qmail Digest 30 Dec 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1229

Sat, 30 Dec 2000 02:47:21 -0800 


qmail Digest 30 Dec 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1229

Topics (messages 54458 through 54487):

supervise
        54458 by: I. Herman
        54460 by: Tim Hunter
        54461 by: I. Herman
        54463 by: Tim Hunter
        54473 by: David Nim

1 message sent - recieved 4x !
        54459 by: B.Negr�o

bigger and better error msg's
        54462 by: I. Herman

forwarding *almost* everything to another host
        54464 by: Rolf Hillen

even stranger
        54465 by: I. Herman
        54469 by: Tim Hunter

bare lf problem
        54466 by: Boz Crowther

mail dissappearing
        54467 by: I. Herman
        54470 by: Tim Hunter

Re: Qmail and Large Scale Dynamic Mailings
        54468 by: Collin B. McClendon

alias
        54471 by: Alexander Bl�schke
        54472 by: Matthew Patterson

thoughts for future qmail
        54474 by: Matthew Patterson
        54476 by: David Nim
        54477 by: Henning Brauer
        54479 by: adi
        54483 by: Russell Nelson
        54485 by: Matthew Patterson

domain alias question
        54475 by: I. Herman
        54478 by: Greg Owen

Outlook Features ??
        54480 by: Dennis
        54481 by: Ron Guerin
        54482 by: Keith Kemp
        54486 by: Marc Knoop

Logging problem..
        54484 by: �̵��� /Yi, Dong-ryon/

PGP
        54487 by: Sridhar Balasubramanian

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]


----------------------------------------------------------------------

since most of my problems are with supervise, is there a way I can disable that?  and if so..how do i do it?


Supervise is designed to "superivse" a program and keep it running if it dies for any reason.
I seriously doubt that supervise is the root of your problems.
Perhaps you can post to the list the troubles you are having, along with relevant logs and we can help you work through them.
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:02 AM
To: Qmail
Subject: supervise

since most of my problems are with supervise, is there a way I can disable that?  and if so..how do i do it?


Here's the error messages I'm getting.
 
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-send/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock: temporary failure
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 10:47 AM
To: Qmail
Subject: RE: supervise

Supervise is designed to "superivse" a program and keep it running if it dies for any reason.
I seriously doubt that supervise is the root of your problems.
Perhaps you can post to the list the troubles you are having, along with relevant logs and we can help you work through them.
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:02 AM
To: Qmail
Subject: supervise

since most of my problems are with supervise, is there a way I can disable that?  and if so..how do i do it?


I assume you followed the directions in LWQ, check your steps again, as you probably missed something.
When do you get this message?
 
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 11:15 AM
To: Tim Hunter
Cc: Qmail
Subject: RE: supervise

Here's the error messages I'm getting.
 
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-send/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock: temporary failure
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 10:47 AM
To: Qmail
Subject: RE: supervise

Supervise is designed to "superivse" a program and keep it running if it dies for any reason.
I seriously doubt that supervise is the root of your problems.
Perhaps you can post to the list the troubles you are having, along with relevant logs and we can help you work through them.
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:02 AM
To: Qmail
Subject: supervise

since most of my problems are with supervise, is there a way I can disable that?  and if so..how do i do it?


I had a problem like this when I started supervise as root and then for some reason started it as a normal user.  Try to check the permissions on the lock files to see if your user can access them.
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:15 AM
To: Tim Hunter
Cc: Qmail
Subject: RE: supervise

Here's the error messages I'm getting.
 
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-send/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock: temporary failure
 


Hy all
I sent from my outlook express 1 test message to one e-mail account. When I
listed his maildir, I saw he recieved 4 times my single message. The
messages have subtle diferences in it's headers(in red). I don't know how to
interpret it. Could someone help me? Bellow, are the 4 messages headers.
thanks!

