Re: A firestorm of protest?
At 23:46 15.1.2001 +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 03:18:10PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: I'm considering removing the entire patches section from www.qmail.org. Why? Because a patch implies that something is wrong, and needs to be fixed. However, when someone produces a "patch" for smtp-auth, that implies that qmail-smtpd has a problem that the patch fixes. I'd rather see people steal the necessary parts of Makefile, and Dan's library code, and create a stand-alone "qmail-smtpd-auth" program. I'd just rename it from patches to "additional functionality" or something like that. I guess, thats the correct approach. It would be very helpful for the qmail community to "organize" the patches - or have them organized. From my point of view - actually how I organize the mails coming from this mailing list - one should differentiate between "Add-Ones" (eg. scripts working within .qmail and the brand new Log-Analyzer in perl) leaving the product unchanged and "Miscellaneous enhancements" covering the patches against the code. Both should be organized by feature and/or qmail module. This would help to keep track of the patches. When I initially created the SPAMCONTROL patch, I had the same problem like everybody has: Here and there is a useful piece of code (=patch) which I integrated into a larger set. But this is not as trivial as it seems. While qmail 1.03 is since years in the field SMTP development is going further (eg. STARTTLS and SASL) and of cause, everybody is interesting employing those features. It is necessary to integrate those enhancements (even though they are not coming from DJB and might be as complex as qmail-ldap) in order to be competitve. In addition, since qmail is prefered by ISPs, there requirements are different wrt the end user. Therefore, we have today packages like vpopmail, sqwebmail and others which enhence qmail and it's complexity significantly. Maybe it would worthwile to consider this as well as an "organizational" item for qmail.org. cheers. eh. +---+ | fffhh http://www.fehcom.deDr. Erwin Hoffmann | | ff hh| | ffeee ccc ooomm mm mm Wiener Weg 8 | | fff ee ee hh hh cc oo oo mmm mm mm 50858 Koeln| | ff ee eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm| | ff eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm Tel 0221 484 4923 | | ff hh hhccc ooomm mm mm Fax 0221 484 4924 | +---+
Re: A firestorm of protest?
Thus spake Piotr Kasztelowicz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): If you want to use bloated, unreliable, immensely fat software with a Where I have written, that EACH patch? Only USEFUL patch. The world goes forward! There is no objective measure for the usefulness of a patch. Thus, there will be endless fruitless discussions that make everyone feel bad, and in the end either Dan does not include the patch, which means that it was all for naught, or Dan does include the patch, and then the discussion will also have been for naught since Dan already includes patches he likes without external discussions (the pop3 daemon is based on someone else's code). Felix
Re: A firestorm of protest?
Thus spake Kris Kelley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): If you want to use bloated, unreliable, immensely fat software with a nice author who will include every patch anyone sends him, switch to Exim. I mean it! Please go away and use Exim. It has all the features anyone could ever want from an MTA, and around 20 million more features. Does Exim also come with a nice mailing list that doesn't demand the exile of people with dissenting opinions? Exim is luser friendly. That's why it is luser software. Felix
Authenticate for default domain
Hi, How do I authenticate for my default domain with just the username ? ie If I use OE 5.0, I should give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED]. I have about 25 domains , but need to authenticate only for my primary domain this way !! This is a little urgent !! Raghu
Re: Bogus popularity claims for Sendmail
Mark Delany write: I would (...) just use the 250 responses from the remote SMTP servers. I wouldn't bother chasing down the MX and then probing it, from the perspective of Sendmail vs qmail vs the-rest, the queue-id responses are sufficiently distinct with a few pattern matches. The best server logs to look at are probably those that are running diverse-interest mailing lists. ISP logs - regardless of whether they are running qmail - are probably fine since we're not counting local deliveries. Good idea. For fun, I decided to look at the logs from our server for the last two weeks. The sample size comes to 3,016,454 messages delived to 62,786 different SMTP servers around the world. Out of these 62,786 remote SMTP servers, 16,658 are running sendmail (27%) and 5098 are running qmail (8%). (The server providing these logs belongs to an ISP and includes a good mix of private, commercial, educational and government users. The remote servers are mostly active servers at other ISP's, schools or businesses I presume, few `idle workstations') -- Gjermund Sorseth
Re: A firestorm of protest?
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Felix von Leitner wrote: There is no objective measure for the usefulness of a patch. Thus, there will be endless fruitless discussions that make everyone feel bad ... Lets so Dan take way of further progress of qmail himself ...:-) Piotr --- Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
Documentation of qmailanalog
Hi there, I am searching for the Documentation of qmailanalog from last one day on net. but unable to find it.Please suggest me where i can get that or if somebody has with him pl. mail me. Thanks, Piyush Jain. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
qmailanalog scripts
Hi, did anyone make the attemt to get the output of qmailanalog in a webpage. I think of kind of report-page where you get a short monthly summary for each local/virtual domain (how many messages, how many Megs, etc.) If there is nothing like this around, would anyone else be interested in such a script or is it just me? bye /ch
RE: Authenticate for default domain
How do I authenticate for my default domain with just the username ? ie If I use OE 5.0, I should give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have about 25 domains , but need to authenticate only for my primary domain this way !! This is a little urgent !! Raghu, You haven't told us *anything* about your qmail setup, so how you expect us to be telpathic and work out what you've setup, I don't know. The fact that you're using multiple domains suggests you might be using, say, vpopmail or VMailMgr, but that's speculation. Possible answer to your question: Run your default domain separately (outside of virtualdomains etc; separate POP3 service). There is a mailing list for vpopmail which may be more appropriate. Andrew.
RE: Authenticate for default domain
are you talking about SMTP-AUTH or POP3 auth? -marlon -Original Message-From: qmailu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 5:46 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Authenticate for default domain Hi, How do I authenticate for my default domain with just the username ? ie If I use OE 5.0, I should give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED]. I have about 25 domains , but need to authenticate only for my primary domain this way !! This is a little urgent !! Raghu
Re: Bogus popularity claims for Sendmail
Out of these 62,786 remote SMTP servers, 16,658 are running sendmail (27%) and 5098 are running qmail (8%). Perhaps it is also interesting to look at how many of the messages were delivered to what type of server. Out of the 3,016,454 messages in the sample, 484,010 were delivered to servers running sendmail (16%) and 313,195 to servers running qmail (11%). This shifts the numbers in favor of qmail, which suggests that large sites prefer to run qmail rather than sendmail. -- Gjermund Sorseth
Re: QMTP MX-question
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 05:16:45AM -, D. J. Bernstein wrote: Johan Almqvist writes: Quoting http://cr.yp.to/proto/mxps.txt Don't believe everything you read. :-) My original design made QMTP-only mail exchangers easier but made QMTP+SMTP mail exchangers harder. This was a bad tradeoff. Clients should interpret a QMTP priority as ``try QMTP, then try SMTP.'' Which is my interpretation of part of the spec, but another part contradicts this. Then a typical SMTP host that adds QMTP support can keep its single MX record but change the priority. Could you please revise the spec? Greetz, Peter.
Re: qmail list reply-to
From: "Brett Randall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:00:06 +1000 Then the sender should ask for a Cc: - remember kids, it isn't called Courtesy Copy for nothing. I thought it was Carbon Copy? Considering that the majority of Internet users these days are so young that the have never seen carbon paper, that term seems to be as obsolete as "dialing" a telephone. At Stan Freburg said, "That went out with button shoes!" Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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. Emanuel.exe
Re: Volunteers for a multilog patch?
Last week there was much discussion (some of it even on topic :) about making multilog rotate files on receipt of a signal. Here's my very simple patch to make multilog rotate its current file on receipt of SIGHUP. I have tested it under RedHat Linux 6.2 ONLY. However, as I have used Dan's coding style (all 2 lines of it) it should work under any systems on which multilog currently works. My tests were fairly minimal - I hammered multilog as fast as I could and sent it a SIGHUP. I then checked to see if it lost any data between rotations - it didn't. It obviously needs field testing, but I think it will allow us to rotate based on time. All we need is a cron job to send the SIGHUP at the appropriate time. If you use this, please let me know how it goes. If I get positive feedback (or no feedback at all) I'll release it in the same manner as my tai64nunix package - ie a stripped down daemontools with only enough to build the new multilog. This should comply with Dan's licensing rules. -- Regards Peter -- Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate) Phone: +1 613 368 4398 Fax: +1 613 564 7739 e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left" Emanuel.exe
Re: Running Multiple Copies of Qmail on the same server...
