qmail Digest 15 Feb 2001 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1276
Topics (messages 57194 through 57278):
qmail compilation and optimization
57194 by:
57195 by: Peter van Dijk
57250 by: Bruce Guenter
Qmail slow!
57196 by: Schiffbauer, Anthony
57198 by: Peter van Dijk
57216 by: Uwe Ohse
57223 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
57225 by: Schiffbauer, Anthony
57231 by: Schiffbauer, Anthony
57236 by: Dave Sill
57241 by: Schiffbauer, Anthony
57242 by: David Dyer-Bennet
57244 by: Jeremy Suo-Anttila
57245 by: Curtis Generous
57274 by: Uwe Ohse
Email Footer
57197 by: Andrew McMorris
57201 by: Pawel Garbowski
57202 by: Andrew Bold
57208 by: Robin S. Socha
57211 by: Jim
57230 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
Re: [AMaViS-user] amavis w/qmail
57199 by: Clint Bullock
Re: Load Balancing with qmail
57200 by: japc
Re: error in qmail logs
57203 by: James R Grinter
57221 by: Jason Radford
BUILDING THE VPASSWD.CDB FILE
57204 by: qmailu
57205 by: Henning Brauer
How to set up qmail for several "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"?
57206 by: Gregor Szaktilla
57232 by: Dave Sill
57243 by: David Dyer-Bennet
Re: aliasing to a command
57207 by: Dave Sill
57246 by: Medi Montaseri
57251 by: Tim Hunter
concurrency isn't growing up to the limit
57209 by: Dario Dal Ben
57213 by: Sean C Truman
57229 by: Dave Sill
Re: Has anyone used qmail with xfs on Linux 2.4?
57210 by: Mikael Suokas
Re: Email Footer [slightly OT]
57212 by: Andrew Bold
Re: Importing Emails into ezmlm-idx
57214 by: Peter Green
57215 by: Robin S. Socha
57220 by: Peter Cavender
57222 by: Adam McKenna
57226 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
57238 by: Charles Cazabon
57239 by: Sean C Truman
57248 by: Stefaan A Eeckels
Re: vpopmail
57217 by: Sean C Truman
Re: WARNING
57218 by: Sean C Truman
Re: Empty Sender
57219 by: J.J.Gallardo
Re: adding users
57224 by: Peter Cavender
Image of Isolated Snowhite in Rembrandts PC (Don`t fear this message)
57227 by: Rembrandt Lensink
Re: Source of Anna Kournikova Virus admits...
57228 by: Rembrandt Lensink
57254 by: Peter van Dijk
57260 by: M. Yu
limit user sending email
57233 by: Yee Siew Chin
57240 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: client is blocking my mail server...
57234 by: Dave Sill
57273 by: Daniellek
Re: how to install pop3d on redhat7?
57235 by: Dave Sill
Intranet Qmail server
57237 by: Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga
List user's email behaviour. Best approach?
57247 by: Jeff_Newton
57249 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: virtualdomain/smtproute
57252 by: Michael Boyiazis
qmail job
57253 by: Daniel Chicayban
57259 by: Kari Suomela
57261 by: Sean C Truman
Mail forwarding with .qmail-???
57255 by: Mathieu Martin
57256 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
57257 by: Bill Parker
Newbie Help With MS Exchange Using qmail as Gateway
57258 by: schoon.amgt.com
remote/roaming pop/imap users - sending email?
57262 by: SNFettig Listserv
57264 by: Peter Cavender
57268 by: SNFettig Listserv
57270 by: Sharma, Vijay Hargian
vpopmail, qmail and postmaster
57263 by: Sashka
smtp,qmail
57265 by: zbeinet
virus scanner for qmail install problems
57266 by: Andrew Gray
57267 by: Andrew Gray
weird
57269 by: M. Yu
57271 by: Alex Pennace
Q: tcpserver use of -B
57272 by: Timothy Lorenc
57275 by: Uwe Ohse
Load Testing on QMAIL
57276 by: qmailu
57277 by: Irwan Hadi
amavis and qmail
57278 by: Bill Parker
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all, I've seen the standard qmail compilation flags are just "-O2". Does anybody tried any other level of optimization like "-O6... -fomit-frame-pointer... -DCPU=686..." ? What would be the benefits of compiling with these flags ? Is this safe ? I'm using egcs version egcs-1.1.2-30 in a Linux box. Thanks Renato. ( I know this is more of a compiler issue, but I think it is worth to exchange experiences... )
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 09:46:30AM -0300, wrote: > Hi all, > > I've seen the standard qmail compilation flags are just "-O2". > > Does anybody tried any other level of optimization like > "-O6... -fomit-frame-pointer... -DCPU=686..." ? What would be the benefits > of compiling with these flags ? Is this safe ? I doubt if it is safe. > I'm using egcs version egcs-1.1.2-30 in a Linux box. Ah, egcs. No, it is not safe. egcs is a crack-product. > ( I know this is more of a compiler issue, but I think it is worth to > exchange experiences... ) qmail is hardly CPU-intensive, it spends very little time in loops without any I/O. I think the benefits would be small. Greetz, Peter.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 12:45:58PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 09:46:30AM -0300, wrote: > > I've seen the standard qmail compilation flags are just "-O2". > > > > Does anybody tried any other level of optimization like > > "-O6... -fomit-frame-pointer... -DCPU=686..." ? What would be the benefits > > of compiling with these flags ? Is this safe ? > I doubt if it is safe. This should all be safe on stable compilers. > > I'm using egcs version egcs-1.1.2-30 in a Linux box. > Ah, egcs. No, it is not safe. egcs is a crack-product. Actually, egcs 1.1.2 is quite stable and safe. I've never had it break working C or C++ code. > > ( I know this is more of a compiler issue, but I think it is worth to > > exchange experiences... ) > qmail is hardly CPU-intensive, it spends very little time in loops > without any I/O. I think the benefits would be small. This, however, is very true. It is very rare that any part of qmail will take significant amounts of CPU time. -- Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
I sound like a caveman in my subject line! whoa! Anyways I have a FreeBSD machine running qmail (but is not running DNS, I am running DNS on another machine) for some reason, whenever you send email , it doesnt get delivered for atleast 6 hours. Am I not setting something correclty?
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 07:47:16AM -0500, Schiffbauer, Anthony wrote: > I sound like a caveman in my subject line! whoa! Anyways > I have a FreeBSD machine running qmail (but is not running DNS, I am running > DNS on another machine) for some reason, whenever you send email , it doesnt > get delivered for atleast 6 hours. Am I not setting something correclty? Probably. However, you provide us no details of your setup, so we can't know. Tell us more :) Greetz, Peter.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 07:47:16AM -0500, Schiffbauer, Anthony wrote: > I sound like a caveman in my subject line! whoa! Anyways > I have a FreeBSD machine running qmail (but is not running DNS, I am running > DNS on another machine) for some reason, whenever you send email , it doesnt > get delivered for atleast 6 hours. Am I not setting something correclty? cd /whereever/qmail-1.03 make check this will possibly show that the trigger file has wrong permissions. Otherwise you might want to provide more information. Regards, Uwe
+ Uwe Ohse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Otherwise you might want to provide more information. Including log file entries! Does it show failed delivery attempts? What happens when you run qmail-qread or qmail-qstat? - Harald
thanks! umm.. I am trying to look at the logs. I cant find them. Where are they? I will run qmail and see -----Original Message----- From: Harald Hanche-Olsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Qmail slow! + Uwe Ohse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Otherwise you might want to provide more information. Including log file entries! Does it show failed delivery attempts? What happens when you run qmail-qread or qmail-qstat? - Harald
Ohman, this stinks. $orry,_I_couldn't_find_any_host_named_.._(#5.1.2) this is what I get in my maillog. I am not running DNS on this particular machine. -----Original Message----- From: Harald Hanche-Olsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Qmail slow! + Uwe Ohse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Otherwise you might want to provide more information. Including log file entries! Does it show failed delivery attempts? What happens when you run qmail-qread or qmail-qstat? - Harald
"Schiffbauer, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >thanks! umm.. I am trying to look at the logs. I cant find them. Where are >they? Where'd you tell them to go? If you don't know that, then tell us how you installed qmail and we'll tell you where to look for the logs. -Dave
Hi dave, it was already installed on there when I was handed the box. I tried to reinstall by looking at this: Qmail Linux howto http://ww.skyinet.net/~onogos/docs/Qmail-HOWTO Now, I know it says Linux, but I figure it couldnt be too different. -----Original Message----- From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 1:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Qmail slow! "Schiffbauer, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >thanks! umm.. I am trying to look at the logs. I cant find them. Where are >they? Where'd you tell them to go? If you don't know that, then tell us how you installed qmail and we'll tell you where to look for the logs. -Dave
"Schiffbauer, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I sound like a caveman in my subject line! whoa! Anyways > I have a FreeBSD machine running qmail (but is not running DNS, I am running > DNS on another machine) for some reason, whenever you send email , it doesnt > get delivered for atleast 6 hours. Am I not setting something correclty? It's a shot in the dark with so little information, but this is the characteristic failing if the permissions on the trigger file are wrong. -- 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/
http://howto.globelinks.com/qmail-howto-freebsd.html try looking there for a nice howto on Qmail+FreeBSD 4.* Jps ----- Original Message ----- From: "Schiffbauer, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Dave Sill'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 1:50 PM Subject: RE: Qmail slow! > Hi dave, > it was already installed on there when I was handed the box. I tried to > reinstall by looking at this: > Qmail Linux howto http://ww.skyinet.net/~onogos/docs/Qmail-HOWTO > > Now, I know it says Linux, but I figure it couldnt be too different. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 1:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Qmail slow! > > > "Schiffbauer, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >thanks! umm.. I am trying to look at the logs. I cant find them. Where are > >they? > > Where'd you tell them to go? If you don't know that, then tell us how > you installed qmail and we'll tell you where to look for the logs. > > -Dave >
