qmail Digest 4 Mar 2001 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1293
Topics (messages 58309 through 58365):
Return-Path
58309 by: Jon
58313 by: Wolfgang Zeikat
Re: Scalable Mail Solution
58310 by: Tim Hassan
Re: Problem receiving email.
58311 by: Grant
Re: trigger with wrong permission.
58312 by: skyper
58316 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: Qmail Licensing Terms
58314 by: Alex Kramarov
58315 by: Charles Cazabon
uucp server and qmail
58317 by: Yee Siew Chin
58318 by: Yee Siew Chin
58320 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
Re: New qmail version request
58319 by: Mark Delany
58327 by: Balazs Nagy
compiling ezmlm-idx with mysql-3.23.32
58321 by: dan
sms-gateway
58322 by: Martin Kos
58323 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
58324 by: Martin Kos
58325 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
58326 by: Martin Kos
Qmail-Fetchmail: delivered-to
58328 by: Martin Sch�ler
58329 by: Alexander Jernejcic
58333 by: Martin Sch�ler
58334 by: Alexander Jernejcic
58336 by: Martin Sch�ler
58346 by: Charles Cazabon
HELP!! it is not going anywhere!! :(
58330 by: Hatem
58331 by: Alexander Jernejcic
58332 by: Martin Sch�ler
58335 by: Chris Johnson
Re: Problem with rss?
58337 by: Todd A. Jacobs
58338 by: Chris Johnson
58340 by: Todd A. Jacobs
58357 by: Russell Nelson
58359 by: Todd A. Jacobs
58360 by: Russell Nelson
rblsmtpd not recognizing -R flag
58339 by: Todd A. Jacobs
58341 by: Chris Johnson
58342 by: Chris Johnson
58343 by: Todd A. Jacobs
I couldn't find a mail exchanger or IP address
58344 by: Steve Marks
58345 by: Martin Kos
58347 by: Martin Kos
My mail is lost!!
58348 by: Hatem
58350 by: Chris Johnson
58351 by: Peter Cavender
Spam from addresses harvested from message IDs
58349 by: Chris Johnson
58353 by: Wolfgang Zeikat
Qmail and time zone
58352 by: Kari Suomela
58354 by: Mark Delany
58355 by: Chris Johnson
58358 by: Peter Cavender
Re: Benchmarking qmail -- opinions, please
58356 by: Russell Nelson
Peculiar results with multilog
58361 by: John R Levine
58362 by: Dan Peterson
Re: qmail 2.0 exploit
58363 by: Brett Randall
58364 by: David Coley
relaying
58365 by: Rohit Gupta
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,
I have been running qmail for about 2 months now and everything has been
great :-) I have a very simple setup. I host web sites on the server using
Apache, and when someone uses a perl script though there web site, email
sent by perl script has a return-path of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I thought qmail might use the username of the Apache web server as the
return-path but it doesn't. Anyway to control what the return-path is? I
have qmail setup to use the "alias" username to store mail and the Maildir
format. So my /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains file looks like -
websiteurl.com:alias-websiteurl
Any ideas? All the best,
Jon
In the previous episode (03.03.2001), Jon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Anyway to control what the return-path is?
with qmail you can also use the command
sendmail -f <sender adress> <recipient> to send mails.
if your script uses that, you could thus define the "return-path", the
smtp envelope sender, to be precise.
qmail-inject -f would do the same.
man qmail-inject
should give you more info.
wolfgang
What type of bandwidth connection would probably be best for a 5 million
user mail cluster? I am thinking maybe T3 (definitely cannot afford OC)? The
network is starting small and to later expand, what would be good for 1/2
million maybe for a start? T1?
links to articles/documentation relating to bandwidth would be nice
Any ideas/opinions are greatly appreciated
Thanks
Tim
> What is in ~hob/.qmail?
[hob@hob hob]$ cat ~/.qmail
./Maildir/
[hob@hob hob]$
> Don't run qmail-smtpd as root. This problem is completely separate
> from the issue that prompted your query.
It's not being run as root.
qmaill 1922 0.0 1.0 1100 320 ? S 18:36 0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog
t /var/log/qmail/smtpd
Thanks.
hi
> > I started debugging and found that /var/qmail/queue/lock/trigger was:
> > prw------- 1 qmails qmail 0 Mar 2 15:36 trigger
> [...]
> > I set ownership and permissioins to:
> >
> > prw-r----- 1 qmailq qmail 0 Mar 2 15:51 trigger
> >
> > is this a known bug ? Any security problems with my modifications ?
> > (i dont see any....)
>
> Leave the ownership of the trigger alone, and change the permissions to
> rw--w--w- .
hu ? You mean allowing any local user to cat /dev/zero >trigger
is the better idea ? Giving non-trusted processes write access
to a pipe of a daemon (running with root-privilieges) is never
a good idea tought.
Which qmail daemon/process also needs to write to the trigger ?
It works fine here with qmailq.qmail/640...(or at least qmail seems to
work as expected :>)
skyper
--
PGP: dig @segfault.net skyper axfr|grep TX|cut -f2 -d\"|sort|cut -f2 -d\;
skyper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Leave the ownership of the trigger alone, and change the permissions to
> > rw--w--w- .
