qmail Digest 8 Jul 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1419
Topics (messages 65687 through 65714):
I get timeouts
65687 by: Moritz Schmitt
65688 by: Lukas Beeler
65689 by: Ahmad Ridha
65690 by: Moritz Schmitt
65691 by: Lukas Beeler
65692 by: Arjen van Drie
65693 by: Moritz Schmitt
65694 by: Moritz Schmitt
65695 by: Ahmad Ridha
65697 by: Lukas Beeler
65698 by: Flavio Curti
65699 by: Charles Cazabon
65700 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
65702 by: Arjen van Drie
Re: [Announce] oSpam version 0.02
65696 by: MarkD
qmail-queue-patch and qmail-scanner
65701 by: Andreas Grip
65707 by: Charles Cazabon
65708 by: Lukas Beeler
65709 by: Charles Cazabon
65710 by: Andreas Grip
65711 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
65712 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: I get (no more) timeouts
65703 by: Moritz Schmitt
storing email messages
65704 by: David Balatero
65705 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
65706 by: Lukas Beeler
Re: Solaris vs. Linux vs. FreeBSD
65713 by: Piotr Kasztelowicz
Re: queue-repair v.0.8.3
65714 by: Charles Cazabon
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My Dear All-Knowing Administrators,
there is another problem which I failed to solve. Suprise, surprise... After
I installed qmail with the help of you guys and the [Life with qmail]
documention qmail is running. But not as I wish it to run. If I pipe a
message to qmail-inject it delivers fast and without any problems but if I
connect to the server or from the server to localhost it's responding but I
get a timeout. So the port is open but qmail is not coming up.
I know it's little information I give but I really don't know what to say
more. So if you guys could think about it and give me a hint or directions
it would be greatly appreciated.
Enjoy your weekends,
-Moritz
what do the logs say ?
whats your /service/qmail-smtp/run script ?
what does ps aux | grep qmail say ?
what does netstat -lp say ?
At 16:31 07.07.2001 +0200, you wrote:
>My Dear All-Knowing Administrators,
>
>there is another problem which I failed to solve. Suprise, surprise... After
>I installed qmail with the help of you guys and the [Life with qmail]
>documention qmail is running. But not as I wish it to run. If I pipe a
>message to qmail-inject it delivers fast and without any problems but if I
>connect to the server or from the server to localhost it's responding but I
>get a timeout. So the port is open but qmail is not coming up.
>I know it's little information I give but I really don't know what to say
>more. So if you guys could think about it and give me a hint or directions
>it would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Enjoy your weekends,
>-Moritz
--
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Moritz Schmitt writes:
>After
> I installed qmail with the help of you guys and the [Life with qmail]
> documention qmail is running. But not as I wish it to run. If I pipe a
> message to qmail-inject it delivers fast and without any problems but if I
> connect to the server or from the server to localhost it's responding but > I get a
>timeout. So the port is open but qmail is not coming up.
Have you tried using -R, -H, and -l 0 options for tcpserver? Which version
of LWQ did you use? CMIIW, those options are used in the latest LWQ since
timeout problem when connecting to SMTP and/or POP3 is FAQ#1 in this list.
Regards,
Ahmad Ridha
Hi Lukas,
/var/log/maillog:
=================
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.297162 new msg 29
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.297410 info msg 29: bytes 228 from
<admin@w
s1.waagen-schmitt.de> qp 245 uid 1001
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.300407 starting delivery 1: msg 29 to
local
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.300561 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.370908 delivery 1: success: did_0+0+1/
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.372435 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Jul 7 15:34:32 ws1 qmail: 994512872.394171 end msg 29
Jul 7 15:54:23 ws1 qmail: 994514063.631888 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Jul 7 15:59:28 ws1 qmail: 994514368.613996 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Jul 7 16:24:28 ws1 qmail: 994515868.758520 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Jul 7 16:39:23 ws1 qmail: 994516763.655740 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
There was one local delivery and that worked just fine (As you probably
already noticed by reading the logfile).