According to David Dyer-Bennet: > > "Schiffbauer, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I sound like a caveman in my subject line! whoa! Anyways > > I have a FreeBSD machine running qmail (but is not running DNS, I am running > > DNS on another machine) for some reason, whenever you send email , it doesnt > > get delivered for atleast 6 hours. Am I not setting something correclty? > > It's a shot in the dark with so little information, but this is the > characteristic failing if the permissions on the trigger file are > wrong. Should it be that long before qmail-send checks the todo directory? Does anyone know what the wakeup interval is for qmail-send (e.g. checks the queue for work to be done)? It's not obvious from the code, and doing a couple of tests, looks like somewhere around 6-7 minutes. TIA --curtis p.s. I'm not talking about the backoff algorithm that affect a message retry interval, but rather the wake-up cycle of qmail-send.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 04:00:58PM -0500, Curtis Generous wrote: > Should it be that long before qmail-send checks the todo directory? 25 minutes. Regards, Uwe
Hi could someone please point me in the right direction for information on how to add a footer to all emails that our company send please. I am also interested in not having the footer for emails sent to our own company can anyone please point me in the right way. Cheers. Andrew McMorris, Systems Administrator, All-Hotels Ltd. www.All-Hotels.com
Hello, * Andrew McMorris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010214 14:22] wrote: > Hi could someone please point me in the right direction for information on > how to add a footer to all emails that our company send please. > > I am also interested in not having the footer for emails sent to our own > company can anyone please point me in the right way. qmail-queue.patch + qmail-qfilter.patch + perl script greets, pawel -- pawel garbowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday 14 February 2001 1:19 pm, Andrew McMorris wrote: > Hi could someone please point me in the right direction for information on > how to add a footer to all emails that our company send please. > In our organisation all inbound and outbound SMTP traffic is routed through a NT server running MIMESweeper. This has the ability to add footers to outbound email. (As you'll see below when this gets to you...) It also runs some basic content filtering checks, and checks all mail that passes through it with Sophos Anti-virus. I'm told that it works reliably and rarely has any problems. I used to have a patch to qmail that inserted footers onto the end of every mail. However, it didn't work with mail containing MIME attachments. As I didn't think my limited C hacking skills would get this working reliably, we stuck with the MIMESweeper solution. > I am also interested in not having the footer for emails sent to our own > company can anyone please point me in the right way. The MUAs we use are configured to use our main mail server for SMTP and POP. qmail then handles any SMTP routing. Internal mail is handled locally by the mail server, with outbound mail routed through the NT server. This lets us get away with not having the disclaimer stamped on internal mail. (Of course, it also means that internal mail is not virus checked. We're looking into using Amavis to do this.) Hope this helps. -- Andrew Bold Unix Systems Administrator -- This message is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by anyone else is unauthorised. If you have received this message in error, you must not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this message. Such unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please delete it immediately and advise us by return e-mail to the above address.
* Andrew Bold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010214 08:52]: > On Wednesday 14 February 2001 1:19 pm, Andrew McMorris wrote: > > Hi could someone please point me in the right direction for information on > > how to add a footer to all emails that our company send please. http://www-archive.ornl.gov:8000/, search for "footer". Don't forget to bring popcorn. > In our organisation all inbound and outbound SMTP traffic is routed > through a NT server running MIMESweeper. This has the ability to add > footers to outbound email. (As you'll see below when this gets to > you...) Well, great. So you're acutally sending the following to public mailing lists? I'm sorry I have to ask but what does braindamaged translate to in your language? > This message is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It > is intended solely for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by > anyone else is unauthorised. [blablabla] 8 lines of nothing. "legally privileged", huh? More like "intellectually differently abled". > It also runs some basic content filtering checks, and checks all mail that > passes through it with Sophos Anti-virus. I'm told that it works reliably > and rarely has any problems. "Reliable" and "rarely" don't mix well in a binary world. Welcome to Unix, Andrew - our tools either work, or they don't. Exchange *does* *not* *work* and neither does NT. Your solution is not a solution. It's a viable way of creating a security hole the size of Redmond. Go away. > Unix Systems Administrator You wish, mouse pusher.
> 8 lines of nothing. "legally privileged", huh? More like "intellectually > differently abled". That's about 50 lines less nothing than your response contained
+ "Andrew McMorris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Hi could someone please point me in the right direction for information on | how to add a footer to all emails that our company send please. | | I am also interested in not having the footer for emails sent to our own | company can anyone please point me in the right way. Recent flamage notwithstanding, I'd suggest running two instances of qmail. The second one will be used for outgoing mail only. The first, and primary, qmail will have a catch-all virtualdomain for all the stuff that isn't for local recipients: In /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains: :alias-outgoing In /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-outgoing-default: |cat - /legalese-notice | /var/qmail-outgoing/bin/qmail-inject -f"${SENDER}" |"${EXT2}@${HOST}" (all that on one line, in case the line gets broken between you and me). Well, this is the main principle anyway. Tweak to taste. - Harald
Rainer Link wrote: > On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Bill Parker wrote: > > > I am working on installing amavis for scanning inbound/outbound emails with > > NAI's Virus Scan engine. I have a question, in running the ./configure for > > amavis, > > it says it needs reformime (which is a part of the maildrop package). If I > > compile > > and install maildrop, does it interfere at all with qmail, or is there a > > way to only > > compile and install the reformime binary from the maildrop package? > > I don't think it will interfere. Best solution: after "make" simply copy > the binary reformime (we don't need the other maildrop stuff at all) to > /usr/local/bin/ (and do not do a "make install"). It will not interfere. Maildrop is just another mail delivery agent. You have to specifically tell qmail to use it. I use maildrop for all of my standard users. In ".qmail" you can put a line like, |/usr/bin/maildrop /home/users/johndoe/.mailfilter or with qmail-ldap, place the following in "deliveryprogrampath" /usr/bin/maildrop /home/users/johndoe/.mailfilter or you can globally use maildrop... Then, you can use maildrop's structured filter language to do server side filtering for the user or just deliver the message to the Maildir without filtering. It has many nice features that you might be interested in. Later, -- S. Clint Bullock Network Administrator University of Georgia Office of the Vice President for Research 626 Boyd GSRC Athens, GA 30602-7411 (706) 542-5936 (706) 542-3837 FAX
Hum, or you can use iptables. On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:23:14AM -0500, tc lewis wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Andrew Wafula wrote: > > > > Is there any way one can do load balancing with qmail, i.e I have two > > machines both with qmail set up and running. Is there a way that I can have > > them both serving as smtp servers without the clients knowing which machine > > is sending the ail for them? > > > > you can use dns mx preferences for smtp. > you can use dns round-robin a records. > you can use a load balancer like http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/, or an f5 bigip, >or alteon's, or cisco's, etc etc. > > -tcl. > > -- Jose AP Celestino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> || SAPO / PT Multimedia Administração de Sistemas / Operações || http://www.sapo.pt --------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Radford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Actually I use a tool called qmHandle -d# to delete a few messages out of > qmail's message queue. Funny thing is doing a qmHandle -l produces: qmHandle will attempt to shutdown qmail before removing the file from the queue, but it would seem that even if it fails to do so it will remove the file. > Messages in local queue: 0 > Messages in remote queue: 2 don't know about the descrepancy in numbers, sorry. James.
On 14 Feb 2001 14:01:04 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James R Grinter) wrote: > qmHandle will attempt to shutdown qmail before removing the file from > the queue, but it would seem that even if it fails to do so it will > remove the file. I wonder if supervise is starting qmail backup before qmHandle can perform it's deletes? > > > Messages in local queue: 0 > > Messages in remote queue: 2 > > don't know about the descrepancy in numbers, sorry. After wandering around the /mess queue I found a number of old 0K files hanging around without /info /local /remote counterparts. I guess I'll watch when I delete messages again to see if this occurs. Thanks -Jason > James. >
./configure --enable-relay-clear-minutes=60 --enable-logging=y --enable-default-domain=qmailnv.maa.sify.net --enable-large-site=y --enable-roaming-users=y --enable-deliver-filter=y --enable-ip-alias-domains=y --enable-hardquota= 500000 --enable-tcpserver-file= ~vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp
while for courier-imap the options were
./configure --without-authldap --without-authmysql --without-authcram - with-authvchkpw.
