Re: Reply Address
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 08:52:24PM +1300, David Anso wrote: Why don't the reply's for this list go back to the list? Wouldn't that make it a little bit easier? See http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html -- See complete headers for more info
Re: Maildir format
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 12:11:16AM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 12:53:37AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Um, am I missing something? I thought the whole point of the "info" portion of the filename of the message in the maildir? Right, and do you want the filename changing all the time? Instead of a simple "open()", you have to do a "opendir(), readdir(), string match, closedir()" set of syscalls. I suppose that you could attempt a simple open() first, and then only if that fails do you go searching. I saw that from another message. Valid point. Perhaps the server would treat the observed filenames as a "cache" mapped by the unchanging portion. Any miss would cause a revalidation of all of them (since readdir typically issues only one syscall per many directory entries). This is basically what you described. I'd say, indeed, a cache based on the unchanging part of the filename, always doing full readdir() [or getdents(), depending on your UNIX], and then gathering info from files that aren't in the cache already. Note that this is from a MUA point of view (not even POP3, just MUA, that wants to work with headers). I don't very much favor the idea of extending the Maildir structure just to add flags like that. On the other hand, such extensions are ideal for storing other persistent client (configuration) data. I don't see the need for that.. On the subject of extensions of Maildir, though, I had a bit of a radical thought: make each message a directory, containing one file for the headers, and one file per attachment. This has the benefit of pre-parsing attachments for processes like IMAP that want to be able to fetch just one of the parts, but at a significant cost. Fetching the entire message would cause quite a bit of conversion and repackaging. Searching now touches even more files. Every message now uses at least 3 inodes now instead of just one, with the side effect of increasing the amount of wasted (slack) space. More disk accesses to examine a mailbox. Hmmm... I don't like this one: - IMAP-stuff is still as complicated, delivery is _more_ complicated now. - wasting inodes and therefore hindering NFS performance which is isn't so good already for Maildir. I see no benefits. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
unknown local user forward another smtp server
i want forward unknown local user to my isp smtp server for realy without changeing the message header ie. ( rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) wheter domain.com is in my locals the user userunknown is the unknown user in that domain i thing we have to something .qmail-default file by sachin
qmail Digest 18 Jan 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 884
qmail Digest 18 Jan 2000 11:00:01 - Issue 884 Topics (messages 35586 through 35631): Re: Good patches to apply to new installations? 35586 by: Niall R. Murphy 35587 by: Hans Sandsdalen 35588 by: Walt Mankowski 35601 by: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin Guidelines for large mail installations 35589 by: Brian Baquiran 35591 by: petervd.vuurwerk.nl 35592 by: Peter C. Norton 35605 by: Sam 35609 by: richard.illuin.org 35623 by: Tracy R Reed Re: problem with pop3 connexion 35590 by: Pierre-Yves DESLANDES Re: ezmlm response 35593 by: Robert Harrison qmail setup 35594 by: Jacob Joseph 35597 by: Luis Bezerra 35604 by: Juan E Suris courier imap and shared folders 35595 by: Samuel Gisiger 35603 by: Sam Qmail has "helo" - bug ?! 35596 by: Thomas Foerster 35598 by: Petr Novotny Double email delivery problem 35599 by: Tim Rea 35613 by: Tim Rea Re: Eudora (was: Re: Double email delivery problem) 35600 by: Henrik Öhman 35602 by: Henrik Öhman 35606 by: Mikael Schmidt 35612 by: Jon Rust Courier-IMAP Authenticate via Checkpassword ! 35607 by: Seyyed Hamid Reza Hashemi Golpayegani Qmail installation frustrations. 35608 by: Steve Wolfe 35618 by: David Anso Re: Server Water Sprinkler 35610 by: Lorens Kockum Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch for qmail-1.03 35611 by: cmikk.uswest.net 822bis 35614 by: Alex Shipp Re: Qmail Security 35615 by: Claus Färber 35622 by: Tracy R Reed 35628 by: David Anso Fastforward piping question 35616 by: sbeck.globalreaction.com MX, ETRN and QMAIL 35617 by: J.M. Roth \(iip\) 35619 by: David Anso 35620 by: Marc-Adrian Napoli Re: Maildir format 35621 by: Russell Nelson 35624 by: Bruce Guenter 35630 by: petervd.vuurwerk.nl Ezmlm, oddball question... 35625 by: Mike Insert a From field (mess822) 35626 by: Stefan Witzel Reply Address 35627 by: David Anso 35629 by: Anand Buddhdev unknown local user forward another smtp server 35631 by: sachin 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] -- I personally use vanilla qmail. It is -not- necessary to patch it. I was under the impression bigdns allowed qmail to send to sites that it would otherwise have problems resolving MX for? Niall -- Niall Richard Murphy: System Operator, Ireland On-Line -- They said, "You have a blue guitar / You do not play things as they are." The man replied, "Things as they are / Are changed upon the blue guitar." ---Wallace Stevens "Niall R. Murphy" wrote: I personally use vanilla qmail. It is -not- necessary to patch it. I was under the impression bigdns allowed qmail to send to sites that it would otherwise have problems resolving MX for? Niall -- Niall Richard Murphy: System Operator, Ireland On-Line -- They said, "You have a blue guitar / You do not play things as they are." The man replied, "Things as they are / Are changed upon the blue guitar." ---Wallace Stevens vanilla qmail? What is that? And where di I find it? -- /hans On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 01:07:56PM +0100, Hans Sandsdalen wrote: vanilla qmail? What is that? And where di I find it? "Vanilla" is an English expression meaning that it's just the plain, unaltered version. I believe it has its origin in ice cream flavors. You can order "plain vanilla", or vanilla with nuts, vanilla with fudge ripple, vanilla with chocolate chip cookie dough, etc. On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Niall R. Murphy wrote: I personally use vanilla qmail. It is -not- necessary to patch it. I was under the impression bigdns allowed qmail to send to sites that it would otherwise have problems resolving MX for? Niall This problem is very picky about the machines it crops up on. Some people claim that linux has this problem, while both of my linux systems do not have the patch and have never had an issue. The LWQ mail page goes into detail with a description of the problem, and really, the only advice is to check your log files often and if you see the problem, then patch. If it aint broke, dont fix it. Also (i havent verified this) but i have heard that AOL recently is under the byte limit, so this may no longer be a problem (but there might be others not under the limit, who knows) ___ _ __ _ __ /___ ___ /__ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC
Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 04:51:49AM +0100, J.M. Roth iip" wrote: Hi there. I have 3 MXs for a domain. The lowest preference MX is the local server. The other 2 are the customer's internal server as well as an SMTP queueing machine (ETRN etc.). The local machine is there in case the customer's server and the mail queue fails. If I send mail using the local server (outgoing mail server) it doesn't even go to the higher preference MX servers but simply delivers locally, instead to the highest preference MX, that is the customer's server or its queue. The domain is listed in rcpthosts and virtualdomains. Take it out of virtualdomains. By putting it there you're telling qmail to handle that domain locally, which isn't what you want. List it in rcpthosts only. Chris
Re: Maildir format
On Fri, Jan 14, 2000 at 03:07:09PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Right, and any scalable email system is going to use NFS. Therefore No. We scale with pop-proxies, and do without NFS at all. We rely heavily on LDAP to achieve this. Regards, bert. -- +---+ | http://www.rent-a-nerd.nl | nerd for hire | | +---+ | - U N I X - | | Inspice et cautus eris - D11T'95
nonexit user
i want forward unknown local user to my isp's smtp server for relay without changeing the message header ie. ( rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) wheter domain.com is in my locals the user userunknown is the unknown user in that domain i got dial up connection to my isp my main mail server is located at ait.com i got two location i want use same domain name for internal as well as external mailling . or is there any way to send messages to my other popaccount with the same domain name i thing we have to something in .qmail-default file by sachin
Large ISPs/services running qmail?