/var/log/qmail/smtpd/current:
=============================
@400000003b470951237673fc tcpserver: status: 0/0
@400000003b470d051a494944 tcpserver: status: 0/0
@400000003b470dc910d0310c tcpserver: status: 0/0
@400000003b4714991e312234 tcpserver: status: 0/0
@400000003b4715ca1f41f5f4 tcpserver: status: 0/0
@400000003b471ba622749c2c tcpserver: status: 0/0
@400000003b471f251cc5a76c tcpserver: status: 0/0
I don't understand it but it doesn't look too evil, doesn't it?
/service/qmail-smtpd/run:
=========================
#!/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 -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
-u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
ps aux | grep qmail:
====================
root 235 0.0 0.1 1048 608 p0 S+ 5:17PM 0:00.00 grep qmail
root 158 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01 supervise
qmail-s
root 160 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 supervise
qmail-s
qmails 164 0.0 0.0 908 468 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.02 qmail-send
qmaill 167 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01
/usr/local/bin/mu
qmaill 170 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01
/usr/local/bin/mu
qmaill 172 0.0 0.0 872 500 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 splogger qmail
root 173 0.0 0.0 872 396 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-lspawn
|pre
qmailr 174 0.0 0.0 872 408 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-rspawn
qmailq 175 0.0 0.0 860 428 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-clean
netstat -lp:
============
netstat: option requires an argument -- p
Ok, I assume it's netstat -lp tcp:
==================================
tcp:
405 packets sent
373 data packets (12488 bytes)
0 data packets (0 bytes) retransmitted
0 resends initiated by MTU discovery
32 ack-only packets (27 delayed)
0 URG only packets
0 window probe packets
0 window update packets
0 control packets
608 packets received
372 acks (for 12489 bytes)
2 duplicate acks
0 acks for unsent data
349 packets (471 bytes) received in-sequence
0 completely duplicate packets (0 bytes)
0 old duplicate packets
0 packets with some dup. data (0 bytes duped)
0 out-of-order packets (0 bytes)
0 packets (0 bytes) of data after window
0 window probes
0 window update packets
0 packets received after close
0 discarded for bad checksums
0 discarded for bad header offset fields
0 discarded because packet too short
0 connection requests
3 connection accepts
0 bad connection attempts
0 listen queue overflows
3 connections established (including accepts)
0 connections closed (including 0 drops)
0 connections updated cached RTT on close
0 connections updated cached RTT variance on close
0 connections updated cached ssthresh on close
0 embryonic connections dropped
372 segments updated rtt (of 373 attempts)
0 retransmit timeouts
0 connections dropped by rexmit timeout
0 persist timeouts
0 connections dropped by persist timeout
0 keepalive timeouts
0 keepalive probes sent
0 connections dropped by keepalive
0 correct ACK header predictions
231 correct data packet header predictions
Thanks so far,
-Moritz
-----Original Message-----
From: Lukas Beeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 4:36 PM
To: Moritz Schmitt
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I get timeouts
what do the logs say ?
whats your /service/qmail-smtp/run script ?
what does ps aux | grep qmail say ?
what does netstat -lp say ?
At 16:31 07.07.2001 +0200, you wrote:
>My Dear All-Knowing Administrators,
>
>there is another problem which I failed to solve. Suprise, surprise...
After
>I installed qmail with the help of you guys and the [Life with qmail]
>documention qmail is running. But not as I wish it to run. If I pipe a
>message to qmail-inject it delivers fast and without any problems but if I
>connect to the server or from the server to localhost it's responding but I
>get a timeout. So the port is open but qmail is not coming up.
>I know it's little information I give but I really don't know what to say
>more. So if you guys could think about it and give me a hint or directions
>it would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Enjoy your weekends,
>-Moritz
--
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hmm seems difficult
At 17:20 07.07.2001 +0200, you wrote:
>Hi Lukas,
>
>/var/log/maillog:
>=================
>
>
>There was one local delivery and that worked just fine (As you probably
>already noticed by reading the logfile).
yes of course..
>/var/log/qmail/smtpd/current:
>=============================
>
>I don't understand it but it doesn't look too evil, doesn't it?
nothing happens... i think its the run file..
