RE: [IMail Forum] Any ASSP Pro's out there?
On a daily basis: Run move2num Run dbupdate In ASSP setup (web interface) put a check in these options: Add Spam Probability Header Add Bayes Confidence Header Add Spam Header* Add Spam Reason Header * Adds a header(X-Assp-Spam: YES) this allows your users to filter what ASSP thinks is spam. Explain to your users what you are doing, ask them to help you by sending spam to assp-spam and mistaken ham to assp-notspam. This will help to build your corpus. The instructions tell you to run in test mode to build the corpus, a good idea I am thinking, the ASSP delay function stops most of the crud. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 November 2006 03:41 To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Any ASSP Pro's out there? I second that. I had the same panic when I first ran it. Just watch the spam notspam folder for 2 weeks and make sure you manually clean it up. Then follow the last steps of the doc and go live. It works wonders! 2 weeks huh? Long time. So don't run the dbupdate until after the 2 weeks? We process about 19,000 emails daily on the server. 2 Weeks is gonna be a while :P Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] ASSP problems
I have this error randomly on ASSP: Your server has unexpectedly terminated the connection. Possible causes for this include server problems, network problems, or a long period of inactivity. Account: 'x', Server: 'smtp.xxx', Protocol: SMTP, Port: 25, Secure(SSL): No, Error Number: 0x800CCC0F I have tried with telnet and also there the connection is closed randomly. Following are some additional information on the configuration: - ASSP runs on the same box of IMail 2006.1 - On the server there are 2 IP addresses and all MX records point to the secondary IP - On Imail there are about 600 domains for a total of 3000 users. - ASSP has the following configuration: - SMTP Destination: secondary IP:25 - Listen Port: 25 - Maximum SMTP Sessions: 0 - Maximum Sessions/IP: 10 - SMTP Idle Timeout: 0 - Secondary Hostnames/IP-Nr(s) of this server: server name (first IP address): secondary IP address Thank you for any help on this issue. Mauro To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Any ASSP Pro's out there?
Did you verify that all your outbound email is going through ASSP? Kinda obvious I know but we had a problem where ours wasn't for a couple of months and boy did it get ugly as the whitelist entries started to expire. Once I figured that out and fixed it things improved radically within a day or two. -Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 5:55 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: [IMail Forum] Any ASSP Pro's out there? Installed ASSP 4+ days ago, and all seems fine. Except I'm getting A LOT of valid email blocked via the Beyesian filter. Is there a way to make it less sensitive or something? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Upgraded from 8.21 to 8.22, now POP3 won't work with SSL enabled...
I wonder if it has anything to do with the SSL cert? Haven't gotten any bites on the list for this problem yet. I'm going to recreate the cert and see if that does the trick. In the mean time, if anyone wants to chime in with ideas - please do! Thanks, Sam SJ.Stanaitis - Network Administrator Decorative Product Source E-commerce Network -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Thomas - Mathbox Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:04 AM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgraded from 8.21 to 8.22, now POP3 won't work with SSL enabled... Sam, Can't imagine what else would be hanging out on port 995 to cause this error. I disabled SSL and the POP3D loaded fine. Under 8.21 it loaded fine with SSL. Anyone have an idea? Haven't tried rebooting the server just yet... I have the same problem. Ever since I moved Imail to the new server, if I restart the machine or just the POP3 service, I have had to restart POP3 4 or 5 times before it would start clean. I thought it was a problem that had been there all along, but only became visible when I moved Imail to the faster machine. Prior to the move, Imail had been running on a dual 1 Ghz PIII system. So, I thought it was a processor speed related race condition. NOPE! I just happen to have the old server still available. I haven't gotten around to making it into a gateway server yet. So, I fired it up and TLS was not enabled on the old system. I hadn't enabled TLS until after I moved it! Like you, if I disable TLS, POP3 starts up just fine on the first try. So, thank you for figuring that out. I also happened to notice the Version info on the admin panel. 8.22 dated October 2005. Ipswitch, can we get this fixed also? Michael Thomas Mathbox 978-683-6718 1-877-MATHBOX (Toll Free) To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Any ASSP Pro's out there?
Mike, I spent about two weeks training the Bayesian filter before I was happy with it. Those two weeks were very time consuming (and dull) spent moving messages between the spam and notspam folders (frequenting rebuilding the spamdb) but in the end the filter works well. If you know more than I, you can play with the confidence level. You might want to take a look a the ASSP list (https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user). --jimm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Installed ASSP 4+ days ago, and all seems fine. Except I'm getting A LOT of valid email blocked via the Beyesian filter. Is there a way to make it less sensitive or something? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Any ASSP Pro's out there?
I spent about two weeks training the Bayesian filter before I was happy with it. Those two weeks were very time consuming (and dull) spent moving messages between the spam and notspam folders (frequenting rebuilding the spamdb) but in the end the filter works well. If you know more than I, you can play with the confidence level. You might want to take a look a the ASSP list (https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user). Thanks... I thought you only rebuild the spamdb filter after the 2 weeks? Should I still be rebuilding it daily during the 2 weeks of training? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
[IMail Forum] Another 2006.1 web mail error
Hi again, I have had two reports of this particular error in webmail, which shows up in the left-hand column:An error was encountered while processing your request. (Return to previous page) If you encounter this error again, please provide the following information to your network administrator to assist in trouble-shooting. Message:System error StackTrace:at Hunny.Mail.Socket.Connect(String host, Int32 port) at Hunny.Mail.Imap4Client.Connect(String address, Int32 port) at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Connection..ctor(IUser user) at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Folder.get_UnreadCount() at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.ProcessMailFolderList(ArrayList folders, Nodes level) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.ProcessMailFolders(IUser user) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.Page_Load(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.OnLoad(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() at System.Web.UI.Control.AddedControl(Control control, Int32 index) at System.Web.UI.ControlCollection.Add(Control child) at Infragistics.WebUI.UltraWebListbar.UltraWebListbar.CreateChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.EnsureChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain()Is anyone else experiencing these errors?-Dave DohertySkywaves, Inc.508-425-7176[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IMail Forum] ASSP problems
I have this error randomly on ASSP: ASSP has a mailing list for support that you can browse and join at http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=69172 The reason I point this out is I haven't seen you posting this question there. I would suggest posting your configuration questions there. - ASSP runs on the same box of IMail 2006.1 - SMTP Destination: secondary IP:25 - Listen Port: 25 Where did you get the idea to use port 25 on both IP's? This may work as it obviously does somewhat for you, but I do not believe it is optimal. I think you need to have Imail listen on a separate port like 125, and that should not be accessible to the internet. Doug Traylor To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Asp error
Title: Asp error 2006 is filled with permission problems so this wouldn't surprise me. Since this is a 2003 server .net 1.1 came on it but it is patched. I was thinking of removing the Iadmin app pool and recreating it but am not sure. I'm leaning more towards the if it isn't broken don't fix it methodology. I hate this because a smoking engine is usually an indicator of bigger problems. :) Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave DohertySent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:29 AMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] Asp error Bill, Could not create a Disk Cache Sub-directory for the Application Pool. This is similar to an error I used to see occasionally in the early days of .NET 1.0. As I recall, it was a permissions error that was extremely hard to solve because the error message didn't describe what was actually happening. Installing .NET Framework 1.1 over 1.0 solved the problem, as I remember it. -d - Original Message - From: Matrosity Hosting To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:57 AM Subject: [IMail Forum] Asp error This isn't a fire but I have one of these in my application events: Error: The Template Persistent Cache initialization failed for Application Pool 'IAdmin' because of the following error: Could not create a Disk Cache Sub-directory for the Application Pool. The data may have additional error codes.. Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
RE: [IMail Forum] OT: Barracuda vs MXLogic?