Would it help if I use a mysql authentication mechanism. If yes how do I proceed ?
Expecting someone to crack this asap !!!!
Raghu
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 07:37:26PM +0530, qmailu wrote: > Hi, please wrap your lines at 72 chars. > I am all set to migrate 350000 users to Qmail. I have created the users with dummy >passwords and while injecting their original password noticed that it takes 3 hours >to build the vpasswd.cdb file. After I have built the .cdb file , if I change the >password for even a single user the .cdb file gets built again and worse it takes 3 >hours to complete the process. The result a password change comes into effect only >after 3 hours. Can someone substantiate if this is true (hopefully it shouldn't be >!!). Secondly if I kill the process then the whole vpasswd file gets corrupt and I >seem to have lost all the passwords for the 350000 odd users. How do I solve this >problem ?? This is _very_ vpopmail specific, I'm sure you get more useful answers if asking on the vpopmail list. For this amount of users you might want to check qmail-ldap, http://www.nrg4u.com and http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ldap/ -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg http://www.bsws.de | Germany
Hi all, I have read several docs but I haven't found the information (but I'm not sure if I understand everything right) to answer the following question ... so please can someone lend me a hand: I have set up a server to host several (virtual) domains. How can I tell qmail that mail for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" has to be delivered to a different user than mail for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? I read some docs on how to setup qmail for handling mails for virtual domains but that docs said that mail for _all_ users of a particular domain is collected in a single mailbox (one single mailbox for each domain). But I want to have different accounts for e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as well as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". eg: [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-02 [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-03 [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-02 [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-03 Is that possible with qmail (I'm sure it is...)? What documents should I read? Sorry for my bad english and thanks for helping ... Gregor Szaktilla -- maccc Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Laengenhardstr. 13 Tel. : (0761) 700 997 D-79104 Freiburg Fax : (0761) 700 998
Gregor Szaktilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-01 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-02 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-03 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-01 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-02 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-03 > >Is that possible with qmail (I'm sure it is...)? Of course. :-) In control/virtualdomains: dom-1.dom:alias-dom-1 dom-2.dom:alias-dom-2 Then populate the necessary .qmail files as follows: File Contents ~alias/.qmail-dom-1-info dom-1-01 ~alias/.qmail-dom-1-peter dom-1-02 ~alias/.qmail-dom-1-tim dom-1-03 ~alias/.qmail-dom-2-info dom-2-01 ~alias/.qmail-dom-2-peter dom-2-02 ~alias/.qmail-dom-2-tim dom-2-03 -Dave
Gregor Szaktilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi all, > > I have read several docs but I haven't found the information (but I'm > not sure if I understand everything right) to answer the following > question ... so please can someone lend me a hand: > > I have set up a server to host several (virtual) domains. How can I tell > qmail that mail for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" has to be delivered to a different > user than mail for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? I read some docs on how to setup > qmail for handling mails for virtual domains but that docs said that > mail for _all_ users of a particular domain is collected in a single > mailbox (one single mailbox for each domain). But I want to have > different accounts for e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as > well as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". > > eg: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-01 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-02 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-1-03 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-01 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-02 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] should go to dom-2-03 > > Is that possible with qmail (I'm sure it is...)? What documents should I > read? Yes. It's clearly (to me) described in the basic documents that come in the tarball, and described in much more detail in Life With Qmail (lifewithqmail.org). The basic idea is you set up dom-1.dom and dom-2.dom as virtual domains. In the virtualdomains file put things like: dom1-dom:dom1 dom2-dom:dom2 and create local users dom1 and dom2, who will control dom1 and dom2 respectively. Now, in ~dom1 (that's the home directory for user dom1; that's given in the passwd file), the file .qmail-info will control what is done with email for [EMAIL PROTECTED] and in ~dom2, the file .qmail-info will control what is done with email for [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or you can use a virtual domains add-on package like vmailmgr or vpopmail to centralize control of the virtual addresses, if you prefer. For large complex setups I think the add-on is better. For smaller simpler setups (like mine with a a dozen or so domains and mostly a few dozen forwarding addresses in them) I find using users and .qmail files easier and clearer. Also very easy when I delagate a domain to somebody. > Sorry for my bad english and thanks for helping ... Your english seems quite good, from this message anyway. -- 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/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Feb 13 18:54:21 samba qmail: 982119261.837833 delivery 11917: deferral: >/bin/sh:_/home/medi/l/foo:_Permission_denied/ What is the output of: ls -ld / /home /home/medi /home/medi/l /home/medi/l/foo (ls really needs a "recursively upward" option.) -Dave
Just in case others don't have the context of this posting, we are troubleshooting a Qmail (.qmail-test) alias containing a command (ie /home/medi/l/foo) [medi@samba medi]$ ls -ld / /home /home/medi /home/medi/l /home/medi/l/foo drwxr-xr-x 23 root root 4096 Dec 13 13:59 / drwxr-xr-x 39 root root 4096 Feb 7 12:35 /home drwx------ 10 medi users 4096 Feb 13 18:30 /home/medi drwxr-xr-x 2 medi users 4096 Feb 13 18:50 /home/medi/l -rwxr-xr-x 1 medi users 94 Feb 13 18:40 /home/medi/l/foo [medi@samba medi]$ Since medi's home dir is too strict, I moved foo(1) to /tmp/foo. I now get the following Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.542210 starting delivery 12197: msg 204880 to local "|/tmp/foo"@mail.sc.prepass.com Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.542837 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20 Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.542963 delivery 12196: success: did_0+1+0/qp_12418/ Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.543151 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.543297 end msg 204872 Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.549566 delivery 12197: failure: Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/ So looks like qmail is not recognizing the command and thinking its a user's name. FYI I don't have any user called "test", such an alias /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-test Dave Sill wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Feb 13 18:54:21 samba qmail: 982119261.837833 delivery 11917: deferral: > >/bin/sh:_/home/medi/l/foo:_Permission_denied/ > > What is the output of: > > ls -ld / /home /home/medi /home/medi/l /home/medi/l/foo > > (ls really needs a "recursively upward" option.) > > -Dave -- ======================================================================= Medi Montaseri, [EMAIL PROTECTED], 408-450-7114 Prepass Inc, IT/Operations, Software Eng. =======================================================================
I am guessing the contents of .qmail-test are currently |/tmp/foo the | causes it to be treated wrong. just try /tmp/foo/ if you want it delivered into the /tmp/foo/ directory ----- Original Message ----- From: "Medi Montaseri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dave Sill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:13 AM Subject: Re: aliasing to a command > Just in case others don't have the context of this posting, we are > troubleshooting > a Qmail (.qmail-test) alias containing a command (ie /home/medi/l/foo) > > [medi@samba medi]$ ls -ld / /home /home/medi /home/medi/l /home/medi/l/foo > drwxr-xr-x 23 root root 4096 Dec 13 13:59 / > drwxr-xr-x 39 root root 4096 Feb 7 12:35 /home > drwx------ 10 medi users 4096 Feb 13 18:30 /home/medi > drwxr-xr-x 2 medi users 4096 Feb 13 18:50 /home/medi/l > -rwxr-xr-x 1 medi users 94 Feb 13 18:40 /home/medi/l/foo > [medi@samba medi]$ > > Since medi's home dir is too strict, I moved foo(1) to /tmp/foo. I now get > the following > > Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.542210 starting delivery 12197: msg > 204880 to local "|/tmp/foo"@mail.sc.prepass.com > Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.542837 status: local 2/10 remote > 0/20 > Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.542963 delivery 12196: success: > did_0+1+0/qp_12418/ > Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.543151 status: local 1/10 remote > 0/20 > Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.543297 end msg 204872 > Feb 14 13:10:09 samba qmail: 982185009.549566 delivery 12197: failure: > Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/ > > So looks like qmail is not recognizing the command and thinking its a > user's name. > FYI I don't have any user called "test", such an alias > /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-test > > Dave Sill wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >Feb 13 18:54:21 samba qmail: 982119261.837833 delivery 11917: deferral: > > >/bin/sh:_/home/medi/l/foo:_Permission_denied/ > > > > What is the output of: > > > > ls -ld / /home /home/medi /home/medi/l /home/medi/l/foo > > > > (ls really needs a "recursively upward" option.) > > > > -Dave > > -- > ======================================================================= > Medi Montaseri, [EMAIL PROTECTED], 408-450-7114 > Prepass Inc, IT/Operations, Software Eng. > ======================================================================= > > > >