>/service/qmail-smtpd/run:
>=========================
>
>#!/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 -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
>-u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
does /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming exist, and is there a
/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb ?
did you try to re - paste the run file
>ps aux | grep qmail:
>====================
>
hmm here it looks something different:
root 17686 0.0 0.0 1192 56 ? S Jun18 0:00 supervise
qmail-s
root 17688 0.0 0.0 1192 56 ? S Jun18 0:01 supervise
qmail-s
root 4876 0.0 0.0 1192 56 ? S Jun20 0:03 supervise
qmail-p
qmaill 14760 0.0 0.1 1208 220 ? S Jul01 0:00
/usr/bin/logger -
qmaill 14761 0.0 0.1 1208 220 ? S Jul01 0:01
/usr/bin/logger -
qmaill 14762 0.0 0.1 1208 220 ? S Jul01 0:02
/usr/bin/logger -
qmails 29723 0.0 0.0 1248 152 ? S Jul01 0:01 qmail-send
root 29725 0.0 0.0 1204 68 ? S Jul01 0:00 qmail-lspawn
./Ma
qmailr 29726 0.0 0.0 1204 112 ? S Jul01 0:00 qmail-rspawn
qmailq 29727 0.0 0.0 1196 92 ? S Jul01 0:00 qmail-clean
qmaild 29730 0.0 0.0 1760 68 ? S Jul01 0:00
/usr/local/bin/tc
root 28178 0.0 0.2 1320 516 pts/2 S 18:00 0:00 grep qmail
i think its the tcpserver process missing... running under user "qmaild"
>netstat -lp:
>============
>
i did really mean netstat -lp
net-tools 1.60
netstat 1.42 (2001-04-15)
i get an output like this:
[pasted only the relevant line]
tcp 0 0
*:smtp *:* LISTEN 29730/tcpserver
Iam not really sure where the problem is, but i think it's the run file of
qmail-smtpd
iam using the following file:
--- /service/qmail-smtpd/run ---
#!/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 -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
-u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp \
/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rblackholes.mail-abuse.org -r
'relays.mail-abuse.org:Open Relay - see ' \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
--- END ---
and this works perfectly
did you try to run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd on the console ?
did you try to run qmail-smtpd under inetd ?
[ just for testing purposes... daemontools with it run files confuses me..
inetd isn't as good as daemontools, but its a lot less complex... just to
exclude errors ]
Hope i helped so far
--
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:20:01PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote:
>
>ps aux | grep qmail:
>====================
>
>root 235 0.0 0.1 1048 608 p0 S+ 5:17PM 0:00.00 grep qmail
>root 158 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01 supervise
>qmail-s
>root 160 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 supervise
>qmail-s
>qmails 164 0.0 0.0 908 468 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.02 qmail-send
>qmaill 167 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01
>/usr/local/bin/mu
>qmaill 170 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01
>/usr/local/bin/mu
>qmaill 172 0.0 0.0 872 500 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 splogger qmail
>root 173 0.0 0.0 872 396 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-lspawn
>|pre
>qmailr 174 0.0 0.0 872 408 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-rspawn
>qmailq 175 0.0 0.0 860 428 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-clean
>
Give us a
ps auwwwwwwwx | grep qmail
i also had a similar problem; turned out to be spaces after the '\'
EndOfLine characters in my startup scripts...
--
Grtz,
Arjen.
Hi Ahmad,
yes, I tried all of "your" three options but it didn't work out. I'm using
LWQ version 2001-06-07 and it suggests -R, -v and -l 0. But there must be an
other problem...
Thanks anyways,
-Moritz
-----Original Message-----
From: Ahmad Ridha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 5:06 PM
To: qmail
Subject: Re: I get timeouts
Moritz Schmitt writes:
>After
> I installed qmail with the help of you guys and the [Life with qmail]
> documention qmail is running. But not as I wish it to run. If I pipe a
> message to qmail-inject it delivers fast and without any problems but if I
> connect to the server or from the server to localhost it's responding but
> I get a timeout. So the port is open but qmail is not coming up.
Have you tried using -R, -H, and -l 0 options for tcpserver? Which version
of LWQ did you use? CMIIW, those options are used in the latest LWQ since
timeout problem when connecting to SMTP and/or POP3 is FAQ#1 in this list.