Hi Jason We have been using a Barracuda in front of our IMail server for the last 2 years and have been very happy with the unit. The unit is easy to administer and setup. We had to make some changes to our SMTP ports but that is the way we are set and I don't think that would be typical setup. The support from Barracuda is very good, and they will go to all lengths to make sure the issues are fixed. The other day wehad a single IP send over 4000 messages in a two hour time frame which were stopped very easily and did not affect the normal flow of mail. The biggest advantage to the Barracuda is that is has reduced the work load on the mail server which until we switched was being ground down to the point that it was running at about 90% full load all the time. Best Regards,James Robb From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason LovenSent: Monday, October 30, 2006 3:53 PMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: [IMail Forum] OT: Barracuda vs MXLogic? Can anyone out there comment on the effectiveness of a tool like a Barracuda vs the hosted AS services like MXLogic? A few of our customers domains are getting mauled by directory attacks and just a general huge wave of spam and were trying to find a solution. MXLogic looks nice for the lower-tech places (not really good at self administering) and the Barracuda has the appeal of having lower recurring costs. Thank you, Jason Loven Manager - Technical Services Department Computer Associates, Inc.36 Thurber Blvd, Smithfield RI 02917Phone: (401)232-2600, Fax: (401)232-7778Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.cainetserv.com/
RE: [IMail Forum] Having problems with a domain
Can connect to both without a problem Steven Couture WebNet Services, Inc. (914) 923-4811 Ext. 100 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sharyn Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:49 AM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: [IMail Forum] Having problems with a domain Good morning, I am having problems emailing the following domain: melbourneitcbs.com I have telnetted to both their mail servers, manually, and get a 421 error. 217.79.216.190 and 217.69.20.190 I logged onto DNS report but Scott's software was able to contact the domain without issue. I am not having issues with any other domains. I've checked my Imail logs and all other mail seems to be flowing with no problems at all. This just started happening a few days ago, I have been able to email them up until last Thurs. Can someone please telnet to these servers and tell me if they are getting a 421 error as well? Thanks, Sharyn To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
Just out of curiosity, what is the benefit of running ASSP, IMGATE, Barracuda, and Alligate all in front of your mail system? I have used most of these products individually in front a several different types of mail servers, and it would seem to me there would be little if any benefit from using several systems in succession as they all mostly offer the same options/features -- give or take a couple. ~M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Moody Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:31 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 ASSP, IMGATE, , Barracuda and Alligate all sit in front of the mail server and act as a gateway. If you keep your mail server otherwise firewalled and have one of these products out in front then the vulnerability is mitigated (from external sources). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:28 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 So am I to understand that ASSP somehow prevents the vulnerabtility from being a problem? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
Oops, never mind. I misread the previous message. You were offering these as examples and advising to choose ONE, not use them all. ;-) That makes sense. *self-administered dope slap in progress* ~M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Moody Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:31 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 ASSP, IMGATE, , Barracuda and Alligate all sit in front of the mail server and act as a gateway. If you keep your mail server otherwise firewalled and have one of these products out in front then the vulnerability is mitigated (from external sources). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:28 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 So am I to understand that ASSP somehow prevents the vulnerabtility from being a problem? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
Not literally. I meant the SMTP Proxies in general, whatever your choice was. One is enough. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Callahan Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:54 AM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 Just out of curiosity, what is the benefit of running ASSP, IMGATE, Barracuda, and Alligate all in front of your mail system? I have used most of these products individually in front a several different types of mail servers, and it would seem to me there would be little if any benefit from using several systems in succession as they all mostly offer the same options/features -- give or take a couple. ~M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Moody Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:31 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 ASSP, IMGATE, , Barracuda and Alligate all sit in front of the mail server and act as a gateway. If you keep your mail server otherwise firewalled and have one of these products out in front then the vulnerability is mitigated (from external sources). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:28 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 So am I to understand that ASSP somehow prevents the vulnerabtility from being a problem? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
S'Okay. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Callahan Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:58 AM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 Oops, never mind. I misread the previous message. You were offering these as examples and advising to choose ONE, not use them all. ;-) That makes sense. *self-administered dope slap in progress* ~M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Moody Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:31 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 ASSP, IMGATE, , Barracuda and Alligate all sit in front of the mail server and act as a gateway. If you keep your mail server otherwise firewalled and have one of these products out in front then the vulnerability is mitigated (from external sources). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:28 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 So am I to understand that ASSP somehow prevents the vulnerabtility from being a problem? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Asp error
Title: Asp error I hate this because a smoking engine is usually an indicator of bigger problems. "Left to themselves, things go from bad to worse." - Somebody's corollary to Murphy's Law, "The perversity of a system tends to a maximum." :-) -d - Original Message - From: Matrosity Hosting To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:35 AM Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Asp error 2006 is filled with permission problems so this wouldn't surprise me. Since this is a 2003 server .net 1.1 came on it but it is patched. I was thinking of removing the Iadmin app pool and recreating it but am not sure. I'm leaning more towards the if it isn't broken don't fix it methodology. I hate this because a smoking engine is usually an indicator of bigger problems. :) Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave DohertySent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:29 AMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] Asp error Bill, Could not create a Disk Cache Sub-directory for the Application Pool. This is similar to an error I used to see occasionally in the early days of .NET 1.0. As I recall, it was a permissions error that was extremely hard to solve because the error message didn't describe what was actually happening. Installing .NET Framework 1.1 over 1.0 solved the problem, as I remember it. -d - Original Message - From: Matrosity Hosting To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:57 AM Subject: [IMail Forum] Asp error This isn't a fire but I have one of these in my application events: Error: The Template Persistent Cache initialization failed for Application Pool 'IAdmin' because of the following error: Could not create a Disk Cache Sub-directory for the Application Pool. The data may have additional error codes.. Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
RE: SPAM-WARN:RE: [IMail Forum] Upgraded from 8.21 to 8.22, now POP3 won't work with SSL enabled...