Hello all, What large ISPs or services are running qmail, and roughly how much traffic do they have (e.g. number of messages per day)?
qmail errors
ok i keep getting this error message on my machine, i had qmail installed fine, but then i edited the /etc/passwd and /etc/group and changed some uid/gids, I then reinstalled qmail (including directories and permmisions as described in life with qmail.) and i keep getting this error message, i am starting qmail-start with ./Maildir and have remade directories, for myself starting delivery 335: msg 112777 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 starting delivery 336: msg 112789 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 8/10 remote 0/20 delivery 330: deferral: Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/ status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 i am getting responses to my mails saying for my default domain and all my virtual domains, i am using vpopmail for virtual domains, incase that is somehow relavant. ** ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** ** The original message was received at Tue, 18 Jan 2000 02:25:35 -0600 from [10.40.100.9] - The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Deferred: Connection refused by theodorespaint.com. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours Will keep trying until message is 3 days old If someone knows how i can fix this, or can point me in the right direction i would appriciate it greatly
Re: Large ISPs/services running qmail?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 12:08:08PM +, Fred Backman wrote: Hello all, What large ISPs or services are running qmail, and roughly how much traffic do they have (e.g. number of messages per day)? Yahoo! is running entirely on qmail (with some modifications to suit their size), Hotmail's outgoing mail server is qmail, egoups (now incorporating egroups and onelist) run close to 26 mailing lists on qmail, Resaux IP Europeene (RIPE) and Network Solutions (incoming mail) are both on qmail. I don't know about numbers of messages, but these sites are certainly extremely big. -- See complete headers for more info
Re: qmail errors
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 07:56:10AM -0600, Rich Stock wrote: ok i keep getting this error message on my machine, i had qmail installed fine, but then i edited the /etc/passwd and /etc/group and changed some uid/gids, I then reinstalled qmail (including directories and permmisions as described in life with qmail.) and i keep getting this error message, i am starting qmail-start with ./Maildir and have remade directories, for ^^^ That should be ./Maildir/ with a trailing slash. Without the slash, qmail-local is trying to deliver the message to a _file_ called Maildir, but in fact finds a directory instead and defers delivery. myself starting delivery 335: msg 112777 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 starting delivery 336: msg 112789 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 8/10 remote 0/20 delivery 330: deferral: Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/ status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 -- See complete headers for more info
Re: Large ISPs/services running qmail?
Anand Buddhdev wrote: Yahoo! is running entirely on qmail (with some modifications to suit their size), Hotmail's outgoing mail server is qmail, egoups (now incorporating egroups and onelist) run close to 26 mailing lists on qmail, Resaux IP Europeene (RIPE) and Network Solutions (incoming mail) are both on qmail. I don't know about numbers of messages, but these sites are certainly extremely big. egroups are running 26 lists??? or did you mean X lists with 26 subscribers? Thanks for the reply though!
forwarding non-local mail to one specific SMTP-server
Hi, my problem is this: (generally it's been metioned before, but it has changed a little bit :-) i have a bunch of clients using my qmail-server as smtp for relaying out to the internet. the thing is that I want to tweak it a little bit so that when the mailserver is delivering non-local mail, then it should process it thru another smtp-server on my network before going out on the internet, this is a virus-scanning-smtp. So therefore, all outgoing smtp has to be routed thru that one before entering the internet and out to the recipient. is there any good solutions for this kind of action? and is it configurable so that it does this action with only one or two domains? (that is the sender-domain...) so if: [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends a message to a non-local, then it goes out thru this special smtp-relay and virus-scanning thing, but if [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends a message to a non-local, then it goes directly on to the net... a little wierd problem i would presume :) --- Geir O. Høgberg ** This footnote confirms that this email message and it's attachments has been swept by MIMEsweeper 4.0 for the presence of computer viruses. This has been done by ElTele Østfold AS. Coustomer service e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Corporate WEB site: www.eltele.no **
AW: qmail errors
Might be an error in your qmail-start: It should be ./Maildir/ not ./Maildir . Otherwise Qmail means ./Maildir to be a Mailbox format file. Holger ok i keep getting this error message on my machine, i had qmail installed fine, but then i edited the /etc/passwd and /etc/group and changed some uid/gids, I then reinstalled qmail (including directories and permmisions as described in life with qmail.) and i keep getting this error message, i am starting qmail-start with ./Maildir and have remade directories, for myself starting delivery 335: msg 112777 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 starting delivery 336: msg 112789 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 8/10 remote 0/20 delivery 330: deferral: Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/ status: local 7/10 remote 0/20 i am getting responses to my mails saying for my default domain and all my virtual domains, i am using vpopmail for virtual domains, incase that is somehow relavant. ** ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** ** The original message was received at Tue, 18 Jan 2000 02:25:35 -0600 from [10.40.100.9] - The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Deferred: Connection refused by theodorespaint.com. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours Will keep trying until message is 3 days old If someone knows how i can fix this, or can point me in the right direction i would appriciate it greatly
On heavily loaded sites
Hello! It seems that from next Monday on, I'll be in charge for administrating a large mail and webmail system (over 30 emails per day, at least 10 active users). I've never met such large systems yet, so I'm seeking advice. Does anyone run mail system of such scale? Does Maildir storage work well under that loads? What storage is used, if not? How can be solved problem of too many user directories under same main dir? Are there any points I'd like to miss? Alex. PGP signature
Re: Large ISPs/services running qmail?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 02:13:57PM +, Fred Backman wrote: their size), Hotmail's outgoing mail server is qmail, egoups (now incorporating egroups and onelist) run close to 26 mailing lists on egroups are running 26 lists??? or did you mean X lists with 26 subscribers? Last I heard, it was 26 _lists_. The number of subscribers could be much higher. -- See complete headers for more info
Re: Large ISPs/services running qmail?