the first: name: 978041164.20999.falcon,S=2292

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 20997 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Received: from 14bis.plugway.com.br (HELO 14bis) (200.195.39.9)
  by falcon.plugway.com.br with SMTP; 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Message-ID: <000c01c0711a$aa4c7640$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?B.Negr=E3o?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: teste
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:08:10 -0200


message 2: name: 978041548.21061.falcon,S=2395

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 21059 invoked by uid 0); 28 Dec 2000 22:12:28 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 20997 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Received: from 14bis.plugway.com.br (HELO 14bis) (200.195.39.9)
  by falcon.plugway.com.br with SMTP; 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Message-ID: <000c01c0711a$aa4c7640$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?B.Negr=E3o?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: teste
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:08:10 -0200

message 3: name: 978041657.21087.falcon,S=2395

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 21078 invoked by uid 0); 28 Dec 2000 22:14:17 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 20997 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Received: from 14bis.plugway.com.br (HELO 14bis) (200.195.39.9)
  by falcon.plugway.com.br with SMTP; 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Message-ID: <000c01c0711a$aa4c7640$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?B.Negr=E3o?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: teste
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:08:10 -0200

message 4: name: 978041657.21089.falcon,S=2498

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 21085 invoked by uid 0); 28 Dec 2000 22:14:17 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 21059 invoked by uid 0); 28 Dec 2000 22:12:28 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 20997 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Received: from 14bis.plugway.com.br (HELO 14bis) (200.195.39.9)
  by falcon.plugway.com.br with SMTP; 28 Dec 2000 22:06:04 -0000
Message-ID: <000c01c0711a$aa4c7640$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?B.Negr=E3o?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: teste
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:08:10 -0200


-------------------------------------------------
 -- Bruno Negr�o -- Suporte
 -- Plugway Acesso Internet Ltda.
 -- (31)34812311
 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]


OK..even with the other thing going on w/ supervise, it appears that something is working..but now i have this error message.  I checked to see the control/locals and everything else had the proper domain info in there...but here is what it's saying:
 

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at madhorizons.com.

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. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,

it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)



Hi All,

I'm using qmail as a kind of mail proxy to hide our (low traffic)
exchange 
server who handles the mail for e.g. foo.com.
Currently, I'm using the following setup which works fine for that
purpose:
-------------
- two mx entrys for foo.com and proxy.foo.com which point to
proxy.foo.com
- me: 
        proxy.foo.com 
- locals:
        localhost
        proxy.foo.com
- plusdomain (do I really need this?):
        foo.com
- rcpthosts:
        localhost
        proxy.foo.com
        foo.com.de
- smtproutes
        foo.com:[192.168.x.x]
------------
Now, I want the proxy also to handle some ezmlm newsletters.
Instead of using "proxy.foo.com" (or maybe rename it to "lists.foo.com")
as 
the domain part of the lists, I'd like to use "foo.com", what means that 
the proxy must handle the mail at least for some selected users of
foo.com itself.

I'm not so familiar with ezmlm, but as I could see it so far, my idea is
to 
configure qmail to handle foo.com itself (me: foo.com ;locals: localhost 
foo.com;rcpthosts foo.com) but to forward all messages, *except* the
messages for 
the user(s) who handle(s) the lists (e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]), to the exchange server.

How can I do this? Is there another (better) way to get along with the 
problem?

Thanks

Rolf


OK..no longer getting the control/locals error.  When i send a test email to the dummy test user ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) i don't get an mail-daemon message back, but no mail shows up anywhere.  Here's part of the log from /var/qmail/log:
 
@400000003a4c99bb144389c4 starting delivery 1: msg 403451 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4c99bb14467bac status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99bb14a39b84 starting delivery 2: msg 403455 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4c99bb14a6b864 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99bb18dbb754 delivery 1: deferral: /bin/sh:_dot-forward:_command_not_found/
@400000003a4c99bb18deb10c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99bb199e384c delivery 2: deferral: /bin/sh:_dot-forward:_command_not_found/
@400000003a4c99bb19a0d444 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99c00093a2ec status: exiting
@400000003a4c9a3b0eec1f2c status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c9a420444a4cc status: exiting
@400000003a4c9a450828cc6c status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c9a9003bf09ac status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 
 
What's this dot-forward thing?  Am I supposed to have it?
    


