[vchkpw] qmailadmin valias ?
Hi, i have added an alias with two email and when i try to remove one email i get Error of files 1 and in my log i have : Error: valias_remove() not implemented for non-SQL backends. can t non sql remove alias (when there is more than 1 for 1 email ? )
Re: Re[4]: [vchkpw] SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hi troll, At 21:39 21.05.04 +0200, you wrote: Hello Erwin, Friday, May 21, 2004, 7:37:15 PM, you wrote: EH Dr. Erwin Hoffmann | FEHCom | http://www.fehcom.de/ EH Wiener Weg 8, 50858 Cologne | T: +49 221 484 4923 | F: ...24 To be rude and without respect, this was the speciality of Your ancestors when they pretended to be the most bright race on Earth. For Your records annoo 1914-18, 1940-1945. Clearly, some can't deny their roots. Though I live in Germany, I'm not German. It would be better, to go back to some useful discussion. regards. --eh. Dr. Erwin Hoffmann | FEHCom | http://www.fehcom.de/ Wiener Weg 8, 50858 Cologne | T: +49 221 484 4923 | F: ...24
[vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello List, On Friday, May 21, 2004 at 5:21:36 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (at least in part): In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your e-mailadress and Your password of Your mailbox over the internet. [...] This is only true for SMTP Authentication of type plain and login. With CRAM-MD5 its quite save. [...] Yes, it's 'quite' safe, but You still reveal Your e-mailadress. If there are many hops between Your workstation and the smtpserver, You can get some spam in return. Well, as you are this enlightened you'll for sure be able to tell me the difference to POP authentication than, aren't you? I don't talk about the different protocol; but in my limited (inherited from my ancestors, which, as you stated, /pretended/ to be the most bright) mind and with a lot of ignorance I thought POP3 sends my username and pass as well. Using vpopmail for POP3 server the username will most the time be my e-mail-address; exactly the same you say it's insecure to send. But I'm pretty sure you'll be able to tell me where my mistake is located, because POP-b4-SMTP is, as you claimed yourself (see above), MUCH MORE secure than SMTP-AUTH. More, Your mail is sent in plaintext. Why do you mix authentication method and connection security? It's two VERY different layers in communication model. The one is layer 3/4, the other is layer 7 in OSI model. There is NOTHING you can mix about them, there is NOTHING you can compare them on. It's like comparing apples and plants. The plant MIGHT be an apple tree, but you simply can't tell. So please stop whining, write a SMTP-over-SSL-HOWTO and be happy. I prefer encrypted streams, You're free to do. But what's the relation to a SMTP-AUTH problem? -- Best regards Peter Palmreuther I am evil, I make the devil sign.
Re: [vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello Peter, Saturday, May 22, 2004, 6:34:03 PM, you wrote: PP Hello List, PP On Friday, May 21, 2004 at 5:21:36 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (at PP least in part): In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your e-mailadress and Your password of Your mailbox over the internet. PP [...] This is only true for SMTP Authentication of type plain and login. With CRAM-MD5 its quite save. PP [...] Yes, it's 'quite' safe, but You still reveal Your e-mailadress. If there are many hops between Your workstation and the smtpserver, You can get some spam in return. PP Well, as you are this enlightened you'll for sure be able to tell me PP the difference to POP authentication than, aren't you? PP I don't talk about the different protocol; but in my limited PP (inherited from my ancestors, which, as you stated, /pretended/ to be PP the most bright) mind and with a lot of ignorance I thought POP3 sends PP my username and pass as well. Using vpopmail for POP3 server the PP username will most the time be my e-mail-address; exactly the same you PP say it's insecure to send. PP But I'm pretty sure you'll be able to tell me where my mistake is PP located, because POP-b4-SMTP is, as you claimed yourself (see above), PP MUCH MORE secure than SMTP-AUTH. More, Your mail is sent in plaintext. PP Why do you mix authentication method and connection security? It's PP two VERY