Am 27.05.2009 04:44, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
TB3 seems to be fine without extra capability stuff.
Does it still ask for the CAPABILITY command? One solution could
actually be that Dovecot just stops giving the full CAPABILITY before
logging in. I did some tests for this recently, and it
On May 27, 2009, at 2:22 AM, reg9009 wrote:
In my opinion, dovecot should give capabilities, regardless if
before or after login sequence. What would be the problem of it or
why would it be intented to be removed. It would actually just break
with a rather common client and change
While I recognize that Timo has some valid points here with regard
to determining capabilities before vs. after login, I definitely
would consider breaking compatibility with Thunderbird to be a
MAJOR, MAJOR showstopper, regardless of the reasons for doing it.
--
Rich Wales / ri...@richw.org
On May 27, 2009, at 2:40 AM, Rich Wales wrote:
While I recognize that Timo has some valid points here with regard
to determining capabilities before vs. after login, I definitely
would consider breaking compatibility with Thunderbird to be a
MAJOR, MAJOR showstopper, regardless of the reasons
Timo Sirainen schrieb:
On May 27, 2009, at 2:22 AM, reg9009 wrote:
In my opinion, dovecot should give capabilities, regardless if before
or after login sequence. What would be the problem of it or why would
it be intented to be removed. It would actually just break with a
rather common
On May 27, 2009, at 2:48 AM, reg9009 wrote:
Hmm, that's indeed a problem. Well, for the plugins depending on
different users I don't have an answer. But I think TB is using the
capability command again after login. I'll check.
It's not, but if it's force-fed the new capability it'll use it.
Hi,
recently moved our server from mbox format to Maildir format.
Almost all the users are very happy with this, since the speed had increased
very much.
I used mb2md to do the conversion and on this task all the mailboxes that had
. (dot)
on their names were converted to _.
But there is one
The alternative that I'm thinking right now is that in the pre-login process
Dovecot would only advertise those capabilities that are actually useful
before login. Then after login it would send an updated capability reply to
the client. The important question here is: Are there any clients
On May 27, 2009, at 3:15 AM, Max Ivanov wrote:
The alternative that I'm thinking right now is that in the pre-
login process
Dovecot would only advertise those capabilities that are actually
useful
before login. Then after login it would send an updated capability
reply to
the client. The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Dieter Faulbaum wrote:
But it seems, that my sieve-scripts on the local dovecot server are not
recognised by this combination.
You have to simulate the delivery after synchronisation. However, I wonder
how this is to work:
I just had a thought. It's probably going to be too big of a change
for v2.0, so something to think about for v3.0:
Supporting multiple UIDs is difficult. Currently expire-tool and
v2.0's LMTP server are implemented in a way that it's always running
as root and only temporarily dropping
Timo Sirainen schrieb:
3. Mail processes talk to storage processes via some protocol. They
can talk via UNIX socket or TCP/IP. If an existing connection can't
handle the target UID, a new connection is made that either reuses an
existing storage proces or creates a new one.
This sounds
The big problem is what the protocol should be. Use some existing RPC
protocol? It should be something extensible so that a plugin in imap process
can talk to a plugin in storage process, without the base processes knowing
anything about the details (e.g. imap-quota plugin asking quota usage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I have a configuration problem, that I ignored till now.
Many MUAs tag SPAM themselves and move SPAM to a junk folder (Thunderbird
uses Junk).
It is said to not automatically train these mails, but let have an human
revise them.
On 147, 05 27, 2009 at 01:31:41PM +0400, Max Ivanov wrote:
The big problem is what the protocol should be. Use some existing RPC
protocol? It should be something extensible so that a plugin in imap process
can talk to a plugin in storage process, without the base processes knowing
anything
Hi,
I am resending this email, since the fist one didn't hit the list.
Recently we moved our server from mbox format to Maildir format and started
using Dovecot.
Almost all the users are very happy with this, since the speed had increased
very much.
I used mb2md to do the conversion and on this
I'm seeing this message in my /var/log/maillog:
May 26 12:35:00 agencymail dovecot: IMAP(i...@example.com): Inotify
instance limit for user exceeded, disabling. Increase
/proc/sys/fs/inotify/max_user_instances
I rummaged through google, and found :
Just installed it. Upgraded from 1.1.15. So far so good.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 27 May 2009, dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
surprise given the error message really). I can fix that with echo 256
/proc/sys/fs/inotify/max_user_instances , but as /proc is temporary, so if I
change it won't it break if/when the system
Hello,
Tried with version 1.1.13 - the same issue.
Does anybody succeed in auth. virtual users using active directory and
authentication binds mechanism?
I've found a lot of examples how to use password lookups but I cannot
use it, unfortunately.
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Misha Volodko
And this may be why:
* -0.7 BAYES_20 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 5 to 20%
* [score: 0.1759]
* 3.9 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook
* 0.4 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Carlos Xavier wrote:
Im sendding
On 05/27/2009 05:04 PM Carlos Xavier wrote:
Im sendding messages to the list and they do not show up.
Who wrote this messages to the mailing list?
* http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2009-May/039893.html
* http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2009-May/039902.html
Regards,
Pascal
--
Pascal Volk wrote:
Im sendding messages to the list and they do not show up.
Who wrote this messages to the mailing list?
* http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2009-May/039893.html
* http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2009-May/039902.html
It's possible to switch off reception of own
Currently I have a mail server running postfix and dovecot with users
in mysql. I have Outlook (blich) clients checking IMAP mail on the
server. I'd like to build some fault-tolerance into that system in
case I have hardware failure.
I've read through:
dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
Currently I have a mail server running postfix and dovecot with users in
mysql. I have Outlook (blich) clients checking IMAP mail on the server.
I'd like to build some fault-tolerance into that system in case I have
hardware failure.