What is your default delivery method?
Also is there a .qmail file for the user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apparently either your default delivery method or this users .qmail file has errors in it.
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 12:11 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: even stranger

OK..no longer getting the control/locals error.  When i send a test email to the dummy test user ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) i don't get an mail-daemon message back, but no mail shows up anywhere.  Here's part of the log from /var/qmail/log:
 
@400000003a4c99bb144389c4 starting delivery 1: msg 403451 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4c99bb14467bac status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99bb14a39b84 starting delivery 2: msg 403455 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4c99bb14a6b864 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99bb18dbb754 delivery 1: deferral: /bin/sh:_dot-forward:_command_not_found/
@400000003a4c99bb18deb10c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99bb199e384c delivery 2: deferral: /bin/sh:_dot-forward:_command_not_found/
@400000003a4c99bb19a0d444 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c99c00093a2ec status: exiting
@400000003a4c9a3b0eec1f2c status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c9a420444a4cc status: exiting
@400000003a4c9a450828cc6c status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4c9a9003bf09ac status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 
 
What's this dot-forward thing?  Am I supposed to have it?
    


Ok, so I've got a command-line email utility that I'm running from DOS, and I'm trying to set up a qmail relay host.  Most mail client software (Outlook Express, etc.) on my network is able to send mails through the relay, and I'm able to send mail successfully from the host itself, but not the utility; every time I tried the tcp connection ended with status 256 and nothing came through.
 
I've discovered that this indicates the bare lf problem with some mailers, and so I'm trying to use fixcrio to resolve the problem since replacing all these non-compliant command-line utilities isn't really an answer.  The script that starts qmail is:
 
#!/bin/sh
QMAILUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
 -u $QMAILUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/fixcrio \
 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
 
Now when I send an email from the command-line utility, this is what comes up in the log (this is the entire log, starting with a restart of qmail):
 
@400000003a4c5aa605104d84 tcpserver: status: 0/40
@400000003a4c5ab805227dc4 tcpserver: status: 1/40
@400000003a4c5ab8052786d4 tcpserver: pid 1099 from 192.168.20.27
@400000003a4c5ab80538c8cc tcpserver: ok 1099 :192.168.20.16:25 :192.168.20.27::1
228
@400000003a4c5abe3b4ea3dc tcpserver: end 1099 status 256
@400000003a4c5abe3b4f28ac tcpserver: status: 0/40
 
The interesting thing is, despite the fact that I'm still terminating with status 256 an email gets through, but it doesn't have any info in it (no from, no subject, no body).
 
Any help is greatly appreciated.


I got all this...but where is the mail going?  It didn't show up in any directories I have.  Does this piece of the log below show it's working?  I can mail out of qmail no prob...just when it comes in i get probs..
 
@400000003a4cd3a901fbf134 starting delivery 8: msg 403449 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4cd3a901fc145c status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a90f42e604 delivery 8: success: did_1+0+0/
@400000003a4cd3a90f43286c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a9141067ec new msg 403450
@400000003a4cd3a91410d54c info msg 403450: bytes 1692 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 11286 uid 503
@400000003a4cd3a9167f21e4 starting delivery 9: msg 403450 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4cd3a9167f6834 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a9167f838c delivery 7: success: did_0+1+0/qp_11286/
@400000003a4cd3a9167fa2cc status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a9167fbe24 end msg 403449
@400000003a4cd3a919022efc delivery 9: success: did_1+0+0/
@400000003a4cd3a919027164 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a91981abb4 end msg 403450
@400000003a4cd4732f256b7c status: exiting
@400000003a4cd47718f5b3ac status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd47e2a778754 status: exiting
@400000003a4cd47e32aaf474 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20                      


What is your default delivery method?  or the contents of the users you are receiving mail from?
It is being delivered successfully according to your default delivery methods, whatever they may be.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: I. Herman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 1:22 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: mail dissappearing

I got all this...but where is the mail going?  It didn't show up in any directories I have.  Does this piece of the log below show it's working?  I can mail out of qmail no prob...just when it comes in i get probs..
 
