Re: Quick question

[Lukas Beeler]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 12:13:38AM +, mike wrote:
> but why so many process running as root?  Here's my process list.
>  I understand all of it except the first 5 

qmail uses many more processes than sendmail, which is one monolithic 
programm, running as root. If you look at your "ps aux" a little more 
exactly, you will see that only supervise processes and qmail-lspawn run 
as root. supervise processes do nothing more than just "guard" a 
service, and restart them if they die. have a look at supervise.c in the 
daemontools directory. qmail-lspawn does just invoke qmail-local's with 
the respective UID/GID of the receiver. this is, why this programm 
need's root right. You see, there are more processes, because qmail is 
more modular, and splitted into different processes, for more security.

-- 
Lukas Beeler<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG Fingerprint: 8030 1C2F 66C5 9D80 AA31  6604 7D4D 0A67 68D8 B67E

Quick question

[mike]

I'm fairly new to qmail. I was a sendmail fan forever till I got bored and 
decided to switch to qmail.  So far I love it. I started readin the 
lifewithmail homepage and decided to try it out.  I've got everything 
installed and running but 1 thing puzzles me, I know it's probably a goofy 
question and please no harsh comments  ;)  but why so many process running 
as root?  Here's my process list.  I understand all of it except the first 5 
process all running as root.  I know this is probably some easy thing but 
I'm the paranoid type and it makes me curious.  Thanks for any info

root   954  1.0  0.6  1244  380 ?S16:59   0:00 svscan 
/service
root   955  0.0  0.5  1204  348 ?S16:59   0:00 supervise 
qmail-send
root   956  0.0  0.5  1204  348 ?S16:59   0:00 supervise log
root   957  0.0  0.5  1204  348 ?S16:59   0:00 supervise 
qmail-smtpd
root   958  0.5  0.5  1204  348 ?S16:59   0:00 supervise log
qmaill 959  0.5  0.5  1216  348 ?S16:59   0:00 
/usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail
qmails 960  1.5  0.6  1264  424 ?S16:59   0:00 qmail-send
qmaill 962  0.5  0.5  1216  348 ?S16:59   0:00 
/usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail/smtpd
root   963  0.5  0.5  1216  360 ?S16:59   0:00 qmail-lspawn 
./Maildir/
qmailr 964  0.0  0.5  1216  360 ?S16:59   0:00 qmail-rspawn
qmailq 965  0.0  0.6  1212  376 ?S16:59   0:00 qmail-clean
qmaild 966  1.0  1.1  1768  712 ?S16:59   0:00 
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -l 0 -x /etc/tcp.
root   970  0.0  1.3  2568  840 pts/0R16:59   0:00 ps aux 

Question about Process Usage and running problems (newbie)

[Dave Lewis]

I just recently switched from sendmail to qmail and I've noticed that my
process usage seems to be alot higher than it used to be.   Below is a ps
incuding all the qmail processes.  I don't transfer that much mail and
I've been told that Qmail is supposed to be better.. When I ran sendmail 
my usage was under 1 usually .50 or something.. now it's almost 3 ??

Is there something wrong ??? how can I fix it..  or is this normal ?


root  3445  0.0  0.0  1152   60 ?SAug11   0:00 tcpserver -R -H 0 pop3 
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.domain.com
   