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 05:18:30PM -0700, James Stevens wrote: Can someone point me to a web page that has some explanation of setting up concurrent running qmails on the same machine and what edits I need to make to avoid conflicks.. Just compile them using different dirs, and install them into those same different dirs. Also, be careful when launching qmail-smtpd. With tcpserver, the "IP" parameter can NOT be 0 (every interface, which is the most common setting). Each tcpserver must be bound to it's own network interface, (assuming you're always using the same port). RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 Emanuel.exe
Re: concurrencyremote
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 05:36:50PM -0400, Doug Schmidt wrote: I would like to increase qmail's concurrencyremote from the default 20 to 40. When I create: /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote and put a value of 40 in the file, I restart qmail and get the error: Oct 10 16:53:14 server qmail: 971211194.211356 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls Any help on this would be great. Check permissions on /var/qmail/control and all files therein. Emanuel.exe
Incomming message filter
hi everyone: I have linux and qmail installed( Sorry, I am a chinese people and poor in English ),I want to make my server can let user configure their mailbox to reject certain messages by MAIL-FROM,but I don't know how to do.Please help me. Thanks. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ === ÐÂÀËÃâ·Ñµç×ÓÓÊÏä http://mail.sina.com.cn ÐÂÀËÍƳö°ÂÔ˶ÌÐÅÏ¢ÊÖ»úµã²¥·þÎñ http://sms.sina.com.cn/ Emanuel.exe
Re: VMailMGR hostname based access
This question belongs on the vmailmgr mailing list. On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 02:14:50PM -, Chris Cioffi wrote: I'm digging into virtual domains and I'm having a problem with logging into my virtual domain. In /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains I have a line that looks like this: virtdom.net:virtdom.net virtdom.net is a valid unix user with home directory /home/virtdom.net Please don't hide the details from us. It only makes our job harder. I can log into my account (user) with this 'virtdom.net-user' but not with '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' or 'user:virtdom.net'. My /etc/vmailmgr/separators contains '@:%' Is there a setting required to permit hostname based access? Nope, unless you mean IP-based virtual domains. I've looked through the docs for vmailmgr and it seems to assume hostbased access just kinda works. It does. -- Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://em.ca/~bruceg/ Emanuel.exe
Re: Logging with checkvpw and qmail-pop3d problems?
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 09:33:57AM -0600, John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote: Does anybody know what variable i would need to get checkvpw to log properly with qmail-pop3d? This was discussed recently in the vmailmgr mailing list. Put a script containing the following into /etc/vmailmgr/checkvpw-postsetuid, and make it executable: #!/bin/sh echo "Login OK: $VUSER $MAILDIR $USER $HOME" -- Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://em.ca/~bruceg/ Emanuel.exe
Re: [OT] iso-8859-1 charset problems
From: Martin Jespersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 00:00:41 +0200 Hi all i have written an sms forward filter in perl that allows me to trigger an s ms message to me if a mail matches my criteria. i then send an sms including the sender of the mail and the subject line. Now my problem is this: I live in denmark and thus it happens pretty often that a subject line incl udes non-standard ascii characters. subject lines with non-standard ascci characters are iso-8859-1 encoded, ex ample follows: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E5_min_skat_-_jeg_g=E5r_til_afdelingsm=F8de_i?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?_Bredgade_nu_-_jeg_ringer_senere=2E_Kys_til_dig_fra_mig?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?_=2AS=2A?= this subject actually reads: Nå min skat - jeg går til afdelingsmøde iBredgade nu - jeg ringer senere. Kys til dig fra mig*S* (if this looks weird don't worry -it's danish :) ofcourse this looks pretty silly in an sms message så what i would like is a way to convert this back to ascii I assume you mean you want to convert it back to iso-58859-1. I did this in tcl a while back. It's actually fairly simple, ?charset?Q?text? means that 'text' is encoded into ascii using quoted printable. quoted printable basically just says that '=dd' should be replaced with the code in hex. I think the actual conversion is a one liner in perl...something along the lines of 's/=(..)/chr(hex($1))/eg' (Note this is untested.) Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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. Emanuel.exe
Re: A bug or am I being daft?
From: "Austad, Jay" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:15:03 -0500 Doesn't the case change violate RFC821 or 822? I seem to remember reading that case in the user portion of the email address should never be changed because the accounts "Bob" and "bob" are two completely different accounts on a unix machine. The rfc says not to change it on mail that a host is relaying, but it leaves it up the the host to do what's appropriate for local addresses. It's really the only reasonable thing they could have specified in a world where some systems have mixed case and some don't. Whether or not qmail should fold addresses into lower case is debatable, but the RFC doesn't give any guidance since it was written to be able to work on systems where folding case is a requirement. Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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. Emanuel.exe
Re: (OT) Vmailmgr and Vpopmail
On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 06:50:59PM +0700, Joomy wrote: Hi all, sorry about this OT, but I can't find any good information about vmailmgr/vpopmail. If anyone have a nice url , please tell me. (not vmailmgr/vpopmail website) I have some (stupid) question about vmailmgr and vpopmail Some answers just about vmailmgr. 1. Can I use more then 8 chars password with both system ? like md5 in shadow password ? or I have to user ldap authentication ? AFAIK, vmailmgr supports MD5 passwords, so probably passwords which are longer than 8 chars. 2. Can I use .qmail (for forwarding purpose) in each user dir ? not the .qmail-USER in domain dir. The .qmail, no, but you cann add forwarders to vmailmgr accounts with the vchforwarders command. 3. Which file/dir will be count when I use quota support in each user dir ? Don't really understand this question... There are per-system user quota, per mail-user quota, etc... and the last one, about file system. What is the differrent if 1. I store 50,000 user mail directory in the same directory. (can I do this ? are there any limitation about file sytem ?) should be ok. 2. I store 50,000 user mail directory by using the vpopmail (create sub-dir when dir reach 100 dirs or something like that) well, that's the vpopmail or vmailmgr which will do that : you don't have to create the directory by yourself... Good luck :) Olivier -- _ Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland Emanuel.exe
Re: qmail list reply-to
From: "Brett Randall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:00:06 +1000 Then the sender should ask for a Cc: - remember kids, it isn't called Courtesy Copy for nothing. I thought it was Carbon Copy? Considering that the majority of Internet users these days are so young that the have never seen carbon paper, that term seems to be as obsolete as "dialing" a telephone. At Stan Freburg said, "That went out with button shoes!" Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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. Emanuel.exe
Re: qmail list reply-to
From: "Brett Randall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:00:06 +1000 Then the sender should ask for a Cc: - remember kids, it isn't called Courtesy Copy for nothing. I thought it was Carbon Copy? Considering that the majority of Internet users these days are so young that the have never seen carbon paper, that term seems to be as obsolete as "dialing" a telephone. At Stan Freburg said, "That went out with button shoes!" Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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. Emanuel.exe
virus in list
don't open attachment emanuel.exe from "funky gao"
hmmm
Emanuel.exe is not needed thx -Message d'origine- De?: funky gao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Envoy¨¦?: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 12:41 ¨¤?: Doug Schmidt Cc?: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet?: Re: concurrencyremote On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 05:36:50PM -0400, Doug Schmidt wrote: I would like to increase qmail's concurrencyremote from the default 20 to 40. When I create: /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote and put a value of 40 in the file, I restart qmail and get the error: Oct 10 16:53:14 server qmail: 971211194.211356 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls Any help on this would be great. Check permissions on /var/qmail/control and all files therein.