Hello to everybody! I have two problems: 1) I'm using RedHat 6.2 with qmail-1.03+vpopmail+sqwebmail+courier-imap on an HP Netserver LH6000 w/ 2xPentium III Xeon 700MHz, 1GB RAM, 2 36GB 10000rpm scsi-2 hdd in RAID1. I have raised values for /proc/sys/fs/file-max to 16384, /proc/sys/fs/inode-max to 65536 and, with ulimit, max user proc and max file size to unlimited. In /etc/rc.d/rc.local I raised tcpserver concurrency limit to 600 (POP and SMTP), /var/qmail/control/concurrencylocal is set to 40. Using postal to generate a smtp workload, I have obtained 4500messages/min (1KB size) as maximum value. (Postal runs on another machine connected via 10MB/s ethernet switch) During the tests I have verified, with qmail-qstat, that the number of messages in the queue grows enough fastly and that the concurrency-local does not exceed 10/40 (as visible in /var/log/maillog). During the test the free RAM remains around to 512MB and syslogd doesn't exceed 50% of cpu load. Now the question: why concurrency-local doesn't exceed 10/40? 2) Thinking that it can aid me resolve 10/40 concurrency problem, I've tried to apply big-todo.patch and big-concurrency.patch but I do not succeed. make setup check stops because concurrency limit is set greater than 255; the patch has set concurrency limit in qmail-spawn to 1000. The steps that I have followed are: tar xvzf qmail-1.03.tar.gz cd qmail-1.03 patch -p0 < /tmp/big-todo.patch make setup check Where is the mistake? Thanks. Dario
You shoud be using multilog. If your syslogd is even close to 50% of CPU then you really need to be using multilog. Cheers Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dario Dal Ben" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 8:29 AM Subject: concurrency isn't growing up to the limit > Hello to everybody! > > I have two problems: > > 1) > I'm using RedHat 6.2 with qmail-1.03+vpopmail+sqwebmail+courier-imap on an > HP Netserver LH6000 w/ 2xPentium III Xeon 700MHz, 1GB RAM, 2 36GB 10000rpm > scsi-2 hdd in RAID1. I have raised values for /proc/sys/fs/file-max to > 16384, /proc/sys/fs/inode-max to 65536 and, with ulimit, max user proc and > max file size to unlimited. > In /etc/rc.d/rc.local I raised tcpserver concurrency limit to 600 (POP and > SMTP), /var/qmail/control/concurrencylocal is set to 40. > Using postal to generate a smtp workload, I have obtained 4500messages/min > (1KB size) as maximum value. > (Postal runs on another machine connected via 10MB/s ethernet switch) > During the tests I have verified, with qmail-qstat, that the number of > messages in the queue grows enough fastly > and that the concurrency-local does not exceed 10/40 (as visible in > /var/log/maillog). > During the test the free RAM remains around to 512MB and syslogd doesn't > exceed 50% of cpu load. > Now the question: why concurrency-local doesn't exceed 10/40? > > 2) > Thinking that it can aid me resolve 10/40 concurrency problem, I've tried to > apply big-todo.patch and big-concurrency.patch but I do not succeed. > make setup check stops because concurrency limit is set greater than 255; > the patch has set concurrency limit in qmail-spawn to 1000. > The steps that I have followed are: > tar xvzf qmail-1.03.tar.gz > cd qmail-1.03 > patch -p0 < /tmp/big-todo.patch > make setup check > > Where is the mistake? > > Thanks. > Dario > > >
"Dario Dal Ben" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >During the tests I have verified, with qmail-qstat, that the number of >messages in the queue grows enough fastly >and that the concurrency-local does not exceed 10/40 (as visible in >/var/log/maillog). >During the test the free RAM remains around to 512MB and syslogd doesn't >exceed 50% of cpu load. >Now the question: why concurrency-local doesn't exceed 10/40? It could be the qmail-send bottleneck. qmail-send does a big loop where it processes new messages and passes them off to qmail-lspawn and qmail-rspawn. If you have a fast enough stream of incoming messages, qmail-send will be too busy handling them to keep qmail-*spawn busy. >Thinking that it can aid me resolve 10/40 concurrency problem, I've tried to >apply big-todo.patch and big-concurrency.patch but I do not succeed. >make setup check stops because concurrency limit is set greater than 255; >the patch has set concurrency limit in qmail-spawn to 1000. >The steps that I have followed are: >tar xvzf qmail-1.03.tar.gz >cd qmail-1.03 >patch -p0 < /tmp/big-todo.patch >make setup check > >Where is the mistake? Can't tell. Did you install the big-concurrency patch first? Successfully? Frankly, I doubt either of these patches will help dramatically. -Dave
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:28:15AM +0100, Van Liedekerke Franky wrote: > try using the 2.4.1 kernel, which has built-in reiserfs support (a good > journaling system) and adapt the small changes to qmail in order to work > reliable under reiserfs, see > http://www.jedi.claranet.fr/qmail-reiserfs-howto.html > There is a post referenced on lwn.net about stability problems with reiserfs, <URL:http://www.lwn.net/2001/0208/kernel.php3>. You may want to have a look at those, and wait for the fixes before using reiserfs in production. - Mikael -
Excellent - my first flame from Mr. Socha. I suddenly feel privileged. Apologies to everyone else for the spam. This is the first and last time I will reply to anything like this. On Wednesday 14 February 2001 2:24 pm, you wrote: > Well, great. So you're acutally sending the following to public mailing > lists? I'm sorry I have to ask but what does braindamaged translate to > in your language? In my language, "acutally" is spelled "actually", and "braindamaged" is actually "brain damaged". Your comments speak for themselves. I feel sad that I have to correct you on simple spelling issues. > > > This message is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It > > is intended solely for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by > > anyone else is unauthorised. [blablabla] > > 8 lines of nothing. "legally privileged", huh? More like "intellectually > differently abled". If I could remove the footer, I would. However this is out of my control and is a requirement of our internal audit department. Not a lot I can do about it. Sorry. > "Reliable" and "rarely" don't mix well in a binary world. I know. Why do you think I run Unix boxes instead of NT? As I said before, the box is out of my control. (Maybe the expression "I'm told that..." was a little too vague for you...) Sure, I could set up my own little mail server to bypass the NT box, but I like having a job to get up for in the morning. > Welcome to Unix, Andrew - our tools either work, or they don't. Thanks. About 15 years too late for the welcome, but thanks anyway. I've been doing this for a while > Exchange *does* *not* *work* and neither does NT. Tell me something I don't know, then you might be able to contribute something useful instead of just fanning the flames. > Your solution is not a solution. It is a system that works for us, and that is all that I was trying to say. > It's a viable way of creating a security hole the size of Redmond. If I had a choice, all the NT boxes would be dropped off the edge of the nearest cliff. > Go away. No. > > > Unix Systems Administrator > > You wish, mouse pusher. Minix, Xenix, Linux, Risc/OS, SCO UnixWare, ICL DRS/NX, Solaris 2.x/7/8, AIX. All versions of Unix I've administered over the last 15 years. Replies such as the one Robin has posted do nothing to help the image of qmail or open source products in general. Let's try and keep it to the point and keep the flames down. Maybe some people who are usually the first to cry "netiquette" should go and look up the term themselves. Again, sorry to all for feeding to the flame. Apologies for wasting your bandwidth. -- Andrew Bold Unix Systems Administrator -- This message is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by anyone else is unauthorised. If you have received this message in error, you must not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this message. Such unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please delete it immediately and advise us by return e-mail to the above address.
* Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > Jeremy Suo-Anttila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > anyone know how i can import 350 email addy's from a text file into ezmlm ? > > `man ezmlm-sub`. Dear Sirs: I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at ALL! It just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD ANYTHING TO MY LIST!!! Charles (if that is your REAL NAME), why don't you try posting something HELPFUL once in a while?!?!?!?!?! FROM A REAL H4X0R, /pg -- Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- "It's God. No, not Richard Stallman, or Linus Torvalds, but God." (By Matt Welsh)
* Peter Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010214 11:45]: > * Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > > `man ezmlm-sub`. > > Dear Sirs: Hello, whining luser, > I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at > ALL! It just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD > ANYTHING TO MY LIST!!! That's because you've been too busy playing with yourself instead of learning the basics of, like, the net and stuff: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=import+ezmlm+list+of+subscriber+from+file It's, like, the first hit, D00d3. > FROM A REAL H4X0R, Wow. They've got Peter. That's really sad. Like, really... Duh... Hehe...
>* Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > > Jeremy Suo-Anttila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > anyone know how i can import 350 email addy's from a text file >into ezmlm ? > > > > `man ezmlm-sub`. > >Dear Sirs: > >I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at ALL! It >just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD ANYTHING TO >MY LIST!!! Ummm, I think those worthless words were the INSTRUCTIONS to do what you wanted. if you have them in a text file, simply do ezmlm-sub /path/to/ezmlm/list < the_text_file and change the /path/to./ezmlm/list and the_text_file to the proper values, do not type as shown above. Think you can handle THAT?? BTW, these questions are for the ezmlm list -- I and others just finished answering this same questioin there 20 minutaes ago...