different layers in communication model. PP The one is layer 3/4, the other is layer 7 in OSI model. PP There is NOTHING you can mix about them, there is NOTHING you can PP compare them on. It's like comparing apples and plants. The plant PP MIGHT be an apple tree, but you simply can't tell. PP So please stop whining, write a SMTP-over-SSL-HOWTO and be happy. I prefer encrypted streams, PP You're free to do. But what's the relation to a SMTP-AUTH problem? Before You make comments, first read the previous post. I am talking about TLS, smtps adn You are talking about pop3, complete out of the road. When I see word like 'enligtment' and I some sarcasm, seems You are German either, see my previous comment. Stop Your sarcasm, and rebuild first Your country and mentality. -- Best regards, DEBO Jurgen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.guide.be * www.gids.be * www.guide.fr * www.shop.fr / \ sarl GUIDE (sdet) --- the GUIDE, de GIDS, TELESHOP, SHOP __ | __ 128, rue du faubourg de Douai | / | \ |FR-59000 Lille, La France / \ | / \ Tél/Fax +32 59 26.91.51 Mobile +32 479 212.841 /|__\|/__|\ Sitehttp://sarl.guide.fr \| /|\ |/ N° TVA FR-55.440.243.988 |\ / | \ /|RC Lille 74075/2001B01478 |__\ | /__|Siret 440 243 988 00027 | Compte BE: KREDBEBB (BIC) BE56.466-5571951-88 (IBAN) --- Compte FR: CMCIFR2A (BIC) FR76.1562-9027-0200-0455-1870-127 (IBAN) \ / Conditions (terms): http://sarl.guide.fr/conditions.php www.teleshop.fr * www.teleshop.be * www.teleshop.biz * www.teleshop.info * www.teleshop.name
Re: [vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
please remove this troll from the list. i'm tired of hearing this bigotry on a technical mailing list. there is no content in this post that has anything to do with either the list, or the thread in question. At 11:06 AM 5/22/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before You make comments, first read the previous post. I am talking about TLS, smtps adn You are talking about pop3, complete out of the road. When I see word like 'enligtment' and I some sarcasm, seems You are German either, see my previous comment. Stop Your sarcasm, and rebuild first Your country and mentality. Paul Theodoropoulos http://www.anastrophe.com
[vchkpw] vdelivermail ignoring NOQUOATA?
I have Vpopmail 5.4.0 installed on a FreeBSD 4.9 system. We experienced a situation with very heaver load averages (sometimes 30) and determined that vdelivermail seemed to be taking far too long to process mail delivery. I ran truss on several of the vdelivermail processes and discovered that vdelivermal was doing a stat on every directory in the recipients domain, evidently for quota purposes. However, no quotas are installed on the system. vlimits.default is using default and every user also has NOQUOTA set. Any ideas as to what could be causing this? Rod Kreisler
[vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello List, On Saturday, May 22, 2004 at 8:06:41 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (at least in part): [full quote snipped] Before You make comments, first read the previous post. Well, ok. *erm* I just recognize: already done. I am talking about TLS, smtps You are. In fact you are. But maybe I just have to repeat my question, maybe you did not recognize it, because there was too much confusing text around it: Why do you mix authentication method and connection security? adn You are talking about pop3, complete out of the road. No. Now I'm pretty sure the whole mass of text confused you. I told you, SMTP-AUTH sends the e-mail-address and password as well as POP3-AUTH does. This was related to your comment (I'm allowed to quote your comment in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]): ,- | In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS | security as SMTP after POP, `- You YOU started comparing SMTP-AUTH to other, POP3-invocating, authentication / relay-allowing, methods. So IF POP3 is out of the road, it is only YOU who brought it into this thread. When I see word like 'enligtment' and I some sarcasm, seems You are German either, You're so ... so ... amusing. You need the word enlightment (which I did not even write; I wrote you're enlightened) and some sarcasm for recognizing a fact, which can easily be obtained from the senders address? You ARE funny. see my previous comment. The one