/var/spool/mail/popmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
root 18160  0.0  0.2  1124  340 ?SAug11   0:00 svscan
root 18161  3.5  0.2  1088  320 ?SAug11 101:22 supervise qmail-pop3d
root 18162  0.0  0.2  1088  320 ?SAug11   0:00 supervise log
root 18163  0.0  0.2  1088  320 ?SAug11   0:00 supervise qmail-send
root 18164  0.0  0.2  1088  320 ?SAug11   0:00 supervise log
root 18165  0.0  0.2  1088  320 ?SAug11   0:00 supervise qmail-smtpd
root 18166  0.0  0.2  1088  320 ?SAug11   0:00 supervise log
qmaill   18168  0.0  0.2  1100  312 ?SAug11   0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog 
t /var/log/qmail/pop3d
qmaill   18169  0.0  0.2  1100  312 ?SAug11   0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog 
-t s250 /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
qmaild   18170  0.0  0.0  1152   68 ?SAug11   0:00 
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u 520 
   -g 519 0 smtp 
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
qmaill   18171  0.0  0.0  1104  116 ?SAug11   0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog 
t s 250 /var/log/qmail/qmail-send
#517 18172  0.0  0.1  1148  160 ?SAug11   0:00 qmail-send
root 18178  0.0  0.2  1100  344 ?SAug11   0:00 qmail-lspawn 
|dot-forward .forward?./Maildir/
#516 18179  0.0  0.0  11000 ?SW   Aug11   0:00 [qmail-rspawn]
#515 18180  0.0  0.0  1092   92 ?SAug11   0:00 qmail-clean
qmaild   27733  0.0  0.2  1104  332 ?S03:29   0:00 
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
root 31318  0.0  0.5  1648  748 ?R03:30   0:00 sh ./run
root 31319  0.0  0.1  1436  236 ?R03:30   0:00 sh ./run


ALSO , when I run the svscan startup file I get a bind error, already in
use  I have a feeling that this may be part of it.. but there is
nothing listening on those ports other than qmail.. I've tripple checked
the inetd.conf file and all the mail type commands are #'d out.  

Is there something I've done wrong ??? or just missed 

If more information is needed.. I'd be glad to post it or deal with
someone off list...

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance


Dave

Re: pop3d question

[Henning Brauer]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 01:42:27PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Good idea.  Wouldn't the simplest way to accomplish this be to wrap
> qmail-pop3d with a shell script that did something like:
> 
>   qmail-pop3d ./Maildir/
>   rm -f ./Maildir/cur/*

That's _very_ dangerous. What about dropped connections before all mail is
retrieved? And AFAIK there are clients connecting once, auth'ing, LIST and
QUIT (our script deletes all Mail then) and reconnecting later to actually
fetch mails (would fetch mails - your script deleted them all then...)
- pop3 webmail clients (IMHO broken by design, but anyway...) come to my mind.

-- 
* Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de *
* Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany   *
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: pop3d question

[Peter van Dijk]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 12:46:12PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > Is there any way to configure qmail-pop3d for not allow pop3 users
> > to leave messages on server?
> 
> Not in the way you're thinking.  Instead, have a cron job run nightly
> which looks in all users' Maildirs and deletes any file older than (say)
> 3 days.  Make sure your users know about this in advance.

Better: remove all files in Maildir/cur/ at the end (or start) of a
popsession. This should be quite trivial scripting, and achieves
exactly the desired effect.

Otherwise: patch qmail-pop3d to delete messages instead of moving them
to cur/.

And indeed: make sure your users know, or they will be surprised and
will complain.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: pop3d question

[Charles Cazabon]

GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Is there any way to configure qmail-pop3d for not allow pop3 users
> to leave messages on server?

Not in the way you're thinking.  Instead, have a cron job run nightly
which looks in all users' Maildirs and deletes any file older than (say)
3 days.  Make sure your users know about this in advance.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

pop3d question

[GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI]

Hi all.

Is there any way to configure qmail-pop3d for not allow pop3 users
to leave messages on server?

--ejg:wq!

Re: qmail-queue question

[Charles Cazabon]

Edward McLain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Ok.. so qmail-remote crashed.. but why?

Who knows?  Did you kill it?

> It had also been running for over 3 hours?

So?  Long messages to a slow host can do this.
 
> Well to test it out I did the following:
[...]

You didn't use proper SMTP syntax, which qmail-remote would have.  Who
says you connected to the same machine as qmail-remote did?
"mx09.mindspring.com" could be a cluster of machines sitting behind a
load balancer.
 