At 2000.01.18 13:08, Tuesday, you wrote: Hello all, What large ISPs or services are running qmail, and roughly how much traffic do they have (e.g. number of messages per day)? Hi, we are running a public email service (web, pop3, forward) with a 5 frontend, 2 NFS backend, 1 database server qmail setup: 245 000 active mailboxes, 4-500 000 messages/day, 90 000 web logins/day, 150 000 pop3 logins/day. All numbers are growing. Frontends are running FreeBSD, NFS backends are SGI O200s running Irix (because of XFS journaling), database is Solid. Each component is heavily customized in the sources. Currently everything works off the SQL database, but we are thinking towards LDAP because of SQL performance problems and need for replication. Any similar or larger experiences? Andras Tudos C3, Budapest
Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL
Ok, a few things. I know, lower priority = higher number. When I said lower priority I meant exactly that. f.e.: in MX 5 mail.customer.com in MX 10 queue.server.com in MX 20 ourbackup.ourdomain.com in case MX5 and MX10 fail it should go to the appropriate account on MX20. to Chris: taking it out of virtualhosts simply prevents it from ending up in the right mailbox (has this to do something with DNS lookups?) to Marc-Adrian: if I delete the domain out of rcpthosts the MX20 won't receive anything for that domain to David: thanks, I'm going to check out the smtproutes thing SO: Any idea? Is smtproutes the right thing to do? Best regards! -- jmr - Original Message - From: Chris Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: J.M. Roth iip" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 11:12 AM Subject: Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL
Re: Maildir format
Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The needs I am aware of include: - the basics of POP3 plus... [snip] - hierarchical multiple mailbox support That should include something that makes sense for a host that's behind a firewall and/or NAT and/or dynamic-IP dialup to authenticate and download mail for multiple users (to basically do what people try to do with fetchmail/multidrop or ETRN or other dodgy solutions nowadays). The existing POP3 protocol doesn't have an accepted RFC-level solution for identifying the set of users to whom each message should go, and SMTP requires that the host be reachable at a static IP address. A good modern protocol cannot assume the server can open a link to the client, or that the client is coming from a known address. - message upload (for draft messages and for transmittal) All client/server communications should ideally happen in the new/fixed protocol; I'd just as soon not do any SMTP relaying at all, and instead require that the user offer credentials in order to relay outbound through me. This neatly solves the remote-dialup-relay problem too. A challenge-response authentication system is a debatable need. On one hand, with it you never send your pass phrase in the clear. On the other, all your content is still in the clear, so it would be better to assume a SSL link where necessary. Making the authentication separate from the after-authentication protocol allows you to bolt on whatever you need; simple user-password may be all that's exportable in a vanilla release from a US vendor, but some sites may want something stronger. There may also be sites that want to require internal communications, especially those that have to cross the Internet, go through an encrypted/authenticated tunnel. -- Anthony DeBoer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: On heavily loaded sites
Alex Povolotsky wrote: Hello! It seems that from next Monday on, I'll be in charge for administrating a large mail and webmail system (over 30 emails per day, at least 10 active users). I've never met such large systems yet, so I'm seeking advice. Does anyone run mail system of such scale? Does Maildir storage work well under that loads? What storage is used, if not? How can be solved problem of too many user directories under same main dir? Are there any points I'd like to miss? Alex. Well, plenty of people here have run larger systems (as recent posts have shown). Maildir doesn't really have a problem due to the number of users, so as long as the user direectories are stored in such a way as to not cause large directory searches then there is nothing instrinsic about qmail that will cause it to fail. Of course there will be a point at which the aggregate load on your system will exceed the system's capability at which point you'll need to do something about it. One of the areas that you are likely to have problems with first is the I/O load created by the queue. But as always, the best thing you can do is conduct a fairly rigourous performance analysis of the system to determine just what sort of demands are currently being placed on it and what resources are likely to be totally consumed first. Mark.
Replacing delivery method...
I just want to hear your opinions... How difficult would be to replace qmail-send and qmail-pop3d to put and pull mail to and from database (MySQL)? I don't like idea of overwhelming file system with milion of mails ;-) Or has anyone implemented this? -- Ondrej Sury: [EMAIL PROTECTED], +420602667702 GLOBE Internet s.r.o.: http://www.globe.cz/, [EMAIL PROTECTED], +420233356502 NAJDI.TO; http://najdi.to/, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PRESS.CZ; http://press.cz/, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Replacing delivery method...
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 04:46:31PM +0100, Ond?ej Surý wrote: I just want to hear your opinions... How difficult would be to replace qmail-send and qmail-pop3d to put and pull mail to and from database (MySQL)? I don't like idea of overwhelming file system with milion of mails ;-) What leads you to believe that a database such as MySQL will not overwhelm your file system trying to do the same thing? Did you make any comparative performance measurements? Regards.
Re: Replacing delivery method...
From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Ond=F8ej=20Sur=FD?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 16:46:31 +0100 I just want to hear your opinions... How difficult would be to replace qmail-send and qmail-pop3d to put and pull mail to and from database (MySQL)? I don't like idea of overwhelming file system with milion of mails ;-) Or has anyone implemented this? You would prefer to overwhelm a database with millions of emails? I suspect you'll find the filesystem to be faster. Chris -- Chris Garrigues virCIO http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ http://www.virCIO.Com +1 512 432 4046 +1 512 374 0500 4314 Avenue C O- Austin, TX 78751-3709 My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft, but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft. PGP signature
Re: Replacing delivery method...