Re: Possible problem with qmail-qmtpc patch
* Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010115 23:53]:
I don't see it. Russ's patch looks like this (at least, in the
version I downloaded):
+if (qmtp_priority(ip.ix[i].pref)) {
+ if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int) qmtp_port,timeoutconnect)
== 0) {
+ tcpto_err(ip.ix[i].ip,0);
+ partner = ip.ix[i].ip;
+ qmtp(); /* does not return */
+ }
+}
+if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int) smtp_port,timeoutconnect) ==
0) {
In other words, if the MX priority indicates QMTP, try to make a QMTP
connection. If that connection fails--if it times out, or if the
remote system does not accept the connect request--timeoutconn will
return -1 and qmail-remote will go on to try to make an SMTP
connection.
timeoutconn seems to only return -1 when the attemt times out, NOT if the
remote system doesn't accept the connection attempt. (That's what my
experiments have shown, at least... I'd like very much for this to be
seconded by others before I have another go at this!)
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
PGP signature
Why?
In the last minute I have received 5 emails from this list purporting to be from funky gao. All have an attachment called Emanuel.exe. 4 are messages from regular contributors who are not (apparently) Chinese. These appear to be from other than their normal origins. What is going on? I am certainly not executing the attached exe (and it probably would not run on either my OS/22 box I'm on now nor the Linux or OBSD ones) but I'm mightily suspicious. In a way this is a test to see if the list is hijacked. In the beginning was The Word and The Word was Content-type: text/plain The Word of Rod.
Viruses on the list
Hello everybody. Our virus scanner detected a couple of mails that contain a virus. The message looks like this: Scanning file /var/tmp/qmail-local2076/unpacked/mm.eyj8Cr Scanning file /var/tmp/qmail-local2076/unpacked/Emanuel.exe Found the W32/Navidad.e@M trojan !!! Please take care. Best regards. -- Ertan Payci Seruba GmbH Notkestrasse 1322607 Hamburg FON: 0049 40 41360-212 FAX: 0049 40 41360-100 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please stop sending me your virus infected files!
Even though the message is in norwegian, you will recognize that it's a QMAILSCANNER virus warning, and I've gotten 6 more last hour. Please disinfect your computer and / or temporarly stop sending mail. MVH Andr PaulsbergIDG New Media Support Informasjon fra IDG New Media - http://www.newmedia.no Viktig: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Denne meldingen ble ikke sendt til avsenders adresse, da det ser ut til at dette er fra en meldingsliste eller annen automatisert e-post melding] Et Virus ble funnet i en e-post sendt til deg. E-post skanneren avbrt og stoppet hele meldingen fr den ndde deg. Det er rapportert at Virus er av typen: virus TROJ_NAVIDAD.E Ta kontakt med ditt IT personell vedrrende sprsml for gjeldende regler. E-posten som ble sendt til deg, hadde flgende adresser: MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... og med flgende meldingshode: From:"funky gao" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Martin Jespersen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Qmail mailing list" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OT] iso-8859-1 charset problems Message-ID: 00cd01c0681e$b37264a0$[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date:Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:40:55 +0800 (CST) Den orginale meldingen er tatt vare p i: mailscan2:/var/spool/qmailscan/quarantine hvor System Anti-Virus Administrator videre kan diagnostisere den. E-post skanneren rapporterte flgende nr meldingen ble skannet: --- ---iscan results --- Virus Scanner v3.1, VSAPI v5.170-0617 Trend Micro Inc. 1996,1997 Pattern version 832 Pattern number 25093 Configuration: -a -r -nl -c1 -c2 -u -s Directory /var/spool/qmailscan/mailscan297964821727269 /var/spool/qmailscan/mailscan297964821727269/979648217.27271-0.mailscan2 /var/spool/qmailscan/mailscan297964821727269/Emanuel.exe *** Found virus TROJ_NAVIDAD.E in file /var/spool/qmailscan/mailscan297964821727269/Emanuel.exe == Directory: Searched : 1 File: Searched : 2 Scan : 2 Infected : 1 Infected : 1(Include files been compressed) Time: Start : 1/16/101 13:30:17 Stop : 1/16/101 13:30:17 Used : 00:00 ---
RE: 2 QUESTIONS
Oliver, all of your emails are being sent with a virus infected executable attached, Emanuel.exe, you may want to have a look at your machine before sending more emails. Dave -Original Message- From: funky gao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 6:42 AM To: Linux Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 2 QUESTIONS On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:18:58AM +0200, Linux wrote: 2)I'm managing a mail server with qmail. I have about 200 users and 50 virtual domains, and all my configuration works correctly. I have created about 180 real users (passwd and shadow files) in my system for managing virtual domains accounts. I know that many servers (with qmail) over the internet, host a lot of virtual users (1), but i can't think they created 9000 real users!! Someone can tell me if there was a method to avoid the creation of real account for managing virtual users? Yes: if you use vmailmgr http://www.vmailmgr.org, you will need only one real account per domain, and with vpopmail (check qmail.orG), only one account. Both have own mailing lists. Regards, Olivier -- _ Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
Virus-ridden emails from 'funky gao'?
Is everyone else receiving a bunch of emails from 'funky gao'? Can someone remove this [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the list? I've received quite a few messages from him this morning, all containing the file Emanuel.exe with a virus. Dave -Original Message- From: funky gao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 6:42 AM To: Brett Randall Cc: Robin S. Socha; qmail Subject: Re: qmail list reply-to From: "Brett Randall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:00:06 +1000 Then the sender should ask for a Cc: - remember kids, it isn't called Courtesy Copy for nothing. I thought it was Carbon Copy? Considering that the majority of Internet users these days are so young that the have never seen carbon paper, that term seems to be as obsolete as "dialing" a telephone. At Stan Freburg said, "That went out with button shoes!" Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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.
Re: qmail list reply-to
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* Please check your system I have recieved this attachment "Emanuel.exe" from your addres six times It contains the "win32.Navidad.b" virus thanks - Original Message - From: "funky gao" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Brett Randall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Robin S. Socha" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "qmail" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 1:41 PM Subject: Re: qmail list reply-to From: "Brett Randall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:00:06 +1000 Then the sender should ask for a Cc: - remember kids, it isn't called Courtesy Copy for nothing. I thought it was Carbon Copy? Considering that the majority of Internet users these days are so young that the have never seen carbon paper, that term seems to be as obsolete as "dialing" a telephone. At Stan Freburg said, "That went out with button shoes!" Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 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.
Re: Incomming message filter
your outlook has been afffected by W32.Navidad.16896... please take care!!
qmail smtp daemon takes long to display banner
Hi, my installed qmail server takes long to display its banner, i dont know why, i've followed lifewithqmail step by step and cant figure out what is the problem! Best Regards Gonalo Gomes.
Re: TWO INSTANCES OF QMAIL
I can think of some very good reasons to run a second instance of SMTP, for instance, providing roaming mail service to a large userbase who dialup through earthlink. Earthlink blocks any other SMTP than their own when their users dial up, so with a second SMTP server on another port, you effectively can bypass that problem. I run my SMTP through supervise, so all I had to do was go into /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd, and edit the run script. In the run script, just copy your whole command line in after the first instance, and change the port. Restart your mail, and you're all set (if you want to use a named port, you have to add the name in /etc/services, otherwise you'll use a number). Nothing to it. Rob Grant wrote: In my opinion you shouldn't be running two instances of qmail on the same machine and nor should you ever change the default mail port which is 25. On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, qmailu wrote: Hi, How do I run two instances of qmail on the same machine - the first one listening on port 25 (default smtp port) and the second on some other port, for eg. say 1099. The two instances need to have two different control files - and should not interfere with each others existance. Raghu -- Rob Hines Jr. System Administrator
Re: virus in list
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:03:14PM +0800, Keith, Yeung Wai Kin wrote: don't open attachment emanuel.exe from "funky gao" Why should I? wine emanuel.exe ? Regards. -- Jose AP Celestino [EMAIL PROTECTED] || SAPO / PTM.COM Administrao de Sistemas / Operaes || http://www.sapo.pt --- Elevating brain damage to an art form. Windows.
