Re: undeliverable mail
On Dec 20, 2006 02:00 PM, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Beastie MRA wrote: On Dec 20, 2006 10:31 AM, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:26 . I'm in a small dim room with doors labeled Dungeon and Forbidden. There is noise, the door marked Dungeon flies open and Beastie MRA SHOUTS: Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help I use the virtusertable in sendmail, and I have my valid addresses, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] bv and then for after that is a line of @wjv.com nouser. And nouser is defined in aliases as nouser: /dev/null On one of the mail servers I maintain I just checked and I had 260,000+ messages routed to *file* in the maillog - which shows up as mailer=*file* in the logs. That maillog rotates every night at midnight. Is not really a freebsd-net problem so I removed that from the reply to line. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com Thanks for response... but this virtusertable will not stop SMTP server in internet to keep send you undeliverable message. I assume someone doing nasty with forged and use my domain email to send his spam message to non existing user. and i got undeliverable message. Is there any clue ?? Oh.. i forget to mention i use 4.11-STABLE for my MX Hmmm... SPF records are a good tool against this sort of thing. Perhaps if you change from: mra.co.id. v=spf1 mx to mra.co.id. v=spf1 mx -all That means that SPF compliant mail servers should refuse to accept messages (ie. a hard fail) from any machine other than the MXes for mra.co.id See http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax for the full story on SPF records. It's not a 100% solution and it will take the spammers some time to realise that forging your address in their e-mails is much less effective. On the positive side, it will mean that many mailservers reject the incoming spam during the SMTP dialog so you'll get fewer bounce messages. This problem exposes an architectural flaw in many e-mail server setups. Either all of the MXes for a domain have to be able to verify addresses on incoming e-mails and reject any non-existent destinations during the SMTP dialog, or (like Bill does above) once a message has been accepted by any of the mail servers for your domain, it should never be bounced back to the (probably forged) mail address in the headers because the recipient doesn't exist. Bouncing for other reasons, (like eg. mailbox over quota) does not generally add to the overall spam load. Normally a very simple site with just one server will get that right, but a more complex site with several MXes and various SMTP routers etc. internally will frequently not. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW Thanks... i have problem with SPF record in dns , because i have serveral mobile users and off site users that use SMTP provide by internet provider. and i cant list it one by one in spf record. :( regards Reza ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: undeliverable mail
Beastie MRA wrote: On Dec 20, 2006 02:00 PM, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Beastie MRA wrote: On Dec 20, 2006 10:31 AM, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:26 . I'm in a small dim room with doors labeled Dungeon and Forbidden. There is noise, the door marked Dungeon flies open and Beastie MRA SHOUTS: Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help I use the virtusertable in sendmail, and I have my valid addresses, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] bv and then for after that is a line of @wjv.com nouser. And nouser is defined in aliases as nouser: /dev/null On one of the mail servers I maintain I just checked and I had 260,000+ messages routed to *file* in the maillog - which shows up as mailer=*file* in the logs. That maillog rotates every night at midnight. Is not really a freebsd-net problem so I removed that from the reply to line. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com Thanks for response... but this virtusertable will not stop SMTP server in internet to keep send you undeliverable message. I assume someone doing nasty with forged and use my domain email to send his spam message to non existing user. and i got undeliverable message. Is there any clue ?? Oh.. i forget to mention i use 4.11-STABLE for my MX Hmmm... SPF records are a good tool against this sort of thing. Perhaps if you change from: mra.co.id. v=spf1 mx to mra.co.id. v=spf1 mx -all That means that SPF compliant mail servers should refuse to accept messages (ie. a hard fail) from any machine other than the MXes for mra.co.id See http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax for the full story on SPF records. It's not a 100% solution and it will take the spammers some time to realise that forging your address in their e-mails is much less effective. On the positive side, it will mean that many mailservers reject the incoming spam during the SMTP dialog so you'll get fewer bounce messages. This problem exposes an architectural flaw in many e-mail server setups. Either all of the MXes for a domain have to be able to verify addresses on incoming e-mails and reject any non-existent destinations during the SMTP dialog, or (like Bill does above) once a message has been accepted by any of the mail servers for your domain, it should never be bounced back to the (probably forged) mail address in the headers because the recipient doesn't exist. Bouncing for other reasons, (like eg. mailbox over quota) does not generally add to the overall spam load. Normally a very simple site with just one server will get that right, but a more complex site with several MXes and various SMTP routers etc. internally will frequently not. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW Thanks... i have problem with SPF record in dns , because i have serveral mobile users and off site users that use SMTP provide by internet provider. and i cant list it one by one in spf record. :( The usual solution to that is to set up authentication on your mail server and require your mobile users to submit new messages via that machine. Most mail clients are capable of dealing with several mail accounts with different SMTP server fairly readily. Enabling SASL in the stock system sendmail under FreeBSD is also fairly simple and described in the handbook. Works for me -- I'm writing this at work and sending it through my home mail server. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. Flat 3 7 Priory Courtyard PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW, UK signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: undeliverable mail
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Beastie MRA wrote: On Dec 20, 2006 10:31 AM, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:26 . I'm in a small dim room with doors labeled Dungeon and Forbidden. There is noise, the door marked Dungeon flies open and Beastie MRA SHOUTS: Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This happens when you run a mailserver, however big or small, and will keep on happening as long as email mark 1 keeps running; kids, crooks and scammers learn how to assemble kit robots; and M$ rules the waves. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. If it's from a persistent single source, or a class of IPs on a single network or ISP, a polite but well documented message to the responsible contact address for the domain or IP address block often still works. dig, and (e.g) dnsstuff.com or other whois frontends are handy friends. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. Always to the same non-user, or a range of them? You'll see both types. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules You can block anything you find a nuisance, and sometimes have to. If you can't do it with the mailserver and the RP for the domain won't or can't help, use your firewall. No RFC prohibits you from protecting yourself or the network you're responsible for. 'ipfw add 1 deny tcp from $badmx to any 25 in recv $oif setup' is my mantra for short term blocks .. if still happening after a few days, they may get promoted to a higher rule number, else deleted. Automatic tools are great, but so are logs, tcpdump and your favourite firewall .. But I doubt we get 260,000 messages a year here, so listen to Bill :) Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help I use the virtusertable in sendmail, and I have my valid addresses, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] bv and then for after that is a line of @wjv.com nouser. And nouser is defined in aliases as nouser: /dev/null On one of the mail servers I maintain I just checked and I had 260,000+ messages routed to *file* in the maillog - which shows up as mailer=*file* in the logs. That maillog rotates every night at midnight. Is not really a freebsd-net problem so I removed that from the reply to line. Me too. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com Thanks for response... but this virtusertable will not stop SMTP server in internet to keep send you undeliverable message. No, but delivery ends with the User Unknown response; you get no body. I assume someone doing nasty with forged and use my domain email to send his spam message to non existing user. You get that. Lots. But it's nearly all millions of rooted windows boxes doing their [EMAIL PROTECTED] dance; don't take it too personally :) and i got undeliverable message. Sorry, do you mean a message in your maillog, or you're actually getting phony bounce messages mailed to your address? You get that too .. Cheers, Ian Is there any clue ?? Oh.. i forget to mention i use 4.11-STABLE for my MX regards Reza ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: undeliverable mail
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 23:58 , Men gasped, women fainted, and small children were reduced to tears as Ian Smith confessed to all: On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Beastie MRA wrote: On Dec 20, 2006 10:31 AM, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [bunches deleted - wjv] But I doubt we get 260,000 messages a year here, so listen to Bill :) I used to get 300,000 spams PER DAY for springbreak.com until in desperation I changed the MX records to point to local host. I didn't really want to do that, but I had no choice. The first time that domain was brought up in 1995, before I got involved with the principles. It was up for only about 2 - 3 weeks before the ISP turned them off as it was totally overloading their T1. So they became their own IPS with a dedicatd T1 to AGIS - back before it became spam central. Keeping track of a domain that comes up #1 in google with only 1 key word can be a pain. Now things are nicer as my servers are inside a rack at the local Level 3 facility and I have 24x7 access in case of problems. Running 100Mbit links into their global OC768 with no provider above me makes things a bit more problematic. The only thing that would make me give up this whole business is the email problem. But all our email clients are business customers that are clients of a local HW/SW support house so I NEVER have to talk with end users - as the support house does all the trouble shooting on the client side, and I only get real problems forwarded to me. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