>
> hu ? You mean allowing any local user to cat /dev/zero >trigger
> is the better idea ? Giving non-trusted processes write access
> to a pipe of a daemon (running with root-privilieges) is never
> a good idea tought.
That's the way it's designed. The author put a lot of thought into this,
and there has never been a security hole in qmail. Look at the code
yourself; it's safe.
> It works fine here with qmailq.qmail/640...(or at least qmail seems to
> work as expected :>)
Except that you might see 25-minute delays on processing mail.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Manvendra Bhangui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Just want to know if the Qmail Licensing allows me to modify qmail for
my own
> > use or my company's use. Basically I want to shorten the text in the
> > qmail-send.c for bounce messages. Does the licensing permit me to make
such
> > changes
>
> This is a FAQ. djb's licensing terms (or rather views on licensing and
> distribution) are well-documented on his site, and there have been
> many, many discussions on the list about them. See the list archives for
> details.
>
> Secondly, changing the bounce messages is a bad idea. See
> http://cr.yp.to/proto/qsbmf.txt for reasons why.
Just wanted to remind, that there is a bounce-limit patch on www.qmail.org
that does exactly what the original letter asked for - shortening bounce
messages , seemengly withough any problems. I have installed it after my
client send a 30 MB message to a non existing recipient on a qmail box.
(After that I also started using control/databytes).
Alex Kramarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Manvendra Bhangui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Basically I want to shorten the text in the qmail-send.c for bounce
> > > messages.
> >
> > Secondly, changing the bounce messages is a bad idea. See
> > http://cr.yp.to/proto/qsbmf.txt for reasons why.
>
> Just wanted to remind, that there is a bounce-limit patch on www.qmail.org
> that does exactly what the original letter asked for - shortening bounce
> messages , seemengly withough any problems. I have installed it after my
> client send a 30 MB message to a non existing recipient on a qmail box.
> (After that I also started using control/databytes).
That's to eliminate attachments or the body, right? The way I read the
original author's intent is to change the text of the bounce message, not
the included copy of the original 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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
hi,
how can i configure a qmail to work with a uucp
server?
rgds,
yee
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
hi,
how can i configure a qmail to act as a uucp server?
rgds,
yee
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
> how can i configure a qmail to work with a uucp
> server?
Look at www.qmail.org. There is a bsmtp/rmail implementation made
by Olaf Titz.
Regards, Frank
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 10:14:20PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > But why does qmail have to be patched to use LDAP? Why not use a script
> > > which extracts user information from the LDAP database, puts it in passwd
> > > format, and feeds it to qmail-pw2u? Then cron it every hour or something.
> > > Voila,
> >
> > Better yet, why not make a replacement qmail-getpw? That's how I built an
> > LDAP-aware qmail a couple of years ago.
>
> But if the LDAP query fails in qmail-getpw-ldap, you have to either defer or
> bounce.
Sure. But there's nothing wrong with a deferral.
If deferrals are a problem for qmail-getpw-ldap, I'd pursue a more
reliable LDAP service. Remember that the LDAP service is most likely
also used to authenticate your POP users and they'll what
authentication to be reliable well before qmail cares about a few
deferrals.
In any event what I was really getting at was merely the modularity
that a qmail-getpw plugin can provide.
Regards.
On Fri, Mar 02 2001, Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> impressed with the modularity of qmail. The only patches I see as
> necessary anywhere are big-concurrency and big-todo. Everything else is
> just sugar.
Yes. In the past I wrote patches to qmail but these are just salted the
otherwise tasty meal. I wrote additions what can improves qmail and can
make it more modular, but I think patches should be gone. Extensions *are*
the way.
I understood that DJB written qmail not for us, but for the idea of creating
a standards-compliant, secure mta. In other words, features aren't in the
first line in the extension lists, and weird features aren't in the list at
all. LDAP queries are can be handled by extensions, by replacing
qmail-getpw. The whole local user lookup can be replaced this way.
And yes, big-concurrency and big-todo can be an included patch candidate,
but I think only the dns patch is neccessary to work correctly.
--
Nagy Balazs, LSC
http://www.lsc.hu/
Hello,
I've searched the archive and the ezmlm-idx faq and I haven't found any
pertinent information. I hope this is the right place to post this
question. If not, could someone please direct me?
While trying to compile ezmlm-idx-0.40 with ezmlm-0.53 and mysql-3.23.32,
I am receiving the following error during the make:
www:/usr/local/src/ezmlm-0.53# make
./load ezmlm-gate subdb.a getconf.o slurpclose.o slurp.o \
getopt.a getln.a auto_bin.o env.a sig.a fs.a \
strerr.a substdio.a stralloc.a alloc.a error.a str.a case.a wait.a \
open.a lock.a seek.a `head -1 conf-sqlld`
/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so: undefined reference to
`__fxstat64@@GLIBC_2.1'
/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so: undefined reference to
`__xstat64@@GLIBC_2.1'
/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient.so: undefined reference to
`__lxstat64@@GLIBC_2.1'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [ezmlm-gate] Error 1
I am pretty sure that the sub_mysql/conf-sql* files are set correctly.
