qmail Digest 8 May 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1358
Topics (messages 62035 through 62099):
queue operates very slow !
62035 by: Nissim Penias
62037 by: Peter van Dijk
linebreak handling / qmail-inject
62036 by: Sascha Dahl
62041 by: Dave Sill
62042 by: Markus Stumpf
Re: POP3 Cluster
62038 by: Karsten W. Rohrbach
62039 by: Russ Allbery
Re: SMTP AUTH and TLS
62040 by: Dave Sill
Re: rcpthosts default allow all ?
62043 by: Charles Cazabon
using safecat to filter mail
62044 by: Peter Peltonen
62045 by: Magnus Bodin
62046 by: Johan Almqvist
62047 by: Peter van Dijk
62049 by: Peter Peltonen
62050 by: Peter Peltonen
62059 by: peter green
Selective forwarding of email
62048 by: Russell P. Sutherland
62054 by: Charles Cazabon
����J�o�]��
62051 by: ����
Patch on qmail-smtpd / vpopmail for rejecting unknown users
62052 by: Tonix
62085 by: Larry M. Smith
62087 by: Larry M. Smith
Re: How to increase the qmail "concurrency"?
62053 by: root.mail.delanet.com
62055 by: root.mail.delanet.com
62058 by: root.mail.delanet.com
62070 by: root.mail.delanet.com
62071 by: Ross Davis - Data Anywhere
62073 by: tc lewis
Avoiding Returun-path <>
62056 by: Enrique Rodr�guez L�zaro
62057 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: FromMail.pl
62060 by: Lisa Applegate
maildrop + vmailmgr
62061 by: peter green
Qmail and its parts.
62062 by: root.mail.delanet.com
62065 by: Carl J. Danowski
62067 by: Willy De la Court
62068 by: Peter van Dijk
62069 by: Andy Bradford
62076 by: Henning Brauer
Re: Can MX record be CNAME?
62063 by: root.mail.delanet.com
62066 by: root.mail.delanet.com
Re: qmail-smtpd, qmail-send and multiple IP addresses
62064 by: root.mail.delanet.com
�z�]�W���t�C....
62072 by: ���T��
Remove
62074 by: robin
$EXT value clarification, virtual domain question
62075 by: Benjamin Collar
62077 by: Chris Johnson
62078 by: Benjamin Collar
62079 by: Benjamin Collar
62080 by: Chris Johnson
62084 by: Paul Gregg
Re: Multiple user with vpopmail
62081 by: Keary Suska
problem with ezmlm
62082 by: Kris von Mach
62083 by: Chris Johnson
62086 by: Kris von Mach
How to setup under qmail for an incoming message to be delivered to multiple addresses?
62088 by: afn.gauss.com.br
Badmailfrom for entire domain/sub_domain
62089 by: admin
62090 by: Brad Schuetz
62091 by: Alex Pennace
62095 by: simon
convert user
62092 by: Yanurul Anwar
62093 by: Csaba Bobak
62094 by: Greg White
smtp auth. question through vmailmgr
62096 by: Evgeni Dobrev
62097 by: Clemens Hermann
delete old mails
62098 by: Clemens Hermann
Daemontools & Supervise
62099 by: Pablo Buenaventura
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello all ,I am having a problem with my qmail server and maybe you could help solving my problem
or give me a little hint of how to solve my own problem .
Problem Description :
------------------------
I am sending mail from my internal network to the outside world and the server hold the messages in the queue for a long time until it sends the message .
When I say alot of time I mean a text message with no attachments takes about 10-20 minutes to leave my queue and get back to me if i send my self a message to test the system through my parent MX server .
My network configuration is that I have one major domain which has an MX that routes all the
mails to my sub domain mail server , for example :
domain.com contains MX yyy.domain.com --> this is my primary domain .
fff.domain.com is a subdomain to domain.com and hold my local mail server fff.domain.com .
all messages going to domain.com and needs to be forwarded to fff.domain.com are forwarded to the @fff.domain.com .
MY Qmail Configuration :
concurrencylocal : 100
concurrencyremote:100
My Mail server is a client dns and contains all the clients in /etc/hosts .
I noticed that a problem could occure with auth service so i fixed it to !!
I am using in my smtpd run script the rbl lists as a wrapper like in dan bernstein howto .
So what could be the problem why the mail takes so long to be sent out ???
I would really appriciate the help and if more info is needed please let me know .
Regards ,
Nissim .
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 01:04:44PM +0300, Nissim Penias wrote: [snip html] Most of us can't and/or won't read HTML. Please mail in plain text if you'd like an answer. Greetz, Peter.