Mark Delany wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 04:46:31PM +0100, Ond?ej Sur wrote: I just want to hear your opinions... How difficult would be to replace qmail-send and qmail-pop3d to put and pull mail to and from database (MySQL)? I don't like idea of overwhelming file system with milion of mails ;-) What leads you to believe that a database such as MySQL will not overwhelm your file system trying to do the same thing? Did you make any comparative performance measurements? Well, this solution have some advanteges and some disadvanteges. Let me think of some: + You can backup all mail much more easily. It's quite easier to backup few database files than bunch file-per-email files. + You can store emails on different machine than qmail-smtpd is running without using N(ot Reliable)FS. + You can run queries over emails in case you save parsed header into db. + It's too much easier to access mails from web (for me) and you don't have to use IMAP. - Database files are bigger than plain emails. But that has nothing to do with my previous question. -- Ondrej Sury: [EMAIL PROTECTED], +420602667702 GLOBE Internet s.r.o.: http://www.globe.cz/, [EMAIL PROTECTED], +420233356502 NAJDI.TO; http://najdi.to/, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PRESS.CZ; http://press.cz/, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maildir format (indexing)
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Russell Nelson wrote: One way to do that would be for Dan to change the Maildir specification so that a Maildir may have multiple "cur" directories. Then, keep a CDB containing a subset of the message headers. Why multiple "cur" directories? I'm guessing that you're trying to avoid rebuilding a large CDB when any cachable item changes. Why not simply use multiple CDB's in a single directory instead? Select a CDB by hashing the file names. I'm also presuming that the CDB will be indexed by something like the message file name. How efficient are things like string searches going to be in that case? My dream states include things like results of previous searches being cached (I have several large folders that I search on the same subset of strings frequently). How would you do that with a CDB? Thanks, -- Jeff Hayward
Re: Maildir format (indexing)
Jeff Hayward writes: On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Russell Nelson wrote: One way to do that would be for Dan to change the Maildir specification so that a Maildir may have multiple "cur" directories. Then, keep a CDB containing a subset of the message headers. Why multiple "cur" directories? Avoid large subdirectory filesystem lossage. I'm also presuming that the CDB will be indexed by something like the message file name. How efficient are things like string searches going to be in that case? My dream states include things like results of previous searches being cached (I have several large folders that I search on the same subset of strings frequently). How would you do that with a CDB? If you're storing mail on a server, I don't see *any* alternative to server-side searching. Not that I know how best to implement it. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
RE: Replacing delivery method...
I dont know to do it. but I think it is could be ok on a system with little users. i.e. If you had email accounts that don't use a system account to acces their email but surely you would have to rewrite half of the POPD and the MTA? Although. + Data Retrieval is a lot faster than Opening and Closing files on accounts with a lot of emails. + No File Locking or DB Locking + Reduces Disk Access - More Space is used up - Complicated - Could be security isssues on pourly planned installations It would be a pain to administer Users. Plus QMail comes with a pukka MTA you would increase the risk of people reading the wrong emails Views? Regards Paul Trippett -Original Message- From: Ondrej Sur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 3:47 PM To: Qmail List Subject: Replacing delivery method... I just want to hear your opinions... How difficult would be to replace qmail-send and qmail-pop3d to put and pull mail to and from database (MySQL)? I don't like idea of overwhelming file system with milion of mails ;-) Or has anyone implemented this? -- Ondrej Sury: [EMAIL PROTECTED], +420602667702 GLOBE Internet s.r.o.: http://www.globe.cz/, [EMAIL PROTECTED], +420233356502 NAJDI.TO; http://najdi.to/, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PRESS.CZ; http://press.cz/, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maildir format (scaling)
On 14 Jan 2000, Russ Allbery wrote: I'm responding to provide a counterpoint to Russ's views. I certainly don't plan on changing his mind by my argument. It is abundantly clear that "there's more that one way to do it (well)" to borrow a phrase. My experience is quite the contrary, namely that delivering to *any* shared file system, whether it be NFS or AFS, is fundamentally less reliable and harder to maintain than delivering mail to independent mail server machines [...] It is funny how one's experiences can be different. At my site, it is exactly the opposite. The minute we changed from a "user dictates server" correspondence to a separation of the data from the application we saw enormous improvement in reliability and ease of maintenance. We serve about 80K users using layer 4 redirectors, 10 application server boxes and 2 NFS servers. There is virtually no maintenance, no outages, and no performance peaks and valleys. By putting our money in to making the data reliable we don't have to have expensive and complicated schemes to keep application servers up. Load balancing happens automatically, not by adding/moving users to application boxes. Failover is just a special case of load balancing. Scales well for us (about 6.5 million messages stored in maildirs) with no limits on the horizon. That said, maildir indexing would help latency in application response quite a bit. Oh, we've also been down the AFS path. Not recommended based on my experience. Regards, -- Jeff Hayward
Re: Maildir setup
Try /etc/skel ... The name says it all... Good Luck JP On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Kevin Waterson wrote: In the qmail/doc/INSTALL.maildir it says to edit /var/qmail/rc and replace ./Mailbox with ./Maildir/ and "by creating a maildir in the new-user template directory" Where is this directory? Kind regards Kevin
Re: forwarding non-local mail to one specific SMTP-server
Geir, Add the following line to your control files: /var/qmail/control/smtproutes = :your.internal.virus-scanning.host-ip Then restart qmail. This will tell qmail to send all non-local (and virtualdomains) mail to the IP you enter there. Best of luck, -Martin On 18 Jan, Geir Høgberg wrote: : Hi, : : my problem is this: (generally it's been metioned before, but it has changed : a little bit :-) : : i have a bunch of clients using my qmail-server as smtp for relaying out to : the internet. : the thing is that I want to tweak it a little bit so that when the : mailserver is delivering non-local mail, then it should process it thru : another smtp-server on my network before going out on the internet, this is : a virus-scanning-smtp. : So therefore, all outgoing smtp has to be routed thru that one before : entering the internet and out to the recipient. : : is there any good solutions for this kind of action? and is it configurable : so that it does this action with only one or two domains? (that is the : sender-domain...) so if: [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends a message to a non-local, then : it goes out thru this special smtp-relay and virus-scanning thing, but if : [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends a message to a non-local, then it goes directly on to the : net... : : a little wierd problem i would presume :) : : : --- : Geir O. Høgberg : ** : This footnote confirms that this email message and it's attachments : has been swept by MIMEsweeper 4.0 for the presence of computer viruses. : : This has been done by ElTele Østfold AS. : : Coustomer service e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Corporate WEB site: www.eltele.no : ** -- Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe Communications --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maildir format (scaling)
