qmail Digest 4 Jan 2001 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1234
Topics (messages 54604 through 54672):
Re: qmail pop no longer works
54604 by: James Raftery
54605 by: Justin Cunningham
54606 by: James Raftery
54607 by: Claudio Nieder
Re: Qmail on SunOS 5.8
54608 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: Alias problem with "-" before "."
54609 by: oliver bender
54626 by: Markus Stumpf
relaying by domain
54610 by: ksemat
54611 by: meric.starcom.co.ug
54612 by: James Raftery
54614 by: Charles Cazabon
54616 by: OK 2 NET - Andr� Paulsberg
54654 by: ksemat
54657 by: ksemat
54659 by: ksemat
54660 by: meric.starcom.co.ug
54666 by: ksemat
qmail/syslog problems please help
54613 by: clydem
54615 by: Charles Cazabon
multiple messages recieved
54617 by: B.Negr�o
qmtpd
54618 by: Justin Bell
54634 by: Russell Nelson
54636 by: Markus Stumpf
54637 by: Russell Nelson
54638 by: David Dyer-Bennet
54639 by: Mark Delany
54641 by: Johan Almqvist
54642 by: Mark Delany
54645 by: Russell Nelson
54650 by: Bruce Guenter
54653 by: Alex Pennace
54655 by: Johan Almqvist
54661 by: Alex Pennace
Local users can clog qmail local queue
54619 by: Mark-Jason Dominus
54620 by: Greg Owen
54621 by: James Raftery
54622 by: Kris Kelley
54623 by: Greg Owen
54624 by: Mark Delany
54625 by: Mark-Jason Dominus
Re: thoughts for future qmail
54627 by: David Benfell
54628 by: Greg Owen
54630 by: Timothy Legant
54635 by: David Benfell
smtproutes
54629 by: Steve Hammond
54631 by: Greg Owen
54633 by: Henning Brauer
54647 by: Wolfgang Zeikat
54648 by: Henning Brauer
Re: x_bit_set ... What is that?
54632 by: Russell Nelson
Relaying on qmtpd
54640 by: David Dyer-Bennet
54643 by: Charles Cazabon
54644 by: Charles Cazabon
54651 by: Bruce Guenter
Re: I want a Rule Based SMTP Multiplexing. Help me.
54646 by: Andre Oppermann
Re: mailbox format
54649 by: Andrew Richards
help in patch
54652 by: KIM
about qmail
54656 by: Wiroon Ruangsang
54662 by: Alex Pennace
Re: Alias problem with "-" before "." - SOLVED!
54658 by: oliver bender
Stress Test
54663 by: Michael Maier
IS TIME_WAIT has somethings to do with qmail?
54664 by: Ould
54667 by: Michael Maier
54668 by: Ould
54669 by: Michael Maier
54672 by: Ould
qmail-scanner
54665 by: KIM
Time zone
54670 by: Alessander Salgueirosa
54671 by: Michael Maier
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:43:35AM -0800, Justin Cunningham wrote:
> the person that sends it gets those "warning: message undelivered for
> 4 hours" type messages
Hi,
It seems that something is blocking incoming SMTP traffic to your
mail server. The warning messages you mention should give some clue
as to what's happening.
Do you have a firewall? Is it recording dropped/denied traffic? Is your
upstream ISP blocking you?
What domain are you trying to receive mail for?
james
--
James Raftery (JBR54)
"Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like
herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the domain is ac.d4a.net. I am just really confused because it only happened over new
years eve, and the computer running qmail was not even touched over that period. it
worked flawlessly before then
and no, i don't have a firewall
thanks for your help
Justin
>Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:58:00 +0000
>From: James Raftery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: qmail pop no longer works
>
>On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:43:35AM -0800, Justin Cunningham wrote:
>> the person that sends it gets those "warning: message undelivered for
>> 4 hours" type messages
>
>Hi,
>
>It seems that something is blocking incoming SMTP traffic to your
>mail server. The warning messages you mention should give some clue
>as to what's happening.
>Do you have a firewall? Is it recording dropped/denied traffic? Is your
>upstream ISP blocking you?
>
>What domain are you trying to receive mail for?
>
>james
>--
>James Raftery (JBR54)
> "Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like
> herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------
Sent with STUPID.COM's free email. Don't YOU belong here? http://www.stupid.com
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:07:46AM -0800, Justin Cunningham wrote:
> the domain is ac.d4a.net. I am just really confused because it only
> happened over new years eve, and the computer running qmail was not
> even touched over that period. it worked flawlessly before then
ac.d4a.net is being announced in the DNS as 203.164.92.195. Is that
correct?
I can't get a connection to port 25 on that machine -- something is
dropping the packets. Might somebody have applied an access list to a
router of yours, or perhaps your upstream ISP has put an access list in
place?
james
--
James Raftery (JBR54)
"Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like
herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
> ac.d4a.net is being announced in the DNS as 203.164.92.195. Is that
> correct?
> I can't get a connection to port 25 on that machine -- something is
With tcpdump running and telnetting to port 25 of that address I see:
12:37:54.262380 ubr1-pos1-0.mirnd1.nsw.optushome.com.au > dog.eschle.com: icmp: host
co3018450-a.mirnd1.nsw.optushome.com.au unreachable - admin prohibited filter
Offending pkt: [|tcp] (DF) (ttl 42,
id 61644) (ttl 231, id 521)
and according to tracroute, it's the last host vefore the destination
who sends that:
21 r1-pos0-0-0.rivrw1.nsw.excitehome.net.au (203.164.3.26) 657 ms 549 ms 535 ms
22 ubr1-pos1-0.mirnd1.nsw.optushome.com.au (203.164.3.146) 550 ms 562 ms 563 ms
23 co3018450-a.mirnd1.nsw.optushome.com.au (203.164.92.195) 571 ms 580 ms 577 ms
So whoever maintains ubr1-pos1-0.mirnd1.nsw.optushome.com.au (203.164.3.146)
has probably put in some filtering there during the last few days.
claudio
--
Claudio Nieder, Kanalweg 1, CH-8610 Uster, Tel +41 79 357 6743
yahoo messenger: claudionieder aim: claudionieder icq:42315212
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.claudio.ch
Rakesh Tiwari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The problem is when i send a blast of mails say 150000 from both the
> boxes. The Qmail on the sun box takes ages to send while the Linux box
> does it in a giffy.
[...]
> One thing i saw was that during the mail blast the "iowait" on the sun
> box is huge. more than 50% at all times.