VIRUS IN LAST 28 MESSAGES FROM FUNKY GAO ON LIST
yea... so far 28 messages have posted back with the virus to the list that have contracted W32/Navidad.e@M in the past 2 1/2 hours... From:"funky gao" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ertan Payci wrote: Hello everybody. Our virus scanner detected a couple of mails that contain a virus. The message looks like this: Scanning file /var/tmp/qmail-local2076/unpacked/mm.eyj8Cr Scanning file /var/tmp/qmail-local2076/unpacked/Emanuel.exe Found the W32/Navidad.e@M trojan !!! Please take care. Best regards. -- Ertan Payci Seruba GmbH Notkestrasse 1322607 Hamburg FON: 0049 40 41360-212 FAX: 0049 40 41360-100 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail with content qmailscan - infected -
Hi, this mail is important for all mail-users that mail under Windows . A mail of the content qmailscan has included an attachment Emanual.exe (or could) This attachment is containing a new macrovirus, not cleanable with the newest Mc Affee (using sdat4115). Regards, Ruprecht --- INTERNOLIX Standards for eBusiness INTERNOLIX AG Ruprecht Helms System-Engineer http://www.internolix.com mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Weiherstr. 20Tel: +49-[0]7533-9945-71 78465 Konstanz Fax: +49-[0]7533-9945-79
Re: tcpserver
Martin Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: maildirmake /etc/skel/Maildir (even from within /cvar/qmail/bin) failed and in the end I had to cd /etc/skel and do /var/qmail/bin/maildirmake Maildir [...] I take it a .qmail file is also required in /etc/skel. As noted by others, no. Provided your default delivery instruction is "./Maildir/", no .qmail files are required for your users if they all posess a Maildir of that path/name. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: smtp to 371.net
Rick Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My mail server is qmail and it plays well. But I can not send any mail to 371.net which has three mx server and one smtp server. mx2.371.net mx3.371.net mx4.371.net smtp.371.net on its website, I got to know that smtp.371.net is recommended. but I can not connect to this server by telneting its 25 port. Can anyone give me a hand? Or is there any other method by which mail servers can communicate with each other? Is the document on its website intended for the ISP's customers? Probably the mx* hosts are intended to be the MX for the domain, and "smtp.371.net" is there as a smart relay for its customers only, and they have port 25 firewalled off from the rest of the net. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: qmail list reply-to
On Tuesday 16 January 2001 13:04, you wrote: *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* Please check your system I have recieved this attachment "Emanuel.exe" from your addres six times It contains the "win32.Navidad.b" virus thanks I was just about to send the same warning when your mail arrived via the list. It's a good job we all use "mutt" and *nix OSes isn't it? ;^) -- Andrew Bold Unix Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by anyone else is unauthorised. If you have received this message in error, you must not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this message. Such unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please delete it immediately and advise us by return e-mail to the above address.
Re: qmail smtp daemon takes long to display banner
Gonalo Gomes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: my installed qmail server takes long to display its banner, i dont know why, i've followed lifewithqmail step by step and cant figure out what is the problem! This is in the FAQs. Read the man page for tcpserver, and pay attention to the section on data-gathering options. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: Authenticate for default domain
Hi, Sorry about that !! My setup - I have test.com as my hostname with MX pointing to my IP address. I also have added testmail1.com, testmail2.com testmail25.com as my virtual domains with their MX pointing to the same IP. Now I need my users in testmail1.com to give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED] to authenticate to retrieve their mails. So how do I setup testmail1.com as the default domain ? Raghu - Original Message - From: Andrew Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'qmailu' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 4:33 PM Subject: RE: Authenticate for default domain How do I authenticate for my default domain with just the username ? ie If I use OE 5.0, I should give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have about 25 domains , but need to authenticate only for my primary domain this way !! This is a little urgent !! Raghu, You haven't told us *anything* about your qmail setup, so how you expect us to be telpathic and work out what you've setup, I don't know. The fact that you're using multiple domains suggests you might be using, say, vpopmail or VMailMgr, but that's speculation. Possible answer to your question: Run your default domain separately (outside of virtualdomains etc; separate POP3 service). There is a mailing list for vpopmail which may be more appropriate. Andrew.
Re: Authenticate for default domain
Hi, Sorry about that !! My setup - I have test.com as my hostname with MX pointing to my IP address. I also have added testmail1.com, testmail2.com testmail25.com as my virtual domains with their MX pointing to the same IP. Now I need my users in testmail1.com to give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED] to authenticate to retrieve their mails. So how do I setup testmail1.com as the default domain ? Raghu - Original Message - From: Andrew Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'qmailu' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 4:33 PM Subject: RE: Authenticate for default domain How do I authenticate for my default domain with just the username ? ie If I use OE 5.0, I should give only username and not [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have about 25 domains , but need to authenticate only for my primary domain this way !! This is a little urgent !! Raghu, You haven't told us *anything* about your qmail setup, so how you expect us to be telpathic and work out what you've setup, I don't know. The fact that you're using multiple domains suggests you might be using, say, vpopmail or VMailMgr, but that's speculation. Possible answer to your question: Run your default domain separately (outside of virtualdomains etc; separate POP3 service). There is a mailing list for vpopmail which may be more appropriate. Andrew.
ENOUGH WITH THE FRIGGIN VIRII WARNINGS!
-- B r e t t R a n d a l l http://xbox.ipsware.com/ brett _ @ _ ipsware.com
Re: looking for mua
"Robin S. Socha" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: mutt is pretty nifty. Another good choice would be Gnus http://www.gnus.org/ which also supports Maildir natively if you use nnmaildir. Since Google doesn't find it, I'll say that nnmaildir lives at URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu/nnmaildir/ Otherwise, Maildir is available as a regular mail backend. Which is to say: the other backends can read incoming mail from a maildir, but they store it in some other format. AFAIK, nnmaildir is the only (existing) way to make Gnus store mail in a maildir. paul
RE: A firestorm of protest?
I'm going to jump into the discussion here and ask why we don't do something like perl has done with cpan? They don't call them patches, or upgrades, or anything else. They call them Modules and have a central repository that users can go and search from. I think this would be ideal for qmail.org site... Just my $0.02 Laurence -- Laurence Brockman Unix Administrator Videon Cablesystems Alberta Inc 10450-178 St. Edmonton, AB T5S 1S2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (780) 486-6527 -Original Message- From: Erwin Hoffmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 1:39 AM To: Henning Brauer; qmail-list Subject: Re: A firestorm of protest? At 23:46 15.1.2001 +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 03:18:10PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: I'm considering removing the entire patches section from www.qmail.org. Why? Because a patch implies that something is wrong, and needs to be fixed. However, when someone produces a "patch" for smtp-auth, that implies that qmail-smtpd has a problem that the patch fixes. I'd rather see people steal the necessary parts of Makefile, and Dan's library code, and create a stand-alone "qmail-smtpd-auth" program. I'd just rename it from patches to "additional functionality" or something like that. I guess, thats the correct approach. It would be very helpful for the qmail community to "organize" the patches - or have them organized. From my point of view - actually how I organize the mails coming from this mailing list - one should differentiate between "Add-Ones" (eg. scripts working within .qmail and the brand new Log-Analyzer in perl) leaving the product unchanged and "Miscellaneous enhancements" covering the patches against the code. Both should be organized by feature and/or qmail module. This would help to keep track of the patches. When I initially created the SPAMCONTROL patch, I had the same problem like everybody has: Here and there is a useful piece of code (=patch) which I integrated into a larger set. But this is not as trivial as it seems. While qmail 1.03 is since years in the field SMTP development is going further (eg. STARTTLS and SASL) and of cause, everybody is interesting employing those features. It is necessary to integrate those enhancements (even though they are not coming from DJB and might be as complex as qmail-ldap) in order to be competitve. In addition, since qmail is prefered by ISPs, there requirements are different wrt the end user. Therefore, we have today packages like vpopmail, sqwebmail and others which enhence qmail and it's complexity significantly. Maybe it would worthwile to consider this as well as an "organizational" item for qmail.org. cheers. eh. +---+ | fffhh http://www.fehcom.deDr. Erwin Hoffmann | | ff hh| | ffeee ccc ooomm mm mm Wiener Weg 8 | | fff ee ee hh hh cc oo oo mmm mm mm 50858 Koeln| | ff ee eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm| | ff eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm Tel 0221 484 4923 | | ff hh hhccc ooomm mm mm Fax 0221 484 4924 | +---+
tcpserver/smtp
Okay I know the to aren't the same, but two seperate issues.