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 10:32:23AM -0600, Jeff Hayward wrote: On 14 Jan 2000, Russ Allbery wrote: I'm responding to provide a counterpoint to Russ's views. I certainly don't plan on changing his mind by my argument. It is abundantly clear that "there's more that one way to do it (well)" to borrow a phrase. My experience is quite the contrary, namely that delivering to *any* shared file system, whether it be NFS or AFS, is fundamentally less reliable and harder to maintain than delivering mail to independent mail server machines [...] It is funny how one's experiences can be different. At my site, it is exactly the opposite. The minute we changed from a "user dictates server" correspondence to a separation of the data from the application we saw enormous improvement in reliability and ease of maintenance. We serve about 80K users using layer 4 redirectors, 10 application server boxes and 2 NFS servers. There is virtually no maintenance, no outages, and no performance peaks and valleys. By putting our money in to making the data reliable we don't have to have expensive and complicated schemes to keep application servers up. Load balancing happens automatically, not by adding/moving users to application boxes. Failover is just a special case of load balancing. Scales well for us (about 6.5 million messages stored in maildirs) with no limits on the horizon. That said, maildir indexing would help latency in application response quite a bit. Oh, we've also been down the AFS path. Not recommended based on my experience. Regards, -- Jeff Hayward In the near future I will try out to store the users mail on one or several CODA server(s). Have anyone any comment on that? Best regards Michael Boman -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M P T E L T D - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Crystal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Maildir format (indexing)
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 10:15:31AM -0600, Jeff Hayward wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Russell Nelson wrote: One way to do that would be for Dan to change the Maildir specification so that a Maildir may have multiple "cur" directories. Then, keep a CDB containing a subset of the message headers. Why multiple "cur" directories? I'm guessing that you're trying to avoid rebuilding a large CDB when any cachable item changes. Why not simply use multiple CDB's in a single directory instead? Select a CDB by hashing the file names. CDB is hashed itself. Using multiple CDB's to share one load is useless. The multiple "cur" directory idea helps performance on average filesystems. I'm also presuming that the CDB will be indexed by something like the message file name. How efficient are things like string searches going to be in that case? My dream states include things like results of previous searches being cached (I have several large folders that I search on the same subset of strings frequently). How would you do that with a CDB? Well the CDB (in my idea, at least) will be indexed to the unchanging part of a message filename (without new/ or cur/ in front), and contain the headers that mutt normally reads from the file itself while opening. [Yes, I am targeting mutt specifically, don't flame me ;)] For searches thru headers, the cdb can be used. For body-text-searches my solution won't help much. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
SSL encrypted POP3/IMAP session?
Where can I find information how to make a SSL encrypted POP3/IMAP
connection to my mailserver?
I am running qmail 1.03 + vpopmail 3.4.11{something} + SqWebMail +
qmailAdmin.
Best regards
Michael Boman
--
W I Z O F F I C E . C O M P T E L T D - Your Online Wizard
16 Tannery Lane, Crystal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778
Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228
email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Maildir format (indexing)
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 06:41:23PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well the CDB (in my idea, at least) will be indexed to the unchanging part of a message filename (without new/ or cur/ in front), and contain the headers that mutt normally reads from the file itself while opening. [Yes, I am targeting mutt specifically, don't flame me ;)] This is not uncommon in a number of the proprietry message stores. An index file that points directly into the mail/mailbox which identifies such things as MIME boundaries, header boundaries and so on. Many treat the index as a cache of high-use knowledge needed by the client applications. For searches thru headers, the cdb can be used. For body-text-searches my solution won't help much. Your cdb/index *could* contain a cache of recent searches. Mark.
sorry_message_has_wrong_owner
What caused a message to be deferred with the error: Sorry,_message_has_wrong_owner? I can't send anything using the /var/qmail/bin/sendmail wrapper without getting this. I did try all the tests successfully in TEST.deliver and TEST.receive, but they all use qmail-inject. Thanks for any help you can give, -Jennifer
Re: sorry_message_has_wrong_owner
Did it ever work or has it never worked? Almost certainly the permissions in /var/qmail have not been set properly or have been changed subsequent to make setup. Have you moved the queue with cp, tar, cpio, etc? Have you restored it from a backup tape? Did you install it according to the qmail install or have you used some 3rd party install? What happens if, as root in the qmail source directory, you go: # make check ?? Regards. What caused a message to be deferred with the error: Sorry,_message_has_wrong_owner? I can't send anything using the /var/qmail/bin/sendmail wrapper without getting this. I did try all the tests successfully in TEST.deliver and TEST.receive, but they all use qmail-inject. Thanks for any help you can give, -Jennifer
Re: Replacing delivery method...
[using SQL for mail store] Wasn't usa.net doing this? I seem to remember seeing a few messages in the past about this. Tim
Re: Replacing delivery method...
[using SQL for mail store] Wasn't usa.net doing this? I seem to remember seeing a few messages in the past about this. I don't know about usa.net, but I've been using PostgreSQL to archive a mailing list for some time. In a setting like an archive where you will be performing searches on the data, and would like to refine the search on criteria such as date, time, keywords, subjet, etc., it's just what the doctor ordered. However, for simple mail storage/retrieval, I don't know if it would be such a good idea. One of the largest detriments would be storage space. With PostgreSQL, your database is usually about five times as large as if you had simply stored the data in a text format. If your mail server is handling high amounts of traffic, then five times the disk space, and a higher load on the disk I/O isn't exactly what you want. : )Of course, the overhead in storage space is going to depend on the server in question, but you're never going to break even. The optimal solution is likely going to somewhat resemble an SQL server that is stripped down and optimized only for mail, and with a more streamlined API than SQL. You don't exactly need to do outer joins for POP3 or IMAP, and features like stored procedures and user-defined data types would only be wasted. : ) steve
Re: sorry_message_has_wrong_owner
Yes, because I had a linking mishap {sheepish grin}, I replaced a few files
in /var/qmail/bin with ones from another machine. I did not realize it would
change anything. Thank you very much for your help. I tried a few other
things, then I did:
#make setup check
and that did it. it works now!