in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]? I saw. And I had to laugh out loudly about such a simple minded attitude. Stop Your sarcasm, Why? Who are you to tell me stopping sarcasm? What makes you better than anybody else? What makes you assume my ancestors gave me that beautiful gift of sarcasm? What makes you sure you can even think about any comparison between times of WWI and WWII and my behavior just right now? What makes you French existence better than mine? and rebuild first Your country I won't. There're some million people in this country, I don't see a single reason why I should rebuild it. - First: I don't see a necessity to /rebuild/ it. Some (partly major) changes might be suitable, but a complete rebuild is far too much. - Second: I'm personally am much to less of a being for having the ability to rebuild the whole country. - Third: even if I would start, there are s many (mostly politicians, nevertheless enough commercial leaders) people guiding this country into it's current misery. My work would not stop this. There are some other reasons, but this would become too much OT. But I'm quite sure you know what you're talking about. At least it's just the reality that's far behind your statements. and mentality. ??? You're is better? Your Q: I don't get SMTP-AUTH to work. Please help A: Use SSL! way of participating and helping others, your You're sarcastic, you're a f*g German! You're behaving like your ancestors 1900-1945! [which implies I'm a either a Caesars fellow or a national socialist; and you don't even now me enough for being at least 1% sure about this facts] is a better mentality? C'mon, guy. You don't want to tell me, you're the better human being? You don't really want to do EXACTLY what you blame me to do: [pretend] to be the most bright race??? You don't really want to tell me (us) we Germans are (still? again?) the bad, ugly, fascistic people and it's the French that'll help the world out of the misery, because of their perfect mind set, given by place of birth and live??? If you really do, you're much poorer than I thought and you don't even deserve being read on this list. P.S.: If you feel the need to reply: please try trimming your quotes to the relevant parts. It's is not necessary to full quote and increase list traffic above the unavoidable level. I don't even ask for slightly reducing your signature; 18 lines is quite a lot. -- Best regards Peter Palmreuther Eggheads unite! You have nothing to lose but your yolks. - Adlai Stevenson
Re: [vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello Peter, Saturday, May 22, 2004, 9:03:21 PM, you wrote: PP Hello List, PP On Saturday, May 22, 2004 at 8:06:41 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (at PP least in part): PP [full quote snipped] Before You make comments, first read the previous post. PP Well, ok. *erm* I just recognize: already done. I am talking about TLS, smtps PP You are. In fact you are. PP But maybe I just have to repeat my question, maybe you did not PP recognize it, because there was too much confusing text around it: PP Why do you mix authentication method and connection security? adn You are talking about pop3, complete out of the road. PP No. Now I'm pretty sure the whole mass of text confused you. I told PP you, SMTP-AUTH sends the e-mail-address and password as well as PP POP3-AUTH does. This was related to your comment (I'm allowed to quote PP your comment in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]): PP ,- PP | In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS PP | security as SMTP after POP, PP `- PP You YOU started comparing SMTP-AUTH to other, POP3-invocating, PP authentication / relay-allowing, methods. PP So IF POP3 is out of the road, it is only YOU who brought it into PP this thread. When I see word like 'enligtment' and I some sarcasm, seems You are German either, PP You're so ... so ... amusing. You need the word enlightment (which PP I did not even write; I wrote you're enlightened) and some sarcasm PP for recognizing a fact, which can easily be obtained from the senders PP address? You ARE funny. see my previous comment. PP The one in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]? I saw. And I had PP to laugh out loudly about such a simple minded attitude. Stop Your sarcasm, PP Why? Who