There's several possible contributing factors here. You installed from
source on the Sun box; did you apply Russell Nelson's big-todo patch to
qmail? If not, that could be slowing you down significantly.
How are you logging? If it's going to syslog, that could be slowing you
down significantly. Use multilog from Dan's daemontools package.
Also, Sun's filesystem is fairly slow when you are doing a lot of directory
scans.
A minor contributing factor could be the compiler you used; Sun's cc has been
shown to produce fairly bloated qmail binaries on this list in the past.
If none of the above are factors, you're probably running out of queue
disk bandwidth.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to work, still have this problem! First of all, I hope you all enjoyed
your holidays and have a Happy New Year!
You asked for logfiles and the reply message: Here you are:
I've modified the example to add a true dummy user paul-john.doe (you don't
really thought, we have a real user John P. Doe, do you?). Here's, what the
logfile and mail replay say:
Maillog:
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail qmail: 978508690.461556 new msg 553859
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail qmail: 978508690.461843 info msg 553859: bytes 3501
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 11815 uid 64
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail qmail: 978508690.466075 starting delivery 4700: msg
553859 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail qmail: 978508690.466223 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail scanmails[11816]: execution started
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail scanmails[11816]: No virus found
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail scanmails[11816]: terminating
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail qmail: 978508691.006699 delivery 4700: failure:
Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
Jan 3 07:58:10 mail qmail: 978508691.006778 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Jan 3 07:58:11 mail qmail: 978508691.012425 bounce msg 553859 qp 11897
Jan 3 07:58:11 mail qmail: 978508691.012670 end msg 553859
Jan 3 07:58:11 mail qmail: 978508691.012918 new msg 553860
Jan 3 07:58:11 mail qmail: 978508691.013082 info msg 553860: bytes 4074
from <> qp 11897 uid 69
Jan 3 07:58:11 mail qmail: 978508691.017319 starting delivery 4701: msg
553860 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 3 07:58:11 mail qmail: 978508691.017472 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Jan 3 07:58:13 mail qmail: 978508693.449762 delivery 4701: success:
10.1.15.5_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_ok_978534279_qp_12606/
Jan 3 07:58:13 mail qmail: 978508693.450098 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Jan 3 07:58:13 mail qmail: 978508693.450233 end msg 553860
return message:
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.morphochem.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, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 11640 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 07:54:50 -0000
Received: from mail.morphochem.de (HELO morphochem.de) (10.1.15.5)
by mail.morphochem.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Jan 2001
07:54:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 11989 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 15:01:13 -0000
Received: from spuky.morphochem.de (HELO spuky) (10.1.8.8)
by mail.morphochem.de with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 15:01:13 -0000
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 14:58:22 +0100
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: oliver bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject:dummy test
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 14:58:21 +0100
Organization: morphochem AG
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
There is a user account "paul" existing on that system, having a .qmail
file in his home directory /home/paul. This .qmail (or even .qmail-john (as
I've read in some of the replies to other similar problems)) will lead into
the above result. We're using qmail as a mailrelay server running Microsoft
Exchange as the local mailsystem. Mails within our company sites are
encrypted. We don't have the dot-forward installed, yet.
If you need some more information, let me know.
Thanks for your help!
Kind regards
Oliver
oliver bender
system administrator
morphochem AG
gmunder str. 37-37a
81379 muenchen
tel. ++49-89-78005-0
fax ++49-89-78005-555
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.morphochem.de
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Cazabon [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Freitag, 22. Dezember 2000 15:46
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: Alias problem with "-" before "."
oliver bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I tried to create an alias file for a user i.e. John-Paul Doe. I named
that
> file .qmail-john-paul:doe I found out, that mails to such a user will be
> returned to sender with an undeliverable notice, stating this user to be
> unknown on my mailserver.
What was the envelope recipient? What _exactly_ was the bounce message?
You didn't specify either, leaving us to guess. With the .qmail file
above,
I would expect you tested sending to "john-paul.doe@yourdomain", but I've
learned not to assume much on this list. Also, show us the log entries for
this attempted/failed delivery.
What is the system account name for this user?
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cc adjusted.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:29:24PM +0100, oliver bender wrote:
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> There is a user account "paul" existing on that system, having a .qmail
> file in his home directory /home/paul. This .qmail (or even .qmail-john (as
> I've read in some of the replies to other similar problems)) will lead into
> the above result. We're using qmail as a mailrelay server running Microsoft
> Exchange as the local mailsystem. Mails within our company sites are
> encrypted. We don't have the dot-forward installed, yet.
Create a .qmail-default file in /home/paul. This will catch up addresses
like paul-<anything>.
If you want to treat paul-john.doe specially you need a
.qmail-john:doe
file in /home/paul.
See dot-qmail(5) "EXTENSION ADDRESSES"
\Maex
--
SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Hello everyone,
Sorry for putting this on the list if it has already been answered however
I checked the archives and failed to get an answer to it and although I
have read 5.4 in the FAQ it does not help me much.
I am using tcpserver and I have set up qmail and done relaying as
instructed in the FAQ however the /etc/tcp.smtp file only accepts realying
by ip address yet I would like to do it by domain name i.e
I have say domain.org hosted by my server and I want the users for this
domain to use my server as their smtp server however their ips keep
changing and they wander a lot thus I would like to relay by domain kind
of the equivalent of relay-domains in sendmail. i.e as long as the from
line is [EMAIL PROTECTED] then my server should allow relaying for that
domain. I know the dangers but I really have no choice in this
matter. Please help. I have tried putting domain names in the place of
ips in /etc/tcp.smtp but it has not worked.
regards,
Sematmba Noah
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Have U tried the rcpthosts file, that shld do the trick.
E
ksemat writes:
> Hello everyone,
> Sorry for putting this on the list if it has already been answered however
> I checked the archives and failed to get an answer to it and although I
> have read 5.4 in the FAQ it does not help me much.
> I am using tcpserver and I have set up qmail and done relaying as
> instructed in the FAQ however the /etc/tcp.smtp file only accepts realying
> by ip address yet I would like to do it by domain name i.e
> I have say domain.org hosted by my server and I want the users for this
> domain to use my server as their smtp server however their ips keep
> changing and they wander a lot thus I would like to relay by domain kind
> of the equivalent of relay-domains in sendmail. i.e as long as the from
> line is [EMAIL PROTECTED] then my server should allow relaying for that
> domain. I know the dangers but I really have no choice in this
> matter. Please help. I have tried putting domain names in the place of
> ips in /etc/tcp.smtp but it has not worked.