> mail from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This isn't proper SMTP.

> Any ideas?

Just one:  stop worrying until you have evidence of an actual problem.
Everything you've described so far can be completely normal behaviour.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

Re: qmail-queue question

[MarkD]

> Ok.. so as someone pointed out I have to now search by the deliver
> number.. So I ran:
> 
> [root@mail send]# grep "delivery 366" * | /usr/local/bin/tai64nlocal
> 2001-08-09 13:41:28.533103500.s:@40003b72c36a2839ff1c starting
> delivery  366: msg 112603 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [root@mail send]#
> 
> Ok.. so the last attempt started at 1:41PM..
> So what happened to the one before it?
> 
> [root@mail send]# grep "delivery 26:" * | /usr/local/bin/tai64nlocal
> 2001-08-09 10:17:31.319774500.s:@40003b72a32e0b08b30c starting
> delivery  26: msg 112603 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 2001-08-09 13:41:28.533103500.s:@40003b72c33a3620be2c delivery 26:
> deferral: qmail-remote_crashed./
> [root@mail send]#
> 
> Ok.. so qmail-remote crashed.. but why?

Unless something very unusual is happening to your system, I'd say
that someone or something killed it. An unpatched qmail-remote has no
record of crashing in the last, oh, 3 years of people using it.

> It had also been running for over 3 hours?

That's not necessarily a problem. Mail is allowed to get stuck. Is any
mail getting thru to these sites or are they all failing?

> Well to test it out I did the following:
> 
> [root@mail qmail]# telnet mx09.mindspring.com 25
> Trying 207.69.200.36...
> Connected to mx09.mindspring.com.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 pickering.mail.mindspring.net EL_3_4_0 /EL_3_4_0  ESMTP Earthlink
> Mail Service Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:20:40 -0400 (EDT)
> helo mail.highspd.net
> 250 pickering.mail.mindspring.net Hello mail.highspd.net
> [208.62.90.230], please to meet you
> mail from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender ok
> rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Recipient ok
> data
> 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself
> this is a test.
> please disregard
> .
> 250 tn5s62.1dc.37kbi14 Message accepted for delivery
> quit
> 221 pickering.mail.mindspring.net closing connection
> Connection closed by foreign host.
> 
> Ok.. so I can send mail directly just fine.. So what in the heck is
> going on here?  This is what is puzzling me the most..?

Hard to say. It could be that the contents of the mail are a problem
for mindspring, are they large? Do they have binary data?

It could be that qmail-remote is connecting to an MX that's
particularly slow or dead.

It could be that you have an smtproutes entry for that domain that
points incorrectly.

> BTW.. this was happening with "stock" qmail also before I patched it
> with the qmail-queue patch for qmailscanner.

If you are saying you are sure that qmail-remote was crashing with a
stock qmail install, then I'd be highly suspicious of a
library/compiler/OS problem. I know that might sound like a cop-out,
but a crashing qmail-remote is virtually unheard of. It's also
possible that there is some sort of system resource that is becoming
unavailable causing the kernel to kill the qmail-remote.

Does this happen to all qmail-remotes or only those sending to
mindspring? Does it happen to all qmail-remotes or only those that run
for a long time?

If you can reliably determine which ones are going to crash in advance
of them crashing, then do a system call trace on one of them to see
why it's dying. Show us the trace.


Regards.

RE: qmail-queue question

[Edward McLain]

OTECTED]
2001-08-09 13:41:28.533103500.s:@40003b72c33a3620be2c delivery 26:
deferral: qmail-remote_crashed./
[root@mail send]#

Ok.. so qmail-remote crashed.. but why?
It had also been running for over 3 hours?