Any help would be much appreciated.
thanks,
Dan Barber
Mojolin: The Linux Job Site
http://mojolin.com
hi folks!
i need to set up a domain that works like this:
if i send an email to number@smshost, a script should be started and the
"number" used as a parameter for this script. how should i set up my
.qmail-file ? i have no idea with this one?? thanks for help
Martin
--
http://www.kos.li/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +41-76-384-93-33
ICQ# 13556143
Say NO to HTML in mail and news
Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux. See http://www.debian.org/
> "number" used as a parameter for this script. how should i set up my
> .qmail-file ? i have no idea with this one?? thanks for help
Read the man page for qmail-command (type "man qmail-command" - just to be
sure ...).
Regards, Frank
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote:
> Read the man page for qmail-command (type "man qmail-command" - just to be
> sure ...).
ops.. ok i've found now the thing with the "LOCAL"-paramter. but i have
still a problem, i don't need only the data from LOCAL .. i need to add an
@ to the end of the paramter.
like userxyz@domain
LOCAL is userxyz
but i need
userxyz@
how can i do this?
greets
Martin
--
http://www.kos.li/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +41-76-384-93-33
ICQ# 13556143
Say NO to HTML in mail and news
Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux. See http://www.debian.org/
> ops.. ok i've found now the thing with the "LOCAL"-paramter.
If you want to build a "one for all" script this is not sufficient.
You need to catch the addresses with a .qmail-something-default
file and then you must use the DEFAULT environment variable.
> still a problem, i don't need only the data from LOCAL .. i need to add an
> @ to the end of the paramter.
> how can i do this?
How about
| my-sms-gateway-script "$DEFAULT@"
in the .qmail-something-default file?
Regards, Frank
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote:
> If you want to build a "one for all" script this is not sufficient.
> You need to catch the addresses with a .qmail-something-default
> file and then you must use the DEFAULT environment variable.
i know that it wouldn't work, but it's okay as long as i send only to one
user/number in one mail... that's enough for me ;-)
> How about
> | my-sms-gateway-script "$DEFAULT@"
> in the .qmail-something-default file?
wow...yeah... that works just fine!
thank you very much for the help !
-Martin
--
http://www.kos.li/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +41-76-384-93-33
ICQ# 13556143
Say NO to HTML in mail and news
Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux. See http://www.debian.org/
Hello,
QMail is now working fine here for some months for local delivery and remote
delivery. Just recently I wanted to take the last hurdle to manage the
incoming mail transport from my external domain/mailhost(QMail) to our local
mailserver (QMail).
I chose Fetchmail seeming to be the reasonable transport for our
non-permanent internet connection.
In my understanding "alias@localhost" looked reasonable. Since the fetchmail
had not yet a "set postmaster" and "localhost" was no virtualdomain, all the
mail was rebounced to all the senders. This was no fun.
Anyway, fetchmail's use of "localhost" is not consistant in my opinion since
no one mails to localhost. I would like to change this to my domain, but
that's not so important for now.
The important problem is, that mail from a single POP3 account should be
routed to different users. The use of "To:" is broken, happily my external
mailhost runs QMail. Three possibilities to intercept:
(1) Fetchmail could parse the envelope "Delivered-To:" in order to supply
qmail-inject with the appropriate target mail user.
(2) qmail-inject parsing the Delivered-To to recover the original addressee.
(3) using the .qmail hack to resend the mail to the correct user.
All the tries as of (1) and (3) end up sending the mails to our local
postmaster. I did try qvirtual, envelope (as of 1), environment variables
(as of 3), usernames (direct, $USER, %T) Using mda instead of SMTP injection
did work the same way. It always ignores the delivered-to and uses a static
username.
At the moment I am very tempted to modify qmail-inject or new-inject to
perform actions as of (2), if using a new option switch argument. But maybe
someone one this list might have an idea, before.
Yours,
Martin Schueler.
hi,
try the following lines in your fetchmail-conf:
poll external.host.pop protocol pop3:
no dns
localdomains your.domain
envelope X-Envelope-To
user yourpopuser with
password yourpwd to * here
forcecr
fetchall
with this setup i fetch mails from an external multidrop qmail-pop3 host
and deliver them to my local qmail mailserver
hope that helps
alexander
> hi,
> try the following lines in your fetchmail-conf:
> poll external.host.pop protocol pop3:
> no dns
> localdomains your.domain
> envelope X-Envelope-To
> user yourpopuser with
> password yourpwd to * here
> forcecr
> fetchall
> with this setup i fetch mails from an external multidrop qmail-pop3 host
> and deliver them to my local qmail mailserver
> hope that helps
> alexander
Rehi.
My fetchmailrc looks similar except for the missing localdomains-entry. The
envelope "Delivered-To:" (probably) has to stay since my qmail-mailhost does
not use "X-Envelope-To:"
Thanks. The "localdomains" fixed my first (not so important) problem. But a
static username "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is still generated.
Martin.
hi again,
> envelope "Delivered-To:" (probably) has to stay since my
> qmail-mailhost does
> not use "X-Envelope-To:"
just a guess: delivered-to has not the original recipient in it...
:) alexander
Hi Alexander,
Checking the environment show that the behaviour changed (in a good way).
/var/log/mail shows now:
[...] new msg 232614
[...] info msg 232614: bytes 952 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1869 uid 0
[...] end msg 232614
[...] new msg 232614
[...] info msg 232614: bytes 948 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1871 uid 0
[...] end msg 232614
[...] new msg 232614
[...] info msg 232614: bytes 956 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1873 uid 0
[...] end msg 232614
Postmaster gets no mail first time. Well, no one gets them. This is new.
qmail-inject now eats them. Strange is, that they have the same ID, although
fetched at the same time.