> regards,
> Sematmba Noah
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Systems Engineer
Infocom Uganda Limited
Tel:077409672 or 075409672
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 06:32:14PM +0300, ksemat wrote:
> instructed in the FAQ however the /etc/tcp.smtp file only accepts realying
> by ip address yet I would like to do it by domain name i.e
As you have noted, it's a terrible idea but if you insist
http://www.palomine.net/qmail/relaymailfrom.html
[ found from http://www.qmail.org/top.html ]
james
--
James Raftery (JBR54)
"Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like
herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ksemat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am using tcpserver and I have set up qmail and done relaying as instructed
> in the FAQ however the /etc/tcp.smtp file only accepts realying by ip address
> yet I would like to do it by domain name
[...]
> I know the dangers but I really have no choice in this matter.
I don't think you've considered all the choices. A POP-before-SMTP
solution would be as effective, but much more secure. Try Bruce Guenter's
relay-ctrl package, which you can find from a link on www.qmail.org.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry for putting this on the list if it has already been answered however
> I checked the archives and failed to get an answer to it and although I
> have read 5.4 in the FAQ it does not help me much.
> I am using tcpserver and I have set up qmail and done relaying as
> instructed in the FAQ however the /etc/tcp.smtp file only accepts realying
> by ip address yet I would like to do it by domain name i.e
> I have say domain.org hosted by my server and I want the users for this
> domain to use my server as their smtp server however their ips keep
> changing and they wander a lot thus I would like to relay by domain kind
> of the equivalent of relay-domains in sendmail. i.e as long as the from
> line is [EMAIL PROTECTED] then my server should allow relaying for that
> domain. I know the dangers but I really have no choice in this
> matter. Please help. I have tried putting domain names in the place of
> ips in /etc/tcp.smtp but it has not worked.
What you are proposing is impossible, because you are confusing IP/RDNS
with the users envelope-sender which cant be detected with TCPSERVER.
Besides you do NOT want use the envelope-sender as a relay authenticator, TRUST ME!
Far better solution is to search the archives for other more reliable methods,
some of them is found here http://www.palomine.net/qmail/relaying.html
and this document is worth reading to get a better perspective on relaying.
If you still will not listen to reason, there are patches to qmail-smtpd that
I believe do just what you want is also included in on this page :)
MVH Andr� Paulsberg
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Have U tried the rcpthosts file, that shld do the trick.
> E
> Systems Engineer
> Infocom Uganda Limited
> Tel:077409672 or 075409672
>
>
Well if you had looked at my question you could see that I can't possibly
put every domain in the world in my rcpthosts file. here is an example:
The domain is domain1.co.ug and it is in rcpthosts:
telnet smtp.server 25
220 smtp.server ESMTP
helo domain1.co.ug
250 smtp.server
mail from:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 ok
rcpt to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpt hosts (#5.7.1)
Thus you see the recipients would all have to be in rcpt hosts which is
just not workable.
I am talking about relaying and not acting as a secondary mx for a domain.
> As you have noted, it's a terrible idea but if you insist
> http://www.palomine.net/qmail/relaymailfrom.html
>
> [ found from http://www.qmail.org/top.html ]
Thanks for this. I am going to try Aaron's suggestion of forcing pop
before smtp and inserting the roaming ip for a period if it fails out then
I will resort to this last.
> I don't think you've considered all the choices. A POP-before-SMTP
> solution would be as effective, but much more secure. Try Bruce Guenter's
> relay-ctrl package, which you can find from a link on www.qmail.org.
As was pointed out by another poster. I guess it is because I did not know
it was possible for a pop before smtp solution but it definitely a much
better solution.
Well Then U have No option other than using pop b4 smtp :)
E
ksemat writes:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > Have U tried the rcpthosts file, that shld do the trick.
> > E
> > Systems Engineer
> > Infocom Uganda Limited
> > Tel:077409672 or 075409672
> >
> >
> Well if you had looked at my question you could see that I can't possibly
> put every domain in the world in my rcpthosts file. here is an example:
> The domain is domain1.co.ug and it is in rcpthosts:
> telnet smtp.server 25
> 220 smtp.server ESMTP
> helo domain1.co.ug
> 250 smtp.server
> mail from:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 250 ok
> rcpt to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpt hosts (#5.7.1)
>
> Thus you see the recipients would all have to be in rcpt hosts which is
> just not workable.
> I am talking about relaying and not acting as a secondary mx for a domain.
>
Systems Engineer
Infocom Uganda Limited
Tel:077409672 or 075409672
Actually I have some options including a patch to qmail-smtpd so that it
can relay using envelope sender addresses with tarpitting I think this
could be reasonably safe. because I can't guarantee that all my users will
pop before smtp besides outlook express has an annoying habit of sending
queued messages before fetching mail at times.
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Well Then U have No option other than using pop b4 smtp :)
> E
> ksemat writes:
>
> > On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Have U tried the rcpthosts file, that shld do the trick.
> > > E
> > > Systems Engineer
> > > Infocom Uganda Limited
> > > Tel:077409672 or 075409672
> > >
> > >
> > Well if you had looked at my question you could see that I can't possibly
> > put every domain in the world in my rcpthosts file. here is an example:
> > The domain is domain1.co.ug and it is in rcpthosts:
> > telnet smtp.server 25
> > 220 smtp.server ESMTP
> > helo domain1.co.ug
> > 250 smtp.server
> > mail from:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 250 ok
> > rcpt to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpt hosts (#5.7.1)
> >
> > Thus you see the recipients would all have to be in rcpt hosts which is
> > just not workable.
> > I am talking about relaying and not acting as a secondary mx for a domain.
> >
>
>
> Systems Engineer
> Infocom Uganda Limited
> Tel:077409672 or 075409672
>
>
Can someone tell me why my syslog is going crazy with all this stuff?
Am I under attack or what? How do I stop ths? It has been going on
for a couple of days and sucks the processor time on my qmail box.
thanks in advance
cm...