Regards,
Ahmad Ridha
Hey Arjen,
here's what you asked for:
root 158 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.01 supervise
qmail-se
nd
root 160 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.01 supervise
qmail-sm
tpd
qmails 164 0.0 0.0 908 468 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.02 qmail-send
qmaill 167 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.01
/usr/local/bin/mul
tilog t /var/log/qmail
root 168 0.0 0.1 892 544 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00
/usr/local/bin/tcp
server -v -H -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c cat
/var/qmail/control/concurrencyi
ncoming -u id -u qmaild -g id -g qmaild 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
qmaill 170 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00
/usr/local/bin/mul
tilog t /var/log/qmail/smtpd
qmaill 177 0.0 0.0 872 500 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00 splogger qmail
root 178 0.0 0.0 872 396 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00 qmail-lspawn
|prel
ine procmail
qmailr 179 0.0 0.0 872 408 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00 qmail-rspawn
qmailq 180 0.0 0.0 860 428 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00 qmail-clean
-Moritz
-----Original Message-----
From: Arjen van Drie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 6:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I get timeouts
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:20:01PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote:
>
>ps aux | grep qmail:
>====================
>
>root 235 0.0 0.1 1048 608 p0 S+ 5:17PM 0:00.00 grep qmail
>root 158 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01 supervise
>qmail-s
>root 160 0.0 0.0 852 440 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 supervise
>qmail-s
>qmails 164 0.0 0.0 908 468 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.02 qmail-send
>qmaill 167 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01
>/usr/local/bin/mu
>qmaill 170 0.0 0.0 860 376 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.01
>/usr/local/bin/mu
>qmaill 172 0.0 0.0 872 500 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 splogger
qmail
>root 173 0.0 0.0 872 396 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-lspawn
>|pre
>qmailr 174 0.0 0.0 872 408 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-rspawn
>qmailq 175 0.0 0.0 860 428 con- I 4:39PM 0:00.00 qmail-clean
>
Give us a
ps auwwwwwwwx | grep qmail
i also had a similar problem; turned out to be spaces after the '\'
EndOfLine characters in my startup scripts...
--
Grtz,
Arjen.
Moritz Schmitt writes:
> /service/qmail-smtpd/run:
> =========================
>
> #!/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 -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
> -u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
>
CMIIW, but those ' (single quotes) should be ` (backquotes), right?
Regards,
Ahmad Ridha
At 18:37 07.07.2001 +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote:
>root 168 0.0 0.1 892 544 con- I 5:55PM 0:00.00
>/usr/local/bin/tcp
>server -v -H -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c cat
>/var/qmail/control/concurrencyi
>ncoming -u id -u qmaild -g id -g qmaild 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
why is it running as root ???
it looks like the id's arent correctly inserted...
try to repaste the run script
did you recognize the difference between ' and ` ?
--
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hi
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:20:01PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote:
> @400000003b470951237673fc tcpserver: status: 0/0
> @400000003b470d051a494944 tcpserver: status: 0/0
> @400000003b470dc910d0310c tcpserver: status: 0/0
> I don't understand it but it doesn't look too evil, doesn't it?
afaik it does.. it says zero of max. zero connections. so you told
tcpserver to server a maximum of 0 connections...
> MAXSMTPD='cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming'
whats in that file? (you should prolly have something like 20 in there)
are the ' backticks (`)?
greetz & hope it helps
Flavio
--
http://no-way.org/~fcu/
Moritz Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MAXSMTPD='cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming'
That's your problem. Fix this script so it matches "Life with qmail".
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Moritz Schmitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> LWQ version 2001-06-07 and it suggests -R, -v and -l 0. But there must be an
You forgot -H.
Frank
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 06:47:22PM +0200, Lukas Beeler wrote:
>did you recognize the difference between ' and ` ?
This seems to be (part of) the problem.
You put a tic (') where it should be a
backtic (`).
--
Grtz,
Arjen.
Looks quite nice.
A question: How do you deal with mailing lists?