Martin.
Martin Schüler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Checking the environment show that the behaviour changed (in a good way).
>
> /var/log/mail shows now:
>
> [...] new msg 232614
> [...] info msg 232614: bytes 952 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1869 uid 0
> [...] end msg 232614
> [...] new msg 232614
> [...] info msg 232614: bytes 948 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1871 uid 0
> [...] end msg 232614
> [...] new msg 232614
> [...] info msg 232614: bytes 956 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1873 uid 0
> [...] end msg 232614
>
>
> Postmaster gets no mail first time. Well, no one gets them. This is new.
> qmail-inject now eats them.
Yes, fetchmail can lose your mail if everything is not configured
perfectly. Might I suggest my own "getmail", which will not? See my
.sig for a link. It doesn't do delivery by SMTP injection, which is a
broken design.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I had enough with qmail!!
please help me out.. I had qmail setup (after a long fight!) and finally got
the tests TEST.receive and TEST.deliver went without problems...
Now, as it seems to be there are no problems, can someone help me out WHY I
am getting this beautiful (please feel free to change the word beautiful to
anything you might think of!!) error from my outlook express which runs on
another computer on the lan!! (192.168.1.2)!!
I did the following :
qmail-pw2u
and then qmail-newu
and rebooted linux ..
and still get this error!!
The Error:
There was a problem logging onto your mail server. Your Password was
rejected. Account: 'hatem@hahlabs', Server: '192.168.1.1', Protocol: POP3,
Server Response: '-ERR this user has no $HOME/Maildir', Port: 110,
Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 0x800CCC90, Error Number: 0x800CCC92
Does $HOME/Maildir give you a hint?? although I have ./Mailbox in my
defaultdelivery!!
I do not know where it gets the that from!!
Can someone help the poor little me!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Schüler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Qmail-Fetchmail: delivered-to
> Hello,
>
> QMail is now working fine here for some months for local delivery and
remote
> delivery. Just recently I wanted to take the last hurdle to manage the
> incoming mail transport from my external domain/mailhost(QMail) to our
local
> mailserver (QMail).
>
> I chose Fetchmail seeming to be the reasonable transport for our
> non-permanent internet connection.
>
> In my understanding "alias@localhost" looked reasonable. Since the
fetchmail
> had not yet a "set postmaster" and "localhost" was no virtualdomain, all
the
> mail was rebounced to all the senders. This was no fun.
>
> Anyway, fetchmail's use of "localhost" is not consistant in my opinion
since
> no one mails to localhost. I would like to change this to my domain, but
> that's not so important for now.
>
> The important problem is, that mail from a single POP3 account should be
> routed to different users. The use of "To:" is broken, happily my external
> mailhost runs QMail. Three possibilities to intercept:
>
> (1) Fetchmail could parse the envelope "Delivered-To:" in order to supply
> qmail-inject with the appropriate target mail user.
> (2) qmail-inject parsing the Delivered-To to recover the original
addressee.
> (3) using the .qmail hack to resend the mail to the correct user.
>
> All the tries as of (1) and (3) end up sending the mails to our local
> postmaster. I did try qvirtual, envelope (as of 1), environment variables
> (as of 3), usernames (direct, $USER, %T) Using mda instead of SMTP
injection
> did work the same way. It always ignores the delivered-to and uses a
static
> username.
>
> At the moment I am very tempted to modify qmail-inject or new-inject to
> perform actions as of (2), if using a new option switch argument. But
maybe
> someone one this list might have an idea, before.
>
> Yours,
> Martin Schueler.
>
>
>
>
>
hi,
Hatem wrote:
> Does $HOME/Maildir give you a hint?? although I have ./Mailbox in my
> defaultdelivery!!
> I do not know where it gets the that from!!
afaik qmail-pop3d only looks for a maildir and not for mailboxes...
> I had enough with qmail!!
> please help me out.. I had qmail setup (after a long fight!) and finally
> got
> the tests TEST.receive and TEST.deliver went without problems...
> ...
> The Error:
> There was a problem logging onto your mail server. Your Password was
> rejected. Account: 'hatem@hahlabs', Server: '192.168.1.1', Protocol: POP3,
> Server Response: '-ERR this user has no $HOME/Maildir', Port: 110,
> Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 0x800CCC90, Error Number: 0x800CCC92
> Does $HOME/Maildir give you a hint?? although I have ./Mailbox in my
> defaultdelivery!!
Hi.
Did you use maildirmake to create the "Maildir". If not, check if the
"Maildir"
contains the subdirectories "new", "cur" and "tmp". Check the permissions
and owner. Check the trailing slash within the .qmail file.
Probably the first step already helps.
Yours, Martin.
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 12:33:20PM -0800, Hatem wrote:
> Does $HOME/Maildir give you a hint?? although I have ./Mailbox in my
> defaultdelivery!!
> I do not know where it gets the that from!!
qmail-pop3d supports only Maildir. It won't work with any other sort of mail
storage format.
You would have learned this and saved yourself a lot of time (not to mention
saved a lot of wear and tear on your exclamation point key) if you'd taken
thirty seconds to look at the qmail-pop3d man page.