Well to test it out I did the following:

[root@mail qmail]# telnet mx09.mindspring.com 25
Trying 207.69.200.36...
Connected to mx09.mindspring.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 pickering.mail.mindspring.net EL_3_4_0 /EL_3_4_0  ESMTP Earthlink
Mail Service Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:20:40 -0400 (EDT)
helo mail.highspd.net
250 pickering.mail.mindspring.net Hello mail.highspd.net
[208.62.90.230], please to meet you
mail from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender ok
rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Recipient ok
data
354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself
this is a test.
please disregard
.
250 tn5s62.1dc.37kbi14 Message accepted for delivery
quit
221 pickering.mail.mindspring.net closing connection
Connection closed by foreign host.

Ok.. so I can send mail directly just fine.. So what in the heck is
going on here?  This is what is puzzling me the most..?

BTW.. this was happening with "stock" qmail also before I patched it
with the qmail-queue patch for qmailscanner.

Any ideas?

Ed McLain

-Original Message-
From: MarkD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 2:04 PM
To: Edward McLain
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail-queue question

On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 12:39:28PM -0500, Edward McLain allegedly wrote:
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: MarkD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:23 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: qmail-queue question
> 
> >> 3. When the queue shows the message arriving on 30 Jul 2001
15:08:23
> I
> >> tend to think that it actually arrive at 3:08 on Jul 30 of 2001,
that
> is
> >> unless qmail is doing something funking with date and time stamps.
;)
> 
> >But you didn't show the log entry that corresponds to this message.
As
> >a consultant with 8 years experience you have probably deduced that
> >*all* messages inserted into the queue create a "new msg" log
> >entry. Where is it?
> 
> There was no "new msg" log entry.  Best I can tell the logs only go
back
> maybe 3 or 4 days and the messages originated 9 days ago.. Thus the
> problem.

It probably would have been helpful if you'd told us about this at the
start. It seemed like you were trying to suggest that the log entry
never existed. I guess that's a lesson for next time.

> I took Richard's advice and added the socket keep-alive patch and that
> actually seems to have fixed the problem.  The old messages seemed to
> have mysteriously disappeared after replacing the qmail-remote exec.  

Mysteriously? Since we've stressed the importance of looking at logs
for answers, I'm sure you've checked the logs to solve the
"mystery". What did they say? I'm sure if you bother, you'll see that
it's not a "mystery" at all. Unless of course you kill -9 qmail-send,
but no one or no docs have ever told you to do this, right?

In any event, as I said in the the last post; queuelifetime applies
*after* the last delivery attempt has exited. It's almost certainly
the case that you killed qmail-remote (or it exited of its own accord)
at which point qmail-send would notice that queuelifetime is exceeded
and bounce the mail. The logs show this stuff by the way.

> Not to start anything else, but is there any better way to stop qmail
> when using tcp-daemonts than svc -d /service/qmail-send ?
> 
> This doesn't seem to always work and I can't ever seem to get all the

It always works. But qmail-send won't exit until all current
deliveries have exited - in fact it logs an entry each time an
outstanding delivery completes.  Did you see different when you
checked the logs? If so, show us.

Edward, for someone with 8 years experience, you should rejoice that
so many of your mysteries and misunderstandings can be solved by
examining and understanding the logs. If the log messages are a
mystery to you, there are plenty of archived posts explaining the
messages.


Regards.

Re: qmail-queue question

[Charles Cazabon]

Edward McLain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Not to start anything else, but is there any better way to stop qmail
> when using tcp-daemonts than svc -d /service/qmail-send ?

No -- that is the proper way to stop qmail with daemontools.
 
> This doesn't seem to always work [...]