are you to tell me stopping sarcasm? What makes you better PP than anybody else? What makes you assume my ancestors gave me that PP beautiful gift of sarcasm? What makes you sure you can even think PP about any comparison between times of WWI and WWII and my behavior PP just right now? What makes you French existence better than mine? and rebuild first Your country PP I won't. There're some million people in this country, I don't see a PP single reason why I should rebuild it. PP - First: I don't see a necessity to /rebuild/ it. Some (partly major) PP changes might be suitable, but a complete rebuild is far too much. PP - Second: I'm personally am much to less of a being for having the PP ability to rebuild the whole country. PP - Third: even if I would start, there are s many (mostly PP politicians, nevertheless enough commercial leaders) people guiding PP this country into it's current misery. My work would not stop this. PP There are some other reasons, but this would become too much OT. But PP I'm quite sure you know what you're talking about. At least it's just PP the reality that's far behind your statements. and mentality. PP ??? You're is better? Your PP Q: I don't get SMTP-AUTH to work. Please help PP A: Use SSL! PP way of participating and helping others, your You're sarcastic, PP you're a f*g German! You're behaving like your ancestors 1900-1945! PP [which implies I'm a either a Caesars fellow or a national socialist; PP and you don't even now me enough for being at least 1% sure about this PP facts] is a better mentality? PP C'mon, guy. You don't want to tell me, you're the better human PP being? You don't really want to do EXACTLY what you blame me to do: PP [pretend] to be the most bright race??? PP You don't really want to tell me (us) we Germans are (still? again?) PP the bad, ugly, fascistic people and it's the French that'll help the PP world out of the misery, because of their perfect mind set, given by PP place of birth and live??? If you really do, you're much poorer than PP I thought and you don't even deserve being read on this list. PP P.S.: If you feel the need to reply: please try trimming your quotes PP to the relevant parts. It's is not necessary to full quote and PP increase list traffic above the unavoidable level. I don't even ask PP for slightly reducing your signature; 18 lines is quite a lot. I didn't, sometimes people think what You mean, and one word brings another. I started about smtp ssl and the improuvements abouve smtp-auth, and at some moment others read half words and start a to answer in terms of encryption. if You append some Germans, who start to flame with words like quote Erwin Hoffman : 'You are joking, troll.' quote Peter Palmreuther : 'as you are this enlightened' quote Paul Theodoropoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] : '... this troll..' Well You known You have to do with egotrippers, people You don't have the maturity to do a nice discussion about the topic. The only professional answer in this case was from some other people, defently people who are working for major companies, who don't need their ego to defend themselves. I was helping a guy out here, i don't need an appended answers from people
Re: [vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Your first message, which started this flamewar. snip Roy, In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your e-mailadress and Your password of Your mailbox over the internet. When a man-in-the-middle catch this e-mail (or worse Your PW), he can use it for spam, or access Your mailbox. Well, considering you send your entire email over the line to get access to pop, this claim is not true. Just thought id bring this up, as everywhere else you are suggesting that it is not true that you said that. Hell, pop3-ssl would be the same as smtp-ssl both would allow secure authentication. SMTP after POP is a pain, and it doesnt help against these so called man in the middle attacks. Unless off course you would also provide a patch to make it pop3-ssl, in which cause the next thing you say would be a better solution. I suggest You use: SHUPP's version with netqmail like : fetch http://www.qmail.org/netqmail-1.05.tar.gz tar xzvf netqmail-1.05.tar.gz.tar cd netqmail-1.05 ./collate.sh # patch with Shupp's TLS and SMTP-Auth fetch