I am setting up qmail running Maildir/
I can get the server running and am able to send mail to my box
locally on the machine itself
If I try to send a message from another machine to that box the
messages goes. I never get a bouce back but the messages never
appears in my maildir/new box. It just gets lost in space so to speak.
I am able to check mail from a remote machine and retrieve it, when I
send it from the same machine of course. but when I start qmail and
tcpserver i get
{pop3d: 979682833.124531 tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address
already used}
Now since I know I am missing something simple, and with a brain fry
(to much OT) I'm missing it or trying to make more out of it than
there is. Therefore a fresh perspective ??
My tcpserver startup looks like this.
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
mail.mydomian.com \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 | \
/var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d
Suggesitons please
How I block some adresses ?????
Hi ! I have 55 e-mail addresses of peoples that constantly send SPAMS for my server. I would like to block these addresses for the whole server. How do I make that? -- Best regards, Ana
Re: tcpserver/smtp
* Dale Herring [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010116 16:39]: My tcpserver startup looks like this. /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.mydomian.com \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d Suggesitons please Starting an smtp server may help tcpserver 0 smtp qmail-smtpd Or, with you paths: /usr/local/bin/tcpserver 0 smtp qmail-smtpd | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd -Johan -- Johan Almqvist http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/ PGP signature
Re: How I block some adresses ?????
Ana, please don't start new threads by replying to old messages! * Ana Paula [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010116 17:03]: I have 55 e-mail addresses of peoples that constantly send SPAMS for my server. I would like to block these addresses for the whole server. How do I make that? Put the addresses, one per line, into /var/qmail/control/badmailfrom Note that this makes qmail-smtpd reject based on the _envelope_ sender. Use Peter's patch at http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/qmail-qmtpc.html to achieve the same thing for qmail-qmtpd. -Johan -- Johan Almqvist http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/ PGP signature
Re: Possible problem with qmail-qmtpc patch
Johan Almqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010115 23:53]:
I don't see it. Russ's patch looks like this (at least, in the
version I downloaded):
+if (qmtp_priority(ip.ix[i].pref)) {
+ if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int)
qmtp_port,timeoutconnect) == 0) {
+ tcpto_err(ip.ix[i].ip,0);
+ partner = ip.ix[i].ip;
+ qmtp(); /* does not return */
+ }
+}
+if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int) smtp_port,timeoutconnect)
== 0) {
In other words, if the MX priority indicates QMTP, try to make a QMTP
connection. If that connection fails--if it times out, or if the
remote system does not accept the connect request--timeoutconn will
return -1 and qmail-remote will go on to try to make an SMTP
connection.
timeoutconn seems to only return -1 when the attemt times out, NOT if the
remote system doesn't accept the connection attempt. (That's what my
experiments have shown, at least... I'd like very much for this to be
seconded by others before I have another go at this!)
Interesting. What type of system are you running? The code in
timeoutconn.c uses getpeername to check whether the connect really
succeeded. This is as DJB suggests in
http://cr.yp.to/docs/unixport.html
When I look at timeoutconn.c, it looks to me like it should return -1
if the connect attempt fails. Any other result implies that
getpeername succeeds when the socket is not connected.
Ian
forwarding mail
Hello All, Is there some way to forward an individuals mail to a different ISP. For example if a user has retired from this company and is using a private ISP now can I forward [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks for the help. Regards, Travis Turner Information Technology Manager Applied Integration Corporation Tucson, Arizona U.S.A. Phone (520) 743-3095 Fax (520) 623-1683 "Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Re: qmail smtp daemon takes long to display banner
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 01:31:16PM -, Gon?alo Gomes wrote: my installed qmail server takes long to display its banner, i dont know why, i've followed lifewithqmail step by step and cant figure out what is the problem! You didn't gave sufficient information, but I could guess the problem. Disable ident lookups, man tcpserver gives you the options. Careful reading of this manpage is important, there are at least two other opions whioch can speed up things. -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg http://www.bsws.de | Germany
Re: smtp to 371.net
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:12:54AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Rick Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My mail server is qmail and it plays well. But I can not send any mail to 371.net which has three mx server and one smtp server. mx2.371.net mx3.371.net mx4.371.net smtp.371.net on its website, I got to know that smtp.371.net is recommended. but I can not connect to this server by telneting its 25 port. Can anyone give me a hand? Or is there any other method by which mail servers can communicate with each other? Is the document on its website intended for the ISP's customers? Probably the mx* hosts are intended to be the MX for the domain, and "smtp.371.net" is there as a smart relay for its customers only, and they have port 25 firewalled off from the rest of the net. dnsmx 371.net gives mx.371.net, so this one is reachable from outside. -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg http://www.bsws.de | Germany
Re: ENOUGH WITH THE FRIGGIN VIRII WARNINGS!
Hey, it took 30 minuttes for my message to go trough! When I sent the message NOONE had complained, later when the list catched up several warning-messages came. Complain to the "fill in the blank" person who sent this virus :( MVH Andr Paulsberg
Re: forwarding mail
Is there some way to forward an individuals mail to a different ISP. For example if a user has retired from this company and is using a private ISP now can I forward [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks for the help. Edit his .qmail file to point to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or remove his user and create an alias with this redirect). This is basic, please read man dot_qmail before farther questions. __IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
Re: forwarding mail
Travis Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there some way to forward an individuals mail to a different ISP. For example if a user has retired from this company and is using a private ISP now can I forward [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Of course there is. It's clearly documented, and is probably in the FAQ. Hint: `man dot-qmail`. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: smtp to 371.net
Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:12:54AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Rick Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My mail server is qmail and it plays well. But I can not send any mail to 371.net which has three mx server and one smtp server. on its website, I got to know that smtp.371.net is recommended. but I can not connect to this server by telneting its 25 port. Can anyone give me a hand? Or is there any other method by which mail servers can communicate with each other? Is the document on its website intended for the ISP's customers? Probably the mx* hosts are intended to be the MX for the domain, and "smtp.371.net" is there as a smart relay for its customers only, and they have port 25 firewalled off from the rest of the net. dnsmx 371.net gives mx.371.net, so this one is reachable from outside. I meant that "smtp.371.net" might be an internal-only mail relay. Any host named "mx\d" is probably a publically-reachable MX. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: Installing mini-qmail seems to require qmail ids contrary to documentation
Yusuf Goolamabbas writes: So, does the installation of mini-qmail require creating of user-ids for installation and then one can delete them subsequently Before running make setup check, you could edit conf-users and conf-groups so that all the first eight lines of conf-users have ``root'' and all the first two lines of conf-groups have ``wheel'' (or ``root'' on some systems). Then you don't have to create new users and groups. I think replacing qmail users with root in conf-* is safe as long as one is doing a mini-qmail installation: there is no queue; there is no setuid program; and there is no long-running daemons. Along this line, I happened to make a ``mini-qmail kit'' some time ago. If you are interested, see: http://pobox.com/~tu/mini-qmail-kit.html -- Tetsu Ushijima
Re: unable to bind: address already used
@40003a636a5e07e6c22c tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used This means that there's already active a pop3-server, look with ps. disable the pop3 entry in inetd.conf. marco leeflang
Re: smtp to 371.net
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 11:33:06AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dnsmx 371.net gives mx.371.net, so this one is reachable from outside. I meant that "smtp.371.net" might be an internal-only mail relay. Any host named "mx\d" is probably a publically-reachable MX. This is speculation. As mx.371.net is a MX for this domain it must be reachable from outside. For the others we don't have any information. -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg http://www.bsws.de | Germany
Re: qmail smtp daemon takes long to display banner
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 06:00:21PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 01:31:16PM -, Gon?alo Gomes wrote: my installed qmail server takes long to display its banner, i dont know why, i've followed lifewithqmail step by step and cant figure out what is the problem! You didn't gave sufficient information, but I could guess the problem. Disable ident lookups, man tcpserver gives you the options. Careful reading of this manpage is important, there are at least two other opions whioch can speed up things. Disabling host resolution also helps quite a lot. Just RTFM before asking. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Tcnica | P. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7 E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Handling an MX record of 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1
We received an influx of mail today addressed to (probably bogus) users at the domain 'groupprojects.net'. This domain has the following MX record: groupprojects.net preference = 0, mail exchanger = 0.0.0.0 When we received the message, qmail connected to 0.0.0.0 to deliver the mail. 0.0.0.0 connects to 127.0.0.1, so qmail ended up connected to itself. It continued to deliver the message to itself, and because 127. is allowed to relay on my system, the message was accepted. Then qmail would immediately begin delivering the message to itself again. Wash, rinse, repeat. I stopped this from happening by denying connections from 127. in my TCP rules file for qmail-smtpd (I changed 127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",,RBLSMTPD=""DENYMAIL="DNSCHECK" to 127.:deny ), but this seemed like kind of a kludgey solution. So I have 2 questions. 1) Is there a better way to do this? Allowing 127. to relay is a convenient way for me to test. I'd like to be able to null-route to these addresses in smtproutes instead, but I don't see a way to do that. 2) Will anything bad happen as a result of blocking SMTP connections from 127.? I can't think of what this would break, but I've always had this address allowed to relay before . . . Thanks, --ScottG.