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 12:39:03PM -0500, Peter Cavender wrote: > Ummm, I think those worthless words were the INSTRUCTIONS to do what > you wanted. Congratulations, you've been successfully baited. Please don't feed the troll. --Adam
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 12:39:03PM -0500, Peter Cavender wrote: > >* Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > > > Jeremy Suo-Anttila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > anyone know how i can import 350 email addy's from a text file > >into ezmlm ? > > > > > > `man ezmlm-sub`. > > > >Dear Sirs: > > > >I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at ALL! It > >just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD ANYTHING TO > >MY LIST!!! > > > Ummm, I think those worthless words were the INSTRUCTIONS to do what > you wanted. Ert... Peter was joking. I think. :-) RC -- +------------------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
Peter Cavender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Dear Sirs: > Ummm, I think those worthless words were the INSTRUCTIONS to do what > you wanted. Please, folks, I wrote the original message -- and even I understood Mr. Green's reply to be a satire of some of the dreck we've seen on the list. No more flames to him, please, or to the list about this particular message. 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robin, This coming from someone who's domain is being ran by sendmail.. Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 11:03 AM Subject: Re: Importing Emails into ezmlm-idx > * Peter Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010214 11:45]: > > * Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > > > > `man ezmlm-sub`. > > > > Dear Sirs: > > Hello, whining luser, > > > I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at > > ALL! It just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD > > ANYTHING TO MY LIST!!! > > That's because you've been too busy playing with yourself instead of > learning the basics of, like, the net and stuff: > http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=import+ezmlm+list+of+subsc riber+from+file > It's, like, the first hit, D00d3. > > > FROM A REAL H4X0R, > > Wow. They've got Peter. That's really sad. Like, really... Duh... > Hehe... >
On 14-Feb-2001 Peter Green wrote: > * Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > > Jeremy Suo-Anttila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > anyone know how i can import 350 email addy's from a text file into ezmlm ? > > > > `man ezmlm-sub`. > > Dear Sirs: > > I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at ALL! It > just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD ANYTHING TO > MY LIST!!! > > Charles (if that is your REAL NAME), why don't you try posting something > HELPFUL once in a while?!?!?!?!?! > > FROM A REAL H4X0R, It took 30 seconds to seek in, but then I ROTFLMAO. Subtlety wins any time. OK, 45 seconds :-) Stefaan -- How's it supposed to get the respect of management if you've got just one guy working on the project? It's much more impressive to have a battery of programmers slaving away. -- Jeffrey Hobbs (comp.lang.tcl)
http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html See: 5.2.1.2. Installation of qmail-pop3d "3. Compile and install checkpassword according to the directions. Make sure you install it as /bin/checkpassword." Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kari Suomela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:30 PM Subject: vpopmail > > Monday February 12 2001 23:10, alex wrote to All: > > > a> It might be stupid question, but I have no clue where should I put > a> startup line for qmail-pop3d and vchkpw? I tried in /var/qmail/rc > a> but > a> it didn't work. Please help me! > > That is not very well documented at all! > > I run mine from /etc/rc.d/rc.local > > KS > > >
George Please stop flamming people on the list.. At least have respect for the people on the list to send him a email directly and not start a Flame on the list.. Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dan Egli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Rembrandt Lensink" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:20 AM Subject: Re: WARNING > Dan, Why did you need to post that message as html as if the original is > *distracting* enough?? plain text would have been sufficent... > > > George > > Dan Egli wrote: > > > Dude, > > > > > > > > The person sending the virus likely has no idea he (or she) is sending > > it. The virus infects your winsock32.dll file, so anyone who sends mail > > using a win32 client (like me for example) is vulnerable. The virus is > > sent automatically. They don't see it. Chill out, and warn people you > > are getting it and ask them to scan their systems for the virus. The > > latest versions of Mcafee and/or Norton Anti-Virus will find and kill > > the virus. > > > > -- Dan > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > *From:* Rembrandt Lensink <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > *Cc:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > *Sent:* Sunday, February 11, 2001 3:37 PM > > > > *Subject:* WARNING > > > > > > _Stop sending us your hahaha Snowhite and the 7 Dwarfs E-mail virus > > or we will chase you and attack your system!!!_ > > > >
"J.J.Gallardo" escribió: > Hi list: > > I have this problem: one server running sendmail receives mail to a user. The >account isn't > local so sendmail try to inject to the destination MX host. The destination says >"user > unknown". Sorry about this mail. Today I've readed RFC1123 and I know more about MTA, so i offer to you the most interesting: 5.2.9 Command Syntax: RFC-821 Section 4.1.2 The syntax shown in RFC-821 for the MAIL FROM: command omits the case of an empty path: "MAIL FROM: <>" (see RFC-821 Page 15). An empty reverse path MUST be supported. 5.3.3 Reliable Mail Receipt ....... If there is a delivery failure after acceptance of a message, the receiver-SMTP MUST formulate and mail a notification message. This notification MUST be sent using a null ("<>") reverse path in the envelope; see Section 3.6 of RFC-821. The recipient of this notification SHOULD be the address from the envelope return path (or the Return-Path: line). However, if this address is null ("<>"), the receiver-SMTP MUST NOT send a notification. If the address is an explicit source route, it SHOULD be stripped down to its final hop. All days are good for learn something.
Hi- note that your reply went just to me, not the list. what do you mean by "qmailadmin for that domain"? try: ezmlm-list /path/to/ezmlm/list to get a dump of the subscribed addresses. --Pete >Ok guys that was helpfull as can be that saved me tons O time. I did >ezmlm-sub /path/to/ezmlm/list < address_list and then it started processing >the list and only took a few minutes. But for some reason none of the >addresses show up in qmailadmin for that domain > >-----Original Message----- >From: Peter Cavender [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:36 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: adding users > > > > > I have done this a few times with a shell script. If you have all > > > the addresses in a text file address_list: > > > > > > #!/bin/sh > > > for foo in `cat address_list`; do > > > ezmlm-sub /path/to/ezmlm/list $foo > > > done > > > >Too wasteful since it calls ezmlm-sub thousands of times. Just > > > >ezmlm-sub /path/to/ezmlm/list < address_list > > > >Mate > >COOL! > >I did not know it could do that, but am glad I know now. > >Thanks, Mate!
virus.bmp
Title: OnTheFly
Welcome to OnTheFly! After receiving several e-mails from news-papers and news-channels I decided to write this letter. The Netherlands, 13 februari 2001
Dear Sir/Madam,
I admit writing the virus.
In this letter I�d like you to know that I didn�t do it for fun. Let me first tell you how I made this.
As I have been reading on the internet all the time, I have made this virus with a Visual Basic Worm Generator, written by [K]Alamar. K. is NOT involved with this worm!
I have been using this programm because I don�t know any programming languages.
About the targets
Anna Kournikova:
Just because I am a big fan of her. She deserves some attention, doesn�t she??
www.DynaByte.nl: Just because I needed a site. A couple of days ago I bought something in that Dutch Ccomputershop and at the moment of writing that virus I had the receipt in front of me, on my desk. I never meant to harm the site (tell me if I did). That�s why I put the 29th of januari as the date of downloading the site. I�m sure that the VBS/OnTheFly.a-virus is already stopped by then..
Some reasons
Ok. This is the most important part of this �press-letter�. Last week I read an artikle about some research (www.idc.com) about the impact of the LoveLetter-virus. The title of that artikle says enough: IDC: internetters hebben niets geleerd van I Love You (wich means in English: Surfing people haven�t learned anything from the I Love You-virus)
I think IDC is right. I also think that you agree with me, according to the rate of spreading�.Maybe this is also Anna�s blame, she is so pretty..J
Last thing I�d like to say is that I never wanted to harm the people you opened the attachment. But after all: it�s their own fault they got infected with the AnnaKournikova virus, OnTheFly virus or watever they call it.
To get rid of that virus, please visit the regular anti-virus sites. They all have some antdote right now.
Sincerely,
OnTheFly
The Netherlands
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 07:10:16PM +0100, Rembrandt Lensink wrote: [virus crap] Could you please pretty *please* stop bothering us with this virus bullshit? We don't care, ok? Greetz, Peter.