Suggestions:
1: You might want to have wildcard entries used with the isinfile(),
that way you can add a whole domain, eg, *@list.cr.yp.to
2: You might want to introduce a command such that a mail can be piped
into it and have that sender address included in the accept list. In
mutt it would then be as easy as cruising thru your existing mailboxes
and running "| ospam_accept" to preload your accept list. A bit of
shell twiddle would get your aliases in their too!
Sure the file format is trivial and a program may seem superfluous,
but what if you change to a DB file later on? You don't want to be
tied down by exposing the file format now.
3: There are a number of hard-coded @8403.ch address in the code, you
might want to either externalize these addresses or indeed externalize
the complete messages to be in separate text files.
4: A minor note. The perl code uses a lot of system() calls when
unlink() and rename() would be safer.
On a more general note, I wonder whether embedding locking within each
and every program that is run via .qmail makes sense? Perhaps better
would be a simple program that single-threads the executation of a
.qmail entry. Eg:
| singlethread ospam whatever
Oh look, BSD has the lockf command. If this is widespread (or if a
triv perl implementation were available) you could remove all that
locking code and simple have:
| lockf -t 20 ospam/ospam.log ospam ospam my@address
Please don't take these as a criticism, I'm glad people are making
tools like this available.
Regards.
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:13:19AM +0200, Olivier M. allegedly wrote:
> Bonjour!
>
> A new and much better version of oSpam is available : oSpam 0.2.
> The news are:
>
> * automatic creation of ospam directory and files
> on first call
> * confirmation mail to sender on success
> * fixed sender email addresses for confirmation mails
> * updated the docs
>
> * Project homepage: http://omail.omnis.ch/ospam/
>
> * Demo: send a mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (test account, emails
> and registred addresses will be trashed every week)
>
> * Description:
>
> oSpam - An ultimative Perl & qmail based anti-Spam System
> =====
>
> It's a package inspired from the mapSoN tool, and other
> tools used for example by the php-project mail server.
>
> 2 main features:
>
> 1) use it for your usenet postings: as From: address, you get
> an "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" address, which will be
> valid one week. After this delay, the mails sent to this
> address will be put in "quarantaine", waiting for a confirmation
> from the author, which will never happen if it is a spam.
>
> 2) use it as your main email address: put all your friends
> addresses in your accepted.txt file. If somebody which isn't
> in the list send you a mail, he will get a small and unique
> confirmation request, and then the mail(s) will be delivered
> transparentely.
>
> Every operation is logged: look at the ~/maildir/ospam/ospam.log file
> and at the source code to understand how the whole is working.
>
>
> * Download: (6.3 KByte big :-)
> http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/omail/ospam-0.2.tar.gz
>
> * Mailing List:
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/omail-ospam
>
> * Other URL's: (cvs, releases, etc)
> http://freshmeat.net/projects/ospam/
>
>
> This is "just" version 0.2, so even if it is already working fine,
> there is still much to be done (check the todo list).
> Comments are welcome!
>
> Regards,
> Olivier
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
> qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch
Hi
I'm using the qmail-queue-patch together with the qmail-scanner and I'm
also thinking about to put some spamfilters before or after the
antivirus scanning.
Then qmail receives a mail through smtp it wait with the response to the
sender that the mail was completly delivered until it has scanned the
mail for virus. If the attachments are big it can take a long time
before it release the connection. And if I add some filters that examine
the mail for unwanted words etc it will take much more time.
Is it ok to let the sending smtp server to wait so long time before it
has processed the mail? For me it sounds like a bad idea to let them
wait. So I'm thinking about to create another queue that the mail can be
placed in first so qmail can tell the sender that it has ben received
and then start to scan and filtering the mail in that queue before it
deliver it to the original queue.
Someone who have any thoughts about a qmail setup like this? Is it a
good idea to queue the message twice or to let the sending server wait?
Andreas
Andreas Grip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm using the qmail-queue-patch together with the qmail-scanner and I'm also
> thinking about to put some spamfilters before or after the antivirus
> scanning.
[...]
> Is it ok to let the sending smtp server to wait so long time before
> [qmail-scanner] has processed the mail? For me it sounds like a bad idea to
> let them wait.