Hi everybody! I considered that qmail seems to make a difference between DOS and UNIX style linebreaks ("\r\n" AND "\n") when sending mails from localhost. As it makes no difference between these linebreak styles when receiving and delivering remote mails to local users I expected qmail also to handle locally sent DOS style mails properly. Furthermore I considered sendmail does this. My qmail is running on a linux box. I tested it with PHP using the mail() function and in addition by using qmail-inject and sending a mail from a textfile that looked like this: to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<USLB> <USLB> Line1<LB> Line2<LB> <LB> Line4<LB> where <USLB> always was a Unix style linebreak ("\n") and <LB> either was a Unix style linebreak too or a DOS style linebreak ("\r\n"). The results in my Outlook were as follows: Unix style linebreaks: >Line1 >Line2 > >Line4 DOS style linebreaks: >Line1 Line2 Line4 Is this the usual behaviour of qmail? That would mean, that it is not 100% sendmail compatible... or did I misconfigure something? If there is a solution for handling DOS style linebreaks with qmail I would appreciate any hints. Regards, Sascha Dahl _______________________________________________________________ b e s t E s h o p . d e A G � Sascha Dahl � IT Consultant TZ/Friedrich-Ebert-Str. � 51429 Bergisch Gladbach � Germany Phone: +49 (0)2204 - 84 34 03 � Fax: +49 (0)2204 - 84 34 19 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] � http://www.besteforschung.de
"Sascha Dahl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I considered that qmail seems to make a difference between DOS and UNIX >style linebreaks ("\r\n" AND "\n") when sending mails from localhost. qmail runs on UNIX systems, and UNIX systems use newlines, not CR-LF. >Is this the usual behaviour of qmail? Yes. >That would mean, that it is not 100% sendmail compatible... Correct. qmail is not bug-compatible with Sendmail. >or did I misconfigure something? No. >If there is a solution for handling DOS style linebreaks with qmail I >would appreciate any hints. Why not just store files with the line breaks appropriate for the OS they're stored on? -Dave
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 12:58:12PM +0200, Sascha Dahl wrote: > I considered that qmail seems to make a difference between DOS and UNIX > style linebreaks ("\r\n" AND "\n") when sending mails from localhost. Read RFC 2821 (obsoleted 821) Bare LF without a preceding CR are invalid in SMTP dialogue. > Is this the usual behaviour of qmail? That would mean, that it is not 100% > sendmail compatible... or did I misconfigure something? If there is a Compatibility to sendmail is irrelevant. qmail implements the standard. Some version of MS exchange and Outloook don't. The funny thing about it is that under some circumstances Outlook can't decode email that has been sent by another Outlook client. > solution for handling DOS style linebreaks with qmail I would appreciate any > hints. Do correct escaping of LFs according to RFC 2821. Just a notice: it is also irrelevant if LF to CRLF conversion does make sense in your opinion. The standard defines that it has to be converted. \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen asleep yet.
Russ Allbery([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.07 00:57:48 +0000: > Karsten W Rohrbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Steve Kennedy([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.05 19:08:32 +0000: > > >> You could also use EMC storage as a back-end, not cheap but very > >> flexible and reliable. > > > emc is good as long as it runs. if some pice fails those boxes are gonna > > fsck forever... > > Huh? What are you talking about? > > About the only drawback to EMC is that it's insanely expensive. And I > really mean it when I say insane. It's incredibly reliable, though; > dual-redundant systems from end to end, at least in the Symmetrix. (The > Clarion products are very different and not really the same sort of > storage.) emc uses a bsd based filesystem implementation. the boxes are darn expensive since they try to make the hardware this resilient against outages that the logical filesystem layer never catches an error. but if it does, you're hosed. maybe you read about those meltdowns of german webspace provider strato... they use emc. the bottom line is, that if a disk fails nothing goes wrong, if one bus fails nothing goes wrong, but if you got unrecoverable data errors on a controller or other bad components, the filesystem gets damaged. due to it's nature, being a ufs/ffs, the box comes up and check filesystems, and you know how long that action lasts when you're checking >1tb... i personally prefer the netapps (although the filesystems are somewhat limited in size compared to emc or ibm) since they invested a lot of grey matter in designing the filesystem and integrating their raid into the filesystem. wafl has no point of inconsistency by design. the worst thing that can happen is the log device crashing (32mb nvram card) which means, that you inflight transactions are hosed. the filesystem on media, in fact, is correct at any point in time. the patents for wafl can be found on patent.womplex.ibm.com (which seems to be another site now) and are worth reading. /k -- > knowledge is power. power corrupts. study hard, be evil KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de [Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-------------------------------------] GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46
Karsten W Rohrbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > emc uses a bsd based filesystem implementation. No, it doesn't; an EMC Symmetrix doesn't have a file system at the disk level. Are you talking about the partitioning? > if one bus fails nothing goes wrong, but if you got unrecoverable data > errors on a controller or other bad components, the filesystem gets > damaged. Yes, with any disk subsystem if you have undetectable controller errors, bad things happen. > due to it's nature, being a ufs/ffs, EMC Symmetrix do not use UFS/FFS unless the host you're connecting to the disk chooses to format the disks that way. If you don't want to deal with UFS, use a logging file system. > i personally prefer the netapps (although the filesystems are somewhat > limited in size compared to emc or ibm) A NetApp is a completely different sort of machine than an EMC. A NetApp exports files over protocol rather than as a simple SCSI device. Maybe you're talking about EMC's Clarion stuff, which is different, or some of their newer experimental SAN stuff? We've been using EMC disk here for quite some time and I don't recognize anything in your descriptions even remotely like what we're running. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Joshu=E9 Mart=EDn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But when I tried to apply the two patches to Qmail sources (f= irst=20 >the TLS patch and then the AUTH), the second patch rejects parts of th= e >AUTH patch. I tried to apply manually the parts of the patch that >were rejected, but the resultant qmail-smtp didn't allow authenticate >nor encript. I've merged these two patches, but I've just got diffs for the two files the conflicted: qmail-remote.c and qmail-smtpd.c. Available upon request. -Dave
D . Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oops. I actually wanted only to be able to send mails OUT to every host > except what is banned. You can "ban" your users from sending mail to certain domains by making them virtualdomains on your own server, and blackholing the mail. You set up a virtualdomain like domain.org:alias-domain.org, and then have a file ~alias/.qmail-domain:org-default which contains only '#'. Then either fiddle with your DNS, or use an smtproutes entry to ensure mail for that domain goes to your mailserver. > I only found out by specifying the domain in rcpthosts I could send mails to > that domain. Could you please point out the exact what-to-do in man page? Go to cr.yp.to and read everything you can find about "selective relaying" or tcpserver. Then read the same topics at www.qmail.org and www.lifewithqmail.org. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have qmail + vmailmgr handling my mail. I want to filter my mail on the server side. My two options are procmail and safecat of which I would prefer safecat. Unfortunately maildrop doesn't support vmailmgr (actually I'm not sure about procmail/safecat either, I would think that they are supported...?). I have now installed safecat but it is unclear for me how to enable the filtering? I probably have to edit users' .qmail files, right? What do I add there to enable the filtering? Where do I add the filter-script? Does safecat understand procmail filtering language -- could someone send me an example of simple filtering script? Regards, Peter
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:24:33PM +0300, Peter Peltonen wrote: > > I have qmail + vmailmgr handling my mail. > > I want to filter my mail on the server side. My two options are procmail and > safecat of which I would prefer safecat. Unfortunately maildrop doesn't > support vmailmgr (actually I'm not sure about procmail/safecat either, I > would think that they are supported...?). safecat has no filtering capabilities. Go for procmail since it contains native Maildir compliance nowadays. /magnus -- :.... Magnus Bodin ::::::::.. http://x42.com/ :::::::::::::::::............ atelionrsmcpdhf.y0w>gv,3:b2+/4q57?k)(1
* Peter Peltonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010507 16:24]: > I have qmail + vmailmgr handling my mail. > I want to filter my mail on the server side. My two options are procmail and > safecat of which I would prefer safecat. Unfortunately maildrop doesn't > support vmailmgr (actually I'm not sure about procmail/safecat either, I > would think that they are supported...?). Why would maildrop not support vmailmgr? -Johan -- Johan Almqvist http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
PGP signature
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 04:37:52PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:24:33PM +0300, Peter Peltonen wrote: > > > > I have qmail + vmailmgr handling my mail. > > > > I want to filter my mail on the server side. My two options are procmail and > > safecat of which I would prefer safecat. Unfortunately maildrop doesn't > > support vmailmgr (actually I'm not sure about procmail/safecat either, I > > would think that they are supported...?). > > safecat has no filtering capabilities. > > Go for procmail since it contains native Maildir compliance nowadays. Maildir support you mean. procmail's Maildir implementation is far from 'compliant' (as far as a real compliancy standard exists), and can lose mail easily. Whenever I use procmail, I pipe mail to safecat for Maildir delivery. Works like a charm. Greetz, Peter.
Johan Almqvist wrote: > Why would maildrop not support vmailmgr? I don't know. Here's a mail I got from Mr. Sam (the author of maildrop) today: --snip-- maildrop does not support vmailmgr. -- Sam --snip-- He did not give any reasons for it, though. Peter
Peter van Dijk wrote: > Whenever I use procmail, I pipe mail to safecat for Maildir delivery. > Works like a charm. > > Greetz, Peter. Could you please send me an example .qmail file how to use procmail + safecat with qmail? I'm also using vmailmgr but I probably can figure out that part myself (or ask about it in the vmailmgr list). Thank you, Peter
* Peter Peltonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010507 11:10]: > > Why would maildrop not support vmailmgr? > > I don't know. Here's a mail I got from Mr. Sam (the author of maildrop) today: > > --snip-- > > maildrop does not support vmailmgr. > > -- > Sam > --snip-- > > He did not give any reasons for it, though. There are no reasons; he's wrong. I'm using maildrop with vmailmgr just fine. /pg -- Peter Green : Architekton Internet Services, LLC : [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- >What does ELF stand for (in respect to Linux?) ELF is the first rock group that Ronnie James Dio performed with back in the early 1970's. In constrast, a.out is a misspelling of the French word for the month of August. What the two have in common is beyond me, but Linux users seem to use the two words together. (Seen on c.o.l.misc)
I've looked through the mailing list archive and FAQ and am not sure that what I am looking for has been covered. I have a machine that is set up to receive all mail for the given domain: goaironly.com There is set of addresses that I want to forward to a legacy MS$Exchange server. For example: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] etc... I've got goaironly.com configured as a virtual domain the the corresponding entries in rcpthosts and virtualdomains: goaironly.com:aironly All of the "new" addresses are being handled nicely by vmailmgr/vdeliver in ~aironly/.qmail-default. I.e they are being delivered locally. If I put: | forward "EXT"@exch.goaironly.com in ~aironly/.qmail-booking and add the corresponding artificial smtproute in smtproutes: exch.goaironly.com::216.13.139.130 The mail gets forwarded by the rcpt address is now changed. (From [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) which the MS$Exchange server may not necessarily like. Any ideas? -- Quist Consulting Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 219 Donlea Drive Voice: +1.416.696.7600 Toronto ON M4G 2N1 Fax: +1.416.978.6620 CANADA WWW: http://www.quist.ca
Russell P. Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is set of addresses that I want to forward to a legacy MS$Exchange > server. [...] > If I put: > > | forward "EXT"@exch.goaironly.com > > in ~aironly/.qmail-booking and add the corresponding artificial > smtproute in smtproutes: > > exch.goaironly.com::216.13.139.130 Looks good so far. > The mail gets forwarded by the rcpt address is now changed. > (From [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > which the MS$Exchange server may not necessarily like. > > Any ideas? Well, the problem mainly seems to be with the legacy system, not qmail. Can you (re)configure the Exchange system to accept that "exch.goaironly.com" is equivalent to "goaironly.com"? Or perhaps forward the mail like this: | forward "$EXT@[216.13.139.130]" instead of your rule above? If the the Exchange equivalent of "defaultdomain" is "goaironly.com", this would likely have the desired affect. Note that I don't know whether Exchange even knows about the concept of an IP address as domain literal. 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Title:��!�A�Q�ȿ���?
