesn't have an elegant
> solution. If you need to do it that badly, then you can justify the added
> busy work.
>
> --
> gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hello all,
i have an lan with internet connection through a firewall. all the users
are inside the lan and the internal mail is hosted by sendmail which
delivers all the internal mails localy and forwads all the external mail
to the mailserver at the firewall from where it goes to the destination.
To receive the mail from external source my mailserver at firewall which
is qmail needs to be configured such that all the mail that are addressed
to @indsoft.co.in should be forwaded to the sendmail inside the lan.
at present the Qmail can deliver local mails and external mails as well as
forwad all the mails that needs to be send to internet from the lan.
but how can i tell Qmail to send all the mails to indsoft.co.in to
192.168.1.1
also how about the error processing, ie no such user etc...
raj
I am re-installing qmail to see if I can figure out the problems I am
having at getting this thing running. Going through the steps on "Life
with qmail" I get to 2.8.5 which states this:
2.8.5. Start qmail
Finally, you can start qmail:
/usr/local/sbin/qmail start
When I enter "/usr/local/sbin/qmail start" I get this error:
multilog: fatal: unable to lock directory /var/log/qmail%smtp: access
denied
qmail is not running when I invoke this command (at least when I do ps
-aux it doesn't show qmail running). BUT, if I go to /var/qmail and run
./rc, qmail starts.
Why am I gettting the error when I use "qmail start"?
James
I still get the error, but I've noticed that when I open another terminal,
qmail seems to be running, but twice. When I do ps -aux I can see these
running:
__________________________________________________________________
root svscan
root supervise qmail-s
root supervise log
root supervise qmail-s
root supervise log
#1011 qmail-send
qmaild /usr/local/bin/tc <-- can't see the rest, goes off screen
root qmail-lspawn ./Ma <-- can't see the rest
#1010 qmail-rspawn
#1009 qmail-clean
qmaill [multilog <defunc <-- can't see the rest
___________________________________________________________________
I am guessing that the reason for the #10 numbers is because this time, on
the second install, I've actually changed the existing lines in
/etc/passwd to the LWQ suggested numbers of 7791:2108 etc.
Anyway, I still get the original error, but qmail is running now. What
can I do to fix this mess I've gotten myself into. I'd really prefer to
just clean qmail off and start over, but I thought just going through the
LWQ steps again would be good enough.
James
