[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm using courier (excellent!) IMAP in a multiple virtual domain
environment. I'm using /etc/userdb for authentication. My problem
is I can't have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] with my current
understanding of the userdb format. There is only a single
Bill Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in your bofh file in your /usr/lib/courier directory add this line...
opt BOFHBADMIME=accept
[...]
I'm basically just throwing this out there and haven't really done that
much research on it. So if any of you gurus would care to correct me,
please do
Gordon Messmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have the option of using more convenient, less secure software.
There's plenty out there to choose from.
The same argument applies to the use of stupid autoresponders. I don't see why
Courier MLM should require a manual marking of confirmation mails
Gordon Messmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the MLM is going to go through the trouble to verify that a user
really wants to be subscribed, it should do *something* to make sure
that it's not going to interpret a very common problem as confirmation
that a user wants to be subscribed.
Martin Furmanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
part of an offending mail
start offending mail
--=000_Dragon381477005134_=
Content-Type: image/jpeg;
name=Stvr mig inte.jpg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=Stvr mig inte.jpg
Ricardo Kleemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to understand how the RBL checking is working...
I have it setup to check spamcop, using bl.spamcop.net, but
it seems to me bl.spamcop.net doesn't resolve in DNS?
I've tried using dig and nslookup to resolve the IP for
bl.spamcop.net and
Joe Laffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Only Microsoft can fix this.
So mail servers MUST accept messages with this format? (only headers
and no blank lines)
I can work around this by writing a script to search and destroy these
messages. ISPs
dick hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've generated the pem files for imapd, pop3d and esmtpd but still have
a little question about the 'CN' position. Does it need 'localhost', the
servername or the FQDN of the machine?
=-=-=-cert.conf-=-=-=
...
[ req_dn ]
C=NL
ST=DR
L=Assen
Hi,
the courierfilter man page says that a courierfilter will receive One or more
pathnames to control files for this message through its socket. Under which
conditions is there more than one control files per message? To what extent does my
courierfilter have to respect any control files
Sam Varshavchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle writes:
But when a mail gets rejected due to my custom filter, I get log
entries of this format:
Oct 9 03:59:00 io courieresmtpd:
error,relay=:::217.88.243.27,from=[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 511 Just
testing
Sam Varshavchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only thing you could do is read the control file to obtain the
recipient list of the original message (there may be more than one, and
courierfilter is invoked once, no matter how many recipients the
message has, and some of those recipients may be
Anand Buddhdev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle writes:
But the recipient address(es) should still be known in this step, so
wouldn't it make sense to include it/them in the error log message?
It's not as if the recipient address was the cause for the rejection
in the DNS blacklist
Hi Sam,
I'm currently experimenting with writing a custom courierfilter. It works
fine, except for one thing. When mails get rejected due to the sending
host being listed in a DNS blacklist (via the BLACKLISTS option in
/etc/courier/esmtpd), I get log entries of this format:
Oct 9 03:37:30
David Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about incorporating Tcl support into maildrop? You simply use a
shared library (the Tcl interpreter) and don't need to fork anything.
Maildrop can add commands to the Tcl interpreter as required to do more
complex things.
How about incorporating Perl
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't get me wrong: I don't really see a harm in accepting
MX-IP *in general* (although there still might be one which I
don't see).
After having thought about the topic a bit and having consulted RFC 1035, I think
there *is* a serious argument against
Malcolm Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If these standards are open to interpretation then there will be
discrepancies between the MTAs.
And that would be a problem... why?
Where did you live during the past 7 years? Under a rock?
Julian,
Please try to show me some
Malcolm Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By the way, it's ironic that Courier *doesn't* accept the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] notation, with all this frothing about the
importance of standards!
Agreed.
Plus, I repeat my question, this time to you:
What might an MX-CNAME mean if not follow CNAME to
Evelyne Pichler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone know good DNSBL servers? Or a list with DNSBL servers?
I use the following:
bl.spamcop.net
Anti-spam, lists recent spam sources, very aggressive, few to none false
positives (depends on your set of e-mail correspondents).
I love this one!
Malcolm Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phillip Hutchings wrote:
If these standards are open to interpretation then there will be
discrepancies between the MTAs.
And that would be a problem... why?
Where did you live during the past 7 years? Under a rock? To clearly see the
consequences
Malcolm Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which leads to the inevitable observation that there are no prizes for
conformance to the RFC, but there are for getting the job done. The
job of a mail transfer agent is to transfer mail. Not pass a
conformance test based on a specific interpretation of
Jon Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Julian Mehnle wrote:
Not conforming to the RFC might not get you a prize, but it definitely
has a price you'll have to pay some day or another. Widely accepting
non-compliance will inevitably make non-compliance... well... widely
Carlos Paz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[invalid MX records pointing to IP addresses]
Yes, I'm totally aware that the domain with broken MX records is at
fault, but telling this reason to an unhappy user won't solve the
problem, and you can't really argue against their pragmatic approach:
What
PROTECTED]: postmaster
I don't know whether this will work well enough to get you off the DSBL list, though.
Good luck!
Julian Mehnle, an otherwise happy Courier user.