���n�h��...�ڳo�Ӭ���J�w�g�}�l�ȤF!
�C�Ӥ몺�����W���Υثe��ADSL����
�F�o�a���q���ڭt��! ���p���W��ʧa!
============�a �ڥhA��=============
�@
I've developed a patch for qmail-smtpd with vpopmail, for rejecting non existing users/aliases/mailing lists. This patch is now working nice on my system since more than 2 months, so I think it's pretty stable and I may submit it to the community. The patch is freely available to everyone want to use it. The address of the HTML page for this patch is: http://www.interazioni.it/qmail
> void err_realrcpt() { out("553 sorry, no mailbox here by that name (#5.7.1 - usrchk)\r\n"); } #5.7.1, Hummm... shouldn't that be #5.1.1 ;) > void err_realrcpt() { out("553 sorry, no mailbox here by that name - usrchk (#5.1.1)\r\n"); } --Larry M. Smith mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] cat BOFH | sed s/Operator/Postmaster/g > BPFH Tonix wrote: > I've developed a patch for qmail-smtpd with vpopmail, for rejecting non > existing users/aliases/mailing lists. > > This patch is now working nice on my system since more than 2 months, so I > think it's pretty stable and I may submit it to the community. > > The patch is freely available to everyone want to use it. > > The address of the HTML page for this patch is: > http://www.interazioni.it/qmail
Let me get the coffee pot put back on... > void err_realrcpt() { out("550 sorry, no mailbox here by that name (#5.1.1)\r\n"); } Sorry about that... RFC2821 4.2.3; 550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable (e.g., mailbox not found, no access, or command rejected for policy reasons) RFC1893 3.2; X.1.1 Bad destination mailbox address The mailbox specified in the address does not exist. For Internet mail names, this means the address portion to the left of the "@" sign is invalid. This code is only useful for permanent failures. Tonix wrote: > I've developed a patch for qmail-smtpd with vpopmail, for rejecting non > existing users/aliases/mailing lists. > > This patch is now working nice on my system since more than 2 months, so I > think it's pretty stable and I may submit it to the community. > > The patch is freely available to everyone want to use it. > > The address of the HTML page for this patch is: > http://www.interazioni.it/qmail
> hi jason why not just say /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote > > add it there...have a good day. Because I'd prefer to politely teach people to learn to help themselves if they can jason
hi jason why not just say /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote add it there...have a good day. On Fri, 4 May 2001, Jason Brooke wrote: > Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 14:35:45 +1000 > From: Jason Brooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: How to increase the qmail "concurrency"? > > > my qmail-mrtg show that the qmail concurrency value 20 is not enough. anyone > > can tell me how to increase it. > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > ---- > > Chris > > > Hi Chris > > Please read 'FAQ' in your source directory, or have a look at > http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html which is linked from www.qmail.org > > jason > > >
> my qmail-mrtg show that the qmail concurrency value 20 is not enough. anyone > can tell me how to increase it. > > Thanks in advance > > > ---- > Chris Hi Chris Please read 'FAQ' in your source directory, or have a look at http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html which is linked from www.qmail.org jason
my qmail-mrtg show that the qmail concurrency value 20 is not enough. anyone can tell me how to increase it. Thanks in advance ---- Chris
concurrency-day.png
Several people already answered this question on the Qmail list. ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 9:28 PM Subject: How to increase the qmail "concurrency"? > > my qmail-mrtg show that the qmail concurrency value 20 is not enough. anyone > can tell me how to increase it. > > Thanks in advance > > > ---- > Chris > >
On Fri, 4 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > my qmail-mrtg show that the qmail concurrency value 20 is not enough. anyone > can tell me how to increase it. > http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/efficiency.html#concurrency -tcl.
How can I avoid emails with Return-path <>? Thanks in advanced.