I don't know, maybe I'm just a little daft from drinking all that beer last nite but pray someone tell me this: wtf has this got to do with Qmail? If I wanted information on some stupid virus created by some asshole I'd have subscribed to a V-I-R-U-S mailing list and not the Q-M-A-I-L mailing list. Seriously, can some kill this thread and for heaven's sake [EMAIL PROTECTED], shut up already about the virus. M. Yu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rembrandt Lensink" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 2:10 AM Subject: Fw: Source of Anna Kournikova Virus admits... OnTheFly ----- Original Message ----- From: Rembrandt L Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:40 AM Subject: Source of Anna Kournikova Virus admits... Welcome to OnTheFly! After receiving several e-mails from news-papers and news-channels I decided to write this letter. The Netherlands, 13 februari 2001 Dear Sir/Madam, I admit writing the virus. In this letter I�d like you to know that I didn�t do it for fun. Let me first tell you how I made this. As I have been reading on the internet all the time, I have made this virus with a Visual Basic Worm Generator, written by [K]Alamar. K. is NOT involved with this worm! I have been using this programm because I don�t know any programming languages. About the targets Anna Kournikova: Just because I am a big fan of her. She deserves some attention, doesn �t she?? www.DynaByte.nl: Just because I needed a site. A couple of days ago I bought something in that Dutch Ccomputershop and at the moment of writing that virus I had the receipt in front of me, on my desk. I never meant to harm the site (tell me if I did). That�s why I put the 29th of januari as the date of downloading the site. I�m sure that the VBS/OnTheFly.a-virus is already stopped by then.. Some reasons Ok. This is the most important part of this �press-letter�. Last week I read an artikle about some research (www.idc.com) about the impact of the LoveLetter-virus. The title of that artikle says enough: IDC: internetters hebben niets geleerd van I Love You (wich means in English: Surfing people haven�t learned anything from the I Love You-virus) I think IDC is right. I also think that you agree with me, according to the rate of spreading�.Maybe this is also Anna�s blame, she is so pretty..J Last thing I�d like to say is that I never wanted to harm the people you opened the attachment. But after all: it�s their own fault they got infected with the AnnaKournikova virus, OnTheFly virus or watever they call it. To get rid of that virus, please visit the regular anti-virus sites. They all have some antdote right now. Sincerely, OnTheFly The Netherlands
i am using qmail 1.03, is it possible to specify certain users to mail local users only and certain users can mail both local and remote users? rgds, yee __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Yee Siew Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i am using qmail 1.03, is it possible to specify certain users to mail local > users only and certain users can mail both local and remote users? Yes and no. If everyone injects their mail via SMTP (say, from workstations on the LAN, or dialup customers), and you want certain IP addresses to only be able to send email which is for you (no relaying), this is a normal setup of qmail. If you want to only allow relaying based on their envelope sender address, it's possible (look at qmail.org) but it isn't secure. A POP-before-SMTP solution such as relay-ctrl is much better here. If they're local users, sending mail through /usr/lib/sendmail or qmail-inject, this is going to require some serious filter scripts, qmail-queue wrappers, or patching qmail. 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniellek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >W dniu Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 03:54:38PM -0500, Dave Sill wystuka-Bł(a):-A > >>If he injects them via SMTP, it's a bit trickier. You could run >>/var/qmail2/bin/qmail-smtpd on a non-standard port, e.g., 2500, and >>tell him to configure his mail client to use port 2500. >> >>You could also configure your main tcpserver to listen to port 25 on >>the existing IP address (and 127.0.0.1) and set up another tcpserver >>on an aliased IP address dedicated to that client. Then you'd have to >>tell him to configure his mailer to that IP alias. > >Ok, this solution would work but isn't best... I't would block all my client >traffic (even short - one recipient letters). I don't know the nature of your client(s) or their mail usage patterns, but if the offending messages are sent by a particular user, you could give that single person the alternative SMTP host or port. That would subject only that one person to waiting for the big delivery. If even that's not acceptable, that person can simply set up an alternative mail user configuration for the bulk sends--or simply reconfigure their SMTP server settings before and after sending a bulk message. >Following this thread - is there possibility to check before sending mail to >queue if it has more than (for example) 50 recipient it wolud be forwarded to >this second qmail-queue. This would be ideal solution... > >There's tarpit patch which checks if there are no more recipients that number >from control/tarpitcount file. Maybe it is possible to alter this patch to >suit my needs... I mean without rewriting whole qmail :) Sure, it's a SMOP (Simple Matter Of Programming). -Dave
W dniu Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 01:35:17PM -0500, Dave Sill wystukał(a): >>Ok, this solution would work but isn't best... I't would block all my client >>traffic (even short - one recipient letters). > >I don't know the nature of your client(s) or their mail usage >patterns, but if the offending messages are sent by a particular user, >you could give that single person the alternative SMTP host or >port. That would subject only that one person to waiting for the big This is some sort of info/newsletter and it happens to be big (500KB message), it's why it's a problem for us. >>Following this thread - is there possibility to check before sending mail to >>queue if it has more than (for example) 50 recipient it wolud be forwarded to >>this second qmail-queue. This would be ideal solution... >> >>There's tarpit patch which checks if there are no more recipients that number >>from control/tarpitcount file. Maybe it is possible to alter this patch to >>suit my needs... I mean without rewriting whole qmail :) >Sure, it's a SMOP (Simple Matter Of Programming). Yesterday noon, i've searched through qmail source (it was hard to recall C programming :) but found a way to do this efficiently :) If everything goes OK, patch should be ready tomorrow :) -- Daniel Fenert --==> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <==-- ==-P o w e r e d--b y--S l a c k w a r e-=-ICQ #37739641-== - czy linux będzie działał gdy na innej partycji będę miał windows? - tak, choć z lekkim obrzydzeniem (robmar) ===- http://daniellek.linux.krakow.pl/ -===< +48604628083 >
"INSOMNIA - Janusz Oles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >how about if I add couple of lines to /etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail What you added looks good. >how about run file in /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/ >What should I type in to that run file? Model it after qmail-smtpd/run, but use the qmail-pop3d invocation from LWQ. E.g., something like: #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 POP3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup FQDN \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 Then make qmail-pop3d/log/run: #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t \ /var/log/qmail/pop3d Don't forget to: chmod +t /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d And generally make sure that the owners/modes of the /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d tree match /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd and likewise for /var/log/qmail/pop3d and /var/log/qmail/smtpd. -Dave
Hi, Does anybody has already implemented something like this ? A qmail intranet+internet mail server with: - Users (envelopes) with internet and intranet mail relay permitted. - Users (envelopes) with just intranet mail relay permitted. At this time, I\'m running a Qmail server with mail relay for the users, but without any kind of restriction, all users can receive and send mail from inside or outside. The actual relay is based on SMTP-after-POP, with vchkpw. Example of the question: User [EMAIL PROTECTED] can send/receive mail from the internet an from the intranet accounts, but user [EMAIL PROTECTED] can only send/receive mail inside the mydomain domain. And if possible, make foobar get DENIED just to inside-outside relay, and not make messages from outside-inside relay blocked, so anyone can still send mail to intranet-only users. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- OK [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- OK [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- OK johnsmith pop3 access ---> OK [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- DENIED [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- OK [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- DENIED (OK if possible) foobar pop3 access ---> OK I\'ve saw this engeneering working on a Novell Netware mail server, with netware users-based relay, made on a simple way. Thanks in advice for any tip. Best Regards, -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga - Analista de Suporte - #179653 Blumenau - Santa Catarina. Tel. (47) 9102-3303 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
What I would like to do is be able to get an idea of a user's email history; who they mailed, received mail from, what was the subject, and what was the size (or if there was an attachment). This information would be useful in determining if there any potential loses of intellectual property via email. Has anyone tried to do this? Can anyone suggest a good approach to take? Cheers, -- Jeff Newton Security Analyst
Jeff_Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What I would like to do is be able to get an idea of a user's email > history; who they mailed, received mail from, what was the subject, and > what was the size (or if there was an attachment). This information > would be useful in determining if there any potential loses of > intellectual property via email. Well, I disagree with your premise: it will only catch accidental or incompetent attempts to ship proprietary IP through email. > Has anyone tried to do this? Many people. The FBI recently has had some publicity about a similar scheme. > Can anyone suggest a good approach to take? Use qmail's QUEUE_EXTRA feature to send a copy of every message to a given alias, controlled by a .qmail file. In that file, pipe messages to a script which uses something (mess822, perl, awk, you name it) to record the envelope sender (Return-Path:), envelope recipient (hmmm, a bit trickier, probably have to parse To:, etc), subject, and date. This is documented in Dan's qmail FAQ. 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to Lincoln (and Chris J) and James A. Brown for taking a stab at my problem. Indeed it was as Chris had suggested to Lincoln. I think I had seen the response and lost it from my mail box and convinced myself that I hadn't seen it... I'll move these people to a virtual domain and then the ones with "non-standard" email addresses will be in their own .qmail file. New employees w/ "standard" email addresses will be picked up by the default .qmail file for that virtual domain and forwarded... :) -- Michael Boyiazis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail Architect, NetZero, Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: Lincoln Yeoh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 6:46 PM > To: Michael Boyiazis > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: virtualdomain/smtproute > > > I asked something _similar_ last week. But it's not exactly the same. > > See Chris Johnson's answer to "translating or remapping > domains to another > domain", 2001/01/29 > > My situation was I wanted: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > to go to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > No changes to the username portion. > > The answer to my situation (thanks to Chris) : > > echo 'corp.rocketcash.com' >> /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts > echo 'corp.rocketcash.com:alias-rocketcash' >> > /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains > echo '| forward "$DEFAULT"@corp.netzero.net' > \ > /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-rocketcash-default > > > But my understanding of your situation is: > > Outside - > firewall -> MSX with AV -> Internal mailservers > u@aimtv -> u@aimtv -> u@aimtv > f@rocketcash -> fipl@netzero -> fipl@netzero > And now you also want > fipl@rocketcash -> fipl@netzero -> fipl@netzero > > Looks possible but may require some modification - depends > how you do the > firstname to longname thing. > > Cheerio, > Link. > > At 02:51 PM 05-02-2001 -0800, you wrote: > >I have a situation which leaves me (I think) caught between > >virtualdomain and smtproute files... > > > >We have qmail running on a firewall box and forwarding > >to the corporate exchange server... > > > >We have users from one domain: > >aimtv.com which we use smtproutes to forward directly > >to a virus scan box... all the email addresses in the aimtv > >domain match those found on the forwarding domain, so > >smtproutes is appropriate. > > > >I'd like all our domains to be that way, but each domain that > >the virus scan box checks needs extra licensing ($$)... > > > >so, we have another domain, corp.rocketcash.com... > >some email addresses are [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >the mail comes in and I use a .qmail file to forward these to > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >future new addresses will be along the line of > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] which will forward > >to the equivalent on corp.netzero.net.... > > > >is there a way to catch all those future addresses and > forward them to > >@corp.netzero.net w/o using smtproutes and without creating > a separate > >.qmail for each new employee? would a catchall .qmail > >file be able to do that? i don't see how. it makes sense > to use smtproutes > >but i cannot from what i can see. > > > >any suggestions? > > > >Thanks, > >-- > >Michael Boyiazis > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Mail Architect, NetZero, Inc. > >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 hello i know that its an off-topic subject, but im going to danbury on March and i'll need a job. i'd like to know if someone can help me about this subject. ask by my resume sending mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] i have strong experience with unix and mail servers languages like cfml unix, php, javascript and so on i am interested in system administration or web developement sysadmin in special thanks and sorry for this off-topic cheers, daniel chicayban -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> Comment: Ask by my public key iQA/AwUBOosezJStthkk04cyEQLHPgCg83yUIrmkZ0XzQyk3KiLSAYt6oeYAnAmw tf2KPHKUqXTGeJlQB4G/tNSE =MdEa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Wednesday February 14 2001 21:11, Daniel Chicayban wrote to All: DC> i have strong experience with unix and mail servers DC> languages like cfml unix, php, javascript and so on DC> i am interested in system administration or web developement DC> sysadmin in special Congratulations! Second grade and especially Grammar might be a good idea! :) KS KARICO Business Services Toronto, ON Canada http://www.ksbase.com ... Teenage Mutant Ninja What?!?!?