Chris
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Timothy Legant wrote:
> Well, first, you could try simplifying it a bit....
I folowed your suggestion here. So far, so good.
> Next, you need to get a patch for rblsmtpd. MAPS removed all the TXT
> records in the RSS zone and now only replies to A record queries.
> rblsmtpd only understands TXT records. See the second bullet at
> http://www.qmail.org/top.html#spam
I applied the patch, ran 'make && make setup check', and had exactly the
same results as before. DUL and RBL work, RSS doesn't. Argh!
--
Todd A. Jacobs
CodeGnome Consulting, LTD
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 03:26:27PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> > Next, you need to get a patch for rblsmtpd. MAPS removed all the TXT
> > records in the RSS zone and now only replies to A record queries.
> > rblsmtpd only understands TXT records. See the second bullet at
> > http://www.qmail.org/top.html#spam
>
> I applied the patch, ran 'make && make setup check', and had exactly the
> same results as before. DUL and RBL work, RSS doesn't. Argh!
You need to invoke rblsmtpd like this (for the RSS zone):
rblsmtpd -r 'relays.mail-abuse.org:Open relay problem
- see <URL:http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?query=%IP%>'
Chris
PGP signature
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Chris Johnson wrote:
> rblsmtpd -r 'relays.mail-abuse.org:Open relay problem - see
> <URL:http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?query=%IP%>'
Where are you invoking this? If I put it in
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run, I get an error.
--
Todd A. Jacobs
CodeGnome Consulting, LTD
Todd A. Jacobs writes:
> I applied the patch, ran 'make && make setup check', and had exactly the
> same results as before. DUL and RBL work, RSS doesn't. Argh!
Quite right, not when you use relays.orbs.org. That zone has been
shut down. It has been replaced by a set of zones. You might want to
add just one, or multiple zones. See http://www.orbs.org for more
information.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Watch out! He's got an
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | opinion, and he's not
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | afraid to share it!
On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Quite right, not when you use relays.orbs.org. That zone has been
> shut down. It has been replaced by a set of zones. You might want to
> add just one, or multiple zones. See http://www.orbs.org for more
> information.
I used inputs.orbs.org and outputs.orbs.org, and still didn't get a
successful block from your auto-tester.
The other address, relays.mail-abuse.org, doesn't work either, but that
has nothing to do with the change of service on ORBS afaik.
--
Todd A. Jacobs
CodeGnome Consulting, LTD
Todd A. Jacobs writes:
> On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> > Quite right, not when you use relays.orbs.org. That zone has been
> > shut down. It has been replaced by a set of zones. You might want to
> > add just one, or multiple zones. See http://www.orbs.org for more
> > information.
>
> I used inputs.orbs.org and outputs.orbs.org, and still didn't get a
> successful block from your auto-tester.
manual.orbs.org.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Watch out! He's got an
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | opinion, and he's not
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | afraid to share it!
I'm trying to run rblsmtd with protection if the lookup fails. According
to both the rblsmtpd usage output and the man page, the -R flag should do
this. However, tcpserver contains this log fragment:
@400000003aa185e70678a39c rblsmtpd: illegal option -- R
@400000003aa185e70678c2dc rblsmtpd: usage: rblsmtpd [ -b ] [ -R ]
[ -t timeout ] [ -r base ] [ -a base ] smtpd [ arg ... ]
And the undocumented -a flag is presumably the A record lookup enabled by
the patch for rblsmtpd, right?
My /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run now looks like:
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD"
\
-u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd \
-rblackholes.mail-abuse.org -rdialups.mail-abuse.org \
-rinput.orbs.org -routput.orbs.org \
-arelays.mail-abuse.org /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
And RSS and ORBS are still failing to block, but RBL and DUL work fine.
--
Todd A. Jacobs
CodeGnome Consulting, LTD
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 04:08:17PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> And the undocumented -a flag is presumably the A record lookup enabled by
> the patch for rblsmtpd, right?
-a is not undocumented, and your presumption is incorrect.
> My /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run now looks like:
>
> #!/bin/sh
> QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
> NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
> MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
> exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD"
> \
> -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd \
> -rblackholes.mail-abuse.org -rdialups.mail-abuse.org \
> -rinput.orbs.org -routput.orbs.org \
> -arelays.mail-abuse.org /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
>
> And RSS and ORBS are still failing to block, but RBL and DUL work fine.
I don't know about ORBS, but since RSS doesn't provide a TXT record, you use
the -r option like this (exactly as I said in my previous message to you):
-r 'relays.mail-abuse.org:Open relay problem \
- see <URL:http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?query=%IP%>'
Chris
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 04:08:17PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> I'm trying to run rblsmtd with protection if the lookup fails. According
> to both the rblsmtpd usage output and the man page, the -R flag should do
> this. However, tcpserver contains this log fragment:
If you're using the latest version of rblsmtpd--the one that comes with
ucspi-tcp--there's no -R option. See http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/rblsmtpd.html
Chris
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Chris Johnson wrote:
> If you're using the latest version of rblsmtpd--the one that comes
> with ucspi-tcp--there's no -R option. See
> http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/rblsmtpd.html
I guess the new syntax didn't make it into the man pages. Thanks for the
URL.