@400000003a4cd3a901fbf134 starting delivery 8: msg 403449 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4cd3a901fc145c status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a90f42e604 delivery 8: success: did_1+0+0/
@400000003a4cd3a90f43286c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a9141067ec new msg 403450
@400000003a4cd3a91410d54c info msg 403450: bytes 1692 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 11286 uid 503
@400000003a4cd3a9167f21e4 starting delivery 9: msg 403450 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@400000003a4cd3a9167f6834 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a9167f838c delivery 7: success: did_0+1+0/qp_11286/
@400000003a4cd3a9167fa2cc status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a9167fbe24 end msg 403449
@400000003a4cd3a919022efc delivery 9: success: did_1+0+0/
@400000003a4cd3a919027164 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd3a91981abb4 end msg 403450
@400000003a4cd4732f256b7c status: exiting
@400000003a4cd47718f5b3ac status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a4cd47e2a778754 status: exiting
@400000003a4cd47e32aaf474 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20                       


Hello All,
I'm having wierd issues with my large mailing lists. I have one with 9k and
one with 22k of subscribers. I've applied big-concurrency, but not the
sysctl.conf changes mentioned here. I had this machine serving just fine
with OpenBSD but after adding listserv I had 
to change OS's. I have noticed that although we haven't added any subsribers
to the first
list and just a few to the second it has slowly over the last week gotten
slower and 
slower at delivering. I am running RedHat Linux 7.0 with Q-mail and
Listserv. I am using
a concurrency both local and remote of 255. I increased __FD_SETSIZE to 4096
and conf-spawn to 255. Unlike in BSD I couldn't get the concurrency raised
past 255. Any suggestions? Is my que perhaps not flushing over time or
perhaps file system fragmentation? (stupid thing to say I suppose with
ext2...)
I'd appreciate any suggestions,
Thanks,
Collin


-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Reifschneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:21 PM
To: Thomas Duterme
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Qmail and Large Scale Dynamic Mailings


On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 11:45:49AM -0500, Thomas Duterme wrote:
>2) Qmail is set to open 20 SMTP connections at a time

Ding ding ding ding!  We have a winner!  Try at least doubling that.
Unfortunately, you can't say "20 per destination" or "20 per domain",
but setting it to "20 total" is really going to kill performance.
Going from 240 to 20 may have been a bit of an over-reaction.  Can you
try 120?  That'll help a LOT.

If you have to leave it at 20, you may want to turn your SMTP timeout
down to like 5 seconds at the beginning of a mailing, so all the slow
to respond mail servers are bypassed, then increase it to like 30 after
an hour or two, then to 200 after another hour or two and do a
"killall -ALRM qmail-send".  Wacky, but it might get the job done...

Sean
-- 
 Why are Bush supporters acting like they won, when Gore has 350,000 more
 popular votes?
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python



Hallo List,

I have the following postal address [EMAIL PROTECTED] Every mail arriving there
should be transmitted to 5 further users. Can I the 5 additional users all
in a alias (.qmail-info) FILE write?

thx alex




if info is an actual account on your box, add the addresses to ~info/.qmail
if not, put the addresses in ~alias/.qmail-info

Matthew Patterson
Unix Systems Administrator
National Support Center, LLC.
Naperville, Illinois, USA

On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote:
>Hallo List,
>
>I have the following postal address [EMAIL PROTECTED] Every mail arriving there
>should be transmitted to 5 further users. Can I the 5 additional users all
>in a alias (.qmail-info) FILE write?
>
>thx alex



i was taking a look at djb's qmail page and saw that future plans for qmail
included showing through dns records whether a server was capable of qmtp or
not. This may have already been beaten to death on this discussion list but:
Why not set up qmail-remote to try to deliver the message over the standard
qmtp port (209 i believe), and if it can't make a connection, then fallback to
smtp?

just a thought, flame at will.

***********************************
Matthew Patterson
Unix Systems Administrator
National Support Center, LLC
Naperville, Illinois, USA
***********************************



Since the vast majority of people use smtp, trying qmtp first would needless
waste a lot of time, packets, and probably create confusion.  A better
solution would probbaly be to use esmtp to query for qmtp like capability.