http://shupp.org/patches/netqmail-1.05-tls-smtpauth-20040207.patch patch ./netqmail-1.05-tls-smtpauth-20040207.patch So now that we have smtp-ssl, or smtps, how is SMTP after POP still more secure? Why not just start an SSL connection and then auth with SMTP? I dont see a difference at all. You brough POP in for no apperant reason at all. Hell, id rather use SMTP auth than first pop and then sending the mail, as its a pain in the ass to configure most mail clients to do POP before SMTP. certificate: You can copy thoses (extension .pem) from : freeBSD, vpopmail stuff cd /var/qmail/control cp /usr/local/cert/ipop3d.pem servercert.pem ln -s servercert.pem ./clientcert.pem Breached# ls /usr/local/cert/ipop3d.pem ls: /usr/local/cert/ipop3d.pem: No such file or directory hrm, thats FreeBSD BTW. Activate TLS by create a certificate, and You will be much better off to create an encrypted connecton to Your SMTP server by the SMTP Enc smtps 465/tcp#smtp protocol over TLS/SSL (was ssmtp) smtps 465/udp#smtp protocol over TLS/SSL (was ssmtp) snip 500 million line sig X-Istence -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAr8DYJukONu5DUaQRAt+1AJ4rE88Og4vvjtJmrr6an0jCZYrduwCgk1C5 WKsxNOR6msDCJFK7wwaboqs= =vm3x -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re[2]: [vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello X-Istence, Saturday, May 22, 2004, 11:06:33 PM, you wrote: XI -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- XI Hash: SHA1 XI Your first message, which started this flamewar. snip Roy, In the OLD days, people were happy with SMTP-Auth. I consider it LESS security as SMTP after POP, because with SMTP-Auth, You sent Your e-mailadress and Your password of Your mailbox over the internet. When a man-in-the-middle catch this e-mail (or worse Your PW), he can use it for spam, or access Your mailbox. XI Well, considering you send your entire email over the line to get access XI to pop, this claim is not true. Just thought id bring this up, as XI everywhere else you are suggesting that it is not true that you said that. XI Hell, pop3-ssl would be the same as smtp-ssl both would allow secure XI authentication. XI SMTP after POP is a pain, and it doesnt help against these so called man XI in the middle attacks. Unless off course you would also provide a patch XI to make it pop3-ssl, in which cause the next thing you say would be a XI better solution. I suggest You use: SHUPP's version with netqmail like : fetch http://www.qmail.org/netqmail-1.05.tar.gz tar xzvf netqmail-1.05.tar.gz.tar cd netqmail-1.05 ./collate.sh # patch with Shupp's TLS and SMTP-Auth fetch http://shupp.org/patches/netqmail-1.05-tls-smtpauth-20040207.patch patch ./netqmail-1.05-tls-smtpauth-20040207.patch XI So now that we have smtp-ssl, or smtps, how is SMTP after POP still more XI secure? Why not just start an SSL connection and then auth with SMTP? I XI dont see a difference at all. You brough POP in for no apperant reason XI at all. Hell, id rather use SMTP auth than first pop and then sending XI the mail, as its a pain in the ass to configure most mail clients to do XI POP before SMTP. certificate: You can copy thoses (extension .pem) from : freeBSD, vpopmail stuff cd /var/qmail/control cp /usr/local/cert/ipop3d.pem servercert.pem ln -s servercert.pem ./clientcert.pem XI Breached# ls /usr/local/cert/ipop3d.pem XI ls: /usr/local/cert/ipop3d.pem: No such file or directory XI hrm, thats FreeBSD BTW. Activate TLS by create a certificate, and You will be much better off to create an encrypted connecton to Your SMTP server by the SMTP Enc smtps 465/tcp#smtp protocol over TLS/SSL (was ssmtp) smtps 465/udp#smtp protocol over TLS/SSL (was ssmtp) snip 500 million line sig XI X-Istence XI -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- XI Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) XI Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org XI iD8DBQFAr8DYJukONu5DUaQRAt+1AJ4rE88Og4vvjtJmrr6an0jCZYrduwCgk1C5 XI WKsxNOR6msDCJFK7wwaboqs= XI =vm3x XI -END PGP SIGNATURE- 'SMTP after POP' is a technique. I clearly stated to do POP3-SSL, to have afterwards a 'SMTP after POP' functionality. You authenticate completely with encruption, You get the smtp server open due to Your authentication for several minutes (for Your IP, if You wish), and You have Your 'SMTP after POP'. If I try to define