Sam, I wonder if it has anything to do with the SSL cert? Haven't gotten any bites on the list for this problem yet. I'm going to recreate the cert and see if that does the trick. In the mean time, if anyone wants to chime in with ideas - please do! I do have SSL running. For me, its TLS that is the issue. Do you have TLS running. Michael Thomas Mathbox 978-683-6718 1-877-MATHBOX (Toll Free) To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] ASSP problems
Sorry ther is an error as the correct SMTP Destination is secondary IP:225 I have already posted the question to ASSP mailing list but anyone has helped me. Thank you if you can help me on this issue. - Original Message - From: Doug Traylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 4:32 PM Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] ASSP problems I have this error randomly on ASSP: ASSP has a mailing list for support that you can browse and join at http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=69172 The reason I point this out is I haven't seen you posting this question there. I would suggest posting your configuration questions there. - ASSP runs on the same box of IMail 2006.1 - SMTP Destination: secondary IP:25 - Listen Port: 25 Where did you get the idea to use port 25 on both IP's? This may work as it obviously does somewhat for you, but I do not believe it is optimal. I think you need to have Imail listen on a separate port like 125, and that should not be accessible to the internet. Doug Traylor To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
Just out of curiosity, what is the benefit of running ASSP, IMGATE, Barracuda, and Alligate all in front of your mail system? I have used most of these products individually in front a several different types of mail servers, and it would seem to me there would be little if any benefit from using several systems in succession as they all mostly offer the same options/features -- The benefit of IMGate (an envelope rejector) as separate box as MX in front of content-scanners is that the very expensive (in power consumption, and in the case of commercial c-s's, in $ ($25K for Barracuda 800 the first year) content-scanners have MUCH LESS content to scan. IMGate blocking just for: 1) bad recipients, 2) unverifiable/undeliverable senders, and 3) greylisting ... will block 75%+ of all inbound traffic, including a huge majority of infected messages. This means the next-hop content-scanner has to process only 25% or less of the load that it would have to process if facing raw Internet inbound traffic. btw, Barracuda (which, afaics, runs postfix as IMGate does) passes dictionary attacks straight through to the mailbox server as Barracuda does un-cached recipient verification at the mailbox server for ever single incoming msg. IMGate blocks dictionary attacks totally by having its own local copy of legit recipients (doesn't have to verify recipients back at the mailbox server). A $600 advanced IMGate recently installed in front of a submerged Barracuda 400 (messages delayed for 12 hours through the Barracuda) prevented the IMGate/Barracuda customer from upgrading to a Barracuda 800 ($25K) and allowd the Barracuda 400 to keep up with the traffic much reduced by IMGate. Content-scanning solutions necessitate receiving 100% of every message so it can be scanned. If you're getting charged for bandwidth, that's a LOT of crap to eat and to pay for. IMGate gives a huge savings in raw bandwidth and in back-end processing (content-scanning). Of course, all of the above applies primarily to moderate- to high-volume mail systems. Low-volume systems can get by with throwing very powerful boxes to do all processing on the mailbox server. And IMGate also give vastly superior outbound traffic handling with detailed logging (answering excellently why wasn't this message delivered). The logging on, eg, a closed box like Barracuda is not available. IMGate also runs its own DNS which can be also used by the back-end systems that will be repeating many of the DNS queries that IMGate will have in DNS cache. btw, IMGate advanced will soon be upgraded with weighted scoring just like ASSP, SpamAssassin, Barracuda, Declude, Sniffer, etc while remaining an envelope rejector, ie, IMGate making the decision to accept or reject a message after the RCPT TO command and before the expensive DATA command. Len To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
I just want to re-clarify something that I mentioned before in relation to the vulnerability and gateways. The only way that one can prevent the exploit on an exploitable copy it to turn off the SMTP service or prevent all external traffic. This is not an option for most running IMail. Those affected are best served in relation to the vulnerability by upgrading to a fixed version. All a script kiddie needs to do is point their exploit script at your unprotected server's IP and it's toast. A gateway can't prevent that from happening. The gateways are great ways to displace the vast majority of trash from getting to a mail server, and they do help prevent other issues such as malformed messages from crashing things like Queue Manager, or protecting servers from being overloaded, and allowing one to use much more CPU aggressive filtering at a deep-scanning layer since there is less to scan. There are a host of other advantages too that are not as universal or independent to one particular product or another. Matt Chris Moody wrote: S'Okay. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Callahan Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:58 AM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 Oops, never mind. I misread the previous message. You were offering these as examples and advising to choose ONE, not use them all. ;-) That makes sense. *self-administered dope slap in progress* ~M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Moody Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:31 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 ASSP, IMGATE, , Barracuda and Alligate all sit in front of the mail server and act as a gateway. If you keep your mail server otherwise firewalled and have one of these products out in front then the vulnerability is mitigated (from external sources). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:28 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22 So am I to understand that ASSP somehow prevents the vulnerabtility from being a problem? Mike N FXOL To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
[IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes?
Title: 2006.1 login changes? Were there any changes to the login pages from 2006.04a to 2006.1? One of our clients uses an extranet that logs users into imail from a link. Thanks, Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
[IMail Forum] Re: [IMail Forum] Another 2006.1 web mail error
Dave, By conincidence I have had two similar errors reported to me this afternoon like this. The error is copied below. I'll log it with Ipswitch and see what they have to say. But you are not alone! An error was encountered while processing your request. (Return to previous page) If you encounter this error again, please provide the following information to your network administrator to assist in trouble-shooting. Message:Object reference not set to an instance of an object. StackTrace: at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Address.BuildFromAddress(IUser imapUser, String charset) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.ComposeMessage.lnkSend_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.ImageLinkButton.OnBtnLink_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.OnClick(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument) at System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEventHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument) at System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(NameValueCollection postData) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() Will David *\*-Original Message-*\*From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/1/2006 3:25:58 PM*\*To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IMail Forum] Another 2006.1 web mail error*\**\* Hi again, I have had two reports of this particular error in webmail, which shows up in the left-hand column:*\**\*An error was encountered while processing your request. (Return to previous page) *\*If you encounter this error again, please provide the following information to your network administrator to assist in trouble-shooting. *\*Message:*\*System error *\*StackTrace:*\*at Hunny.Mail.Socket.Connect(String host, Int32 port) at Hunny.Mail.Imap4Client.Connect(String address, Int32 port) at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Connection..ctor(IUser user) at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Folder.get_UnreadCount() at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.ProcessMailFolderList(ArrayList folders, Nodes level) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.ProcessMailFolders(IUser user) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.Page_Load(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.OnLoad(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() at System.Web.UI.Control.AddedControl(Control control, Int32 index) at System.Web.UI.ControlCollection.Add(Control child) at Infragistics.WebUI.UltraWebListbar.UltraWebListbar.CreateChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.EnsureChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain()*\**\*Is anyone else experiencing these errors?*\**\*-Dave Doherty*\* Skywaves, Inc.*\* 508-425-7176*\* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
All a script kiddie needs to do is point their exploit script at your unprotected server's IP and it's toast. A gateway can't prevent that from happening. Not true in our case. A gateway does protect your server if it's the only way to get to said server. Our gateway AV works after the ASSP proxy and intercepts all incoming email before Imail sees it. Connections to Imail are only made from our AV gateway or internal email clients. A script kiddie would have to use a non-malformed address and basically send a valid email with valid addresses to even get to our Imail server after all connection, recipient, and sender validation tests have passed the ASSP proxy and our AV gateway. We patched anyway to protect against internal attacks. ;o) I don't know how SSL and auth on port 587 would be affected for those sites that have external users, but that isn't an issue for pre 8.22 installs. On a similar note, ASSP can intercept and protect against malformed addresses and such on a secondary listen port for the purpose of smtp auth and can route it to Imail listening on 587 or any other ip:port you like. Unfortunately, it can not handle SSL connections for this purpose. All that being said, I'll have to worry when an exploit is found for my SMTP AV gateway, or ASSP. :o) Doug Traylor To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes?