Jan 3 08:28:27 mail last message repeated 3 times
Jan 3 08:28:27 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:28 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailgate.whsmith.co.uk)
Jan 3 08:28:28 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:28 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:28 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:29 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:29 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:29 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:29 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:29 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail last message repeated 3 times
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:30 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:31 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:31 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:31 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:31 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:32 mail last message repeated 2 times
Jan 3 08:28:33 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:33 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:33 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:33 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:33 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:34 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:34 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailgate.whsmith.co.uk)
Jan 3 08:28:34 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:34 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO ns.haas.co.kr)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail: 978528515.640220 new msg 34861
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail: 978528515.640316 info msg 34861: bytes 1202 from
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 22736 uid 201
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail: 978528515.793398 starting delivery 2624823: msg
34861 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail: 978528515.793479 status: local 1/10 remote 1/20
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:35 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:36 mail qmail: 978528516.317014 delivery 2624823: success:
did_1+0+0/
Jan 3 08:28:36 mail qmail: 978528516.317117 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Jan 3 08:28:36 mail qmail: 978528516.317160 end msg 34861
Jan 3 08:28:36 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:36 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:36 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.013303 new msg 34731
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.013419 info msg 34731: bytes 10030
from
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp
22757 uid 201
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.074553 starting delivery 2624824: msg
34731 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.074624 status: local 1/10 remote 1/20
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.231341 delivery 2624824: success:
did_1+0+0/
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.231431 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail: 978528517.231475 end msg 34731
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:37 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:38 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:39 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:39 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:39 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:39 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:39 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:39 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailgate.whsmith.co.uk)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:40 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:41 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:41 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:41 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:41 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:41 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:41 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:42 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:42 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:42 mail last message repeated 2 times
Jan 3 08:28:42 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:45 mail last message repeated 4 times
Jan 3 08:28:45 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:45 mail last message repeated 2 times
Jan 3 08:28:45 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:45 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:46 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:46 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:46 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:47 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:47 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:47 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:47 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:48 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:48 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:48 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:48 mail last message repeated 2 times
Jan 3 08:28:48 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailgate.whsmith.co.uk)
Jan 3 08:28:48 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:49 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:49 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:49 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:49 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:50 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:50 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:50 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:50 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:50 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:50 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from f44.law3.hotmail.com (HELO
hotmail.com)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:51 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:52 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:52 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:52 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
mailcc.other-world.com)
Jan 3 08:28:52 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:52 mail last message repeated 2 times
Jan 3 08:28:53 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO
lax-app3.tunes.com)
Jan 3 08:28:53 mail qmail-smtpd: Received: from unknown (HELO extreme)
Jan 3 08:28:53 mail qmail: 978528533.588785 new msg 34731
Jan 3 08:28:53 mail qmail: 978528533.588874 info msg 34731: bytes 6583 from
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 22942 uid 201
=======================================================
Clyde W. Messinger | Great Lakes Internet Inc. Since 1995
System Administrator | Regional Internet Service Provider Serving
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 5 Area Codes in Southeastern Michigan
Voice: (810) 679-3395 | 100Mbps+ Connectivity, 56K-DS3, V.90, ISDN
Fax: (810) 679 0187 | Highest Quality Service, Affordable Prices
112 N. Howard | Serving: Government, Business,
Residential
Croswell, MI 48422 | Visit us at http://www.greatlakes.net
************** Broadand Wireless "Is Here NOW!"**************
***** Ask us how it will benefit your business to go wireless.*****
=======================================================
clydem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can someone tell me why my syslog is going crazy with all this stuff?
> Am I under attack or what? How do I stop ths? It has been going on
> for a couple of days and sucks the processor time on my qmail box.
Not sure why its happening in the first place (could it be the bare
linefeed issue?), but the fact that you're logging through syslog could be
why its sucking up so much of your CPU. Switch to logging with multilog
(in Dan's daemontools package) and it probably won't present much of a load
anymore.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Hy all,
All my virtual e-mail account clients are
complaining about recieving multiple messages sometimes. They don't recieve
the same amount of multiple messages, and not all the time. It seems to happen
"randomly". I use vpopmail to administrate my virtual
accounts.
I by myself got this error when I was mading some
tests: I sent various messages to one test email account, everything worked
fine, suddenly, in one test, I sent from my
outlook express 1 message to that email 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
message 2: name:
978041548.21061.falcon,S=2395
message 3: name:
978041657.21087.falcon,S=2395
message 4: name:
978041657.21089.falcon,S=2498
-------------------------------------------------
-- Bruno
Negr�o -- Suporte
-- Plugway Acesso Internet Ltda.
--
(31)34812311
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
Add epignosis.com to the qmtpd list
Justin Bell writes:
> Add epignosis.com to the qmtpd list
Got enough, thanks. Am currently trying to figure out how to get
qmail-qmtpd to return a 'Z' error. It seems to drop the connection
instead of ever returning 'Z'. Probably the best thing to do.
Too bad about this, though:
nelson@desk:/usr/local/src/qmail-1.03-qmtpc$ telnet a.mx.list.cr.yp.to 209
Trying 131.193.178.181...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused
Not that there's an MXPS-compliant MX record for list.cr.yp.to anyway.
--
-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.
While you're on it, will there be support for specifying qmtp connects
via the smtproutes file? Maybe try qmtp first if the port is set to 209?
Thanks,
\Maex
--
SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Markus Stumpf writes:
> While you're on it, will there be support for specifying qmtp connects
> via the smtproutes file? Maybe try qmtp first if the port is set to 209?
I'm not sure it's necessary. smtproutes is only for misconfigured
hosts. Since everyone running qmtpd has a CLUE, nobody's going to
misconfigure their hosts, right? Great, problem solved. :)
--
-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.
Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 3 January 2001 at 16:48:03 -0500
> Markus Stumpf writes:
> > While you're on it, will there be support for specifying qmtp connects
> > via the smtproutes file? Maybe try qmtp first if the port is set to 209?
>
> I'm not sure it's necessary. smtproutes is only for misconfigured
> hosts. Since everyone running qmtpd has a CLUE, nobody's going to
> misconfigure their hosts, right? Great, problem solved. :)
smtproutes is the recommended solution for a number of cases where DNS
gives the wrong answer internally. Split DNS is, I guess, the
sophisticated answer, but for a simple setup smtproutes is a useful
approach to that problem.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:48:03PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Markus Stumpf writes:
> > While you're on it, will there be support for specifying qmtp connects
> > via the smtproutes file? Maybe try qmtp first if the port is set to 209?
>
> I'm not sure it's necessary. smtproutes is only for misconfigured
> hosts.
Really? How about DNS over-rides for, eg, firewall relays?
I agree that it's probably secondary, but not totally superfluous. One
could argue that the same file should apply rather than having two
separate files. And that the file should be renamed to dnsoverride.
Regards.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:48:03PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Markus Stumpf writes:
> > While you're on it, will there be support for specifying qmtp connects
> > via the smtproutes file? Maybe try qmtp first if the port is set to 209?