> i was taking a look at djb's qmail page and saw that future 
> plans for qmail
> included showing through dns records whether a server was 
> capable of qmtp or
> not. This may have already been beaten to death on this 
> discussion list but:
> Why not set up qmail-remote to try to deliver the message 
> over the standard
> qmtp port (209 i believe), and if it can't make a connection, 
> then fallback to
> smtp?



Am Samstag, 30. Dezember 2000 02:04 schrieb David Nim:
> Since the vast majority of people use smtp, trying qmtp first would
> needless waste a lot of time, packets, and probably create confusion.  A
> better solution would probbaly be to use esmtp to query for qmtp like
> capability.

There is one problem left: qmqpd relays for everyone, this need sto be 
changed beforre opening qmqp for everybody.

> > i was taking a look at djb's qmail page and saw that future
> > plans for qmail
> > included showing through dns records whether a server was
> > capable of qmtp or
> > not. This may have already been beaten to death on this
> > discussion list but:
> > Why not set up qmail-remote to try to deliver the message
> > over the standard
> > qmtp port (209 i believe), and if it can't make a connection,
> > then fallback to
> > smtp?

-- 

Henning Brauer         |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS        |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]     |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de            |  Germany



On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:16:28AM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote:
> Am Samstag, 30. Dezember 2000 02:04 schrieb David Nim:
> > Since the vast majority of people use smtp, trying qmtp first would
> > needless waste a lot of time, packets, and probably create confusion.  A
> > better solution would probbaly be to use esmtp to query for qmtp like
> > capability.
> 
> There is one problem left: qmqpd relays for everyone, this need sto be 
> changed beforre opening qmqp for everybody.

You've missed the topic, he talks about qmtp not qmqp.

IMHO, qmtp is there for avoiding smtp protocol 'latency', so querying
qmtp service via esmtp won't much help, especially because there is
already esmtp pipelining. I could be wrong, though :-)

Regards,

P.Y. Adi Prasaja




Matthew Patterson writes:
 > i was taking a look at djb's qmail page and saw that future plans for qmail
 > included showing through dns records whether a server was capable of qmtp or
 > not. This may have already been beaten to death on this discussion list but:
 > Why not set up qmail-remote to try to deliver the message over the standard
 > qmtp port (209 i believe), and if it can't make a connection, then fallback to
 > smtp?

Well, yes, you need this anyway, because the magic MX priority can
only be considered a hint.  As far as I know, though, nobody's ever
made the patches to qmail-remote to convince it to attempt qmtp first.
Feel free to do it.

The concept of non-standard behavior when talking to another of one's
type is not unusual.  Fax machines do it all the time.  The fax
standard is somewhat poor, and so manufacturers have come up with
their own improvements.  These improvements are used whenever the fax
machine notices that it's talking to another one of its own model.

And there are enough qmail sites out there that it's probably worth
introducing this improvement.  I'm just speculating, though; I haven't 
measured.

-- 
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://russnelson.com | A steak, bacon
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | and cheese sandwich is
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | offensive to every major
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | religion.



the reason i was tossing it out on the list is (and i freely admit this): I am
NOT a coder.
If i were a coder, i would have coded it, made a patch file, and attached it to
an email to the group saying what it did. However, an idea is still an idea,
which is why i mention it. as is, i am not (though i am working to rectify the
situation), and so someone else can try to mooch the idea and give the
code-writing a whirl. Best of luck, i know i couldn't do it at this point.

***********************************
Matthew H Patterson
Unix Systems Administrator
National Support Center, LLC
Naperville, Illinois, USA
***********************************

On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Russell Nelson wrote:
Matthew Patterson writes:  > i was taking a look at djb's qmail page and saw
that future plans for qmail  > included showing through dns records whether a
server was capable of qmtp or  > not. This may have already been beaten to
death on this discussion list but:  > Why not set up qmail-remote to try to
deliver the message over the standard  > qmtp port (209 i believe), and if it
can't make a connection, then fallback to  > smtp?

Well, yes, you need this anyway, because the magic MX priority can
only be considered a hint.  As far as I know, though, nobody's ever
made the patches to qmail-remote to convince it to attempt qmtp first.
Feel free to do it.