Title: 2006.1 login changes?
Yes, you have to add a new field - if you are using
the sso.html field as follows -
loginhtml =
loginhtml.replace('name="hdnPwdChanged"', 'name="hdnPwdChanged"
value="yes"');
- Original Message -
From:
Matrosity
Hosting
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:26
PM
Subject: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Were there any changes to the login pages from
2006.04a to 2006.1? One of our clients uses an extranet that logs users into
imail from a link.
Thanks,
Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
Re: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
I think that I was pretty clear about this in the sentence before the one that you quoted. Most people running IMail do not have the option of blocking access to SMTP (service providers for instance), and as long as one can get to the SMTP service and the SMTP service is not patched, it can be hacked. I was clarifying this again because of a good deal of confusion before about gateways stopping the exploits. They can help mask one's system, but the only way to actually prevent the vulnerability is to either patch or remove all SMTP access from such a server, at least to the Internet. There are no SMTP Auth settings for IMail 8.x, and I'm not sure that IMail 9.x is protected on the SMTP Auth port without this patch anyway. Those that need to leave SMTP access open to the Internet must either patch or use a proxy AND also firewall their server from the Internet. Those looking at a gateway specifically to resolve this issue will mostly not find a complete solution due to not being able to firewall their servers from the Internet. Matt Doug Traylor wrote: All a script kiddie needs to do is point their exploit script at your unprotected server's IP and it's toast. A gateway can't prevent that from happening. Not true in our case. A gateway does protect your server if it's the only way to get to said server. Our gateway AV works after the ASSP proxy and intercepts all incoming email before Imail sees it. Connections to Imail are only made from our AV gateway or internal email clients. A script kiddie would have to use a non-malformed address and basically send a valid email with valid addresses to even get to our Imail server after all connection, recipient, and sender validation tests have passed the ASSP proxy and our AV gateway. We patched anyway to protect against internal attacks. ;o) I don't know how SSL and auth on port 587 would be affected for those sites that have external users, but that isn't an issue for pre 8.22 installs. On a similar note, ASSP can intercept and protect against malformed addresses and such on a secondary listen port for the purpose of smtp auth and can route it to Imail listening on 587 or any other ip:port you like. Unfortunately, it can not handle SSL connections for this purpose. All that being said, I'll have to worry when an exploit is found for my SMTP AV gateway, or ASSP. :o) Doug Traylor To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
I think that I was pretty clear about this in the sentence before the one that you quoted. with an front-end MX like IMGate taking raw Internet inbound, you can really shut down via firewall access to the SMTP service, almost completely hardending the SMTP service against attacks. 1. the firewall : a. permits access to Imail port 587 for SMTP-AUTH only. b. re-directs Imail port 25 to Imail port 587. Those looking at a gateway specifically to resolve this issue will mostly not find a complete solution due to not being able to firewall their servers from the Internet. Exactly. Anyone not running packet-filtering firewall in front of them mail system is really asking for trouble. Len To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Re: [IMail Forum] Another 2006.1 web mail error
Thanks, Will. Good to know. -d - Original Message - From: Will David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:36 PM Subject: [IMail Forum] Re: [IMail Forum] Another 2006.1 web mail error Dave, By conincidence I have had two similar errors reported to me this afternoon like this. The error is copied below. I'll log it with Ipswitch and see what they have to say. But you are not alone! An error was encountered while processing your request. (Return to previous page) If you encounter this error again, please provide the following information to your network administrator to assist in trouble-shooting. Message:Object reference not set to an instance of an object. StackTrace: at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Address.BuildFromAddress(IUser imapUser, String charset) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.ComposeMessage.lnkSend_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.ImageLinkButton.OnBtnLink_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.OnClick(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument) at System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEventHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument) at System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(NameValueCollection postData) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() Will David *\*-Original Message-*\*From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/1/2006 3:25:58 PM*\*To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IMail Forum] Another 2006.1 web mail error*\**\* Hi again, I have had two reports of this particular error in webmail, which shows up in the left-hand column:*\**\*An error was encountered while processing your request. (Return to previous page) *\*If you encounter this error again, please provide the following information to your network administrator to assist in trouble-shooting. *\*Message:*\*System error *\*StackTrace:*\*at Hunny.Mail.Socket.Connect(String host, Int32 port) at Hunny.Mail.Imap4Client.Connect(String address, Int32 port) at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Connection..ctor(IUser user) at Ipswitch.Web.Mail.Imap4Folder.get_UnreadCount() at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.ProcessMailFolderList(ArrayList folders, Nodes level) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.ProcessMailFolders(IUser user) at Ipswitch.Web.Client.FolderTree.Page_Load(Object sender, EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.OnLoad(EventArgs e) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() at System.Web.UI.Control.AddedControl(Control control, Int32 index) at System.Web.UI.ControlCollection.Add(Control child) at Infragistics.WebUI.UltraWebListbar.UltraWebListbar.CreateChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.EnsureChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Control.PreRenderRecursiveInternal() at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain()*\**\*Is anyone else experiencing these errors?*\**\*-Dave Doherty*\* Skywaves, Inc.*\* 508-425-7176*\* [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
Re: [IMail Forum] Update for SMTP vulnerability in 8.22