[1] http://www.courier-mta.org
PS: Sam, I tried to include a link to Alexei's recent posting, but SourceForge only
gives Forum
Sam Varshavchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RFC 2821, section 4.1.3 explicitly allows @[ip_address]-style
addressing (e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]), but Courier
doesn't. I get a 513 Syntax error when trying to send a mail
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] through my own
Sam Varshavchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian Mehnle writes:
I want to send mail to the postmaster of a host with a broken DNS MX
configuration. If I try so send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], then
Courier
Someone with broken DNS configuration does not appear to be a likely
candidate
Tim Hunter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
courier will let you send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ip addresses, but
there is no guarntee that the other side will accept it.
No, Courier will never succeed to send to such recipients:
|UNDELIVERABLE MAIL
|
| Your message to the
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RFC 2821, section 4.1.3 explicitly allows @[ip_address]-style
addressing (e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]), but Courier
doesn't. I get a 513 Syntax error when trying to send a mail
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] through my own Courier
installation. Why is that?
Well, my
Hi all,
RFC 2821, section 4.1.3 explicitly allows @[ip_address]-style addressing (e.g. [EMAIL
PROTECTED]), but Courier doesn't. I get a 513 Syntax error when trying to send a
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] through my own Courier installation. Why is that?
Ricardo Kleemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have an updated list of RBL servers? The ones I
have seem to be no longer very effective or not functional.
I've also seen mentioned dynamic rbl lists, which I'm not
sure what that means...
In any case, I wanted to configure courier with
Sam Varshavchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is done by Courier. Courier inserts its own Return-Path: header on
locally-delivered mail, that contains the envelope return address.
If the message already has an existing Return-Path: header, it will get
prefixed by the character.
Out of
Sander Holthaus - Orange XL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you know if there are any efforts being to made to support
[POP3 NTLM authentication] in future realeases of Courier?
I'm not sure, but I doubt that Sam plans to support NTLM auth.
Bgs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My advice would be to use the SubjectAlternativeName (AKA
SubjectAltName) SSLv3 extension instead to list multiple host names
(and IP addresses) specificly. Google may tell you more. Most
browsers and mail
Is it possible to add domains to an existing
Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone happen to know whether Courier works with wildcard
certificates?
As Sam already said, Courier doesn't care what the certificate looks like.
On another note, you really shouldn't use wildcard certificates since they
pose a
Alessandro Vesely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
once again someone choose my e-mail as the sender
for tons of spam. What I've never seen before is
that the original messages contained in failure
reports show the following
1. every message comes from a different IP. Often
those IPs are in MAPS
Juri Haberland [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Scott Morizot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The MX record is illegal. The data section must be a canonical name
of a host (created on the left hand side of an A record), not [...] an
alias.
Regarding MX-IP I agree
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Jerry Amundson wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Just for fun, I added an explicit Content-Disposition: inline
header to signed messages. Let's see if it makes any difference.
It makes a difference with Outlook 2000.
I'm using Outlook
Scott Morizot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The MX record is illegal. The data section must be a canonical name
of a host (created on the left hand side of an A record), not [...] an
alias.
Regarding MX-IP I agree, but regarding MX-CNAME I object:
http://www.mengwong.com/misc/rfc1912-is-wrong.html
Robert Penz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've the same problems since yesterday .. I can't send a mail via smtp
auth for about 5 min or so, after that time it works again until the next
5 problem minutes.
I've tried to narrow the problem down.
during this 5 mins I get only this, after this I
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robert Penz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've following running, whichs is not the same as you've ?
BLACKLISTS=-block=blackholes.mail-abuse.org,BLOCK/127.0.0.2
-block=relays.mail-abuse.org,BLOCK/127.0.0.2
-block=dialups.mail-abuse.org,BLOCK/127.0.0.2
Hi all,
I have been running Courier 0.39.1 on Debian Linux as my mail server
(SMTP(S), POP3(S), IMAP(S)) for about a year now without any noteworthy
problems. Today, the SMTP server started to act up: it accepts TCP
connections virtually immediately, but then reacts only very, very slowly.
Thus,
Julian Mehnle wrote:
[...] Today, the SMTP server started to act up: it accepts TCP
connections virtually immediately, but then reacts only very, very slowly.
Thus, most of the time, the connection times out on the client/peer side.
[...]
Can anyone give me some hints on how to debug the SMTP
(`su -c maildirmake mail
/var/mail/accounts/[account.name]`).
I am currently running authenticated POP3 and SMTP, and plan to support SSL
for both POP3 and SMTP in the future as well. All of this works really
great! :-)
Julian Mehnle.
___
courier
Julian Mehnle wrote:
This is the pam_mail view:
|View pam_mail
| Column | Type | Modifiers
| --+--+---
| name | text |
| password | text |
| maildir | text |
I forgot to include a sample of how Courier sees the view:
| system=# select * from
, but this is absolutely
unnecessary. The concept of views has been designed exactly for purposes
like this.
Julian Mehnle.
___
courier-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
mailing list manager?
I know that one could set up a moderated mailing list, but then, every
individual posting by an/the authorized poster would have to be approved
by the list owner. :-(
Thanks in advance for any hints in the right direction,
Julian Mehnle
Hi all!
Does anyone know how to create a mail address with Courier which causes all
mails received through this address to be discarded? (Think
[EMAIL PROTECTED]!)
Regards,
Julian Mehnle.
___
courier-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe
meant `echo # .qmail-null`.
Anyhow, thanks to both of you!
Julian Mehnle.
___
courier-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
201 - 247 of 247 matches
Mail list logo
