Mon 01 Feb 1999 18:17, les [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have noticed that if I send myself an Email there appears to be at
least a 5 minute delay after the message arrives in $HOME/Maildir/new
before qmail-pop3d will tell me it is there.
Is this normal behaviour?
No.
Is it possible for
"Eric Dahnke" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| How do you folks mail system files (say logs for example)?
There's a book called "The Unix Programming Environment", by Kernighan
and Pike, which is an excellent introduction to the ideas behind Unix.
It's really good for answers to questions like that.
To keep our virtualdomains organized so that several admins can figure out
what is going on:
/var/qmail/control/virtualdomains:
mayod.nb.net:alias-virtuals/net/nb/mayod/q
This scheme works very well for me and the other admins can pick up what
is going on very quickly.
Tim Mayo
On Mon, 1 Feb
"Len Budney" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. In your shell startup scripts, set the environment variables
QMAILSUSER and QMAILSHOST. See qmail-inject(8) for details.
This is somewhat fragile in that users can turn off those
variables and undo your efforts on their behalf.
Paul Gregg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, Why wouldn't this work?
Because you're using a technical solution to fix a social problem.
The spammers will just find another way around the system.
So far, flame.org has rejected just under 1000 messages due to being
on the RBL, 40 due to being on
Greg Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Incidentally, the way to use SRV as a protocol switch here
would be to do a single SRV query for _mail._tcp.domain and use the
port number in the returned records to decide which protocol to use.
But that's still an extra DNS lookup for every current
No, it gives you recourse when they don't. The difference means that
the service will require lots of babysitting.
Or a deposit.
Requiring a deposit would probably prevent a good bit of spam.
Unfortunately market conditions make it impossible to do so and compete
with other ISPs who choose
"Racer X" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, his real problem is that he continues to patronize an ISP who
doesn't provide him with adequate services. The ISP is not at fault
here.
ISP's don't grow on trees, at least outside of U.S. metropolitan
areas.
It's easy for you to say "use a
"Racer X" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Find another ISP.
Not an option.
If there were a real need for people to send outbound email directly to
their recipients, I'm sure we would offer such a service, and I'm sure
we'd have a contract restricting use appropriately. The simple fact is
that there
I'm still striving for mail client independence. What this means is that all
mail for everyone will remain on the server and ideally I'd like the user to
be able to use an imap client of his/her choosing from a PC of his/her
choosing, i.e. a PC at work, PC from home, HPC from wherever.
Some imap
On 01-Feb-99 Racer X wrote:
No, it gives you recourse when they don't. The difference means that
the service will require lots of babysitting.
Or a deposit.
Requiring a deposit would probably prevent a good bit of spam.
Unfortunately market conditions make it impossible to do so and
On 01-Feb-99 Mike Meyer wrote:
Actually, it isn't - it's a simple matter of more immediate
response. If my mail server has a problem, I fix it. If my ISPs mail
server has a problem, I have to call their support number, and they
then call a tech to fix the problem. I respect my ISP, but I can
From: Paul Schinder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:It may come to that. If DSL IP banks become a significant, easily
:blockable source of mostly spam, then of course they will be blocked.
:So? Why is this supposed to be a problem for me if I block them?
:Personally, I think it will be more of a problem
There are a growing number doing this already. Some don't and charge
a hefty "cleanup fee" to the luser's credit card (don't know the details
if anyone's tried to dispute the charge).
Legally I don't know how valid this is. I suspect that it would be
trivial to have this waived as "dispute
Dude, I don't normally chime in on flame wars, especially one's that have no
place being on a qmail mailing list, but if they are that bad, get some
capital investment and put them out of buisness. I started an ISP years
ago, and it bombed miserably, mainly because at the time I was the only one
Hi All!
I work for a english school here in Recife, Brazil, and I
setted up a Qmail server that is woking fine (Thanks Dan!!).
Most of our students have emails accounts at free email servers
like yahoo, hotmail and zipmail (brazilian one).
I'd like to provide the same service to these students.
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
On 01-Feb-99 Mike Meyer wrote:
Actually, it isn't - it's a simple matter of more immediate
response. If my mail server has a problem, I fix it. If my ISPs mail
server has a problem, I have to call their support number, and they
then call a tech
In order that I have valid return mail addresses, I'd like to re-write
the domain in all outgoing mail from my home network so
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" become
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
In addition to what others have mentioned, I discovered that using
Emacs to send email doesn't
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:34:51PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 1 February 1999 at 13:59:11 -0500
Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Too late, Dave. You're trying to solve the wrong problem.
No, I'm trying to solve *my* problem, not
- Jake Jellinek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
| I get loads of messages in my qmail log like this:
|
| 917908634.888123 warning: trouble opening local/0/361859; will try again later
Try Russell's qmail-lint at URL:http://www.qmail.org/qmail-lint-0.51.