Kari, Now was that message called for? Didn't your mother ever teach you, If you do not have anything nice to say! Do not say it at all. I do not recall anyone asking for you for your nasty comments. Why is it that everytime I get a message from this list, it usually is someone trying to be a smart ass, instead of someone either pointing the person in the right direction or letting them know in a professional way that they can not be helped. Sean > Congratulations! Second grade and especially Grammar might be a good > idea! :) > > KS
Hi, I have a few users who want their mail to be delivered locally and to be forwarded somewhere else at the same time. ie: User [EMAIL PROTECTED] wants to be able to connect to our pop server and fetch his mail, and he also wants his mail to be forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] As soon as I create the file ".qmail-x" containing "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]", his mail is forwarded but is no longer delivered locally. Is there a simple way to work around this? Thanks Mathieu Martin Network admin. CoopTel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 08:12:59PM -0500, Mathieu Martin wrote: > Hi, > > I have a few users who want their mail to be delivered locally and to be > > forwarded somewhere else at the same time. > ie: User [EMAIL PROTECTED] wants to be able to connect to our pop server and > fetch his mail, and he also wants his mail to be forwarded to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > As soon as I create the file ".qmail-x" containing "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]", his > > mail is forwarded but is no longer delivered locally. Is there a simple > way to work around this? > man dot-qmail Hint: .qmail files can handle more than one delivery method, one per line RC -- +------------------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
At 01:16 AM 2/15/01 +0000, you wrote: >On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 08:12:59PM -0500, Mathieu Martin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have a few users who want their mail to be delivered locally and to be > > > > forwarded somewhere else at the same time. > > ie: User [EMAIL PROTECTED] wants to be able to connect to our pop server and > > fetch his mail, and he also wants his mail to be forwarded to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > As soon as I create the file ".qmail-x" containing "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]", his > > > > mail is forwarded but is no longer delivered locally. Is there a simple > > way to work around this? > > >man dot-qmail > >Hint: .qmail files can handle more than one delivery method, one per line The answer he is looking for is in .qmail-x make sure the following lines exist: ./smith/Maildir/ <--- change smith to name of local user here &[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Bill
Thanks for reading! I'm in the process of setting up my first qmail server outside the firewall as a SMTP gateway for my domain - amgt.com . What I want is for our MS Exchange 4.0 server - don't worry, I'm replacing it :) - internet mail connector to grab email sitting on the qmail server through the firewall. I don't want qmail to try and automatically forward email through the firewall into the Exchange server and I don't want to create user accounts on the qmail server. I've almost read Running qmail, various docs and searched the email archives. There is a thread about qmail as a smart relay host for ms exchange, but it's not quite right. It looks like I need to setup a virtual domain for my real domain! For some reason I can't get my brain around creating a virtual domain for an exisiting, registered domain. Am I correct in this assumption?? Will creating a virtual domain hold all email for my domain until my exchange server can SMTP out the firewall to pick it all up?? On the topic of sending email, I'm a little confused. I think I need to relay all email from my domain out to the internet. cat amgt.com > /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts sounds right, but I'm not sure. I don't want to accidently setup an open relay or have all outbound email trying to be sent back to the Exchange server. I've been reading the list for a couple of weeks and am impressed with the level of help!! Thanks again! Mark Schoonover IS Manager American Geotechnical -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/E/IT/O d- s+ a C++++$ L++++$> P+++$> L++ E--- W-- N+ o K- w-- !O M- !V PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP t+ !5 X R- tv b+++ DI+ D- G e++ h--- r+++ z++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ Is there another word for synonym???? use Disclaimer; my $opinion_only;
Perhaps I misunderstand the description of blocking relaying as described in LWQ, so please bear with my question. (I'm reading: "Most single-user and small workgroup servers can disable relaying completely, but if you have to support a distributed user community, you'll need a way to allow your users, and only your users, to use your system as a relay. This is accomplished by using tcpserver to set the RELAYCLIENT environment variable, which tells qmail-smtpd to override the rcpthosts file. If you follow the installation instructions in this document, selective relaying will be enabled by default. To give a client relay access, add an entry to /etc/tcp.smtp like: IP address of client:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" and if I understand this correctly, if I know the IP of my clients, then I can allow them to relay messages without a problem. The issue for me, however, is that I need to allow relaying for mobile users dialing into the internet from national ISPs, thus usually ending up with different IPs each time they dial in.) I am setting up my server (FreeBSD 4.0, qmail-1.03, etc) to host a number of domains of which all of the users will be accessing their accounts via pop3 remotely. I want them to be able to authenticate, get mail or authenticate, send mail - i.e. as long as the person has authenticated, they can send mail to users other than on the host. The server is set up with mail going to a Maildir and already works for receiving mail from external domains. I already tried to deal with this with vmailmgr, but ran into roadblocks that go way beyond my ability to solve them - I couldn't get many of the necessary services for vmailmgr to work, and I was successful with simply using checkpassword. So, while I am finishing up the work on the server, could anyone give me some tips or point me in the direction of documentation that could help me in setting up such a service? I am specifically looking for information on pop access for remote/roaming users. Thanks, SF
>The issue for me, however, is that I need to allow relaying for mobile >users dialing into the internet from national ISPs, thus usually ending > up with different IPs each time they dial in.) The solution is simple, and often overlooked, and often asked on this list. Maybe somebody should write a "Life with email" document ;-) If they have dialin access through a "national ISP" then that ISP most certainly has a relaying SMTP server that they can designate in their MUA as their SMTP server. There is no reason on earth that they should have to relay back through the home office server, unless their ISP sucks. You do _NOT_ have to send outgoing mail through the machine that is your _INCOMING_ mail server! OK, there may be some clues in the mail header that the email was not sent from the home office, but who cares? These people are on the road! If they know how to configure a MUA than the return address will look OK and nobody will care or notice. --Pete
<snip> > up with different IPs each time they dial in.) > >The solution is simple, and often overlooked, and often asked on this >list. Maybe somebody should write a "Life with email" document ;-) > >If they have dialin access through a "national ISP" then that ISP most >certainly has a relaying SMTP server that they can designate in their MUA >as their SMTP server. There is no reason on earth that they should have >to relay back through the home office server, unless their ISP sucks. > >You do _NOT_ have to send outgoing mail through the machine that is your >_INCOMING_ mail server! > Pete, Although I agree with your comments with regards to most of the clients (AT&T Worldnet, for example, won't let you send through an SMTP server other than theirs...), the clincher is the fact that (what I so apparently left out...) for two of the domains in question the server is providing "mailhosting" for clients of mine (and it will probably grow to more). In other words, these clients will always be roaming/remote. So, I still need some way to authenticate these people so they can use the server as a "relay" server. SF
Title: RE: remote/roaming pop/imap users - sending email?unsubscribe
Hello, I'm running qmail and vpopmail on my server at work. I would like to forward all e-mail coming to postmaster@ any domain to my e-mail, for example, [EMAIL PROTECTED] How should I do that? Thanks. -- Sashka
Hi people, I realise you are all, umm miffed, with virus stuff at the moment but I need some help. background - I have installed the qmail-spam control patch 1.4.2. by Erwin Hoffman. Very nice. Very smooth, works well. Next I installed the qmail-scanner patch from http://qmail-scanner/sourceforge.net and problems arose. Other than that it's a straight qmail 1.03 problem When I send mail to an account I get Out of memory errors in the log (see below). Testing done so far. Works OK without the perl script in place so I'm pretty sure the qmail-queue patch is fine. basically I tested that assumption by setting QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue" export QMAILQUEUE instead of QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl" export QMAILQUEUE in my qmail startup script. The start script is echo -n " qmail-smtpd" QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl" export QMAILQUEUE supervise /var/supervise/qmail/smtpd tcpserver -v -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \ -u$QMAILDUID -g$NOFILESGID 0 smtp \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd-wrapper 2>&1 | setuser qmaill accustamp | \ setuser qmaill cyclog /var/log/qmail/smtpd & Is there any more info out there on qmail-scanner or even other patches that will do the same thing? Sorry if this is way too much info, but I dont know what to include as I have no idea what is causing this. Log excerpt. 982212344.499363 tcpserver: status: 1/40 982212344.500253 tcpserver: pid 4405 from 203.7.198.1 982212344.545594 tcpserver: ok 4405 ben-db.netconnect.net.au:203.7.198.12:25 ren.n etconnect.com.au:203.7.198.1::1974 982212345.131167 Out of memory! 982212345.140793 tcpserver: end 4405 status 0 982212345.140836 tcpserver: status: 0/40 Regards Andrew Gray Network Administrator NetConnect Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ph +61 3 5332 2140 required email legal disclaimer http://gray.ballarat.net.au/disclaimer.htm