--
Todd A. Jacobs
CodeGnome Consulting, LTD
I'm receiving the "I couldn't find a mail exchanger or IP address" error
when sending email to a specific domain, savvy.com.
I've seen this question asked before by searching the qmail mailing list
archive. The answer has always been that the MX record points to an IP
address instead which is not RFC compliant. However, when I do an nslookup
on the MX record for savvy.com I see this:
> set type=mx
> savvy.com
Server: 216-119-149-101.ipset29.wt.net
Address: 216.119.149.101
savvy.com preference = 10, mail exchanger = pop.e-it.com
savvy.com nameserver = ns1.dnswiz.com
savvy.com nameserver = ns2.dnswiz.com
savvy.com nameserver = ns3.dnswiz.com
savvy.com nameserver = ns4.dnswiz.com
ns1.dnswiz.com internet address = 207.91.131.30
ns2.dnswiz.com internet address = 207.91.131.31
ns3.dnswiz.com internet address = 216.119.149.100
ns4.dnswiz.com internet address = 216.119.149.101
So I don't believe the typical response applies to this case since
pop.e-it.com is not an IP address.
Is there another reason for this error? Am I just missing
something? Could the problem be on my end? This appears to be the only
domain I have problems with (I receive mail from them, I just can't reply).
Thanks for any info,
Steve Marks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Steve Marks wrote:
> I'm receiving the "I couldn't find a mail exchanger or IP address" error
> when sending email to a specific domain, savvy.com.
i couldn't find an mx-entry for this domain ??
; <<>> DiG 9.1.0 <<>> -tany savvy.com
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6989
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 4, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;savvy.com. IN ANY
;; ANSWER SECTION:
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS1.DNSWIZ.COM.
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS2.DNSWIZ.COM.
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS4.DNSWIZ.COM.
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS3.DNSWIZ.COM.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS1.DNSWIZ.COM.
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS2.DNSWIZ.COM.
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS4.DNSWIZ.COM.
savvy.com. 172800 IN NS NS3.DNSWIZ.COM.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
NS1.DNSWIZ.COM. 172800 IN A 207.91.131.30
NS2.DNSWIZ.COM. 172800 IN A 207.91.131.31
NS4.DNSWIZ.COM. 172800 IN A 216.119.149.101
NS3.DNSWIZ.COM. 172800 IN A 216.119.149.100
;; Query time: 144 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Sun Mar 4 02:05:51 2001
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 229
greets
Martin
--
http://www.kos.li/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +41-76-384-93-33
ICQ# 13556143
Say NO to HTML in mail and news
Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux. See http://www.debian.org/
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Steve Marks wrote:
> I'm receiving the "I couldn't find a mail exchanger or IP address" error
> when sending email to a specific domain, savvy.com.
ups ..sorry.. that was my fault :-(... no clue what it could be
otherwise....hmmm...
; <<>> DiG 9.1.0 <<>> -tmx savvy.com
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 55032
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 4
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;savvy.com. IN MX
;; ANSWER SECTION:
savvy.com. 900 IN MX 10 pop.e-it.com.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
savvy.com. 900 IN NS ns1.dnswiz.com.
savvy.com. 900 IN NS ns2.dnswiz.com.
savvy.com. 900 IN NS ns3.dnswiz.com.
savvy.com. 900 IN NS ns4.dnswiz.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns1.dnswiz.com. 900 IN A 207.91.131.30
ns2.dnswiz.com. 900 IN A 207.91.131.31
ns3.dnswiz.com. 900 IN A 216.119.149.100
ns4.dnswiz.com. 900 IN A 216.119.149.101
;; Query time: 244 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Sun Mar 4 02:06:56 2001
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 198
greets
Martin
--
http://www.kos.li/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +41-76-384-93-33
ICQ# 13556143
Say NO to HTML in mail and news
Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux. See http://www.debian.org/
|
Ok, After I had all the problems resovled ... from
installation to the configuration!!
I am now able to do the following:
1) login and use qmail as my SMTP / POP
server:
that is , when I use outlook or pine for example,
to check for e-mails on qmail server, I got no errors reported at
all.
but when I use it to send e-mails, they do not
arrive.
when I send e-mails to it i.e. to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] no problems reported
and the message does not seem to be there!!
Can someone help me in this matter!! I think I am
pretty close to this..
Thanks.
|
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 05:52:43PM -0800, Hatem wrote:
> Ok, After I had all the problems resovled ... from installation to the
> configuration!! I am now able to do the following: 1) login and use qmail as
> my SMTP / POP server: that is , when I use outlook or pine for example, to
> check for e-mails on qmail server, I got no errors reported at all.
>
> but when I use it to send e-mails, they do not arrive. when I send e-mails
> to it i.e. to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] no problems reported and the message does
> not seem to be there!!
What do the logs say?
Chris
PGP signature
> Ok, After I had all the problems resovled ... from installation to the
>configuration!!
> I am now able to do the following:
> 1) login and use qmail as my SMTP / POP server:
> that is , when I use outlook or pine for example, to check for e-mails on qmail
>server, I got no errors reported at all.
>
> but when I use it to send e-mails, they do not arrive.
> when I send e-mails to it i.e. to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] no problems reported and the
>message does not seem to be there!!
>
> Can someone help me in this matter!! I think I am pretty close to this..