Let us know if it doesn't point out the problem for
I made a binary package for Lignux; it is the ..i386.tar.gz file in
ftp://moni.msci.memphis.edu/pub/qmail/var-qmail
There is also a var-qmail-create.tar file, which was used to make the
binary distribution.
There are READMEs in each tarball.
There is one difference between this var-qmail
Len Budney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I for one would be glad to pay at least .37 US dollars per email, if
it helps to reduce spam. This, then, is my proposal:
Out of curiosity, who would pay for (for example) the qmail mailing list?
USD$0.37 * subscribers * messages/day would not be cheap.
(my last post in this thread)
Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Punish ISPs because one of their users happens to break the law?
How quickly do you want the ISPs to go out of business because they
can't afford/obtain insurance against the acts of their users?
Not to worry. The ISP
Russell Nelson wrote:
Dave Sill writes:
,,,
I disagree. Yes, I could configure my server to pass everything off to
the ISP's mail hub, but, frankly, I can do a better job of it than
they can. And switching to a more competant ISP is not an
option. Where I live, there's only one ISP
Heinz Wittenbecher writes:
I'm still striving for mail client independence. What this means is that all
mail for everyone will remain on the server and ideally I'd like the user to
be able to use an imap client of his/her choosing from a PC of his/her
choosing, i.e. a PC at work, PC from
Mark Delany [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tend to look at paging simplistically in most cases. If you're paging
out, then you're running short of memory, but one hopes that these:
On most SysV machines, free physical memory not being used by running
processes is used as a disk cache, causing
Looks like I might have to try myself to implement this feature but I'd
appreciate some wisdom/advice from the more knowledgable about qmail.
The ojective is to make a copy on the qmail server for all mail that a user
sends.
Using procmail to currently filter, sort and seperate inbound mail I'd
I know, asked that before, but here I go again:
I was wondering - did anyone ever look into the creation of a third (or even
more) delivery queues for qmail? Here is what I have in mind:
local - for local addresses, aliases etc.
remote - anything outside the local (mail) domain, subnet,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There may be. I'd not use SSH myself since it isn't free for commercial use.
I'd have to buy the server copy of SSH to be able to offer it as a service
that you pay for.
The licensing for version 1 of ssh is quite liberal.
Have you seen FAQ 8.2? Or you just want to have copies of a single
user's mail?
Mate
Paul Schinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It may come to that. If DSL IP banks become a significant, easily
blockable source of mostly spam, then of course they will be blocked.
So? Why is this supposed to be a problem for me if I block them?
Because it's possible there will reach a point
Len Budney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I for one would be glad to pay at least .37 US dollars per email, if
it helps to reduce spam.
I wouldn't. Nor will I.
Period.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
From: Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Paul Schinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:I'll point out that this mailing list is being run off what is arguably an
:IP address provided to an end-user by an ISP. (At least possibly; I'm not
:aware of whatever arrangements Dan has with his university. But
Mate Wierdl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
use mailsubj as
mailsubj foo bar file.you.want.to.mail
See man page for mailsubj.
I'd recommend also reading mailsubj, since it's just a shell script. You
can then keep using it, knowing that you know what it's doing and you
could do it yourself if you
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 07:24:21PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
} Paul Schinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
}
} It may come to that. If DSL IP banks become a significant, easily
} blockable source of mostly spam, then of course they will be blocked.
} So? Why is this supposed to be a problem
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 07:24:21PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
} Paul Schinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
} It may come to that. If DSL IP banks become a significant, easily
} blockable source of mostly spam, then of course they will be blocked.
} So? Why is this supposed to be a problem for
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:28:04PM -0500, Len Budney wrote:
I for one would be glad to pay at least .37 US dollars per email, if
it helps to reduce spam. This, then, is my proposal:
I'd like to chime in and say that I too would be glad for Len
to pay $US .37 per email.
--
John White
-Original Message-
From: Mate Wierdl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Robert J. Curci [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: Setup question
Although
as installed, I can't telnet to either smtp or pop3 ports. I get a
connected statement but no prompts.
Clearly different. Dial-up's are usually too much trouble for an ISP
track who was using what when. You know who's responsible for a
university faculty machine. (I'm aware of the student problem; my
wife is a university faculty member.) The number of spams I get that
I can identify as from
I told myself I wouldn't reply to this thread...
On Feb 01, 1999 at 19:28:07 -0800, Mike Holling twiddled the keys to say:
Exactly. The implicit assumption being promoted here is that an ISP's
mail server is somehow more "legitimate" than an arbitrary mailserver on
the Internet. As Russ has
40 matches
Mail list logo