Re: Dot in email adress
James R Grinter wrote: "David L. Nicol" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What exactly is the threat this is supposed to guard against? Is it directory descending on vms, or access to the .. directory somehow? I think it's along the lines of something like 'user-/../foo@domain' which would naively search for '.qmail-/../foo'. Replacing '.' is an easy way to prevent it ever being possible. James. Yes, but dot appears so many places -- would not replacing slash be a better solution? -- David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "people with fish eyes and brown socks"
Re: A firestorm of protest?
At 07:21 PM 1/15/2001, you wrote: On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Felix von Leitner wrote: If you want to use bloated, unreliable, immensely fat software with a Where I have written, that EACH patch? Only USEFUL patch. The world goes forward! Ah...but what is useful to thee may not be useful to me :o) Or many others for that matter. Who decides what's useful? Jer
Re: A firestorm of protest?
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:18:10 -0500 (EST), Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why? Because a patch implies that something is wrong, and needs to be fixed. However, when someone produces a "patch" for smtp-auth, that This might be too simple, but why not call them 'modifications' or 'customi[sz]ations'? That doesn't seem to have the implied wrongness... end -- Jurjen Oskam * carnivore! * http://www.stupendous.org/ for PGP key assassinate nuclear iraq clinton kill bomb USA eta ira cia fbi nsa kill president wall street ruin economy disrupt phonenetwork atomic bomb sarin nerve gas bin laden military -*- DVD Decryption at www.stupendous.org -*-
Header rewriting ...
I know that this question is being askedfrom time to time here, but I have never seen a descriptive answer to it. I have to rewrite the FROM field frommessages I recieve through smtp.The only rewriting I have to do is if FROM = alex@a.b then i rewrite to FROM = [EMAIL PROTECTED]. The username stays the same, only rewrite the domail name. I have tried to use the Fixup part from qmail faq, created virtual domain, got Mess822, starting to use new-inject in /alias/.qmail-catchall-default, but I am unable to reach a satisfiing set of parameters for it. Somehow I get the feeling that the virtdomail idea is not designed for tis situation, or am I wrong ??? Help will be apriciated. Alex. __IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
Re: Possible problem with qmail-qmtpc patch
Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think there may be a problem with the patches to qmail-remote that make
it speak QMTP based on MXPS.
If the QMTP connection fails (because the remote host doesn't have a qmtpd
running) this failure will be logged as
deferral: Connected_to_194.47.249.19_but_connection_died._(#4.4.2)/
which means that the message will not be retried at the next best MX but
go back to the queue.
I don't see it.
Now I see it. You can't call connect twice on the same socket. This
patch, on top of Russ's patch, fixes it.
Ian
--- qmail-remote.c.~1~ Sat Jan 6 22:49:02 2001
+++ qmail-remote.c Tue Jan 16 10:30:29 2001
@@ -531,6 +531,9 @@
partner = ip.ix[i].ip;
qmtp(); /* does not return */
}
+ close(smtpfd);
+ smtpfd = socket(AF_INET,SOCK_STREAM,0);
+ if (smtpfd == -1) temp_oserr();
}
if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int) smtp_port,timeoutconnect) ==
0) {
tcpto_err(ip.ix[i].ip,0);
Re: qmailanalog scripts
hi i write one http://www.enderunix.org/isoqlog it suppliess your request On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Clemens Hermann wrote: Hi, did anyone make the attemt to get the output of qmailanalog in a webpage. I think of kind of report-page where you get a short monthly summary for each local/virtual domain (how many messages, how many Megs, etc.) If there is nothing like this around, would anyone else be interested in such a script or is it just me? bye /ch
Re: A firestorm of protest?
"Chris Garrigues" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "David Dyer-Bennet" [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Upgrade" suggests adding features, rather more than "patch" does; patches are often released to fix bugs. How about "addition" or "extension"? I vote for "source code plug-ins". :-) -Dave
Re: Handling an MX record of 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1
Scott Gifford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] 127. is allowed to relay on my system, the message was accepted. Then qmail would immediately begin delivering the message to itself again. Wash, rinse, repeat. I stopped this from happening by denying connections from 127. in my TCP rules file for qmail-smtpd (I changed 127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",,RBLSMTPD=""DENYMAIL="DNSCHECK" to 127.:deny ), but this seemed like kind of a kludgey solution. So I have 2 questions. 1) Is there a better way to do this? Allowing 127. to relay is a convenient way for me to test. I'd like to be able to null-route to these addresses in smtproutes instead, but I don't see a way to do that. Change your rule to: 126.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="@localrelay" and add a virtual domain "localrelay" which files all messages in a single Maildir, or throws them away. Any mail injected from 127. will get its envelope recipient rewritten by appending the contents of RELAYCLIENT, and it will then be handled by this virtual domain. 2) Will anything bad happen as a result of blocking SMTP connections from 127.? I can't think of what this would break, but I've always had this address allowed to relay before . . . Only if you run software on the machine which sends mail by SMTP to localhost rather than using the "sendmail" interface. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: Virus-ridden emails from 'funky gao'?
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 08:02:44 EST, "Hubbard, David" wrote: Is everyone else receiving a bunch of emails from 'funky gao'? Can someone remove this [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the list? I've received quite a few messages from him this morning, all containing the file Emanuel.exe with a virus. Yes, I have been receiving these as well. Our mail server with qmail-scanner has rejected 16 so far. They are probably not going back to him so he may not even be aware... Andy
Re: A firestorm of protest?
: I vote for "source code plug-ins". :-) : : -Dave : Service pack 0.1 Beta? TonyCam
Re: Handling an MX record of 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1
Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Change your rule to: 126.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="@localrelay" 127., of course. Typo. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: A firestorm of protest?
* Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Chris Garrigues" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "David Dyer-Bennet" [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Upgrade" suggests adding features, rather more than "patch" does; patches are often released to fix bugs. How about "addition" or "extension"? I vote for "source code plug-ins". :-) Ummm... Nope. A plug-in is something one plugs in. Like relay-ctrl. Patches are not. A tool to magically merge patches one needs into one big patch (like Felix' jumbo patch) would be really neat (like, smtp-auth fails with the other patches I need applied).
Re: A firestorm of protest?