Umm, never mind, I figured it out 5 mins after i sent this (duh) the qmail-smtpd-wrapper was ulimited to 1024, increasing this to 6000 fixed the error. sorry for the inconvenience. Regards Andrew Gray Network Administrator NetConnect Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ph +61 3 5332 2140 required email legal disclaimer http://gray.ballarat.net.au/disclaimer.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Gray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, 15 February 2001 16:09 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: virus scanner for qmail install problems > > > Hi people, I realise you are all, umm miffed, with virus stuff at > the moment > but I need some help. > background - > I have installed the qmail-spam control patch 1.4.2. by Erwin > Hoffman. Very > nice. Very smooth, works well. > Next I installed the qmail-scanner patch from > http://qmail-scanner/sourceforge.net and problems arose. > Other than that it's a straight qmail 1.03 > > problem > When I send mail to an account I get Out of memory errors in the log (see > below). > > Testing done so far. > > Works OK without the perl script in place so I'm pretty sure the > qmail-queue > patch is fine. > basically I tested that assumption by setting > QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue" export QMAILQUEUE > instead of > QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl" export QMAILQUEUE > in my qmail startup script. > > The start script is > echo -n " qmail-smtpd" > QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl" export QMAILQUEUE > supervise /var/supervise/qmail/smtpd tcpserver -v > -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \ > -u$QMAILDUID -g$NOFILESGID 0 smtp \ > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd-wrapper 2>&1 | setuser qmaill > accustamp | > \ > setuser qmaill cyclog /var/log/qmail/smtpd & > > Is there any more info out there on qmail-scanner or even other > patches that > will do the same thing? > Sorry if this is way too much info, but I dont know what to include as I > have no idea what is causing this. > > > Log excerpt. > > 982212344.499363 tcpserver: status: 1/40 > 982212344.500253 tcpserver: pid 4405 from 203.7.198.1 > 982212344.545594 tcpserver: ok 4405 > ben-db.netconnect.net.au:203.7.198.12:25 > ren.n > etconnect.com.au:203.7.198.1::1974 > 982212345.131167 Out of memory! > 982212345.140793 tcpserver: end 4405 status 0 > 982212345.140836 tcpserver: status: 0/40 > > Regards > > Andrew Gray > Network Administrator > NetConnect Communications > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ph +61 3 5332 2140 > > > required email legal disclaimer > http://gray.ballarat.net.au/disclaimer.htm > > > > >
Ok this is weird..... I typed a new message in Outlook Express and forgot (doh!) to enter a recipient before clicking on send. Question: 1. why did qmail allow an empty recipient (or did outlook substituted something in there)? 2. where'd it go? 3. is there an option anywhere in qmail where i can tell it to stop accepting messages with blank recipients? TIA, M. Yu
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 02:16:43PM +0800, M. Yu wrote: > I typed a new message in Outlook Express and forgot (doh!) to enter a > recipient before clicking on send. Question: > > 1. why did qmail allow an empty recipient (or did outlook substituted > something in there)? alex@buick:~$ mconnect 220 buick.pennace.org unauthorized interception prohibited ESMTP HELO foo 250 buick.pennace.org unauthorized interception prohibited MAIL From:<> 250 ok DATA 503 RCPT first (#5.5.1) qmail-smtpd wants at least one recipient. > 2. where'd it go? Confer with your logs. > 3. is there an option anywhere in qmail where i can tell it to stop > accepting messages with blank recipients? But qmail-smtpd already does that.
Hello, I have read through the qmail list and check all the documentation that I could find... but I still do not know how to use the -B option of tcpserver. I have tried -B/<path to filename> which just prints the /<path to filename on the line preceeding the 220 FCN-hostname line. I have tried -B"Welcome to my mail system ", but I get error messages in /var/adm/messages concerning unable to print banner. So... what have others used... I am using this because: -B banner: Write banner to the network immediately after each connection is made. tcpserver writes banner before looking up $TCPREMOTEHOST, before looking up $TCPREMOTEINFO, and before checking cdb. This feature can be used to reduce latency in protocols where the client waits for a greeting from the server. I believe that I am having some latency between another system that is using my qmail server as a smart relay... and I think the other systems (Win2K, yuck...) is causing deferrals in its own mail. Maybe I am off track and someone with experience with relaying for Win2K SMTP service can let me know their experiences. Thank you. -- GET LOADed! Timothy Lorenc USmail: LOAD, Ltd. VP Technology 1700 W. Horizon Ridge Pkwy Suite 102 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Henderson, NV 89012 http://www.load.com ***DISCLAIMER*** If this communication concerns the negotiation of a contract or agreement, the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act does not apply to this communication: contract and/or agreement formation in this matter shall only occur with manually-affixed signatures on original documents.
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 03:22:49AM -0500, Timothy Lorenc wrote: > of tcpserver. I have tried -B/<path to filename> which just prints > the /<path to filename on the line preceeding the 220 FCN-hostname > line. I have tried -B"Welcome to my mail system ", but I get error > messages in /var/adm/messages concerning unable to print banner. > So... what have others used... I am using this because: exec \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 10 -v -D \ -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \ -B'220-Hello! Please go away, i've got more email than i can possibly handle.^M ' \ ip-address port \ prog ... Note that the message includes a literal carriage return (printed here as ^M) and a line feed. Try 194.77.219.24 port 25. Regards, Uwe
At 03:09 PM 2/15/01 +0530, qmailu wrote: >Hi, > >I have setup a qmail box running >qmail-1.03,vpopmail-4.9.6,courier-imap-0.36a. The authentication method is >mysql. I have more than 2 million users. Before I move from my existing >setup - I would like to be absolutely sure qmail can take this load. Are >there many of you running qmail for more than 2 million users. How can I >do the load testing (some load testing tools to the effect ! ) to confirm >that my box will perform under maximum load ? Also what would be the ideal >IMAP connects that I would need to setup as threshold - in my current >setup we have about 500-600 simultaneous imap connects ! Can >courier-imap take this load ? Hotmail before they switched using Windows 2000, they were using qmail, and they can handle at least 15 million accounts there. Of course the key here to do distributed processing for the load, as you won;t use just a single server to handle that load right ?
Here is a message I posted to the amavis mailing list: I tried running the /usr/sbin/scanmails as suggested in a previous message and this is what I got when I sent a test message to a user on my system (/var/log/qmail). I followed the README.qmail instructions from amavis-0.2.1 and made symlinks to qmail-local and qmail-remote in /var/qmail/bin from /usr/sbin/scanmails. 982230586.171074 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 982230636.618106 new msg 668379 982230636.618137 info msg 668379: bytes 738 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 16686 uid 501 982230636.633205 starting delivery 1: msg 668379 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 982230636.633267 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 982230647.420901 delivery 1: success: bin/qmail-local:_basename:_command_not_found/bin/qmail-local:_date:_command_not_found/bin/qmail-local:_ cut:_command_not_found/bin/qmail-local:_ cut:_command_not_found/bin/qmail-local ... <much stuff deleted, btw> ... No_such_file_or_directory//usr/bin/head:_To:_sam@do/Error_report_too_long,_sorry./ and it stops after that, but I am not sure what has happened, here is what the startup script for my qmail system looks like: #!/bin/sh # Qmail Startup # Source function library. . /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions HOSTNAME=`hostname` # See how we were called. case "$1" in start) echo -n "Starting: " env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ qmail-start ./Maildir/ /usr/local/bin/accustamp \ | /usr/local/bin/setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/qmail & echo -n "qmail " env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ tcpserver -H -R -c100 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \ $HOSTNAME \ /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & echo -n "pop " env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ tcpserver -H -R -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c100 -u501 -g60 0 smtp \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > /dev/null & echo "smtp" ;; stop) echo -n "stopping qmail" killall qmail-send killall tcpserver echo ;; restart) $0 stop $0 start ;; status) status qmail ;; *) echo "Usage: qmail {start|stop|restart|status}" exit 1 esac exit 0 Any ideas what has happened? i've put qmail-local and qmail-remote back from qmail-local-real and qmail-remote-real in the meantime -Bill