Len, et. al, IMail 8.x does not support Auth-only on any port, so it is not possible to just simply work around the vulnerability in this way. I agree that forcing SMTP Auth on the server itself would be best, while leaving the MX related stuff to the gateway. Redirecting 25 to 587 on a 9.x server and forcing Auth would be best, but this setup requires port redirection on a firewall so it is not a feature of a gateway, but it is enabled by a gateway. The one caveat here is that IMail 9.x only allows SMTP Auth connections when this is configured, the allow relay IP's cannot be used with this. I do hope that Ipswitch makes a change that also enables IP's to be specified in the place of logins when forcing SMTP Auth. I do not know that on vulnerable versions of 9.x where SMTP Auth is supported, would be protected from the exploit by forcing Auth. I certainly wouldn't assume this to be the case without verification. For those on 9.x, the upgrade to 9.1 is mostly not an issue and the upgrade path is clear. For those that are on 8.2x, the upgrade path is also clear. For those that don't have an upgrade path to at least 8.22 with the patch and need SMTP access to the Internet, they will need at least a proxy/relay for client access, a gateway for MX traffic and their box firewalled. You only need a gateway and a firewall if you don't need SMTP access to the Internet for your own users like Doug, but this setup is not common with IMail users. The only other solution would be IDS and a definition for the exploit (there might already be generic ones that exist on these systems as the exploit uses invalid characters in the domain name portion of the address). Alligate is the only gateway product that I am aware of that can also be setup to proxy/relay SMTP Auth in real-time back to the server, but I wouldn't recommend this configuration for just simply fixing this bug. I believe that this capability exists in the product in order to ease the transition to a gateway since most use the same names for MX and SMTP access, but it is best to have these things be separate in which case there should normally be no need to proxy/relay one's own customers accessing SMTP. I'm sure there are other solutions for this in at least Linux, but I am not familiar with them, and I don't believe that there are any mainstream products available. Matt Len Conrad wrote: I think that I was pretty clear about this in the sentence before the one that you quoted. with an front-end MX like IMGate taking raw Internet inbound, you can really shut down via firewall access to the SMTP service, almost completely hardending the SMTP service against attacks. 1. the firewall : a. permits access to Imail port 587 for SMTP-AUTH only. b. re-directs Imail port 25 to Imail port 587. Those looking at a gateway specifically to resolve this issue will mostly not find a complete solution due to not being able to firewall their servers from the Internet. Exactly. Anyone not running packet-filtering firewall in front of them mail system is really asking for trouble. Len To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes?
Title: 2006.1 login changes?
Hi Mike,
When I use the password stored in Firefox (it's the correct password)
login fails.I have to manually type the password, and it's
annoying. I'm guessing the code you posted has something to do with
that.
However, when I search the web directory for 'sso.html' or
'hdnPwdChanged', nothing comes up. Where is this value
set?
Thanks,
Jim Frasch
2006.1
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:44 PMTo:
Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Yes, you have to add a new field - if you are using
the sso.html field as follows -
loginhtml =
loginhtml.replace('name="hdnPwdChanged"', 'name="hdnPwdChanged"
value="yes"');
- Original Message -
From:
Matrosity
Hosting
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:26
PM
Subject: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Were there any changes to the login pages from
2006.04a to 2006.1? One of our clients uses an extranet that logs users into
imail from a link.
Thanks,
Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes?
Title: 2006.1 login changes?
Jim,
The sso.html only applies if you have
implemented single signon or have a client who wants to log in from an external
or heavily branded page - following the sample technique at http://support.ipswitch.com/kb/IM-20051206-DM06.htm
You're right, the new
hdnPwdChanged field is causing the browser's password to be ignored. The
solution is to check the boxes "remember my username" and "remember my password"
on the login screen. Then it accepts the browser's stored
password.
- Original Message -
From:
Jim F.
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:16
PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Hi Mike,
When I use the password stored in Firefox (it's the correct password)
login fails.I have to manually type the password, and it's
annoying. I'm guessing the code you posted has something to do with
that.
However, when I search the web directory for 'sso.html' or
'hdnPwdChanged', nothing comes up. Where is this value
set?
Thanks,
Jim Frasch
2006.1
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:44 PMTo:
Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1
login changes?
Yes, you have to add a new field - if you are
using the sso.html field as follows -
loginhtml =
loginhtml.replace('name="hdnPwdChanged"', 'name="hdnPwdChanged"
value="yes"');
- Original Message -
From:
Matrosity
Hosting
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006
12:26 PM
Subject: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Were there any changes to the login pages from
2006.04a to 2006.1? One of our clients uses an extranet that logs users into
imail from a link.
Thanks,
Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes? / Single Sign-On
Title: 2006.1 login changes?
Thanks Mike.
Has anyone implemented this so that the username password aren't
displayed in the address bar? At the very least using POST instead of GET
when calling sso.html?
Thanks,
Jim Frasch
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:28 PMTo:
Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Jim,
The sso.html only applies if you have
implemented single signon or have a client who wants to log in from an external
or heavily branded page - following the sample technique at http://support.ipswitch.com/kb/IM-20051206-DM06.htm
You're right, the new
hdnPwdChanged field is causing the browser's password to be ignored. The
solution is to check the boxes "remember my username" and "remember my password"
on the login screen. Then it accepts the browser's stored
password.
- Original Message -
From:
Jim F.
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:16
PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Hi Mike,
When I use the password stored in Firefox (it's the correct password)
login fails.I have to manually type the password, and it's
annoying. I'm guessing the code you posted has something to do with
that.
However, when I search the web directory for 'sso.html' or
'hdnPwdChanged', nothing comes up. Where is this value
set?
Thanks,
Jim Frasch
2006.1
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:44 PMTo:
Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1
login changes?
Yes, you have to add a new field - if you are
using the sso.html field as follows -
loginhtml =
loginhtml.replace('name="hdnPwdChanged"', 'name="hdnPwdChanged"
value="yes"');
- Original Message -
From:
Matrosity
Hosting
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006
12:26 PM
Subject: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Were there any changes to the login pages from
2006.04a to 2006.1? One of our clients uses an extranet that logs users into
imail from a link.
Thanks,
Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes? / Single Sign-On
Title: 2006.1 login changes?
I
would be interested in that too.
I
worked something up in PHP where the login form used POST and then there was a
header redirect to sso.html, but the logon information still appeared in the
address bar for a split-second while sso.html did its
magic.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 4:22 PMTo:
Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes? / Single Sign-On
I don't believe it is possible to implement
sso.html as a POST - the server won't pass the POST databack to
sso.htmlso that the _javascript_ can access it.
I ended up implementing it in ASP
where the enclosing ASP fills out sso.html based on the POSTed data. Let
me know if that would be useful and I'll try to come up with a stripped down
version to post in the next few days.
- Original Message -
From:
Jim F.
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 4:07
PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes? / Single Sign-On
Thanks Mike.
Has anyone implemented this so that the username password aren't
displayed in the address bar? At the very least using POST instead of
GET when calling sso.html?
Thanks,
Jim Frasch
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:28 PMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject:
Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login changes?