> I'm not sure it's necessary. smtproutes is only for misconfigured
> hosts. Since everyone running qmtpd has a CLUE, nobody's going to
> misconfigure their hosts, right? Great, problem solved. :)
I definitely don't agree. There may be cases when I don't want the QMTP
port publicly announced (because I don't have, say, RBL checking and virus
scanning on it) but only between a few hosts that exchange a lot of mail.
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:51:19PM -0600, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 3 January 2001 at 16:48:03 -0500
> > Markus Stumpf writes:
> > > While you're on it, will there be support for specifying qmtp connects
> > > via the smtproutes file? Maybe try qmtp first if the port is set to 209?
> >
> > I'm not sure it's necessary. smtproutes is only for misconfigured
> > hosts. Since everyone running qmtpd has a CLUE, nobody's going to
> > misconfigure their hosts, right? Great, problem solved. :)
>
> smtproutes is the recommended solution for a number of cases where DNS
> gives the wrong answer internally. Split DNS is, I guess, the
> sophisticated answer, but for a simple setup smtproutes is a useful
> approach to that problem.
Even so, split DNS still doesn't necessarily help a solitary firewall
relay. Teh relay needs to see the external view for outbound mail and
the internal view for inbound. Tricky when the DNS is defined by a
system-wide config file, namely /etc/resolv.conf. I guess multiple
instances in seperate chroot environments might do it, but that's a
lot of work.
Regards.
Mark Delany writes:
> Really? How about DNS over-rides for, eg, firewall relays?
IMHO (In my Most Holy Opinion), that's a job for a specialized DNS
server. Ideally, you could tell dnscache "consult this server
first". Sort of like a priority on an NS record. Instead, you tell
dnscache "we're using this server for this domain".
> I agree that it's probably secondary, but not totally superfluous. One
> could argue that the same file should apply rather than having two
> separate files. And that the file should be renamed to dnsoverride.
It needs to be extended to supply a priority.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com |
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | A bacon cheeseburger is
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | offensive to every major
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | religion.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:55:35PM +0000, Mark Delany wrote:
> Even so, split DNS still doesn't necessarily help a solitary firewall
> relay. Teh relay needs to see the external view for outbound mail and
> the internal view for inbound.
Actually, I'm doing this without a split horizon DNS server. The
firewall running the mail relay does transparent proxying on port 25 for
all connections, and is then free to forward on the the "real" mail
server without interference.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 12:02:12AM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:48:03PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > [...] smtproutes is only for misconfigured
> > hosts. Since everyone running qmtpd has a CLUE, nobody's going to
> > misconfigure their hosts, right? Great, problem solved. :)
>
> I definitely don't agree. There may be cases when I don't want the QMTP
> port publicly announced (because I don't have, say, RBL checking and virus
> scanning on it) but only between a few hosts that exchange a lot of mail.
What are you not agreeing with? Russell stated that smtproutes was a
kludge for hosts with strange or broken configurations. Your situation
fits the criteria perfectly.
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:42:50AM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 12:02:12AM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:48:03PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > > [...] smtproutes is only for misconfigured
> > > hosts. Since everyone running qmtpd has a CLUE, nobody's going to
> > > misconfigure their hosts, right? Great, problem solved. :)
> > I definitely don't agree. There may be cases when I don't want the QMTP
> > port publicly announced (because I don't have, say, RBL checking and virus
> > scanning on it) but only between a few hosts that exchange a lot of mail.
> What are you not agreeing with? Russell stated that smtproutes was a
> kludge for hosts with strange or broken configurations. Your situation
> fits the criteria perfectly.
I don't agree with the concept of having to use SMTP between the "hosts
with strange or broken configurations". I want to use QMTP.
There are other situations: for some of the systems I administer, I have
no way of changing the dns data other than by writing a formal letter (on
paper, mind you) and waiting for over a month, praying that the admins
there will comply with my request. Now please, may I have qmtproutes?
Or even better, a general file, mailroutes:
foo.com:bar.com
propellerheads.org:192.168.1.12
my.propellerheads.org:192.168.1.15:2525
office.propellerheads.org:192.168.1.98:1234:smtp
mail.propellerheads.org:192.168.1.12:209:qmtp
(You get the idea, first three lines deliver by SMTP which is default...)
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 10:57:15AM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote:
> I don't agree with the concept of having to use SMTP between the "hosts
> with strange or broken configurations". I want to use QMTP.
Ok.
> There are other situations: for some of the systems I administer, I have
> no way of changing the dns data other than by writing a formal letter (on
> paper, mind you) and waiting for over a month, praying that the admins
> there will comply with my request.
That is really no way to run a railroad. Those admins should be
reminded that we are in the 21st century, and even if we lack flying
cars, they can process DNS changes electronically easily.
> Now please, may I have qmtproutes?
>
> Or even better, a general file, mailroutes:
>
> foo.com:bar.com
> propellerheads.org:192.168.1.12
> my.propellerheads.org:192.168.1.15:2525
> office.propellerheads.org:192.168.1.98:1234:smtp
> mail.propellerheads.org:192.168.1.12:209:qmtp
>
> (You get the idea, first three lines deliver by SMTP which is default...)
I like the mailroutes idea. The relationship between nested wildcard
entries may be more difficult to manage when such relationships span
smtproutes and qmtproutes.
A local user, eric, can set up .qmail-slow like this:
| sleep 3600
If Eric then sends a few hundred pieces of mail to eric-slow, qmail's
local queue will fill up, and local mail delivery will be stopped.
Incoming mail will not be delivered until Eric's 'sleep' processes
time out.
This attack may not be the result of malice; Eric may simply have a
complicated, slow MDA.
User process limits do not appear to be a good solution to this,
because with a normal local queue size (say 10, the default) and a
normal user process limit (say 64) Eric can still effectively prevent
local mail delivery.
Increasing the local queue size may not be an effective solution,
because that has other side effects that may be undesirable, and it
won't stop Eric anyway.
Has this been a problem for anyone in practice? It appears to
constitute a security problem that a single local user can shut down
all local mail delivery indefinitely.
> Has this been a problem for anyone in practice? It appears to
> constitute a security problem that a single local user can shut down
> all local mail delivery indefinitely.
In theory, you are correct, although this is a Denial-Of-Service
attack rather than a strict security breach.
In practice, a local user has many other avenues of attack similar
to this, and for all of them the fix is quite simply to throw the user off
the system. If you run a system with users you worry about, you can (IIRC)
use /var/qmail/users/assign to disallow them from using their .qmail file.
Consider instead a user who puts a stupid filter in his .qmail that
will execute commands listed in an email with COMMAND as the subject line.