> Thanks.
qmail by default does not relay any mail.
If you are running qmail-smtpd with tcpserver, referencing
/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb, you need to add the IP addresses TO FORWARD FROM, to
/etc/tcp.smtp, and compile it to a cdb file
Look at LifeWithQmail
--Pete
Somebody's stupid e-mail address harvester can't tell the difference between an
e-mail address and a Message-ID header. The result is that a lot of spam is
sent to addresses like [EMAIL PROTECTED], which came from the the Message-ID
header ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) of a message that I once sent to
this list. This mail bounces because there is no such address, and, since a lot
of spammers aren't kind enough to provide a legitimate return addresses, much
of this mail double bounces to the postmaster, which is annoying him (me).
What I'd like to do is collect all of this mail in a Maildir, so I can avoid
all the double bounces. What I propose to do is put this in
~alias/.qmail-default:
|condredirect messageidspam sh -c "echo "$DEFAULT" | egrep -q '^a[0-9]+$'"
|fastforward -d aliases.cdb
(Right now ~alias/.qmail-default consists of just the fastforward line.)
Can anyone see anything particularly evil about the above? Is there a better
way to accomplish this? Am I the only one having this problem?
Thanks!
Chris
PGP signature
In the previous episode (03.03.2001), Chris Johnson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>What I'd like to do is collect all of this mail in a Maildir, so I can
>avoid
>all the double bounces. What I propose to do is put this in
>~alias/.qmail-default:
>
>|condredirect messageidspam sh -c "echo "$DEFAULT" | egrep -q '^a[0-9]+$'"
why $DEFAULT ? wouldn't you want to use $LOCAL ?
see http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#environment-variables
>|fastforward -d aliases.cdb
wolfgang
Thursday March 01 2001 22:41, David Dyer-Bennet wrote to All:
>> No, it's not! That's how I noticed it. Someone was blaming my
> client
>> for it, but the problem is the same with all of them. I have tested
>> it with various Netscapes, Outlook 98, Outlook 2000, Outlook
>> Express, PMMail Pro 2000, Sqwebmail and Adjewebmail.
DB> That's because you didn't use a client which adjusts header
DB> timestamps, though.
I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server
doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail
server does.
KS
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 11:28:30PM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote:
>
> Thursday March 01 2001 22:41, David Dyer-Bennet wrote to All:
>
> >> No, it's not! That's how I noticed it. Someone was blaming my
> > client
> >> for it, but the problem is the same with all of them. I have tested
> >> it with various Netscapes, Outlook 98, Outlook 2000, Outlook
> >> Express, PMMail Pro 2000, Sqwebmail and Adjewebmail.
>
> DB> That's because you didn't use a client which adjusts header
> DB> timestamps, though.
>
> I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server
> doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail
> server does.
Er, what do you mean by "proper date headers" and how are you sure you
definition of "proper date headers" isn't being met by qmail?
I suspect what is happening is that qmail is creating Date: headers
that are UTC based and you are used to seeing Date: headers in your
local time zone. Are you sure that what qmail is doing is incorrect or
is it's possible that it's legal according to the standards, but just
that it's different from what you want?
If it's legal according to the standards, but differs from what you
expect, what's your problem exactly?
As others have said, qmail only puts a Date: header in if one isn't
already present, so you can easily override the default by using a
program that puts in a Date: field.
Regards.
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 05:36:17AM +0000, Mark Delany wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 11:28:30PM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote:
> >
> > Thursday March 01 2001 22:41, David Dyer-Bennet wrote to All:
> >
> > >> No, it's not! That's how I noticed it. Someone was blaming my
> > > client
> > >> for it, but the problem is the same with all of them. I have tested
> > >> it with various Netscapes, Outlook 98, Outlook 2000, Outlook
> > >> Express, PMMail Pro 2000, Sqwebmail and Adjewebmail.
> >
> > DB> That's because you didn't use a client which adjusts header
> > DB> timestamps, though.
> >
> > I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server
> > doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail
> > server does.
>
> Er, what do you mean by "proper date headers" and how are you sure you
> definition of "proper date headers" isn't being met by qmail?
>
> I suspect what is happening is that qmail is creating Date: headers
> that are UTC based and you are used to seeing Date: headers in your
> local time zone. Are you sure that what qmail is doing is incorrect or
> is it's possible that it's legal according to the standards, but just
> that it's different from what you want?
And if it puts the Date header in your local time, what happens when you send
mail to someone on the other side of the planet, or, for that matter, in the
next time zone?
Chris
PGP signature
I tried to "fix" this once, succeeded, then decided it was Not A Good
Thing, and changed it back.
IIRC, some amount of fiddling with the hardware clock and the time zone
settings in the OS (Linux here) resulted in "correct" timestamps on mail
as well as correct timstamps elsewhere. I think I just said I was in
Grenwich.
It seems to me that there are standards, damn standards, and The Way
Things Are. Email I get from diverse global origins (eg, this list) NEVER
sorts properly on the actual UTC transmission time due to the variety ways
dates are stamped on messages by assorted MUAs/MTAs.
my $0.02
--Pete
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 05:36:17AM +0000, Mark Delany wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 11:28:30PM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote:
> > >
> > > Thursday March 01 2001 22:41, David Dyer-Bennet wrote to All:
> > >
> > > >> No, it's not! That's how I noticed it. Someone was blaming my
> > > > client
> > > >> for it, but the problem is the same with all of them. I have tested
> > > >> it with various Netscapes, Outlook 98, Outlook 2000, Outlook
> > > >> Express, PMMail Pro 2000, Sqwebmail and Adjewebmail.