Jim,
The sso.html only applies if you
have implemented single signon or have a client who wants to log in from an
external or heavily branded page - following the sample technique at http://support.ipswitch.com/kb/IM-20051206-DM06.htm
You're right, the new
hdnPwdChanged field is causing the browser's password to be ignored. The
solution is to check the boxes "remember my username" and "remember my
password" on the login screen. Then it accepts the browser's
stored password.
- Original Message -
From:
Jim F.
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 3:16
PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Hi Mike,
When I use the password stored in Firefox (it's the correct password)
login fails.I have to manually type the password, and it's
annoying. I'm guessing the code you posted has something to do with
that.
However, when I search the web directory for 'sso.html' or
'hdnPwdChanged', nothing comes up. Where is this value
set?
Thanks,
Jim Frasch
2006.1
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
NSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:44 PMTo:
Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] 2006.1
login changes?
Yes, you have to add a new field - if you are
using the sso.html field as follows -
loginhtml =
loginhtml.replace('name="hdnPwdChanged"', 'name="hdnPwdChanged"
value="yes"');
- Original Message -
From:
Matrosity Hosting
To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006
12:26 PM
Subject: [IMail Forum] 2006.1 login
changes?
Were there any changes to the login pages from
2006.04a to 2006.1? One of our clients uses an extranet that logs users
into imail from a link.
Thanks,
Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644
RE: [IMail Forum] Symantec Antivirus Scan Engine
Yes I have Premium AntiSpam and I give it a medium at best This past week I have had too many Virus get past this engine and then some are stopped on the desktop by a desktop version of Symantec. You would think that a server edition would work better than a desk top version. I am scared that too many are getting in. I am looking at other options to protect my computers. I just spent hours fighting a virus that got in that was missed by Symantec. Trend Micro did find it on the desktop. It was missed by the Premium AntiVirus Kurt From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Deborah Chard Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 4:02 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: [IMail Forum] Symantec Antivirus Scan Engine I have 2006.1 with the Premium AntiSpam and the Symantec Antivirus scan engine. I had been running Imail 8.15 and I wont go on about all the problems I have run into trying to get this up and running. After convincing IMail that I needed an evaluation license for the Antivirus Scan Engine before I even considered upgrading to the Secure Server and giving up my current antivirus, I cant tell if Antivirus is scanning anything. The Symantec Antivirus Scan Engine Status screen indicates that 0 total files and 0 total MB have been scanned. I find nothing in the Windows Server log files indicating that anything has been scanned, nor do I find anything in the IMail logs or Symantec logs to indicate that anything was being scanned. The support team has been unable to help. Is anyone out there using the Symantec Antivirus scan engine? If so, any thoughts I what could be going on here? I am running this with the default configuration, nothing fancy. Thanks Deb Chard SysAdmin ILX Lightwave
Re: [IMail Forum] Symantec Antivirus Scan Engine
Hi Deb- I am using Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition with 2006.1 (NOT using the Premium AntiSpam), and I did use it with 8.15. I made the transition by doing a clean installation of W2K and IM2006, not by upgrading in situ. I have SAV set to scan on create in the spool, and not in the logs or mailboxes. That has worked fine for me for several years. It shows over 100,000 files scanned since the last reboot a day ago or so. -Dave DohertySkywaves, Inc.508-425-7176[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Deborah Chard To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 5:02 PM Subject: [IMail Forum] Symantec Antivirus Scan Engine I have 2006.1 with the Premium AntiSpam and the Symantec Antivirus scan engine. I had been running Imail 8.15 and I wont go on about all the problems I have run into trying to get this up and running. After convincing IMail that I needed an evaluation license for the Antivirus Scan Engine before I even considered upgrading to the Secure Server and giving up my current antivirus, I cant tell if Antivirus is scanning anything. The Symantec Antivirus Scan Engine Status screen indicates that 0 total files and 0 total MB have been scanned. I find nothing in the Windows Server log files indicating that anything has been scanned, nor do I find anything in the IMail logs or Symantec logs to indicate that anything was being scanned. The support team has been unable to help. Is anyone out there using the Symantec Antivirus scan engine? If so, any thoughts I what could be going on here? I am running this with the default configuration, nothing fancy. Thanks Deb Chard SysAdmin ILX Lightwave
[IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
Hi, I have been called in to do an emergency upgrade on an iMail 2006 server that I have seen only once before. It seems to be running 9.01 (according to the services menu in the administrator console) which I am assuming is iMail 2006.01. Now I have downloaded the upgrades IMail 2006.03, and .04 and .1 just in case. When I go to run any of these updates the first message I get is Setup has determined that a later version is already installed. This setup installs an earlier version. So I looked at the files and a lot of them are dated Dec 19, 2005 which makes me believe that I am right that they are running 9.01 / 2006.01 Is there another place to confirm from within IMail Administrator or should I just ignore the upgrade message and proceed? Thank you Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions
RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
I would say you should apply 2006.1 since that is the only version of 2006 that is safe from the latest smtp problem. Bill Foresman Matrosity Hosting www.matrosity.com 850.656.2644 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran JovanovicSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:25 PMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Hi, I have been called in to do an emergency upgrade on an iMail 2006 server that I have seen only once before. It seems to be running 9.01 (according to the services menu in the administrator console) which I am assuming is iMail 2006.01. Now I have downloaded the upgrades IMail 2006.03, and .04 and .1 just in case. When I go to run any of these updates the first message I get is Setup has determined that a later version is already installed. This setup installs an earlier version. So I looked at the files and a lot of them are dated Dec 19, 2005 which makes me believe that I am right that they are running 9.01 / 2006.01 Is there another place to confirm from within IMail Administrator or should I just ignore the upgrade message and proceed? Thank you Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions
Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
There's probably an easier way (like what you tried), but right click on the smtp32.exe file, go to properties, choose the version tab, and then choose "Product Version" from the values there. It should be "9, 1, 0, dev_test" if it is 2006.1. Note that Ipswitch has a funny naming convention where 2006.01 is earlier than 2006.1. It would seem that they should maybe add a dot. If it is really 2006.1, then maybe they have an old copy of the Webmail interface (if it is hard coded in there). Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Hi, I have been called in to do an emergency upgrade on an iMail 2006 server that I have seen only once before. It seems to be running 9.01 (according to the services menu in the administrator console) which I am assuming is iMail 2006.01. Now I have downloaded the upgrades IMail 2006.03, and .04 and .1 just in case. When I go to run any of these updates the first message I get is Setup has determined that a later version is already installed. This setup installs an earlier version. So I looked at the files and a lot of them are dated Dec 19, 2005 which makes me believe that I am right that they are running 9.01 / 2006.01 Is there another place to confirm from within IMail Administrator or should I just ignore the upgrade message and proceed? Thank you Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions
RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