undeliverable mail
Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help regards Reza ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: undeliverable mail
On Dec 20, 2006 10:31 AM, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:26 . I'm in a small dim room with doors labeled Dungeon and Forbidden. There is noise, the door marked Dungeon flies open and Beastie MRA SHOUTS: Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help I use the virtusertable in sendmail, and I have my valid addresses, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] bv and then for after that is a line of @wjv.com nouser. And nouser is defined in aliases as nouser: /dev/null On one of the mail servers I maintain I just checked and I had 260,000+ messages routed to *file* in the maillog - which shows up as mailer=*file* in the logs. That maillog rotates every night at midnight. Is not really a freebsd-net problem so I removed that from the reply to line. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com Thanks for response... but this virtusertable will not stop SMTP server in internet to keep send you undeliverable message. I assume someone doing nasty with forged and use my domain email to send his spam message to non existing user. and i got undeliverable message. Is there any clue ?? Oh.. i forget to mention i use 4.11-STABLE for my MX regards Reza ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: undeliverable mail
It's Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:26 . I'm in a small dim room with doors labeled Dungeon and Forbidden. There is noise, the door marked Dungeon flies open and Beastie MRA SHOUTS: Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help I use the virtusertable in sendmail, and I have my valid addresses, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] bv and then for after that is a line of @wjv.comnouser. And nouser is defined in aliases as nouser: /dev/null On one of the mail servers I maintain I just checked and I had 260,000+ messages routed to *file* in the maillog - which shows up as mailer=*file* in the logs. That maillog rotates every night at midnight. Is not really a freebsd-net problem so I removed that from the reply to line. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: undeliverable mail
Beastie MRA wrote: On Dec 20, 2006 10:31 AM, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:26 . I'm in a small dim room with doors labeled Dungeon and Forbidden. There is noise, the door marked Dungeon flies open and Beastie MRA SHOUTS: Dear All. For past few days, my MX receive thousand of undeliverable message destinated for my non existent user at my domain. This message source come from valid and well configured (almost) smtp server on internet. I'ts waste my internet b/w, cause my MX will reject with non existent user message. I'll try spamd on my firewall and greylist on my MX (postfix), but still no effective, and i cannot block undeliverable message as RFC rules Is there any way i can fix this ? Please help I use the virtusertable in sendmail, and I have my valid addresses, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] bv and then for after that is a line of @wjv.com nouser. And nouser is defined in aliases as nouser: /dev/null On one of the mail servers I maintain I just checked and I had 260,000+ messages routed to *file* in the maillog - which shows up as mailer=*file* in the logs. That maillog rotates every night at midnight. Is not really a freebsd-net problem so I removed that from the reply to line. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com Thanks for response... but this virtusertable will not stop SMTP server in internet to keep send you undeliverable message. I assume someone doing nasty with forged and use my domain email to send his spam message to non existing user. and i got undeliverable message. Is there any clue ?? Oh.. i forget to mention i use 4.11-STABLE for my MX Hmmm... SPF records are a good tool against this sort of thing. Perhaps if you change from: mra.co.id. v=spf1 mx to mra.co.id. v=spf1 mx -all That means that SPF compliant mail servers should refuse to accept messages (ie. a hard fail) from any machine other than the MXes for mra.co.id See http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax for the full story on SPF records. It's not a 100% solution and it will take the spammers some time to realise that forging your address in their e-mails is much less effective. On the positive side, it will mean that many mailservers reject the incoming spam during the SMTP dialog so you'll get fewer bounce messages. This problem exposes an architectural flaw in many e-mail server setups. Either all of the MXes for a domain have to be able to verify addresses on incoming e-mails and reject any non-existent destinations during the SMTP dialog, or (like Bill does above) once a message has been accepted by any of the mail servers for your domain, it should never be bounced back to the (probably forged) mail address in the headers because the recipient doesn't exist. Bouncing for other reasons, (like eg. mailbox over quota) does not generally add to the overall spam load. Normally a very simple site with just one server will get that right, but a more complex site with several MXes and various SMTP routers etc. internally will frequently not. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Undeliverable mail: ERROR