Thanks so much,
-Jennifer
Mark Delany wrote:
Did it ever work or has it never worked?
Almost certainly the permissions in /var/qmail have not been set properly
or have been changed subsequent to make setup.
Have you moved the queue with cp, tar, cpio, etc? Have you restored it
from a backup tape? Did you install it according to the qmail install or
have you used some 3rd party install?
What happens if, as root in the qmail source directory, you go:
# make check
??
Regards.
What caused a message to be deferred with the error:
Sorry,_message_has_wrong_owner? I can't send anything using the
/var/qmail/bin/sendmail wrapper without getting this. I did try all the
tests successfully in TEST.deliver and TEST.receive, but they all use
qmail-inject.
Thanks for any help you can give,
-Jennifer
Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL
Ok, sorry I meant virtualdomains. As I said I would like a backup in case example.com AND the queue for it fail. This I've done with the MX records. One disadvantage is, since the domain must be in rcpthosts on the 3rd machine to receive anything, *if* mail is sent using this machine as outgoing mail server, it doesn't even get sent to example.com, even though it's higher preference... Got it? -- jmr - Original Message - From: "Chris Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 8:22 PM Subject: Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 06:56:25PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, but why not in virtualhosts. How can I distinguish between several mailboxes then on the backup machine?? For one thing, there's no such thing as virtualhosts. Let's say the domain is example.com. You want queue.server.com to accept mail for example.com, but you just want it to queue it and deliver it to mail.customer.com when that machine is available. Is that correct? Then, on queue.server.com, put example.com in rcpsthosts and nowhere else. That's *all* you have to do. Chris
Re: Replacing delivery method...
Just on a related note. M$ Exchange uses a database to store Email. They go on about how wonderful it is, but from personal experience I can tell you it's a "fair weather friend" - works well when it's going, but when any problems occur - you have no idea where to start looking for a solution. Database corruption is of course the worst thing that can happen you to - sometimes restoring from backup doesn't even help as the DB was corrupted days/weeks earlier but just didn't die until recently :-( Thing is: M$ Exchange _doesn't_ use a SQL server backend - it uses a version of the M$ JET database specifically re-written to efficiently handle Email. M$ were intending moving Exchange to M$-SQL (via Transaction Server) - but gave up that idea as the performance would never be as good. I think it would be fair to deduce from that, that a major player in this market doesn't think SQL is appropriate for Email - draw what you will from that... -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 3391 377 Fax: +64 3 3391 417
deferral:Unable_to_switch_to_/home/user:_access_denied.(#4.3.0)
I've searched the doc, and can't find the answer to this problem. The permissions for the directory are: drwxr--r-- For one user, I changed the permissions to drwxr-xr-x and the message in the mail log changed to this: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1) Obviously, I'm using Maildir method - all my MUAs are Netscape. The file permissions for Maildir and everthing in it are drw-r--r-- Adding executable doesn't seem to change things. qmail is set up to use the default qmail userids and groups. What am I missing? Thanks, Michael Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maildir setup
Jose Pedro Pereira wrote: Try /etc/skel ... The name says it all... hmm, there is nothing in this dir? What should be there? Could I be missing something? Kind regards Kevin
Re: deferral:Unable_to_switch_to_/home/user:_access_denied.(#4.3.0)
The permissions on your Maildir directory and the directories underneath need to all be: drwx-- Rick McMillin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator Manager, Network Operations I-Land Internet Services - Original Message - From: "Michael Martin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "qmail list" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 2:36 PM Subject: deferral:Unable_to_switch_to_/home/user:_access_denied.(#4.3.0) I've searched the doc, and can't find the answer to this problem. The permissions for the directory are: drwxr--r-- For one user, I changed the permissions to drwxr-xr-x and the message in the mail log changed to this: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1) Obviously, I'm using Maildir method - all my MUAs are Netscape. The file permissions for Maildir and everthing in it are drw-r--r-- Adding executable doesn't seem to change things. qmail is set up to use the default qmail userids and groups. What am I missing? Thanks, Michael Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maildir setup
* Kevin Waterson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [18 Jan 2000 15:40]: Try /etc/skel ... The name says it all... hmm, there is nothing in this dir? What should be there? Could I be missing something? If you put a Maildir in this area, then every new account will be automatically set up with one. I've used something similar to: # /var/qmail/bin/maildirmake /etc/skel/Maildir Then one can use the "useradd" command to add a new user and the Maildir will be created automatically. P.S. I have only used "useradd" on Linux and Solaris systems. There may be other tools on other Unix (i.e. BSD) systems. -- Quist ConsultingEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 219 Donlea DriveVoice: +1.416.696.7600 Toronto ON M4G 2N1 Fax: +1.416.978.6620 CANADA WWW: http://www.quist.on.ca
Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 08:43:57PM +0100, J.M. Roth iip" wrote: Ok, sorry I meant virtualdomains. As I said I would like a backup in case example.com AND the queue for it fail. This I've done with the MX records. One disadvantage is, since the domain must be in rcpthosts on the 3rd machine to receive anything, *if* mail is sent using this machine as outgoing mail server, it doesn't even get sent to example.com, even though it's higher preference... Got it? No. This is just not the case. rcpthosts only affects *incoming SMTP* mail, and it has no affect whatsoever on where mail is ultimately delivered. It only determines whether your SMTP server will accept the message at the SMTP "RCPT TO" command. It will *not* cause a lower-preference mail exchanger to ignore better-preference ones. Set up the best-preference mail exchanger normally (with the domain in rcpthosts and either locals or virtualdomains). On the non-best-preference mail exchangers, put the domain on rcpthosts only. This is how it's done. Chris
Re: Maildir setup
On 19-Jan-2000, Kevin Waterson wrote: Jose Pedro Pereira wrote: Try /etc/skel ... The name says it all... It says nothing to me at first, until I read 'man useradd'. skel stands for skeleton, I guess. hmm, there is nothing in this dir? What should be there? Could I be missing something? Try 'man useradd' first. -- Ronny Haryanto
Re: deferral:Unable_to_switch_to_/home/user:_access_denied.(#4.3.0)