Hi Matt, The version of SMTPD is 9, 0, 1, 15 and it is dated Dec 19, 2005 which is consistent with 2006.01 I am on site now and have found a partial directory of C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail which seems some leftover files from ICS. There is only one EXE file and it is called trial_rt.exe. The SMTPD and QueueMgr program run from C:\Program Files\IMail Also something is locking the ICS directory (C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail) since I was unable to rename the \IMAIL portion. This is not going to be a fun night. Goran From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Matt Sent: Wed 11/1/2006 8:44 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem There's probably an easier way (like what you tried), but right click on the smtp32.exe file, go to properties, choose the version tab, and then choose Product Version from the values there. It should be 9, 1, 0, dev_test if it is 2006.1. Note that Ipswitch has a funny naming convention where 2006.01 is earlier than 2006.1. It would seem that they should maybe add a dot. If it is really 2006.1, then maybe they have an old copy of the Webmail interface (if it is hard coded in there). Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Hi, I have been called in to do an emergency upgrade on an iMail 2006 server that I have seen only once before. It seems to be running 9.01 (according to the services menu in the administrator console) which I am assuming is iMail 2006.01. Now I have downloaded the upgrades IMail 2006.03, and .04 and .1 just in case. When I go to run any of these updates the first message I get is Setup has determined that a later version is already installed. This setup installs an earlier version. So I looked at the files and a lot of them are dated Dec 19, 2005 which makes me believe that I am right that they are running 9.01 / 2006.01 Is there another place to confirm from within IMail Administrator or should I just ignore the upgrade message and proceed? Thank you Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions winmail.dat
RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
Goran, if you can look through the services and see if anything from Ipswitch or Imail is there. If that does not help, restart in safe mode and rename the directory and restart and check the event logs for what did not start. Also, review the msconfig file. I'll be around after 10 PM mine 1 AM yours if you need me. I hope you are done by then. John T eServices For You Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood. Ralph Waldo Emerson (1802-1882) -Original Message- From: Goran Jovanovic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 6:06 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Hi Matt, The version of SMTPD is 9, 0, 1, 15 and it is dated Dec 19, 2005 which is consistent with 2006.01 I am on site now and have found a partial directory of C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail which seems some leftover files from ICS. There is only one EXE file and it is called trial_rt.exe. The SMTPD and QueueMgr program run from C:\Program Files\IMail Also something is locking the ICS directory (C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail) since I was unable to rename the \IMAIL portion. This is not going to be a fun night. Goran _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Matt Sent: Wed 11/1/2006 8:44 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem There's probably an easier way (like what you tried), but right click on the smtp32.exe file, go to properties, choose the version tab, and then choose Product Version from the values there. It should be 9, 1, 0, dev_test if it is 2006.1. Note that Ipswitch has a funny naming convention where 2006.01 is earlier than 2006.1. It would seem that they should maybe add a dot. If it is really 2006.1, then maybe they have an old copy of the Webmail interface (if it is hard coded in there). Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Hi, I have been called in to do an emergency upgrade on an iMail 2006 server that I have seen only once before. It seems to be running 9.01 (according to the services menu in the administrator console) which I am assuming is iMail 2006.01. Now I have downloaded the upgrades IMail 2006.03, and .04 and .1 just in case. When I go to run any of these updates the first message I get is Setup has determined that a later version is already installed. This setup installs an earlier version. So I looked at the files and a lot of them are dated Dec 19, 2005 which makes me believe that I am right that they are running 9.01 / 2006.01 Is there another place to confirm from within IMail Administrator or should I just ignore the upgrade message and proceed? Thank you Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
Let me share with you what happened. The short answer is that I have upgraded to 2006.1 and everything seems to be working. There were two items giving me grief. 1 There seemed to be a previous installation of ICS 2 The upgrade files were going to downgrade my installation This server was once an iMail 8.2x server. At that time it had everything installed to C:\Program Files\IMail. Then last December it was upgraded in place to IMail 2006 and patch .01 was applied. What this ended up doing is upgrading the core programs in the above directory but all the new web stuff went into C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail and that is where the ICS files were. Since I was coming into this server blind this caused me concern especially when coupled with the #2 problem above. I thought that I have a mixed install of ICS and IMail. Turns out I did not and it is like this because it was an upgraded 8.2x The second problem drove me nuts. I finally figured it out and I believe I have discovered an install bug. I knew I had version 9.01 installed. The version in IMail Services said so and so did the version number on the properties of SMTPD32.exe and the dates were Dec 19, 2005. So why did the upgrade patch tell me that it was going to install an older version of IMail? After some digging I decided that the Install message was simply incorrect since I got the same error message when I tried to run the .03 or .04 or .1 patch. Just to be safe I zipped the two imail directories and exported the IMail registry. I ran the 2006.1 patch, ignored the warning, everything worked. Smooth. Well until I looked at the IMail services. I was now at 9.0 Bad news. I tried to run the .04 patch and this time I got to the Repair or Remove screen. To make the long and frustrating story short the problem was where I had the original and patch files. C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail.exe this is the original 2006 installation file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.01\imail200601.exe 2006.01 patch file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.04\imail200604a.exe 2006.04a patch file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.1\imail.exe 2006.1 patch file The problem was the space between iMail and 2006 AND the fact that there is a file called imail.exe in the directory above the patches If I changed the directory to C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail2006.1\imail.exe (no space) then the patch would work fine If I moved C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail.exe to C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail 2006\IMail.exe and then ran the patch from C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.1\imail.exe then I did not have the problem. Something about installshield breaks with the combination of the space in the patch directory which isolates the word imail and the fact that there is an imail.exe in the directory above (original file) so it invokes the partial directory name.exe from the above directory. Hopefully I have explained myself well and people will not create the weird combination that I did and suffer the same problems. What a pain. Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:06 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Hi Matt, The version of SMTPD is 9, 0, 1, 15 and it is dated Dec 19, 2005 which is consistent with 2006.01 I am on site now and have found a partial directory of C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail which seems some leftover files from ICS. There is only one EXE file and it is called trial_rt.exe. The SMTPD and QueueMgr program run from C:\Program Files\IMail Also something is locking the ICS directory (C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail) since I was unable to rename the \IMAIL portion. This is not going to be a fun night. Goran From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Matt Sent: Wed 11/1/2006 8:44 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem There's probably an easier way (like what you tried), but right click on the smtp32.exe file, go to properties, choose the version tab, and then choose Product Version from the values there. It should be 9, 1, 0, dev_test if it is 2006.1. Note that Ipswitch has a funny naming convention where 2006.01 is earlier than 2006.1. It would seem that they should maybe add a dot. If it is really 2006.1, then maybe they have an old copy of the Webmail interface (if it is hard coded in there). Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Hi, I have been called in to do an emergency upgrade on an iMail 2006 server that I have seen only once before. It seems to be running 9.01 (according to the services menu in the administrator console) which I am assuming is iMail 2006.01. Now I have downloaded the upgrades IMail 2006.03, and .04 and .1 just in case.
Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
Wow, what a mess. I am SO glad I did my install ona new box. -d - Original Message - From: Goran Jovanovic To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 1:06 AM Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Let me share with you what happened. The short answer is that I have upgraded to 2006.1 and everything seems to be working. There were two items giving me grief. 1 There seemed to be a previous installation of ICS 2 The upgrade files were going to downgrade my installation This server was once an iMail 8.2x server. At that time it had everything installed to C:\Program Files\IMail. Then last December it was upgraded in place to IMail 2006 and patch .01 was applied. What this ended up doing is upgrading the core programs in the above directory but all the new web stuff went into C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail and that is where the ICS files were. Since I was coming into this server blind this caused me concern especially when coupled with the #2 problem above. I thought that I have a mixed install of ICS and IMail. Turns out I did not and it is like this because it was an upgraded 8.2x The second problem drove me nuts. I finally figured it out and I believe I have discovered an install bug. I knew I had version 9.01 installed. The version in IMail Services said so and so did the version number on the properties of SMTPD32.exe and the dates were Dec 19, 2005. So why did the upgrade patch tell me that it was going to install an older version of IMail? After some digging I decided that the Install message was simply incorrect since I got the same error message when I tried to run the .03 or .04 or .1 patch. Just to be safe I zipped the two imail directories and exported the IMail registry. I ran the 2006.1 patch, ignored the warning, everything worked. Smooth . Well until I looked at the IMail services. I was now at 9.0 Bad news. I tried to run the .04 patch and this time I got to the Repair or Remove screen. To make the long and frustrating story short the problem was where I had the original and patch files. C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail.exe ç this is the original 2006 installation file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.01\imail200601.exe ç 2006.01 patch file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.04\imail200604a.exe ç 2006.04a patch file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.1\imail.exe ç 2006.1 patch file The problem was the space between iMail and 2006 AND the fact that there is a file called imail.exe in the directory above the patches If I changed the directory to C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail2006.1\imail.exe (no space) then the patch would work fine If I moved C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail.exe to C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail 2006\IMail.exe and then ran the patch from C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.1\imail.exe then I did not have the problem. Something about installshield breaks with the combination of the space in the patch directory which isolates the word imail and the fact that there is an imail.exe in the directory above (original file) so it invokes the partial directory name.exe from the above directory. Hopefully I have explained myself well and people will not create the weird combination that I did and suffer the same problems. What a pain . Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran JovanovicSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:06 PMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Hi Matt, The version of SMTPD is 9, 0, 1, 15 and it is dated Dec 19, 2005 which is consistent with 2006.01 I am on site now and have found a partial directory of C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail which seems some leftover files from ICS. There is only one EXE file and it is called trial_rt.exe. The SMTPD and QueueMgr program run from C:\Program Files\IMail Also something is locking the ICS directory (C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail) since I was unable to rename the \IMAIL portion. This is not going to be a fun night. Goran From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of MattSent: Wed 11/1/2006 8:44 PMTo: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.comSubject: Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem There's probably an easier way (like what you tried), but right click on the smtp32.exe file, go to properties, choose the version tab, and then choose "Product Version" from the values there. It should be "9, 1, 0, dev_test" if it is 2006.1.Note that Ipswitch has a funny naming convention where 2006.01 is earlier than
RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem
Yes, I have seen problems with an older version of PaperPort which installed with a %1 in several registry keys which later led to problems uninstalling other programs that were installed before PaperPort but still used InstallationShield for the installation build. John T eServices For You Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood. Ralph Waldo Emerson (1802-1882) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:07 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Let me share with you what happened. The short answer is that I have upgraded to 2006.1 and everything seems to be working. There were two items giving me grief. 1 There seemed to be a previous installation of ICS 2 The upgrade files were going to downgrade my installation This server was once an iMail 8.2x server. At that time it had everything installed to C:\Program Files\IMail. Then last December it was upgraded in place to IMail 2006 and patch .01 was applied. What this ended up doing is upgrading the core programs in the above directory but all the new web stuff went into C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail and that is where the ICS files were. Since I was coming into this server blind this caused me concern especially when coupled with the #2 problem above. I thought that I have a mixed install of ICS and IMail. Turns out I did not and it is like this because it was an upgraded 8.2x The second problem drove me nuts. I finally figured it out and I believe I have discovered an install bug. I knew I had version 9.01 installed. The version in IMail Services said so and so did the version number on the properties of SMTPD32.exe and the dates were Dec 19, 2005. So why did the upgrade patch tell me that it was going to install an older version of IMail? After some digging I decided that the Install message was simply incorrect since I got the same error message when I tried to run the .03 or .04 or .1 patch. Just to be safe I zipped the two imail directories and exported the IMail registry. I ran the 2006.1 patch, ignored the warning, everything worked. Smooth. Well until I looked at the IMail services. I was now at 9.0 Bad news. I tried to run the .04 patch and this time I got to the Repair or Remove screen. To make the long and frustrating story short the problem was where I had the original and patch files. C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail.exe this is the original 2006 installation file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.01\imail200601.exe 2006.01 patch file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.04\imail200604a.exe 2006.04a patch file C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.1\imail.exe 2006.1 patch file The problem was the space between iMail and 2006 AND the fact that there is a file called imail.exe in the directory above the patches If I changed the directory to C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail2006.1\imail.exe (no space) then the patch would work fine If I moved C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail.exe to C:\Software\iMailServer2006\IMail 2006\IMail.exe and then ran the patch from C:\Software\iMailServer2006\iMail 2006.1\imail.exe then I did not have the problem. Something about installshield breaks with the combination of the space in the patch directory which isolates the word imail and the fact that there is an imail.exe in the directory above (original file) so it invokes the partial directory name.exe from the above directory. Hopefully I have explained myself well and people will not create the weird combination that I did and suffer the same problems. What a pain. Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:06 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem Hi Matt, The version of SMTPD is 9, 0, 1, 15 and it is dated Dec 19, 2005 which is consistent with 2006.01 I am on site now and have found a partial directory of C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail which seems some leftover files from ICS. There is only one EXE file and it is called trial_rt.exe. The SMTPD and QueueMgr program run from C:\Program Files\IMail Also something is locking the ICS directory (C:\Program Files\Ipswitch\IMail) since I was unable to rename the \IMAIL portion. This is not going to be a fun night. Goran From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Matt Sent: Wed 11/1/2006 8:44 PM To: Imail_Forum@list.ipswitch.com Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Upgrading version problem There's probably an easier way (like what you tried), but right click on the smtp32.exe file, go to properties, choose the version tab, and then choose Product Version from the values there.