The concept of non-standard behavior when talking to another of one's
type is not unusual.  Fax machines do it all the time.  The fax
standard is somewhat poor, and so manufacturers have come up with
their own improvements.  These improvements are used whenever the fax
machine notices that it's talking to another one of its own model.

And there are enough qmail sites out there that it's probably worth
introducing this improvement.  I'm just speculating, though; I haven't 
measured.

-- 
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  http://russnelson.com | A steak, bacon
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | and cheese sandwich is
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | offensive to every major
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | religion.
-- 




OK....i finally got everything running..thanks to all that helped.

Now..here's the next question:

I am hosting my domain, madhorizons.com which is an alias of madart.myip.org.

If i send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it gets here w/ no problem.  But when I 
reply, it changes things to [EMAIL PROTECTED]  how do i get qmail to keep 
the aliased domain in the address?




> But when I reply, it changes things to [EMAIL PROTECTED]  how do i 
> get qmail to keep the aliased domain in the address?

        To do this on a server-wide basis, see defaulthost and defaultdomain
in 'man qmail-inject'.  I generally set both of these to the domain name to
get the desired functionality.

        To do this on a per-user basis, see QMAILHOST and MAILHOST in 'man
qmail-inject'.

-- 
        gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
              SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
 



Hi all..

Just wondering if anyone has managed to find a product that allows access
other Outlook features, like the calander, with qmail.

Cheers
Dennis




Yes. It's called Outlook. :)

Share your calendar/tasks/contacts using NetFolders.

If you want Exchange, you'll have to get Exchange.

Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:54 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: Outlook Features ??


Hi all..

Just wondering if anyone has managed to find a product that allows access
other Outlook features, like the calander, with qmail.

Cheers
Dennis







> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Guerin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:12 PM
> To: 'Dennis'; 'Qmail'
> Subject: RE: Outlook Features ??
> 
> 
> Yes. It's called Outlook. :)
> 
> Share your calendar/tasks/contacts using NetFolders.
> 
> If you want Exchange, you'll have to get Exchange.
> 
> Ron
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 8:54 PM
> To: Qmail
> Subject: Outlook Features ??
> 
> 
> Hi all..
> 
> Just wondering if anyone has managed to find a product that allows access
> other Outlook features, like the calander, with qmail.
> 
> Cheers
> Dennis
> 
> 
> 




Ron Guerin writes:

> If you want Exchange, you'll have to get Exchange.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> 
> Just wondering if anyone has managed to find a product that allows access
> other Outlook features, like the calander, with qmail.

Dennis,

Ron put it perfectly together -- Exchange is not just a MTA (OK, it's half
an MTA ;).  I too see a need/benefit from running Exchange in my
organization and already have a brand new PowerEdge waiting to serve that
purpose.  Exchange does have some nifty features that people will find
useful (chat, shared address books/calenders...) -- no question about it.

However, the Exchange server I will create will not have access to the
Internet -- all mail will come through and go out of a qmail server which
runs very, very well.  All list servers will remain pointed at the qmail
mail server too.  

It seems I'm trying to get the best of both worlds...

../mk



I have QMail 1.03 in my FreeBSD machine and it was good until I was reported that some 
of my clients couldn't receive mails from a few other mail servers.

I can't determine where the problem is but I've had another issue that the server 
didn't log the smtp activities. Here's my startup script:

exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail &
tcpserver -HR -x /etc/tcpcontrol/smtp.cdb -v -u 82 -g 81 0 smtp \
        /var/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
tcpserver -x /etc/tcpcontrol/qmtp.cdb -u 82 -g 81 0 qmtp \
        /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qmt
tcpserver -x /etc/tcpcontrol/pop-3.cdb 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup goodtime

I repeated installation and removal several times in vain. I still can't get the smtp 
logs in "maillog" and some remote-to-local messages are rejected after some delay.

Today I encountered another problem. /var/log/maillog has gone while I was doing some 
CGI jobs...

Where do my time and effort gone....? Thanks in advance.






Hi,

I'm new to this concept of encrypting messages with PGP. Does it have
anything to do with the mail server. If so, how can I work 'PGP' with qmail?

can someone point me out a documentation on-line or in their own words
explain?

thanks,
-Sridhar

Reply via email to