On closer examination, I see that the things that fail have to do with user aliases and virtual domains. Guess I gotta go back and revisit that stuff. -Michael Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rick McMillin wrote: The permissions on your Maildir directory and the directories underneath need to all be: drwx-- Rick McMillin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator Manager, Network Operations I-Land Internet Services - Original Message - From: "Michael Martin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "qmail list" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 2:36 PM Subject: deferral:Unable_to_switch_to_/home/user:_access_denied.(#4.3.0) I've searched the doc, and can't find the answer to this problem. The permissions for the directory are: drwxr--r-- For one user, I changed the permissions to drwxr-xr-x and the message in the mail log changed to this: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1) Obviously, I'm using Maildir method - all my MUAs are Netscape. The file permissions for Maildir and everthing in it are drw-r--r-- Adding executable doesn't seem to change things. qmail is set up to use the default qmail userids and groups. What am I missing? Thanks, Michael Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL
Ok, I understand. Didn't have anything like this before. Never mind. But how can I determine then where exactly the mail is delivered in case it arrives on the lower-preference one, if I can't use virtualdomains or whatever... Thanks again Best regards -- jmr - Original Message - From: "Chris Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "J.M. Roth iip"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 9:52 PM Subject: Re: MX, ETRN and QMAIL On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 08:43:57PM +0100, J.M. Roth iip" wrote: Ok, sorry I meant virtualdomains. As I said I would like a backup in case example.com AND the queue for it fail. This I've done with the MX records. One disadvantage is, since the domain must be in rcpthosts on the 3rd machine to receive anything, *if* mail is sent using this machine as outgoing mail server, it doesn't even get sent to example.com, even though it's higher preference... Got it? No. This is just not the case. rcpthosts only affects *incoming SMTP* mail, and it has no affect whatsoever on where mail is ultimately delivered. It only determines whether your SMTP server will accept the message at the SMTP "RCPT TO" command. It will *not* cause a lower-preference mail exchanger to ignore better-preference ones. Set up the best-preference mail exchanger normally (with the domain in rcpthosts and either locals or virtualdomains). On the non-best-preference mail exchangers, put the domain on rcpthosts only. This is how it's done. Chris
Re: Replacing delivery method...
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 08:51:35AM +1300, Jason Haar wrote: Just on a related note. M$ were intending moving Exchange to M$-SQL (via Transaction Server) - but gave up that idea as the performance would never be as good. I think it would be fair to deduce from that, that a major player in this market doesn't think SQL is appropriate for Email - draw what you will from that... Do Oracle store email in their database with 8i? I vaguely thought they did. There is nothing instrinsically wrong with using a database to store email, but the cost/benefits have to be there and I don't think the original poster made it clear what cost/benefits would be for his scenario. Mark.
Re: Replacing delivery method...
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 01:59:36PM -0800, Mark Delany wrote: There is nothing instrinsically wrong with using a database to store email, but the cost/benefits have to be there and I don't think the original poster made it clear what cost/benefits would be for his scenario. Actually you're dead right - I guess what M$ is saying is that even they can't use M$-SQL as their backend server - others like Oracle may be fine ;-) -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 3391 377 Fax: +64 3 3391 417
recipientmap?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- I cannot seem to search the archives to see if this has been discussed. There used to be a control file called recipientmap that is not there anymore. I recall someone commenting that people were using it as an aliases file instead of using the .qmail files. I have a very good use for this file, and now that I need it, it isn't there anymore. I am hoping that someone can show me a good way to do this: Suppose I am responsible for the mail for qmail.org, with 1000 addresses. I set up a mail server someplace called mail.qmail.org, put qmail.org into the locals and rcphosts. Mail is working fine. Now, I set up an office in chicago for this company, with 20 users behind an ISDN line. I install a linux box on the LAN, (mail.chicago.qmail.org) and configure qmail on it so that local users can use it as an SMTP server. I'd like them to check their mail on this machine, also, which means having 20 of the addresses on the main machine go to this machine. This part is easy. On mail.qmail.org, I add a line to smtproutes: chicago.qmail.org:mail.chicago.qmail.org I then put chicago.qmail.org into locals and rcpthosts on mail.chicago.qmail.org, and for every user that is in this office (e.g., alice,bill, and cindy), I create .qmail files on mail.qmail.org: .qmail-alice:[EMAIL PROTECTED] .qmail-bill:[EMAIL PROTECTED] .qmail-cindy:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Now, when anyone sends email to one of the Chicago users, the main server has an "alias" that sends their mail off to the Chicago machine, which puts it into their mailbox. Now comes the problem. If Alice sends an email to Bill, she sends it to the local SMTP server, mail.chicago.qmail.org. She is sending it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Since this machine does not handle email for qmail.org, it finds the MX record, and sends it on to mail.qmail.org (over the ISDN line). mail.qmail.org then sends it back after applying the alias. Thus, local mail has to be sent off of the LAN before it can reach the local user. With recipientmap, the solution is to put these lines into recipientmap on mail.chicago.qmail.org: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Now, mail stays local. Since I no longer have recipientmap, I wonder what the solution is. One solution is to put qmail.org into mail.chicago.qmail.org's virtualdomains file. Then I can create aliases for all of the local users. The problem is that I must also create aliases for EVERY qmail.org user, so that anyone not on the local machine has their mail sent to the main server. This would be a pain to administer, especially when there are dozens of local offices. Any thoughts? - -- Jack McKinney The Lorentz Group http://www.lorentz.com F4 A0 65 67 58 77 AF 9B FC B3 C5 6B 55 36 94 A6 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBOITk/0Zx0BGJTwrZAQFxQAQAh+9Ohc1usPI8Wu8BkN2NFxu9AVLLQoOH rj/xcrnjYdkGRaGopaiIHlKFoBy44WzBq65Eolp/EKywfD9xx0khmPa7Q5ycuOTg xiUXxWhBpMYCyFMk/v3eVAEjgQ4zMuzb3rgDZiqakSSBzx/fkJSVl2UngDcL5FFa 5pHz0DBdbH0= =mKyc -END PGP SIGNATURE-
one user/many pop accounts: best solution?