* Laurence Brockman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm going to jump into the discussion here and ask why we don't do something like perl has done with cpan? They don't call them patches, or upgrades, or anything else. They call them Modules and have a central repository that users can go and search from. I think this would be ideal for qmail.org site... A module is not a patch. You can apply as many well written modules as you like - but you cannot simply patch away at an existing code base. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
RE: tcpserver/smtp
Okay, i got rid of one error and picked up another one.
tcpserver: warning: dropping connection, unable to run qmail-smtpd: file
does not exist
And I still have mail that is going to the machine but it just disapears.
Instead of going to the Maildir/
-Original Message-
From: Charles Cazabon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 10:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: tcpserver/smtp
Dale Herring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am able to check mail from a remote machine and retrieve it, when I
send it from the same machine of course. but when I start qmail and
tcpserver i get
{pop3d: 979682833.124531 tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address
already used}
Something else is already running on port 25. Did you forget to stop
sendmail?
Charles
--
---
Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
---
Re: tcpserver/smtp
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 02:02:33PM -0600, Dale Herring wrote:
Okay, i got rid of one error and picked up another one.
tcpserver: warning: dropping connection, unable to run qmail-smtpd: file
does not exist
So you have yet another error to get rid of.
Is it too obvious to ask that you show us how you are running
tcpserver? And I do mean the exact command, not some paraphrasing as
paraphrasing hides errors.
And I still have mail that is going to the machine but it just disapears.
Instead of going to the Maildir/
I bet you it's not. Show us the log files where the mail
"disapears". It is simply somewhere that you haven't looked.
Regards.
-Original Message-
From: Charles Cazabon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 10:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: tcpserver/smtp
Dale Herring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am able to check mail from a remote machine and retrieve it, when I
send it from the same machine of course. but when I start qmail and
tcpserver i get
{pop3d: 979682833.124531 tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address
already used}
Something else is already running on port 25. Did you forget to stop
sendmail?
Charles
--
---
Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
---
Re: Life With Qmail
"Keith Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I followed the directions to the T in Life with Qmail - http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html. At the end of the install, chapter 2, I re-booted. After my system booted I type ps and there was only 2 processes running: 1) bash 2) ps You're not seeing all the processes. Try one of: ps -ef ps waux Or even: qmail stat (after you put /usr/local/sbin in root's path). Then I issued the command "/usr/local/sbin/qmail start". PS then showed 9 processes running: 1) bash 2) svscan 3) supervise 4) supervise 5) supervise 6) supervise 7) tcpserver 8) qmail-lspawn 9) ps You're still not seeing all processes. Several questions: 1) Why did I have to start qmail manually? You probably didn't. 2) According to the TEST.deliver file there should be 4 processes running: a) qmail-send b) qmail-lspawn c) qmail-rspawn d) qmail-clean Could these be showing as supervise? No. 3) LWQ says "logging will be accomplished by multilog" Where is the log? /var/log/qmail/current for qmail-send /var/log/qmail/smtpd/current for qmail-smtpd (really just tcpserver) -Dave
RE: A firestorm of protest?
how about: stuff-to-make-qmail-a-reasonable-tool-to-use-with-a-few-million-users-that-m ay-encourage-others-to-write-stuff-that-may-introduce-security-holes-and-mak e-the-original-author-uneasy i'm grateful that qmail is security bug free. but i have the need to control the max number of recipients per email and to prevent broken ms SMTP servers from bringing my servers to their knees, etc. while i wrote a similar "enhancement" to qmail to control max rcpt's to what was on the qmail.org site (before i knew to cruise the site for good stuff), i wouldn't want to do that for things like big todo "patch" and perhaps the big concurrancy "patch". if i had a few or ten thousand users, i'd gladly use qmail "out of the box." i'd have someone watch the logs 24/7 and if they see too many connections from one IP, block them with a tcpserver rule. unfortunately i have too many servers and too many users to be doing that. i need the help that others have provided to assist qmail be accepted and usable in many heterogeneous real world environments. -- Michael Boyiazis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail Architect, NetZero, Inc.
Re: A firestorm of protest?
"Robin S. Socha" wrote: * Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Chris Garrigues" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "David Dyer-Bennet" [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Upgrade" suggests adding features, rather more than "patch" does; patches are often released to fix bugs. How about "addition" or "extension"? I vote for "source code plug-ins". :-) Ummm... Nope. A plug-in is something one plugs in. Like relay-ctrl. Patches are not. A tool to magically merge patches one needs into one big patch (like Felix' jumbo patch) would be really neat (like, smtp-auth fails with the other patches I need applied). Why not put together something like that.. a versioning tool for qmail and patches... have a published standard format for dealing with it and specifing the details for each patch (Module).. Jonathan Smith
@home.com mail servers...
Is it just me, or do you folks that run lists find that many of the messages stuck in the queue are to @home.com recipients? Whilst watching my logs, I see *many* "Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establsih_an_SMTP_connection._". I knew they had mail problems, but sheesh! -- ./mk
Re: qmail help quick!
Dan Phoenix [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am noticing all the mail going into the queue and maybe 10 qmail-remote processes whereas I have 250 set for concurrencyremote! You restarted qmail after you modified concurrencyremote? Grep for "status:" in your qmail-send logs to verify that qmail-send agrees that concurrencyremote is set to 250. THis makes no sense to me. THis is a freebsd system and yes sendmail is a symlink to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail. All my config looks right...I have not had this problem before. What is happening? Could be a lot of things. Have you verified that resource starvation isn't problem? E.g., you've got plenty of CPU cycles going to qmail, adequate RAM, adequate network bandwidth, adequate disk I/O performance... i am out of ideas...i checked /var/log/qmail/current and /var/log/qmail/smtpd/currentmail looks like it is going out fine. qmail-showwhatever shows everythign is great..but everything gets thrown in the queue...so many almost damaging it. qmail *always* queues all mail. That's not a problem. I am not sure if I am on these mailing lists...so please cc directly to methx in advance. Done. -Dave
Re: A firestorm of protest?
"Robin S. Socha" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I vote for "source code plug-ins". :-) Ummm... Nope. Nope what? Nope, I don't vote for "source code plug-ins"? Or nope, "source code plug-ins" is not a good rename for "patches"? You're right either way--as the smiley clearly indicates. Seriously, I suggest we call them "modifications", or "mods" for short. -Dave
tcpserver/smtp
Okay, yea I know its not disappearing. Lets just say like you said I can't find it yet. But at least its not getting bounced. tcpserver startup scripts. /usr/local/bin/tcpserver 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup server.mydomain.com \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d Now I am sure that there is a way to include the smtp stuff into the supervise/qmail-smtp/run script... As far as the missing mail goes I have mailed a e-mail with a attachment and the overall used space is increasing.. so I know that it is getting there. Just have to find it.
Re: @home.com mail servers...
Marc Knoop wrote: Is it just me, or do you folks that run lists find that many of the messages stuck in the queue are to @home.com recipients? not so much @home, but usually half of aol's mail exchangers fail to respond at any given point.
Re: @home.com mail servers...
Funny you say that... We've had a broken link to them since 01-10-2001 ~ Tons of mail in the queue... =( Following is a tracert snippet... Tracing route to home.com [199.172.150.102] over a maximum of 30 hops: 10 111 ms 110 ms 120 ms p1-0.lsanca1-br2.bbnplanet.net [4.24.6.77] 11 121 ms 110 ms 140 ms p2-0.lsanca1-br1.bbnplanet.net [4.24.4.13] 12 120 ms 161 ms 130 ms p7-3.paloalto-nbr2.bbnplanet.net [4.24.5.210] 13 120 ms 121 ms 150 ms p4-0.paloalto-nbr1.bbnplanet.net [4.0.5.65] 14 150 ms 121 ms 130 ms p1-0.paloalto-cr1.bbnplanet.net [4.0.6.74] 15 *** Request timed out. Do you have DSL??? Who is your provider??? Jesse : Is it just me, or do you folks that run lists find that many of the messages stuck in the queue are to @home.com recipients? : : Whilst watching my logs, I see *many* "Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establsih_an_SMTP_connection._". I knew they had mail problems, but sheesh! : : -- : ./mk
bounce mail allways double bounces because the 'to' in the envelope is empty?