NOW you have a real security hole.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:52:49PM -0500, Greg Owen wrote:
> In theory, you are correct, although this is a Denial-Of-Service
> attack rather than a strict security breach.
> In practice, a local user has many other avenues of attack similar
> to this, and for all of them the fix is quite simply to throw the user off
Yes; definitely. There's nothing special about local users (though they
do have more potential for mischief). A local or remote user could give
you a large email to be delivered to a slow remote mail server which,
if send enough times, can use up all your remote delivery slots and
'clog the remote queue'.
Such is life. Analyse your logs. Watch your local/remote concurrency.
Wield a big stick.
james
--
James Raftery (JBR54)
"Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like
herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greg Owen wrote:
> Consider instead a user who puts a stupid filter in his .qmail that
> will execute commands listed in an email with COMMAND as the subject line.
> NOW you have a real security hole.
...which is why .qmail commands are executed as the user, instead of as root
or as one of the qmail users. Assuming you don't have any other local
holes, the worst that user can do is machine gun himself in the foot, and he
doesn't need qmail to do that!
---Kris
> ...which is why .qmail commands are executed as the user,
> instead of as root or as one of the qmail users. Assuming
> you don't have any other local holes, the worst that user
> can do is machine gun himself in the foot, and he
> doesn't need qmail to do that!
...you should always assume you have local holes. Even if you
don't, allowing random remote people to get commands executed as local users
is a problem - how about '/bin/mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /etc/passwd'? Even
if there's a shadow file, that'll list usernames to guess passwords on.
But, more to the point, check out
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/guarantee.html:
"Of course, ``security hole in qmail'' does not include problems outside of
qmail: for example, NFS security problems, TCP/IP security problems, DNS
security problems, bugs in scripts run from .forward files, and operating
system bugs generally. It's silly to blame a problem on qmail if the system
was already vulnerable before qmail was installed! I also specifically
disallowed denial-of-service attacks: they are present in every MTA, widely
documented, and very hard to fix without a massive overhaul of several major
protocols. (UNIX does offer some tools to prevent local denial-of-service
attacks; see my resource exhaustion page for more information.)"
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 12:39:43PM -0500, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
>
> A local user, eric, can set up .qmail-slow like this:
>
> | sleep 3600
>
> If Eric then sends a few hundred pieces of mail to eric-slow, qmail's
> local queue will fill up, and local mail delivery will be stopped.
> Incoming mail will not be delivered until Eric's 'sleep' processes
> time out.
> Has this been a problem for anyone in practice? It appears to
> constitute a security problem that a single local user can shut down
> all local mail delivery indefinitely.
Surprise surprise, this is not the first time this issue has been
raised. A simple suggestion in 1998 was to have a timeout on qmail-local
deliveries. See:
http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1998/02/msg00662.html
Regards.
Says "Mark Delany" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1998/02/msg00662.html
The 1998 discussion was just what I was looking for.
(I searched for something like that before I sent my message, but
didn't find it.)
Specifically, I was wondering about the feasibilty of a per-user
concurrency limit, but the archived discussion points out that it is
probably a bad idea. The discussion also mentions the possibiliy of a
timeout in qmail-local, but that also appears to be a good idea.
Thanks very much.
[Cross-posted from qmail mailing list]
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:12:43PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> David Benfell writes:
> > In theory, I have QMTP up on parts-unknown.org. I had already
> > configured the startup for it when I installed qmail in the first
> > place, and I've added a line to my firewall script opening the port to
> > the outside world.
>
> You also need to have an MX record with priority 12801 pointing to the
> host running qmtp. Right now, you only have
> parts-unknown.org. 1D IN MX 0 mx.parts-unknown.org.
>
Ouch. Now I venture off topic for the qmail list (hence the
cross-post) because I use djbdns without understanding it. How does
one set mx priorities with djbdns?
Oh, and if you're going by domains, count greybeard95a.com as well.
They're both hosted on the same box. (Is that cheating?)
--
David Benfell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
The grand leap of the whale up the Fall of Niagara is esteemed, by all
who have seen it, as one of the finest spectacles in nature.
-- Benjamin Franklin.
[from fortune]
PGP signature
David Benfell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:12:43PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > You also need to have an MX record with priority 12801
> > pointing to the host running qmtp. Right now, you only have
> > parts-unknown.org. 1D IN MX 0 mx.parts-unknown.org.
> >
> Ouch. Now I venture off topic for the qmail list (hence the
> cross-post) because I use djbdns without understanding it. How does
> one set mx priorities with djbdns?
Use the 4th field of the MX record data line ("dist") as described
at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/tinydns-data.html:
] @fqdn:ip:x:dist:ttl:timestamp
]
] Mail exchanger for fqdn. tinydns-data creates an MX
] record showing x.mx.fqdn as a mail exchanger for fqdn
] at distance dist, and an A record showing ip as the
] IP address of x.mx.fqdn. You may omit dist; the default
] distance is 0.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:12:43PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> David Benfell writes:
> > In theory, I have QMTP up on parts-unknown.org. I had already
Also in theory, so do I.
Russ, please add catseye.net to your list.
> Don't worry about that. I'll send a confirmation message to all 20+
> people who told me about their qmtp servers, once I've gotten the code
> working. If you get the message "with QMTP", then you know your
> qmtpd server is working.
Looking forward to this :)
-thl
Thanks! It should now be done, for both parts-unknown.org and
greybeard95a.com.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:58:56PM -0500, Greg Owen wrote:
>
> David Benfell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:12:43PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > > You also need to have an MX record with priority 12801
> > > pointing to the host running qmtp. Right now, you only have
> > > parts-unknown.org. 1D IN MX 0 mx.parts-unknown.org.
> > >
> > Ouch. Now I venture off topic for the qmail list (hence the
> > cross-post) because I use djbdns without understanding it. How does
> > one set mx priorities with djbdns?
>
> Use the 4th field of the MX record data line ("dist") as described
> at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/tinydns-data.html:
>
> ] @fqdn:ip:x:dist:ttl:timestamp
> ]
> ] Mail exchanger for fqdn. tinydns-data creates an MX
> ] record showing x.mx.fqdn as a mail exchanger for fqdn
> ] at distance dist, and an A record showing ip as the
> ] IP address of x.mx.fqdn. You may omit dist; the default
> ] distance is 0.
>
> --
> gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
>
>
>
--
David Benfell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
The grand leap of the whale up the Fall of Niagara is esteemed, by all
who have seen it, as one of the finest spectacles in nature.
-- Benjamin Franklin.