Enrique Rodr�guez L�zaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How can I avoid emails with Return-path <>? If you mean "How can I make my server reject mails with an empty (null) envelope sender with qmail?", the answer is "Don't". Stock qmail won't even let you try. The reason for this is that bounce messages and other automated mail are required to be sent with that envelope sender, and SMTP servers are required (by the RFCs) to accept them. To do otherwise is to reduce the reliability of the mail system -- you'll never find out if some of your mail was undeliverable. 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> "FA" == Flavio Alberto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: FA> FormMailpl http://www.worldwidemart.com/scripts/ work it FA> qmail? Be advised that formmail.pl has a giant security hole in it, allowing spammers to abuse your script and use it as an anonymous relay. Another perl script with better security and similar functionality is "mailer", which can be found here: http://www.geekgiveaways.com/code/ Lisa -- As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. -- Dick Cavett
My apologies to Sam and the list. I had forgotten that I have one domain still using vpopmail, and it is this domain in which I am currently using maildrop. Sorry for the misdirection, /pg -- Peter Green : Architekton Internet Services, LLC : [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- I've run DOOM more in the last few days than I have the last few months. I just love debugging ;-) (Linus Torvalds)
qmaild 570 1 0 09:00 ? 00:00:00 tcpserver -c 100 -u 101 -g 102 0so qmail is apparantly running.qmail-showctl looks good. my rcpthosts contains the name of the mailserver, the name of the domain.virtualdomains looks good.. for both users i have defined right now, it has the name of the domain and the username (domainname:username)./etc/qmail/users/assign formatted according to the man page.qmail-qstat reveals:messages in queue: 24
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 14It would help me greatly if anyone could help me understand how all these things fit together. I know supervise is a replacement for just putting something in rc.d or whatever, and i think i have that running right, since qmail is running. What I'm hoping to accomplish is the delivery of the email into the correct user's maildir. Confused as to how vmailmgr fits into this, i've even made the .qmail file in the user's directory simply point at the maildir directory, instead of using the | to send the mail to the vmailmgr.Could someone get me started?Thanks..Carl Danowski
qmaild 570 1 0 09:00 ? 00:00:00 tcpserver -c 100 -u 101 -g 102 0so qmail is apparantly running.qmail-showctl looks good. my rcpthosts contains the name of the mailserver, the name of the domain.virtualdomains looks good.. for both users i have defined right now, it has the name of the domain and the username (domainname:username)./etc/qmail/users/assign formatted according to the man page.qmail-qstat reveals:messages in queue: 24
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 14It would help me greatly if anyone could help me understand how all these things fit together. I know supervise is a replacement for just putting something in rc.d or whatever, and i think i have that running right, since qmail is running. What I'm hoping to accomplish is the delivery of the email into the correct user's maildir. Confused as to how vmailmgr fits into this, i've even made the .qmail file in the user's directory simply point at the maildir directory, instead of using the | to send the mail to the vmailmgr.Could someone get me started?Thanks..Carl Danowski
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, May 04, 2001 18:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > I don't normally ask for help, but this thing (qmail and associated programs) is driving me nuts. > > Environment and background: > > O/S: RedHat 7.0 > > compiled and installed these packages: > > qmail-1.03+patches-18 > supervise-scripts-3.3-1 > ucspi-tcp-0.88-1 > ucspi-unix-0.34-1 > vmailmgr-0.96.9-2 > vmailmgr-courier-imap-0.96.9-2 > vmailmgr-daemon-0.96.9-2 Ok looks good so far > While I thought I've configured everything according to the million man files...mail comes in, gets put into a directory under /var/qmail/queue > > ps -ef | grep qmail reveals: > > root 198 194 0 08:59 ? 00:00:00 supervise qmail > qmaild 570 1 0 09:00 ? 00:00:00 tcpserver -c 100 -u 101 -g 102 0 > > so qmail is apparantly running. Actually this is only smtpd thats running it should look something like this 160 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail 26314 ? S 0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog t s99999 n100 /var/log/qmail/ 26424 ? S 0:00 unixserver -U -q /tmp/.qmail-qread /usr/bin/qmail-qre 26493 ? S 0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog t s99999 n100 /var/log/qmail/ 2393 ? S 0:00 unixserver -U -q /tmp/.qmail-qstat /usr/bin/qmail-qst 11135 ? S 0:03 /usr/local/bin/multilog t s99999 n100 /var/log/qmail/ 11144 ? S 0:06 qmail-send 11168 ? S 0:01 qmail-lspawn ./Maildir/ 11169 ? S 0:00 qmail-rspawn 11170 ? S 0:01 qmail-clean "ls -l /service" should give you something like this lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 15 19:21 pop3d -> /var/qmail/service/pop3d lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 15 19:18 qmail -> /var/qmail/service/qmail lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 15 19:18 qread -> /var/qmail/service/qread lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 15 19:18 qstat -> /var/qmail/service/qstat lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 15 20:55 smtpd -> /var/qmail/service/smtpd try "svc-start qmail" if the qmail link exists in /service if the link does not exists add it and start qmail > qmail-showctl looks good. my rcpthosts contains the name of the mailserver, the name of the domain. > virtualdomains looks good.. for both users i have defined right now, it has the name of the domain and the username (domainname:username). > /etc/qmail/users/assign formatted according to the man page. > qmail-qstat reveals: > > messages in queue: 24 > messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 14 The reason why the mails stick in the queue is because qmail-send is not running start the supervised qmail process and all the mails will be deliverd in seconds. > It would help me greatly if anyone could help me understand how all these things fit together. I know supervise is a replacement for just putting something in rc.d or whatever, and i think i have that running right, since qmail is running. What I'm hoping to accomplish is the delivery of the email into the correct user's maildir. Confused as to how vmailmgr fits into this, i've even made the .qmail file in the user's directory simply point at the maildir directory, instead of using the | to send the mail to the vmailmgr. > > Could someone get me started? > > Thanks.. > > Carl Danowski > > << File: ATT00071.html >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBOvbhfv4IaGw3x6aJEQIdAQCg9IoXebKcuNuVuLKjNZlZe/zsXCAAoI+H jpzDDXUE/TTGrJWhhDrnjsgy =cxfc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:36:54PM -0400, Carl J. Danowski wrote: > Why is someone sending this message again? I was successfully helped. Something misconfigured at delanet.com Greetz, Peter.