Nope -- it always works.  If not, you didn't install daemontools and
your /service directories properly.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

Re: qmail-queue question

[MarkD]

On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 12:39:28PM -0500, Edward McLain allegedly wrote:
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: MarkD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:23 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: qmail-queue question
> 
> >> 3. When the queue shows the message arriving on 30 Jul 2001 15:08:23
> I
> >> tend to think that it actually arrive at 3:08 on Jul 30 of 2001, that
> is
> >> unless qmail is doing something funking with date and time stamps. ;)
> 
> >But you didn't show the log entry that corresponds to this message. As
> >a consultant with 8 years experience you have probably deduced that
> >*all* messages inserted into the queue create a "new msg" log
> >entry. Where is it?
> 
> There was no "new msg" log entry.  Best I can tell the logs only go back
> maybe 3 or 4 days and the messages originated 9 days ago.. Thus the
> problem.

It probably would have been helpful if you'd told us about this at the
start. It seemed like you were trying to suggest that the log entry
never existed. I guess that's a lesson for next time.

> I took Richard's advice and added the socket keep-alive patch and that
> actually seems to have fixed the problem.  The old messages seemed to
> have mysteriously disappeared after replacing the qmail-remote exec.  

Mysteriously? Since we've stressed the importance of looking at logs
for answers, I'm sure you've checked the logs to solve the
"mystery". What did they say? I'm sure if you bother, you'll see that
it's not a "mystery" at all. Unless of course you kill -9 qmail-send,
but no one or no docs have ever told you to do this, right?

In any event, as I said in the the last post; queuelifetime applies
*after* the last delivery attempt has exited. It's almost certainly
the case that you killed qmail-remote (or it exited of its own accord)
at which point qmail-send would notice that queuelifetime is exceeded
and bounce the mail. The logs show this stuff by the way.

> Not to start anything else, but is there any better way to stop qmail
> when using tcp-daemonts than svc -d /service/qmail-send ?
> 
> This doesn't seem to always work and I can't ever seem to get all the

It always works. But qmail-send won't exit until all current
deliveries have exited - in fact it logs an entry each time an
outstanding delivery completes.  Did you see different when you
checked the logs? If so, show us.

Edward, for someone with 8 years experience, you should rejoice that
so many of your mysteries and misunderstandings can be solved by
examining and understanding the logs. If the log messages are a
mystery to you, there are plenty of archived posts explaining the
messages.


Regards.

RE: qmail-queue question

[Edward McLain]

-Original Message-
From: MarkD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail-queue question

>> 3. When the queue shows the message arriving on 30 Jul 2001 15:08:23
I
>> tend to think that it actually arrive at 3:08 on Jul 30 of 2001, that
is
>> unless qmail is doing something funking with date and time stamps. ;)

>But you didn't show the log entry that corresponds to this message. As
>a consultant with 8 years experience you have probably deduced that
>*all* messages inserted into the queue create a "new msg" log
>entry. Where is it?

There was no "new msg" log entry.  Best I can tell the logs only go back
maybe 3 or 4 days and the messages originated 9 days ago.. Thus the
problem.


>> 5. To get the logs I went to /var/log/qmail/send and did a grep on
the
>> message id number like so:
>>  grep 112535 *
>> If you know something I don't know, then please tell me, but as far
as I

>How long does the system keep the logs for? Has it been rolled off by,
>eg, newsyslog?

>> Any real help on this issue would be appreciated from anyone.

>We want all the log entries associated with the message. If your log
>system has rolled them off, then stop the log rolling so you can
>retain all the information. Then pick an example that shows us the
>full life-cycle of the message and how it exceeds queuelifetime after
>the last delivery attempt.

>It may simply be that the delivery program is not exiting. It's only
>at the point that qmail-send looks at queuelifetime.


>Regards.

I took Richard's advice and added the socket keep-alive patch and that
actually seems to have fixed the problem.  The old messages seemed to
have mysteriously disappeared after replacing the qmail-remote exec.  

Not to start anything else, but is there any better way to stop qmail
when using tcp-daemonts than svc -d /service/qmail-send ?

This doesn't seem to always work and I can't ever seem to get all the
daemons to stop loading and running without editing /etc/inittab and
commenting out the line that runs the svcscanboot and doing a kill -HUP
1.  Then I have to do a kill or killall on all the qmail daemons to
actually shut it down.