* SECURITY NOTICE * This is an automated notification. An attachment was sent by your address, in the message ERROR, that violates Kimberly-Clark's E-mail security policy regarding potentially dangerous attachments. The offending message has been dropped and will not be delivered. Unsafe attachments include: SHS, VBS, VBA, VBX, JS, JSE, VBE, COM, SCR, PIF and EXE file types and message/partial MIME content (split messages.) If you need to send one of these file attachments for business reasons, please compress this file into a password-protected .ZIP archive file before sending. You may use WinZip, PentaZip, gzip or another comparable program. If you do not know why you received this notice, it is possible that your computer has been infected by a virus, or someone else's computer, whom you correspond with, has been infected and is now using your address without your knowledge or consent. Please contact your system administrator for further information. We apologize for any inconvenience, and thank you for your understanding. If you have any questions, please send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do not include any attachments. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Undeliverable mail: 6pathwaywinpppoenbidlkfetnetxwinpppoewinpppoelsldlkfet
Failed to deliver to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Virus Nimda in your computer!!! Reporting-MTA: dns; demos.su Original-Recipient: rfc822;[EMAIL PROTECTED] Final-Recipient: system;[EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Received: from [218.70.144.57] (HELO RUNNER-INTER) by demos.su (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.6/D) with SMTP id 62355072 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:47:29 +0300 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 6pathwaywinpppoenbidlkfetnetxwinpppoewinpppoelsldlkfet MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type=multipart/alternative; boundary=_ABC123456j7890DEF_ X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Unsent: 1 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:47:30 +0300 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Epals (Undeliverable mail, return to sender)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, January 06, 2003 6:45 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a multi-part message in MIME format... =_1042069519-15086-238 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Your message could not be delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED] because their mailbox is full. Try resending your message at a later date. Your orginal message is attached to this email. =_1042069519-15086-238 Content-Disposition: attachment Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from localhost (smtp2 [127.0.0.1]) by mail.epals.com (ePALS-PostMaster) with ESMTP id A3CAC3C5E7 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:45:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [216.136.204.119]) by mail.epals.com (ePALS-PostMaster) with ESMTP id 26D273C5D5 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:45:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from hub.freebsd.org (hub.freebsd.org [216.136.204.18]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BAE955597; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 538) id 3905F37B405; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1D9942E800D; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by hub.freebsd.org (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:11 -0800 Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4B437B401 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from fat_man.ascendency.net (12-211-152-75.client.attbi.com [12.211.152.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82CE243ED4 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from mike (user-119bct7.biz.mindspring.com [66.149.179.167]) (authenticated) by fat_man.ascendency.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h08NiKQ24471; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:44:20 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Mike Loiterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Hovey' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Bios not recognizing correct HD size Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:40:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List-ID: freebsd-questions.FreeBSD.ORG List-Archive: http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/ (Web Archive) List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=help (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-questions List-Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-question s X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk =20 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:40 PM Stephen Hovey mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought fbsd didnt use the bios when addressing a drive =20 On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Mike Loiterman wrote: =20 =20 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 =20 PROBLEM I have an old Compaq machine that I'm trying to install a 20 gig drive into, but it's only recognizing the first 2112MB. Obviously this is a limitation of the BIOS. Aside from buying an PCI ATA card (the machine only has one PCI slot and I'm using it for my NIC), is there anyway to get this drive working on the exsisting system?=20=20=20= =20 =20 =20 CURRENT SETTINGS Compaq Presario 4504 Phoenix BIOS, not sure what version Maxtor Drive, not sure which model since there are no markings on the drive itself Drive is Primary Master and the Cylinder Limitation Jumper is set as well.=20 =20 Detection Type: Auto Cylinders: 4092 Heads: 16 Sectors 63 Multi-Sector Transfers: 16 Sectors LBA Mode Control: Enabled 32 Bit I/O: Disabled Transfer Mode: Fast PIO 4. =20 I can put the drive into User Detection mode and adjust the Cylinders, Heads, and Sectors myself, but I don't know what settings to use.=20=20 =20 Thanks to all for help. =20 - --- Randomly Generated Quote: Why do cats have canine teeth? =20 Mike Loiterman PGP Key 0xD1B9D18E http://www.ascendency.net =20 =20 =20 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.0 Comment: This message has been digitally signed by Mike Loiterman =20 iQA/AwUBPhy0sGjZbUnRudGOEQLmgwCfcF3+qfZOjbdlXFbk7/Tlc31sMXcAoIz0