On Mon, 07 May 2001 14:36:54 EDT, "Carl J. Danowski" wrote: > Why is someone sending this message again? I was successfully helped. Someone else finally noticed... If you check the archives, I brought this up months ago and no one seemed to notice the duplicates. mail.delanet.com has been doing this for quite some time now. I finally just wrote a procmail recipe for all of mail.delanet.com on another account that I post from because I was tired of seeing the duplicates. :-) Andy
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:36:54PM -0400, Carl J. Danowski wrote: > Why is someone sending this message again? I was successfully helped. mail.delanet.con reinjects them - broken fetchmail config? -- * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de * * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany * Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:14:52AM +0300, Peter Peltonen wrote: > But you are absolutely sure that it won't? If so, great, no problemo then. You can't be sure about anything. There are broken DNS libraries out there, paranoid configured tcpservers/inetds/... The funny thing about this whole thread is that the source of all problems is probably a lousy provider, that doesn't care for PTR delegations. So why don't you get yourself a caring one? \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen asleep yet.
I shall make no further comment.
From: Darcy Buskermolen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Is there a way to get qmail to use the IP that mail is recived in on to > resend it back out ? > > ie My qmail box has a few IP applied to it. > > 10.1.1.1 > 10.1.1.2 > 10.1.1.3 > > I'd like mail comming in via smtp on 10.1.1.2 to go out useing 10.1.1.2 as > the src address. Currently it defaults to 10.1.1.1 > > IS there a way to do this ? Hi Darcy, I think you should look into the NAT (network Address Translation) possibilities that are offered by the underlying operating system, rather than trying to change the behavior of network applications like qmail. I can't speak for all UNICES, but on Linux 2.4, you could make use of the netfilter/iptables architecture to do some source address NAT in the netfilter postrouting table based on the source and/or destination destination TCP/UDP ports. It might also be possible to do it on a 2.2 kernel with advanced routing support and iproute2. I'd be glad to hear from *BSD people on the list if ipfilter offers similar functionality (possibly in private email). Regards, Filip
Title: New Page 1���𤣦n�ɭn�n�n�W���z�]!
�@
Howdy Question 1) I'm not sure I understand the values of $EXT correctly. Will someone confirm/deny my assesment? There is a file ~alias/.qmail-mail:aaa:com-default. When in the file, the variables would be: $EXT: mail.aaa.com-default $EXT2: mail.aaa.com $EXT3: default Question 2) Let's say in control/virtualdomains I put: mail.aaa.com:alias-mail.aaa.com This will be delivered to the ~alias/.qmail-mail:aaa:com-default file (if it's the only matching file). But when I'm in that file, how do I know what username is being sent to? Could I put something like: mail.aaa.com:alias-mail.aaa.com-$USER in virtualdomains and thus catch it with $EXTs in the .qmail (and thus forward it to the right place)? Thank you all for your help, Ben
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:10:22PM -0600, Benjamin Collar wrote: > Let's say in control/virtualdomains I put: > > mail.aaa.com:alias-mail.aaa.com > > This will be delivered to the ~alias/.qmail-mail:aaa:com-default file (if > it's the only matching file). But when I'm in that file, how do I know > what username is being sent to? If by "username" you mean "local part of the address [EMAIL PROTECTED]," it's in $DEFAULT. Chris
On Mon, 7 May 2001, Chris Johnson wrote: > If by "username" you mean "local part of the address [EMAIL PROTECTED]," > it's in $DEFAULT. Do you mean $DEFAULT would equal "whatever" in "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? And this variable is available in the .qmail- file? Sorry I'm not up on the terminology :) Thanks Ben > > Chris >
Doh, that was a complete misunderstanding of what you were saying on my part. Sorry! Allright, so let's say I want to pass the local part of the address to the .qmail file from virtualdomains, i.e.: control/virtualdomains: mail.aaa.com:alias-mail.aaa.com-$LOCAL ~alias/.qmail-mail:aaa:com-default: # could use $DEFAULT which refers to the $LOCAL of virtualdomains. Would $LOCAL in virtualdomains be the variable to use? Thanks again Ben On Mon, 7 May 2001, Benjamin Collar wrote: > On Mon, 7 May 2001, Chris Johnson wrote: > > > If by "username" you mean "local part of the address [EMAIL PROTECTED]," > > it's in $DEFAULT. > Do you mean $DEFAULT would equal "whatever" in > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? And this variable is available in the .qmail- > file? > > Sorry I'm not up on the terminology :) > > Thanks > Ben > > > > > > Chris > > > >
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:46:13PM -0600, Benjamin Collar wrote: > On Mon, 7 May 2001, Chris Johnson wrote: > > > If by "username" you mean "local part of the address > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]," it's in $DEFAULT. > > Do you mean $DEFAULT would equal "whatever" in "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? And > this variable is available in the .qmail- file? Yep. From the qmail-command man page: > DEFAULT is the portion corresponding to the default part of the .qmail-... > file name; DEFAULT is not set if the file name does not end with default. Chris