[from fortune]
PGP signature
Hi,
I have a redhat 7 \ qmail installation. I want to use this as a smtp
frontend to send all messages to our exchange server. I have set smtproutes
to smtp:exchange. When I send a message it gets delivered locally to me
using the procmail rc and when trying to use binmail rc nothing seems to
happen (mail message gets logged in maillog - logged with procmail not
logged with binmail ). Neither sends it to the exchange server. Everything
seems to be working and I can telnet to smtp using either rc and compose a
message and get a mail id when sent - it's just when sending it doesn't get
forwarded. Any help
Thanks,
Stephen Hammond
> I have a redhat 7 \ qmail installation. I want to use this
> as a smtp frontend to send all messages to our exchange
> server. I have set smtproutes to smtp:exchange. When I send
> a message it gets delivered locally to me....
Make sure that the domain you are sending mail to is not listed in
locals or virtualdomains, only rcpthosts and smtproutes.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SoftLock.com is now DigitalGoods!
Am Mittwoch, 3. Januar 2001 21:48 schrieben Sie:
> Hi,
>
> I have a redhat 7 \ qmail installation. I want to use this as a smtp
> frontend to send all messages to our exchange server. I have set smtproutes
> to smtp:exchange. When I send a message it gets delivered locally
1) Do NOT add the affected domain to locals, only to rcpthosts
2) your smtproutes-syntax is nonsens, use domain:host
--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de | Germany
In the previous episode (03.01.2001), Steve Hammond
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I have set
>smtproutes
>to smtp:exchange.
the syntax to send all mail (except for locals) to one host is:
:that.one.host
wolfgang
Am Donnerstag, 4. Januar 2001 00:47 schrieb Wolfgang Zeikat:
> In the previous episode (03.01.2001), Steve Hammond
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >I have set
> >smtproutes
> >to smtp:exchange.
>
> the syntax to send all mail (except for locals) to one host is:
> :that.one.host
Right, but this was not his intention.
> wolfgang
--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de | Germany
�rjan V�llestad writes:
> I found something that seems right.
> I will check if the .qmail - alias files has executable rights, or the
> alias domains directory.
> I believe that is the case here?
> Uh-oh:_.qmail_has_prog_delivery_but_has_x_bit_set._(#4.7.0)/
God dag. The error message should tell you exactly what the problem
is. As an added security measure, a program that modifies a .qmail
file may optionally set the x bit in the permissions. Since the x bit
is otherwise useless, it should never be set. qmail-local checks the
x bit and refuses to do program deliveries.
Sendmail had a very bad history of allowing remote users to invoke
rogue program deliveries. Dan was rightfully cautious about program
deliveries when he first wrote qmail.
--
-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.
Is there any reason I should ever enable relaying of messages arriving
via qmtp? All the smtp relay cases I have are for clients submitting
mail; currently no clients that I know of can submit via qmtp. So no
need?
In the hypothetical future case where some client did submit outbound
mail via qmtp, would I ever want a different list of relaying IP's for
qmtp than for smtp? For future generality, should I be using the same
cdb for both?
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
David Dyer-Bennet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any reason I should ever enable relaying of messages arriving
> via qmtp? All the smtp relay cases I have are for clients submitting
> mail; currently no clients that I know of can submit via qmtp. So no
> need?
This may be jumping the gun, but I imagine Bruce Guenter might just right
a qmtp module for nullmailer to go alongside the existing qmqp and smtp
modules. He's mentioned on this list once that it would not be an
enormous effort. If you have workstations/clients with no need for an
SMTP daemon of their own, nullmailer is an excellent choice for an MTA.
> In the hypothetical future case where some client did submit outbound
> mail via qmtp, would I ever want a different list of relaying IP's for
> qmtp than for smtp? For future generality, should I be using the same
> cdb for both?
In general I would say yes, but I can see at least one possible condition
which would make you want two separate configurations. If you use Dan's
idea of setting the RELAYCLIENT variable to "@fixme" to fix up borken SMTP
client conversations (early Eudora, etc), you would probably want to skip
it for qmtp clients -- at least until someone perpetrates a braindead qmtp
client upon us.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This may be jumping the gun, but I imagine Bruce Guenter might just right
> a qmtp module for nullmailer...
^^^^^
Sheesh, that should have been "write", obviously.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:13:09PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> This may be jumping the gun, but I imagine Bruce Guenter might just right
> a qmtp module for nullmailer to go alongside the existing qmqp and smtp
> modules. He's mentioned on this list once that it would not be an
> enormous effort.
Unless I'm misreading the QMTP spec, you can use the qmqp protocol
module with it. Just put "qmqp --port=209 remote" in the remotes config
file.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> Henning Brauer writes:
> > > If you wanted to be really clever, you could modify qmail-smtpd so
> > > that it would run qmail-qmqpc to store the email on the proper
> > > server(s).
> >
> > You might want to check qmail-ldap, it has native clustering support doing
> > exactly what you want. Download at http://www.nrg4u.com, Documentation at
> > http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ldap/.
>
> Yeah. The problem with the qmail-ldap patch is that it has a bunch of
> unrelated stuff in it, e.g. anti-spam, and TLS.
Which you can either disable or throw out if you don't need/want it.
To get a working qmail-ldap without that you install a normal qmail
1.03, compile qmail-ldap and simply copy qmail-lspawn and qmail-local
over to /var/qmail/bin. Thats it.
--
Andre
Hi Omer,
> How can I find pop3 daemon that supports mailbox format for Mailbox file
> that resides user's home dir. LWQ(life with qmail ) says there is a
> patch for qpopper but it is for 2.53 (which is old enough ).There is now
> qpopper3.1.2.tar.gz version.
> Any suggestions are welcome.
>
> Additionally LWQ says if a user has no .qmail file mail bounces to the
> owner (one sends mail).But I have managed to send a mailto user that has
> no .qmail file.I use Mailbox format by now.I will switchto Maildir
> later.Can that makes conflict with LWQ ?
(I don't remember this one being answered on the list yet...)
Well... since you're going to move to Maildir anyway, why not spend
time doing that rather than implementing a temporary mbox/qpopper
solution?
See the qmail source and www.qmail.org for utilities to convert in either
direction from mbox to Maildir (so you know that you can always go
back from Maildirs to mboxes - that may reassure you).