Re: Epals (Undeliverable mail, return to sender)
nope - I think we are all gettin em - some loser signed up, and didnt unsign up before losin his address On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Mike Loiterman wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, January 06, 2003 6:45 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a multi-part message in MIME format... =_1042069519-15086-238 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Your message could not be delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED] because their mailbox is full. Try resending your message at a later date. Your orginal message is attached to this email. =_1042069519-15086-238 Content-Disposition: attachment Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from localhost (smtp2 [127.0.0.1]) by mail.epals.com (ePALS-PostMaster) with ESMTP id A3CAC3C5E7 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:45:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [216.136.204.119]) by mail.epals.com (ePALS-PostMaster) with ESMTP id 26D273C5D5 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:45:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from hub.freebsd.org (hub.freebsd.org [216.136.204.18]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BAE955597; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 538) id 3905F37B405; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1D9942E800D; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by hub.freebsd.org (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:11 -0800 Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4B437B401 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from fat_man.ascendency.net (12-211-152-75.client.attbi.com [12.211.152.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82CE243ED4 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:45:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from mike (user-119bct7.biz.mindspring.com [66.149.179.167]) (authenticated) by fat_man.ascendency.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h08NiKQ24471; Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:44:20 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Mike Loiterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Hovey' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Bios not recognizing correct HD size Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:40:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List-ID: freebsd-questions.FreeBSD.ORG List-Archive: http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/ (Web Archive) List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=help (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-questions List-Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-question s X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk =20 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:40 PM Stephen Hovey mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought fbsd didnt use the bios when addressing a drive =20 On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Mike Loiterman wrote: =20 =20 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 =20 PROBLEM I have an old Compaq machine that I'm trying to install a 20 gig drive into, but it's only recognizing the first 2112MB. Obviously this is a limitation of the BIOS. Aside from buying an PCI ATA card (the machine only has one PCI slot and I'm using it for my NIC), is there anyway to get this drive working on the exsisting system?=20=20=20= =20 =20 =20 CURRENT SETTINGS Compaq Presario 4504 Phoenix BIOS, not sure what version Maxtor Drive, not sure which model since there are no markings on the drive itself Drive is Primary Master and the Cylinder Limitation Jumper is set as well.=20 =20 Detection Type: Auto Cylinders: 4092 Heads: 16 Sectors 63 Multi-Sector Transfers: 16 Sectors LBA Mode Control: Enabled 32 Bit I/O: Disabled Transfer Mode: Fast PIO 4. =20 I can put the drive into User Detection mode and adjust the Cylinders, Heads, and Sectors myself, but I don't know what settings to use.=20=20 =20 Thanks to all for help. =20 - --- Randomly Generated Quote: Why do cats have canine teeth? =20 Mike Loiterman PGP Key 0xD1B9D18E
confidential to geeky@epals.com [Fwd: Undeliverable mail, returnto sender]
Original Message Subject: Undeliverable mail, return to sender Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:38:23 -0800 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: paul beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your message could not be delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED] because their mailbox is full. Try resending your message at a later date. Your orginal message is attached to this email. -- Paul Beard: seeking UNIX/internet engineering work in Seattle area. Details available below: http://paulbeard.no-ip.org/paulbeard.html I found out why my car was humming. It had forgotten the words. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