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > Doh, that was a complete misunderstanding of what you were saying on my > part. Sorry! > > Allright, so let's say I want to pass the local part of the address to the > .qmail file from virtualdomains, i.e.: > > control/virtualdomains: > mail.aaa.com:alias-mail.aaa.com-$LOCAL > ~alias/.qmail-mail:aaa:com-default: > # could use $DEFAULT which refers to the $LOCAL of virtualdomains. > > Would $LOCAL in virtualdomains be the variable to use? You wouldn't use it in the virtualdomains file, but in the .qmail file. I tend not to use ~alias, but users/assign - but it is the same anyway... e.g. Say I receive mail for foobar.co.uk and want to map every username to the equivalent foobar.com address for delivery, e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc cd /var/qmail echo "foobar.co.uk:foobar-co-uk" >> control/virtualdomains echo "foobar.co.uk" >> control/rcpthosts Put: +foobar-co-uk:popuser:888:888:/var/qmail/popboxes/foobar-co-uk::: into users/assign (remember this file should have a "." on the last line and you have to run qmail-newu to create the cdb) Then in /var/qmail/popboxes/foobar-co-uk, create .qmail-default with: Each of these does the same thing: | if U=`echo "$LOCAL"@foobar.com | sed 's/foobar-co-uk-//'`; then forward "$U"; fi (this should all be on one line) Here $LOCAL is "foobar-co-uk-user1", so we need sed to get rid of the "virtual user". If you use alias, you'll probably have to remove something else. Or | forward "$EXT2"@foobar.com Or | if U=`echo "$EXT2"@foobar.com`; then forward "$U"; fi Hope this helps, Paul Gregg.
You will likely need to have separate installations of vpopmail to accomplish this, and you may need to edit the source manually to allow this functionality. On the brighter side, you may not need to have different "parent" users since you are supposed to be able to set quotas on a per account basis in vpopmail. -K > From: Sebastien VIEILLARD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 12:26:27 +0200 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Multiple user with vpopmail > > I'am an isp and i want to use vpopmail for any site installed on server. > > The problem is that any site have one specific unix user. and of course, any > user have a limited quota. > > But vpopmail create mailbox for only one unix user (vpopmail user by default). > Is anybody know, what i can do to have each mailbox > ~vpopmail/domains/domainename, under specific unix user. > > thx > >
Hi, I know this might be a bit off-topic, and I apologize, but I don't know where else to turn to. I have a small mailing list, 260 members. I have sent out one email to the list with a attachment of 638kb. I have plenty of bandwidth, I also have 768MB Ram on the system, my qmail concurrencyremote was set to 255. Only the first 150 of list members received the email. I checked the logs, and it shows that qmail sent out only 150 emails. I got no errors, no nothing, and the remaining 110 members didn't receive anything... So my question is, what could it be? I am really lost here... So I am grabbing at straws, could it be that my databytes was set to 100000000 and 150 emails with 638kb attachment come out to ~97996800? I am running ezmlml-0.53+ezmlm-idx-0.40 and qmail1.03 Can anyone give me some pointers as to what it might be or where I should look for answers? Thanks! __ Kris.
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 06:09:14PM -0400, Kris von Mach wrote: > I have a small mailing list, 260 members. I have sent out one email to the > list with a attachment of 638kb. I have plenty of bandwidth, I also have > 768MB Ram on the system, my qmail concurrencyremote was set to 255. Only the > first 150 of list members received the email. I checked the logs, and it > shows that qmail sent out only 150 emails. I got no errors, no nothing, and > the remaining 110 members didn't receive anything... > > So my question is, what could it be? I am really lost here... So I am > grabbing at straws, could it be that my databytes was set to 100000000 and > 150 emails with 638kb attachment come out to ~97996800? No. databytes applies only to incoming SMTP mail. > I am running ezmlml-0.53+ezmlm-idx-0.40 and qmail1.03 > > Can anyone give me some pointers as to what it might be or where I should > look for answers? You should look in the logs. You'll find there the reasons for the deferrals. (I know you said that there's nothing in the logs that indicates a problem, but if you sent mail to 260 recipients and it was delivered to only 150 of them, there will be something in the logs telling you why.) Chris
>No. databytes applies only to incoming SMTP mail. That is what I thought too. >You should look in the logs. You'll find there the reasons for the deferral= >s. >(I know you said that there's nothing in the logs that indicates a problem,= > but >if you sent mail to 260 recipients and it was delivered to only 150 of them, >there will be something in the logs telling you why.) > >Chris I did check the logs. According to the logs, there were only 150 emails sent. There were no deferrals. It's like as if the list was made out of only 150 members. I have tripple checked and the list does in fact have 260 members. When it started the delivery of 150th email, this is what I had in my log, @400000003af6a3f40f5aafdc status: local 1/10 remote 153/255, the three other deliveries were of just some other email sends. And then after this, no errors and no deferrals, just delivery success messages for the first 150 emails. Also, the 150emails that were sent are the first 150 emails from the 260... It's actually in order. I have dumped the list from the mailing list, and created another list with just the remaining 110, and sent out my email that way, which of course went out without a problem. Maillog shows just the first 150 emails sent out, also no errors. I also checked messages log and dmesg log, nothing in there either... __ Kris.