it 'SMTP after POP3_SSL', well we have a new definition. You can take worsds out of the sentense, espescialy when someone writes terrible English, like I do, but I really known every topic what You mean. First try to understand, and answer on the same road I explained and not of the road. And if some people start with flaming... The flamewar did NOT start with my message. It started with Mr Doctor Hoffmans words, I quote 'troll' Well if we You to the road of ego, I can put other things on the table, but this serves not this list, and it was already a waste of time. This is my final answer, You can help out the guy with his problem. I leave it all to You, nice guys. I have a company to run. -- Best regards, DEBO Jurgen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.guide.be * www.gids.be * www.guide.fr * www.shop.fr / \ sarl GUIDE (sdet) --- the GUIDE, de GIDS, TELESHOP, SHOP __ | __ 128, rue du faubourg de Douai | / | \ |FR-59000 Lille, La France / \ | / \ Tél/Fax +32 59 26.91.51 Mobile +32 479 212.841 /|__\|/__|\ Sitehttp://sarl.guide.fr \| /|\ |/ N° TVA FR-55.440.243.988 |\ / | \ /|RC Lille 74075/2001B01478 |__\ | /__|Siret 440 243 988 00027 | Compte BE: KREDBEBB (BIC) BE56.466-5571951-88 (IBAN) --- Compte FR: CMCIFR2A (BIC) FR76.1562-9027-0200-0455-1870-127 (IBAN) \ / Conditions (terms): http://sarl.guide.fr/conditions.php www.teleshop.fr * www.teleshop.be * www.teleshop.biz * www.teleshop.info *
[vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello List, On Saturday, May 22, 2004 at 11:24:43 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (at least in part): The flamewar did NOT start with my message. PLOconnection interrupt *beep* -- Best regards Peter Palmreuther Bumper sticker: All the parts falling off this car are of the very finest British manufacture
[vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
Hello List, On Saturday, May 22, 2004 at 11:24:43 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (at least in part): I clearly stated to do POP3-SSL, to have afterwards a 'SMTP after POP' functionality. Sure. I may quote your first reply: ,- [ mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] | Activate TLS by create a certificate, and You will be much better off | to create an encrypted connecton to Your SMTP server by the SMTP Enc | smtps 465/tcp#smtp protocol over TLS/SSL (was ssmtp) | smtps 465/udp#smtp protocol over TLS/SSL (was ssmtp) `- -- Best regards Peter Palmreuther Computer Science is merely the post-Turing decline in formal systems theory.
Re: [vchkpw] Re: SMTP Auth HOWTO?
I know this is a shameless plug, but I'm a happy customer. Have Inter7 do a SugarBox install for less time/money than it takes to figure it out using online resources and googled howtos. I didn't have to second-guess or debug anything. Within 4 hours of the consultant logging in via SSH, I had SMTP-AUTH, POP-before-SMTP, SMTP/SSL, POP3, POP3/SSL, IMAP, IMAP/SSL, CRAM-MD5 and a complement of TinyDNS and SqWebMail all working together. Within another hour, he had MySQL replication and redundancy working. He left all the source code on my box so that I could make modifications and customizations later using make install and even build additional servers later. If you don't make a living installing Qmail/Vpopmail servers, it's less expensive and more practical to just let someone else do it. I've installed qmail/vpopmail from scratch before and believe that it can be a PITA to get done right. -- Eric Ziegast
Re: [vchkpw] vdelivermail ignoring NOQUOATA?
Nevermind it was a corrupt build. Interesting thing was that I rebuilt it... twice... and still had problems. I finally got the idea to copy the vdelivermail executable from a machine with the same arch. Problem solved. Rod K wrote: I have Vpopmail 5.4.0 installed on a FreeBSD 4.9 system. We experienced a situation with very heaver load averages (sometimes 30) and determined that vdelivermail seemed to be taking far too long to process mail delivery. I ran truss on several of the vdelivermail processes and discovered that vdelivermal was doing a stat on every directory in the recipients domain, evidently for quota purposes. However, no quotas are installed on the system. vlimits.default is using default and every user also has NOQUOTA set. Any ideas as to what could be causing this? Rod Kreisler