> > >
> > > DB> That's because you didn't use a client which adjusts header
> > > DB> timestamps, though.
> > >
> > > I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server
> > > doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail
> > > server does.
> >
> > Er, what do you mean by "proper date headers" and how are you sure you
> > definition of "proper date headers" isn't being met by qmail?
> >
> > I suspect what is happening is that qmail is creating Date: headers
> > that are UTC based and you are used to seeing Date: headers in your
> > local time zone. Are you sure that what qmail is doing is incorrect or
> > is it's possible that it's legal according to the standards, but just
> > that it's different from what you want?
>
> And if it puts the Date header in your local time, what happens when you send
> mail to someone on the other side of the planet, or, for that matter, in the
> next time zone?
>
> Chris
>
Charles Cazabon writes:
> I've been trying to prove this -- I'm in the early stages of benchmarking this,
> but queue injection at least seems to agree with this; I see either no
> performance change or a small performance drop as conf-split increases from 1
> to various values during queue injection.
Try it again with a queue of 10,000 messages.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Watch out! He's got an
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | opinion, and he's not
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | afraid to share it!
I just switched my qmail setup (one of them at least) to daemontools,
qmail, two tcpservers for smtp, one for qmqp. It works great, execpt for
one teensy thing. I have the same run command for all the log files:
exec setuidgid qmaill \
multilog t s4000000 ./logfiles '-*' '+*status:*' =logfiles/status
(except for the log size after the t, which I fiddle so each one rotates
its logs about equally often.)
The logger for qmail puts the status in logfiles/status. The loggers for
the tcpservers don't, although they make the main logfiles (current,
rotating to @whatever) correctly. It just creates a zero length status
file. The status lines logged from tcpserver look like this:
@400000003aa13cff07eb6d7c tcpserver: status: 2/40
so it sure looks to me like they should be stored in logfiles/status.
Any suggestions what's wrong?
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner
Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47
John R Levine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have the same run command for all the log files:
>
> exec setuidgid qmaill \
> multilog t s4000000 ./logfiles '-*' '+*status:*' =logfiles/status
>
> The status lines logged from tcpserver look like this:
>
> @400000003aa13cff07eb6d7c tcpserver: status: 2/40
>
> Any suggestions what's wrong?
'*' matches anything except the character that follows it. Since "tcpserver"
has an 's' in it, the first '*' stops at the 's' in "tcpserver." Since it
doesn't see "tatus:*" after that, the line is not logged. Try adding some
spaces:
'-*' '+* status: *'
--
Dan Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://danp.net
"67MB is a reasonable size for named. Your box has 256M, so don't worry
about it." --Michael R. Wayne, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 02 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dan could fix this by releasing qmail-1.03.1 with different
> installation instructions. Of course, if he did, some people would
> take that to be an admission that there actually is a security hole in
> qmail-1.03.
Who cares what other people think? If he (Dan) is giving out a
product which is even better and easier to set up than his last
version, then who cares about the reasons? What are we doing?
Making software design a sentimental practice?
I say just stick LWQ into qmail-1.whatever-is-next, and then all
alleged bug reports, whether true or not (which can be debated
until the end of time - ask yourself if it possible for both
sides to agree. It is human nature that they won't) will be old
news.
--
"People say Microsoft payed $14M for using the Rolling Stones song
'Start me up' in their commercials. This is wrong. Microsoft payed
$14M only for a part of the song. For instance, they didn't use the
line 'You'll make a grown man cry'."
You know you guys are all assuming a lot. Who even says there will be a new
version of qmail. qmail 1.03 is a very stable product... and stable is good
in the linux world... just wish other venders would be willing to produce a
product that was stable and then not muck with it until something truly
useful is added. I'm sick and tired up updating software because one user
needs that "neat new toe clipping option".
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Randall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 3:15 AM
To: Ian Lance Taylor
Cc: Jason Brooke; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail 2.0 exploit
On 02 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dan could fix this by releasing qmail-1.03.1 with different
> installation instructions. Of course, if he did, some people would
> take that to be an admission that there actually is a security hole in
> qmail-1.03.
Who cares what other people think? If he (Dan) is giving out a
product which is even better and easier to set up than his last
version, then who cares about the reasons? What are we doing?
Making software design a sentimental practice?
I say just stick LWQ into qmail-1.whatever-is-next, and then all
alleged bug reports, whether true or not (which can be debated
until the end of time - ask yourself if it possible for both
sides to agree. It is human nature that they won't) will be old
news.
--
"People say Microsoft payed $14M for using the Rolling Stones song
'Start me up' in their commercials. This is wrong. Microsoft payed
$14M only for a part of the song. For instance, they didn't use the
line 'You'll make a grown man cry'."
|
Hello all Gurus
I wish to relay to all hosts...
i am already authenticating users from
tcpserver but is there any way that i dont have to specify hosts , for
which i can act as a relay , in the RCPTHOSTS file but simpy relay for
ALL
|