Hi, I have several domains that I am in the process of transferring to one machine with my qmail mailserver. I've gotten in the habit of accessing my pop mail for different domains at different times depending on what I'm doing. My main email address on each of these domains is the same username, i.e. siffert@domain1 siffert@domain2 siffert@domain3 I know how to store them into different Maildirs in my "siffert" account, depending on domain, thanks to dot-qmail and virtualdomains. But how can I access these different Maildirs through pop? It seems that pop always relies on a hardcoded mailbox name like ~/Maildir, and storing all my different domains' mail in there would scramble them all together. Am I going to *have* to use different useraccounts and header-forging to accomplish this? Thanks, Curt
Chang MCIS mail system to Qmail
Dear all: We use MCIS mail to provide mail service.Now we want to use qmail to provide mail service.How can we replace MCIS mail by Qmail? Tony Chang System Engineer Information Technology Division Hoshin Gigamedia Center Inc
Re: one user/many pop accounts: best solution?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 02:39:59PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have several domains that I am in the process of transferring to one machine with my qmail mailserver. I've gotten in the habit of accessing my pop mail for different domains at different times depending on what I'm doing. My main email address on each of these domains is the same username, i.e. siffert@domain1 siffert@domain2 siffert@domain3 I know how to store them into different Maildirs in my "siffert" account, depending on domain, thanks to dot-qmail and virtualdomains. But how can I access these different Maildirs through pop? It seems that pop always relies on a hardcoded mailbox name like ~/Maildir, and storing all my different domains' mail in there would scramble them all together. Am I going to *have* to use different useraccounts and header-forging to accomplish this? You need either to use one of the virtual domains packages (see www.qmail.org), or use a different version of checkpassword. I have a patch to the standard checkpassword that lets you use a cdb database to look users up and decide where qmail-pop3d should look for mail. It also works with regular /etc/passwd users. It's pretty simple to set up. See http://www.palomine.net/qmail/checkcdb.tar.gz Chris
recovery
- Forwarded message from XY (X Y) - From: XY (X Y) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: e-mail problem [...] ps I liked your message that you gave up! - End forwarded message - Stefan
Re: one user/many pop accounts: best solution?
I have a simple script in C that resolves same-user-name-but-different-domains. It authenticates a POP account using Postgresql. You can download the script from http://x.csusb.net/free/qmail/ Tong At 06:14 PM 1/18/00 -0500, Chris Johnson wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 02:39:59PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have several domains that I am in the process of transferring to one machine with my qmail mailserver. I've gotten in the habit of accessing my pop mail for different domains at different times depending on what I'm doing. My main email address on each of these domains is the same username, i.e. siffert@domain1 siffert@domain2 siffert@domain3 I know how to store them into different Maildirs in my "siffert" account, depending on domain, thanks to dot-qmail and virtualdomains. But how can I access these different Maildirs through pop? It seems that pop always relies on a hardcoded mailbox name like ~/Maildir, and storing all my different domains' mail in there would scramble them all together. Am I going to *have* to use different useraccounts and header-forging to accomplish this? You need either to use one of the virtual domains packages (see www.qmail.org), or use a different version of checkpassword. I have a patch to the standard checkpassword that lets you use a cdb database to look users up and decide where qmail-pop3d should look for mail. It also works with regular /etc/passwd users. It's pretty simple to set up. See http://www.palomine.net/qmail/checkcdb.tar.gz Chris
Re: recipientmap?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 04:11:18PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, mail stays local. Since I no longer have recipientmap, I wonder what the solution is. One solution is to put qmail.org into mail.chicago.qmail.org's virtualdomains file. Then I can create aliases for all of the local users. The problem is that I must also create aliases for EVERY qmail.org user, so that anyone not on the local machine has their mail sent to the main server. This would be a pain to administer, especially when there are dozens of local offices. recipientmap was a feature of qmail 1.01, and was withdrawn in qmail 1.02 and above. The functionality of recipientmap is now incorporated into virtualdomains. Read the qmail-send man page more carefully, and you'll find your solution. Basically you're on the right track, but you've missed something. -- See complete headers for more info
Qmail forwarding question
Hi. I'm new to qmail. I would like to know on how I would redirect incoming mails to a an smtp server that is internal to our network. I would want my qmail acts as an email gateway. With sendmail, I do it this way, The /etc/mailertable contains mydomain.comsmtp:[192.168.1.1] So any mail sent to mydomain.com will be forwarded to 192.168.1.1 Thanks
Re: Qmail forwarding question
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 02:48:27PM +0800, Ronneil Camara wrote: Hi. I'm new to qmail. I would like to know on how I would redirect incoming mails to a an smtp server that is internal to our network. I would want my qmail acts as an email gateway. With sendmail, I do it this way, The /etc/mailertable contains mydomain.com smtp:[192.168.1.1] echo 'mydomain.com:[192.168.1.1]' /var/qmail/control/smtproutes -- See complete headers for more info
Serveral recipients in a alias?
can I do a alias like this: --8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8--- # cat .qmail-stuff ./0/user1/Maildir/ ./1/user2/Maildir/ --8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8--- Please advice Michael Boman -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M P T E L T D - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Crystal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Serveral recipients in a alias?
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 02:57:08PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote: can I do a alias like this: # cat .qmail-stuff ./0/user1/Maildir/ ./1/user2/Maildir/ Only if 0/user1/Maildir and 1/user2/Maildir are both owned by the same user under which the alias runs to deliver that mail. -- See complete headers for more info
Re: Serveral recipients in a alias?
On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 10:00:39AM +0300, Anand Buddhdev wrote: On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 02:57:08PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote: can I do a alias like this: # cat .qmail-stuff ./0/user1/Maildir/ ./1/user2/Maildir/ Only if 0/user1/Maildir and 1/user2/Maildir are both owned by the same user under which the alias runs to deliver that mail. Okey, then there should be no problem with that as I am using vpopmail that does just that: use a single system UID/GID to store X numbers of domains/users. =) Best regards Michael Boman -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M P T E L T D - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Crystal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Serveral recipients in a alias?
Michael Boman wrote: can I do a alias like this: --8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8--- # cat .qmail-stuff ./0/user1/Maildir/ ./1/user2/Maildir/ --8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8---8--- Please advice Michael Boman Sure. As long as you follow the standard .qmail file syntax. Just remember that qmail-local is the one delivering the mail and processing the .qmail files. The directory specified in /var/qmail/users/assign for the virtual domain is considered to be the current working directory. So relative path names will be based on that directory. You can also specify aliases into other virtual domain directories like /home/vpopmail/domains/domain1/user3/Maildir/ or ../domain2/user4/Maildir/ As long as user/group ownership is the same. Ken Jones www.inter7.com