I've read through:
I never said anything about breaking Thunderbird.
Sorry if I misinterpreted your response to reg9...@yahoo.de (when
he said that your proposed change would actually just break with a
rather common client and change behaviour to all previous versions).
--
Rich Wales / ri...@richw.org /
Hi,
I use a OpenLDAP for authentication. To authenticate a full DN as the user name
must be used, like cn=jim,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com. There are several
domains, like example2.com and example3.com. I want to use Dovecot with ldap
and authentication binds. For testing I use auth_bind_userdn
At 01:17 PM 5/27/2009, Seth Mattinen wrote:
You're probably looking for Dovecot replication, which as far as I'm
aware, has not made itself known in a functional form yet. I really want
to see master/master replication.
I at least don't think I am - I think I'd rather run dovecot with two
Quoting dove...@corwyn.net:
At 01:17 PM 5/27/2009, Seth Mattinen wrote:
You're probably looking for Dovecot replication, which as far as I'm
aware, has not made itself known in a functional form yet. I really want
to see master/master replication.
I at least don't think I am - I think I'd
Sorry for the missing subject.
Hi,
I use a OpenLDAP for authentication. To authenticate a full DN as the user
name must be used, like cn=jim,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com. There are several
domains, like example2.com and example3.com. I want to use Dovecot with ldap
and authentication binds.
At 01:49 PM 5/27/2009, Rick Romero wrote:
But what it sounds like you're saying is that there's no good way to
run dovecot so that if the single server it's on fails I can keep
service availability?
If you have 2 dovecot servers with your mailboxes stored on a SAN
(over NFS), you can front
On 26. mai. 2009, at 01.51, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 11:50 +0200, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
On 25. mai. 2009, at 00.12, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Sun, 2009-05-24 at 12:17 +0200, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
mailbox_command = procmail -a $EXTENSION
mailbox_transport =
The big problem is what the protocol should be. Use some existing
RPC protocol? It should be something extensible so that a plugin in
imap process can talk to a plugin in storage process, without the
base processes knowing anything about the details (e.g. imap-quota
plugin asking quota
I am using dovecot with postfix, which was setup to do virtual
domains. Dovecot is setup to authenticate against pam (I know, I know)
and knows to look for email in /var/spool/vmail/:
virtual_mailbox_base = /var/spool/vmail
I also have virtual_mailbox_maps defined as
virtual_mailbox_maps
Hello, been lurking a while, about to move over to Dovecot soon. I
have a nice test machine up and running. My previous email server
when talking IMAP to Apple Mail, will eventually go deaf and new
messages will not make it to the Inbox of Apple Mail Client. A
restart of the desktop
on 5-27-2009 6:20 AM Carlos Xavier spake the following:
Hi,
I am resending this email, since the fist one didn't hit the list.
Yes it did!
snip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Qua, 2009-05-27 at 12:27 -0700, Scott Haneda wrote:
Hello, been lurking a while, about to move over to Dovecot soon. I
have a nice test machine up and running. My previous email server
when talking IMAP to Apple Mail, will eventually go deaf and new
messages will not make it to the
Timo Sirainen skrev:
The big problem is what the protocol should be. Use some existing RPC
protocol? It should be something extensible so that a plugin in imap
process can talk to a plugin in storage process, without the base
processes knowing anything about the details (e.g. imap-quota plugin
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 14:02 -0400, dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
Would this mean I would configure two identical dovecot systems, and
point them both at the same SAN space? (so instead of having a
yes, and use NAS not SAN
you could also use DNS load balancing in a away that has 0 cache TTL
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 17:16 +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
And this may be why:
* 3.9 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook
Ugh. :/ I've been looking into a FP for that rule recently, though the
issue I spotted is different from these headers. Hmm, and it
Marc Perkel wrote:
Just installed it. Upgraded from 1.1.15. So far so good.
Nice to know, but it would be more useful if you were to
include some details about your test environment.
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 14:02 -0400, dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
At 01:49 PM 5/27/2009, Rick Romero wrote:
But what it sounds like you're saying is that there's no good way to
run dovecot so that if the single server it's on fails I can keep
service availability?
If you have 2 dovecot servers
At 02:00 PM 5/27/2009, Seth Mattinen wrote:
You're going to need something in front of the two servers to abstract
the connections (another poster recommended ultramonkey) if you want
them both to be serviced by the same IP address. My suggestion was to
use active/standby, where the standby
At 04:21 PM 5/27/2009, you wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 14:02 -0400, dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
yes, and use NAS not SAN
Why NAS and not SAN?
you could also use DNS load balancing in a away that has 0 cache TTL on
MX addresses, thats better than a software based LB if you cant afford a
At 06:39 PM 5/27/2009, Timo Sirainen wrote:
If you don't necessarily need load-balancing to multiple servers, it
should be faster and more reliable to use active/passive and some
(automated) failover between them. If you use active/active servers, you
either need some clustered filesystem (not
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 21:47 -0400, dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
At 04:21 PM 5/27/2009, you wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 14:02 -0400, dove...@corwyn.net wrote:
yes, and use NAS not SAN
Why NAS and not SAN?
Because the two technologies differ and it permits you to run non
clustering FS's,
Protocol buffers are Google's ... blah-blah-blah ... using a variety of
languages - Java, C++, or Python.
I can't find good old plain C in this variety of languages :(
Protocol buffers is flexible message format specification, there are
plenty implementations of it , including C based:
Here is sample filename from Maildir:
1243423383.M745917P32169.termserv1,W=1295:2,Sa
1) why there is no S=size field? It definetely differs from
1295.I've not quota plugin, could it be the reason of this?
2) what does a flag mean? I not found any description of this
neither in Maildir spec nor
48 matches
Mail list logo