Hello all!! I have the following situation: I�m using qmail for all incoming and outgoing messages in a internet domain - let�s say domain.com. I need to setup qmail to send a copy of every message sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] automatically. I cannot be sure that [EMAIL PROTECTED] will copy [EMAIL PROTECTED] for every message he/she sent. Can Qmail handle such feature with no additional compilation? Do I need any additional package compatible with it? Regards.
Hi Guys; I am getting annoying emails comming from [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this guys change the address the next week to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] I really want domain.com blocked!! and badmailfrom only handles individual emails how can I block *@domain.com. RBL is solution but some of this guys are not on the list (yet). Thank! Dan
man qmail-smtpd: A line in badmailfrom may be of the form @host, meaning every address at host. -= Brad Schuetz =-==-= [EMAIL PROTECTED] =- -----Original Message----- From: admin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 7:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Badmailfrom for entire domain/sub_domain Hi Guys; I am getting annoying emails comming from [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this guys change the address the next week to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] I really want domain.com blocked!! and badmailfrom only handles individual emails how can I block *@domain.com. RBL is solution but some of this guys are not on the list (yet). Thank! Dan
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 07:01:29PM -0700, admin wrote: > Hi Guys; > > I am getting annoying emails comming from [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this guys > change the address the next week to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] I really want > domain.com blocked!! and badmailfrom only handles individual emails how can > I block *@domain.com. But badmailfrom can block @domain.com, check the qmail-smtpd man page. By the way, if you have problems with @domain.com why not mail the address listed in whois for domain.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED], and file an abuse complaint. Or if the envelope sender is forged, track down the abuse desk by IP and pester them, perhaps giving [EMAIL PROTECTED] a heads up.
Unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] #t 19:01 07/05/2001 -0700, admin wrote: >Hi Guys; > >I am getting annoying emails comming from [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this guys >change the address the next week to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] I really want >domain.com blocked!! and badmailfrom only handles individual emails how can >I block *@domain.com. RBL is solution but some of this guys are not on the >list (yet). > > >Thank! > > >Dan
Hi, Step 1) 'man qmail-pw2u' Step 2) 'man qmail-newu' Step 3) mail to the list if no success Have a good read at the good-enough qmail docs. Csaba Original Message dated 2001.05.08, 4:33:41 Author: "Yanurul Anwar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Re: convert user: hi all recently i convert mail server into qmail. we used a new comp and instaled it. i'm trying to convert user from /etc/passwd from the old server (about 1500 user) into qmail user in the new server (including the password). is there any easy way to do this? rather than typing it one by one? any manual? __________ This message went through virus scan at Trend Ltd. which stated the message was clean of viri appeared before 2001.05.02.
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:33:41AM +0700, Yanurul Anwar wrote: > hi all > > recently i convert mail server into qmail. we used a new comp and instaled it. i'm >trying to convert user from /etc/passwd from the old server (about 1500 user) into >qmail user in the new server (including the password). > is there any easy way to do this? rather than typing it one by one? > any manual? man qmail-pw2u. It's that easy. > HTH, -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Hi all, I host a lot of virtual domains but the Outlook cannot send after receive. I was looking for some way to chenge this setting in the outlook but until now no luck. Is there a posibility to enable smtp authentication through the vmailmgr? I have installed the version of qmail-smtpd.c with authorization but this doesnt work for virtual users. Any help will be appreciated. -- Evgeni Dobrev Network and System Administrator -------------------------------- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel.: +49 9126 2611-66 Fax:-99 eCompetenceCenter Medienagentur und Beratungsgesellschaft mbH Ambazac-Strasse 4, D-90542 Eckental Deutschland
Am 08.05.2001 um 10:24:54 schrieb Evgeni Dobrev: Hi Evgeni, > Is there a posibility to enable smtp authentication through the vmailmgr? not with the standard setup. The problem is that vmailmgr stores the user-database in different home-directories, so you must have root-access to read them. Martin Gerardi offered the following solution on the vmailmgr list: use Eric M. Johnston's smtp-auth patch and set checkvpw suid-root. I have now idea how secure this is, even Bruce did not make any promises. Any comments if this is good or bad are highly appreciated. bye /ch
Hi, quite a while ago I read about a script that checks a maildir and deletes any mail that is older than a specified time (e.g. 30 days). I can not find it anymore :-(. any hints tia /ch
Hi All, For which way could I know if daemontools is installed already? What supervise qmail-send, supervise qmail-smtpd and supervise qmail-pop3d are used for? Thanks, Pablo _______________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger: Comunicaci�n instant�nea gratis con tus amigos - http://messenger.yahoo.es