If you're worried about downtime, don't be: Here's a sample approach,
- Create Maildirs for all users (ensure ownership/rights is correct)
- Change qmail invocation to deliver to Maildirs instead of mboxes in
the users home directory
- Setup qmail-popup/checkpassword/qmail-pop3d for POP3 access
to Maildirs
- Setup a background task to convert the users' mboxes into
the Maildirs. Note that because of the way Maildirs work, you don't
need to worry about the converting messages "Clashing" with any
E-mails that have been delivered by qmail to the Maildir in the meantime.
It's possible that some users may receive delayed messages - i.e. they
checked their mail before the conversion had occurred of their mbox -
but that's likely to affect only a minority of users, and even if they notice,
they're probably not going to be too worried by this.
Alternatively, you could convert any mbox file in a user's directory to
Maildir messages "on the fly" by playing with .qmail files - do the
conversion as a "Program delivery" on the first line, before actually
delivering the message (./Maildir/) on the second line in the .qmail file.
OK, that quite a few steps. But it's easy to test first - just try it out with
a couple of sample accounts until you're completely happy with what
you're doing.
cheers,
Andrew.
Hi guys,
It s my first time to use some patches. I want to install the QMAILQUEUE
patch how can i go about it i got his patch in qmail.org by BRUCE GUENTER.
PLease give me an idea.
Thanks in advance!
|
I want to know about qmail.
Can qmail storage
mail in database?
Please,
Thank you
Best Regard
Wiroon Ruangsang
|
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:51:30PM -0000, Wiroon Ruangsang wrote:
> I want to know about qmail.
http://www.qmail.org/top.html
> Can qmail storage mail in database?
You can deliver and store mail however you want through .qmail files.
Yep, .qmail-default placed in the users home directory solved my problem. Thanx to
Markus!
Kind regards
Oliver
oliver bender
system administrator
morphochem AG
gmunder str. 37-37a
81379 muenchen
tel. ++49-89-78005-0
fax ++49-89-78005-555
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.morphochem.de
-----Original Message-----
From: Markus Stumpf [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Mittwoch, 3. Januar 2001 20:03
To: oliver bender
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: Alias problem with "-" before "."
Cc adjusted.
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 03:29:24PM +0100, oliver bender wrote:
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> There is a user account "paul" existing on that system, having a .qmail
> file in his home directory /home/paul. This .qmail (or even .qmail-john (as
> I've read in some of the replies to other similar problems)) will lead into
> the above result. We're using qmail as a mailrelay server running Microsoft
> Exchange as the local mailsystem. Mails within our company sites are
> encrypted. We don't have the dot-forward installed, yet.
Create a .qmail-default file in /home/paul. This will catch up addresses
like paul-<anything>.
If you want to treat paul-john.doe specially you need a
.qmail-john:doe
file in /home/paul.
See dot-qmail(5) "EXTENSION ADDRESSES"
\Maex
--
SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Hi People!
I was running the following Perl Script for Stress Test qmail:
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
use Thread;
my $addr = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; # change to desired mail address!!
my $var1 = 100;
my $count = 0;
for(my $a=0; $a<10; $a++)
{
my $ref = new Thread \&sendit;
lock &sendit;
}
print "done.\n";
sub sendit{
for(my $x=0;$x<10; $x++){
system 'qmail-inject $addr < 50k.data';
}
}
But when I run it worked fine. 50k.data is a File with 50 KB Random
Data.
The e-Mails have not been send out.
So what I wanna know is if the qmail server blocks the Spam to that
Mailbox?
I really need to know where the Bottleneck is because I need to sendout
500.000 Mails in 36 hrs.
Thanks,
Michael.
Hello,
I have a lot of TIME_WAIT (TCP/IP) on my mail server. And
this grow with time, I think that it well crash my server.
I'm asking if this has no relation with qmail?
Thanks
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
Ould wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a lot of TIME_WAIT (TCP/IP) on my mail server. And
> this grow with time, I think that it well crash my server.
>
> I'm asking if this has no relation with qmail?
>
> Thanks
That looks like a Firewall Problem. :-)
--^..^--------------------------------------------------
michael maier - system & development administrator
flatfox ag, hanauer landstrasse 196a
d-60314 frankfurt am main
fon +49.(0)69.50 95 98-308
fax +49.(0)69.50 95 98-101
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
url http://www.flatfox.com - m a k e m y d a y
--------------------------------------------------------
--- Michael Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit : >
Ould wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a lot of TIME_WAIT (TCP/IP) on my mail server.
> And
> > this grow with time, I think that it well crash my
> server.
> >
> > I'm asking if this has no relation with qmail?
> >
> > Thanks
>
> That looks like a Firewall Problem. :-)
>
Can you explain this few please?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
Ould wrote:
> > That looks like a Firewall Problem. :-)
> >
>
> Can you explain this few please?
Just open Port 25 TCP (for SMTP) and Port 110 (if you are using POP3) on
your Firewall.
I'm sorry they are opened (i.e. SMTP and POP, on the
firewall).
--- Michael Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit : >
Ould wrote:
>
> > > That looks like a Firewall Problem. :-)
> > >
> >
> > Can you explain this few please?
>
> Just open Port 25 TCP (for SMTP) and Port 110 (if you are
> using POP3) on
> your Firewall.
>
> .
> Firewall.
>
> .
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
anybody here installed the qmail-scanner without problem?
Hi all
Well, this is my firt time on the list.
I need a help.
I have the qmail on a linux red hat 6.2 .
All is fine except the time zone.
when i reboot my machine the time zone get one other set, not expected
my machine is set to GMT -3 America S�o Paulo.
It's not a hardware matter, and on other machines that have red hat 6.2
whitout
qmail it not heappens.
Somebody knows about it ???
sds
Alessander Salgueirosa
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
BCS - Actumplus
Curitiba PR
Telefax (0xx41) 262-8314
"Mais a��o para ultrapassar limites"
http://www.actumplus.com.br
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Alessander Salgueirosa wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Well, this is my firt time on the list.
> I need a help.
>
> I have the qmail on a linux red hat 6.2 .
> All is fine except the time zone.
>
> when i reboot my machine the time zone get one other set, not expected
>
> my machine is set to GMT -3 America S�o Paulo.
> It's not a hardware matter, and on other machines that have red hat 6.2
> whitout
> qmail it not heappens.
>
> Somebody knows about it ???
Use linuxconf on Red Hat Systems to adjust the Timezone!!
--^..^--------------------------------------------------
michael maier - system & development administrator
flatfox ag, hanauer landstrasse 196a
d-60314 frankfurt am main
fon +49.(0)69.50 95 98-308
fax +49.(0)69.50 95 98-101
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
url http://www.flatfox.com - m a k e m y d a y
--------------------------------------------------------