No, a few minutes wait is perfectly fine.
> So I'm thinking about to create another queue that the mail can be placed in
> first so qmail can tell the sender that it has ben received and then start
> to scan and filtering the mail in that queue before it deliver it to the
> original queue.
I don't think this is a great idea; it means you have to accept every message,
then scan them, then generate late bounces, instead of rejecting them during
the initial SMTP conversation.
What problem are you trying to solve? Why do you think making the SMTP client
wait a minute or two is a bad idea?
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
At 12:27 07.07.2001 -0600, you wrote:
>Andreas Grip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So I'm thinking about to create another queue that the mail can be
> placed in
> > first so qmail can tell the sender that it has ben received and then start
> > to scan and filtering the mail in that queue before it deliver it to the
> > original queue.
>
>
>What problem are you trying to solve? Why do you think making the SMTP client
>wait a minute or two is a bad idea?
hmm iam not sure, but what is, if the connected mta thinks that the remote
has gone offline, closes the connection and sets the message deferred, and
retries later.. getting the same problem again..
iam not if there exist's a such mta, but its possible that this will cause
problems like that
--
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lukas Beeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:27 07.07.2001 -0600, you wrote:
> >Andreas Grip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > So I'm thinking about to create another queue that the mail can be
> > > placed in first so qmail can tell the sender that it has ben received
> > > and then start to scan and filtering the mail in that queue before it
> > > deliver it to the original queue.
> >
> >What problem are you trying to solve? Why do you think making the SMTP
> >client wait a minute or two is a bad idea?
> hmm iam not sure, but what is, if the connected mta thinks that the remote
> has gone offline, closes the connection and sets the message deferred, and
> retries later.. getting the same problem again..
> iam not if there exist's a such mta, but its possible that this will cause
> problems like that
If there's such an MTA, it's broken. RFC2821 states that the absolute minimum
timeout the sending MTA can use while waiting for the response to the end of
the DATA phase is 10 minutes:
DATA Termination: 10 minutes.
This is while awaiting the "250 OK" reply. When the receiver gets the
final period terminating the message data, it typically performs
processing to deliver the message to a user mailbox. A spurious timeout
at this point would be very wasteful and would typically result in
delivery of multiple copies of the message, since it has been
successfully sent and the server has accepted responsibility for
delivery. See section 6.1 for additional discussion.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon wrote:
>
> Andreas Grip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm using the qmail-queue-patch together with the qmail-scanner and I'm also
> > thinking about to put some spamfilters before or after the antivirus
> > scanning.
> [...]
> > Is it ok to let the sending smtp server to wait so long time before
> > [qmail-scanner] has processed the mail? For me it sounds like a bad idea to
> > let them wait.
>
> No, a few minutes wait is perfectly fine.
>
> > So I'm thinking about to create another queue that the mail can be placed in
> > first so qmail can tell the sender that it has ben received and then start
> > to scan and filtering the mail in that queue before it deliver it to the
> > original queue.
>
> I don't think this is a great idea; it means you have to accept every message,
> then scan them, then generate late bounces, instead of rejecting them during
> the initial SMTP conversation.
qmail-scanner do not reject them, it just bounce them. And what diffrent
should that make if the bunce is a few minutes late? It will be late for
the sender anyway because they use their ISP:s smtp server and the mail
will be sended from that to my smtp server that scan the mail.
> What problem are you trying to solve? Why do you think making the SMTP client
> wait a minute or two is a bad idea?
Well, a smtp-server receiving a lot of mail can reach the limit of
maximum allowed simultanius connection. If the smtp server close the
connection faster there will be more time over and the server is able to
receive more mail. So I think a server, that are faster with closing the
connection should be more efficient.
>
> Charles
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Andreas Grip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> connection faster there will be more time over and the server is able to
> receive more mail. So I think a server, that are faster with closing the
> connection should be more efficient.
Then the backlog is on your server. You still have to scan the mails
and this is the time consuming thing. Additionally you get the
overhead of two queues.
Regards, Frank
Andreas Grip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think this is a great idea; it means you have to accept every message,
> > then scan them, then generate late bounces, instead of rejecting them during
> > the initial SMTP conversation.