Hi, I'm running qmail+vpopmail in a redhat 6.2 box. Instaled yesterday and never installed before, only managed some systems already installed. It seems I doesn't have a mail defined for the bounce mails to go for? I mean, for checking I sended a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], thatemail I'm sure that doesn't exist. I thought I would recibe some bounce mail in [EMAIL PROTECTED], so I checked, but received this: --- Hi. This is the qmail-send program at tuxar.com.I tried to deliver a bounce message to this address, but the bounce bounced!@tuxar.com:Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. vpopmail (#5.1.1)--- Below this line is the original bounce.Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12560 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 03:47:46 -Received: from unknown (HELO pepe) (192.168.1.2) by ol50-71.fibertel.com.ar with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 03:47:46 -asdf --- It seems all bounced mail double-bounces and finally got to postmaster. How can I solve this? Is this important? Would cause any damage? Bellow is the output for qmail-showctl, that I thought It may be usefull for you: --- qmail home directory: /var/qmail.user-ext delimiter: -.paternalism (in decimal): 2.silent concurrency limit: 120.subdirectory split: 23.user ids: 512, 513, 514, 0, 515, 516, 517, 518.group ids: 512, 513. badmailfrom: (Default.) Any MAIL FROM is allowed. bouncefrom: (Default.) Bounce user name is MAILER-DAEMON. bouncehost: (Default.) Bounce host name is tuxar.com. concurrencylocal: (Default.) Local concurrency is 10. concurrencyremote: (Default.) Remote concurrency is 20. databytes: (Default.) SMTP DATA limit is 0 bytes. defaultdomain: Default domain name is tuxar.com. defaulthost: (Default.) Default host name is tuxar.com. doublebouncehost: (Default.) 2B recipient host: tuxar.com. doublebounceto: (Default.) 2B recipient user: postmaster. envnoathost: (Default.) Presumed domain name is tuxar.com. helohost: (Default.) SMTP client HELO host name is tuxar.com. idhost: (Default.) Message-ID host name is tuxar.com. localiphost: (Default.) Local IP address becomes tuxar.com. locals: me: My name is tuxar.com. percenthack: (Default.) The percent hack is not allowed. plusdomain: Plus domain name is tuxar.com. qmqpservers: (Default.) No QMQP servers. queuelifetime: (Default.) Message lifetime in the queue is 604800 seconds. rcpthosts: SMTP clients may send messages to recipients at tuxar.com. morercpthosts: (Default.) No effect. morercpthosts.cdb: (Default.) No effect. smtpgreeting: (Default.) SMTP greeting: 220 tuxar.com. smtproutes: (Default.) No artificial SMTP routes. timeoutconnect: (Default.) SMTP client connection timeout is 60 seconds. timeoutremote: (Default.) SMTP client data timeout is 1200 seconds. timeoutsmtpd: (Default.) SMTP server data timeout is 1200 seconds. virtualdomains: Virtual domain: tuxar.com:tuxar.com rcpthosts.lock: I have no idea what this file does. virtualdomains.lock: I have no idea what this file does. locals.lock: I have no idea what this file does.--- Sorry If this is docummented elsewhere and I missed. Thanks in advance, Sebastian Brocher www.tuxar.com
tcpserver with more connection control
Sorry, if this is somewhat off topic, but I haven't found a ucspi-tcp list. (and nothing approriate searching with search engines ;-) Has someone written an addon to tcpserver that allows control of connection frequency based on ip addresses? I am thinking of something like specifing 1.2.3.4 20 connects per 10 minutes If that limit is hit tcpserver would either deny the connection or start an optional other program e.g. smtpreject which could send 220 mail.example.com and a 451 too many connections as an answer to sucessive commands. Thanks, \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Re: A firestorm of protest?
+ Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED]: | Seriously, I suggest we call them "modifications", or "mods" for | short. This whole discussion reminds of a Lisp story I heard many years ago. These folks were making a software package based on Lisp. A manager actually requested that they rename the garbage collector because it (the name) implied that their program produced garbage! But of course, if we are to bend to this silliness in the first place, then Dave's suggestion sound good to me. - Harald
Re: Documentation of qmailanalog
Try the docs that come with qmailanalog. /usr/local/qmailanalog/doc/MATCHUP On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I am searching for the Documentation of qmailanalog from last one day on net. but unable to find it.Please suggest me where i can get that or if somebody has with him pl. mail me. Thanks, Piyush Jain. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: qmailanalog scripts
What's the point? If you have root on the machine you can view it from the terminal session. Just output the results of the various reports that qmailanalog has to a file that is available on your web server. On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Clemens Hermann wrote: Hi, did anyone make the attemt to get the output of qmailanalog in a webpage. I think of kind of report-page where you get a short monthly summary for each local/virtual domain (how many messages, how many Megs, etc.) If there is nothing like this around, would anyone else be interested in such a script or is it just me? bye /ch
Re: ENOUGH WITH THE FRIGGIN VIRII WARNINGS!
Use pine On 17 Jan 2001, Brett Randall wrote:
RE: A firestorm of protest?
I hate to add to the barrage of email about this, but, I feel that I must throw in my 2 cents for the record. My vote for the web site would be qmail-plugins or something to that effect. It does not imply any shortcoming, defect or bug, it simply states that some my find each particular plugin useful, while others may have no use for it at all. As for updating qmail, I would be all for a new version of qmail with some of the more useful (nearly mandatory) plugins already added. A couple I can think of is the oversize DNS packet patch for qmail, and possibly qmail-scanner ( with the option to disable it if not needed). After last nights virus fiasco on this list, is there anyone who doesn't think it might be a welcome addition to a standard qmail install? : ) As for who would decide what is useful and what isn't? I would assume DJB or perhaps a small panel of qmail experts appointed by DJB could vote on additions to the mail install. As I said, these are just my 2 cents from someone not far into the qmail journey. I'm picking it up when and where I can. Aaron Carr
Re: A firestorm of protest?
On 17-Jan-01 at 01:05, Aaron Carr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I hate to add to the barrage of email about this, but, I feel that I must throw in my 2 cents for the record. My vote for the web site would be qmail-plugins or something to that effect. It does not imply any shortcoming, defect or bug, it simply states that some my find each particular plugin useful, while others may have no use for it at all. Why not "Source Code Options" As for updating qmail, I would be all for a new version of qmail with some of the more useful (nearly mandatory) plugins already added. A couple I can think of is the oversize DNS packet patch for qmail, and possibly qmail-scanner ( with the option to disable it if not needed). After last nights virus fiasco on this list, is there anyone who doesn't think it might be a welcome addition to a standard qmail install? : ) But what if someone comes along with the 'killer DNS Option' and a much better scanner/detector of the next brew of spam/virus/worm? As for who would decide what is useful and what isn't? I would assume DJB or perhaps a small panel of qmail experts appointed by DJB could vote on additions to the mail install. Stan The Computer Man aka: Stanton Fields -- http://www.gate.net/~stan The Lab called... Your brain is ready!
Does -probe mean removed?
Sorry this is only partially qmail related; In the Log files generated by ezmlm in DIR/Log, does "-probe" mean the user was removed or only that the user was probed? I'm trying to run statistics and can't find a conclusive answer in the man pages. Thanks! Brian
Re: Does -probe mean removed?
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 05:56:19PM -0800, Brian Ghidinelli wrote: In the Log files generated by ezmlm in DIR/Log, does "-probe" mean the user was removed or only that the user was probed? I'm trying to run statistics and can't find a conclusive answer in the man pages. Thanks! + subscribe via email - unsubscribe via email +manual subscribe manually (e.g. commandline) +manual unsubscribe manually (e.g. commandline) -probe removed because a probe message that bounced back \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Re: A firestorm of protest?
Thus said "Robin S. Socha" on 16 Jan 2001 20:47:55 +0100: A module is not a patch. You can apply as many well written modules as you like - but you cannot simply patch away at an existing code base. Unless you write code in Lisp... :-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 7:16pm up 75 days, 21:36, 5 users, load average: 1.38, 1.35, 1.38