>
> qmail-scanner do not reject them, it just bounce them.
I think you're mistaken, although I don't use qmail-scanner. Issuing a 4xx or
5xx code after DATA _is_ rejecting a message -- it's also a bounce, although
if it's done during the SMTP conversation, the sending MTA is responsible for
generating the bounce message.
> And what diffrent should that make if the bunce is a few minutes late? It
> will be late for the sender anyway because they use their ISP:s smtp server
> and the mail will be sended from that to my smtp server that scan the mail.
There's a big difference. See above. Late bounces have to be generated by
your MTA and delivered; if the message is bounced during the initial SMTP
conversion, the bounce message is the responsibility of the sending MTA, not
the receiving one.
> > What problem are you trying to solve? Why do you think making the SMTP
> > client wait a minute or two is a bad idea?
>
> Well, a smtp-server receiving a lot of mail can reach the limit of maximum
> allowed simultanius connection. If the smtp server close the connection
> faster there will be more time over and the server is able to receive more
> mail. So I think a server, that are faster with closing the connection
> should be more efficient.
Profile, don't speculate. You're trying to solve a problem that doesn't
exist.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are amazing. Of yourse that was my error. I forgot too much sh
programming to remember that!
Thank you soo much,
-Moritz
PS: But also a big thanks to all the other who tried to help me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ahmad Ridha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 6:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I get timeouts
Moritz Schmitt writes:
> /service/qmail-smtpd/run:
> =========================
>
> #!/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 -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
> -u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
>
CMIIW, but those ' (single quotes) should be ` (backquotes), right?
Regards,
Ahmad Ridha
I have $HOME/Maildir setup, cept qmail doesn't seem to be storing messages
in $HOME/Maildir. I have it setup right now so that im sending to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (IP of the server, my user). Any suggestions?
----
David Balatero
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
"David Balatero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have $HOME/Maildir setup, cept qmail doesn't seem to be storing messages
> in $HOME/Maildir. I have it setup right now ...
What does the log say?
Frank
what do the logs say ?
how do you invoke qmail ?
paste your /var/qmail/rc
At 11:04 07.07.2001 -0700, David Balatero wrote:
>I have $HOME/Maildir setup, cept qmail doesn't seem to be storing messages
>in $HOME/Maildir. I have it setup right now so that im sending to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (IP of the server, my user). Any suggestions?
>
>----
>David Balatero
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>----
--
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello
>> > What's is the best OS for run Qmail (and/or Ezmlm)? What advantage and
>> > disadvantage has each one? I'll need send two millions mails per day
....
>Troll, troll, troll your boat, gently down the stream... ;)
>
That's no bad question, because ezmlm with idx version more than 0.40
on Solaris generates bug - the post is not delivered and core is dumped.
This bug is first reported by me in September 2000, where I have
first one installed qmail+ezmlm+idx on Solaris 2.6 and later on 2.7
and later has been described by others. The solution is to use idx
ver. 0.40 or installin patch to ezmlm+idx, which are described on this
list too. Maybe this information should be added to idx faqa, because
still a lot peoples reports this sytuation. So, this is improtant
information for the peoples choosing Solaris for qmail+ezmlm if idx wanna use.
Piotr
---
Piotr Kasztelowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Greetings,
queue-repair v. 0.8.3 has been released and is available for download from
http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/queue_repair/ .
queue-repair is another qmail queue diagnostic and repair tool. Details on
what makes queue-repair different from other tools are set out in
the included BLURB file.
Changes since version 0.8.2 include:
-enforce checking of prime conf-split. Use --i-want-a-broken-conf-split to
force a non-prime split value in repair mode
-add explicit -h, --help options
-enforce checking of existence of basic queue directories to prevent
accidental creation of queue in wrong place due to typos, etc. Use -c,
--create to force creation of a new queue
-when creating a directory, force create missing parent(s)
-fix --no-bigtodo to allow conversion of big-todo queue to non-big-todo;
would previously auto-detect big-todo regardless
-improve forced conversion of non-big-todo queue to big-todo or vice versa,
and improve force change of conf-split for existing queues
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
My opinions are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