Later,
ed

Re: qmail-queue question

[MarkD]

> 3. When the queue shows the message arriving on 30 Jul 2001 15:08:23 I
> tend to think that it actually arrive at 3:08 on Jul 30 of 2001, that is
> unless qmail is doing something funking with date and time stamps. ;)

But you didn't show the log entry that corresponds to this message. As
a consultant with 8 years experience you have probably deduced that
*all* messages inserted into the queue create a "new msg" log
entry. Where is it?

> 5. To get the logs I went to /var/log/qmail/send and did a grep on the
> message id number like so:
>   grep 112535 *
> If you know something I don't know, then please tell me, but as far as I

How long does the system keep the logs for? Has it been rolled off by,
eg, newsyslog?

> Any real help on this issue would be appreciated from anyone.

We want all the log entries associated with the message. If your log
system has rolled them off, then stop the log rolling so you can
retain all the information. Then pick an example that shows us the
full life-cycle of the message and how it exceeds queuelifetime after
the last delivery attempt.

It may simply be that the delivery program is not exiting. It's only
at the point that qmail-send looks at queuelifetime.


Regards.

Re: qmail-queue question

[Charles Cazabon]

Edward McLain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK... Let me explain this a little bit better and maybe clear some
> things up.  

Okay.
 
> 2. The only patch on this system is the qmailqueue-patch for the
> qmailscanner.

This can cause qmail-queue to not be run, but not qmail-remote to crash.
 
> 5. To get the logs I went to /var/log/qmail/send and did a grep on the
> message id number like so:
>   grep 112535 *
> If you know something I don't know, then please tell me, but as far as I
> know, that scans all the files for that number and outputs the line, but
> then again, what do I know.

That doesn't give all the information about that message; in particular,
delivery status lines don't contain the message number, only the
delivery number, which you get from the "starting delivery" lines.
 
> 6. You really could try to be just a little bit less of an ass to
> everyone that may seem new and actually *TRY* to help them,

What do you think I'm doing?  You're wasting everyone's time by posting
incomplete reports -- I'm trying to help you post better reports, so we
can _help_ you.  You want better service than that?  Call Russ Nelson --
he'll come to your house and hold your hand, given sufficient incentive.
For free, it doesn't get any better than this.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

RE: qmail-queue question

[Edward McLain]

OK... Let me explain this a little bit better and maybe clear some
things up.  

1.  I've been using unix for about 8 years now and when someone says to
restart a service or proggy after changing a config file, by god that
service or proggy gets restarted, even if it takes a kill -9 or killall
-9 to do it.

2. The only patch on this system is the qmailqueue-patch for the
qmailscanner.

3. When the queue shows the message arriving on 30 Jul 2001 15:08:23 I
tend to think that it actually arrive at 3:08 on Jul 30 of 2001, that is
unless qmail is doing something funking with date and time stamps. ;)

4. I am a freaking consultant and I wouldn't bother this mailing list
unless it was something worthwhile.  But when all the instructions fail,
and searching through code, and rewriting part of qmail-remote output
actual logging, this is generally the place to turn to.

5. To get the logs I went to /var/log/qmail/send and did a grep on the
message id number like so:
grep 112535 *
If you know something I don't know, then please tell me, but as far as I
know, that scans all the files for that number and outputs the line, but
then again, what do I know.

6. You really could try to be just a little bit less of an ass to
everyone that may seem new and actually *TRY* to help them, that is what
mailing list are for aren't they.  Arrogance is nice and all, but what
good does it do you an empty room when everyone has left you.

Any real help on this issue would be appreciated from anyone.

Later,
Ed McLain

-Original Message-
From: Charles Cazabon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 9:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail-queue question

Edward McLain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[...]
> But I have messages that are getting stuck in the queue sometimes for 
> more than 3 weeks.  I have /var/qmail/control/queuelifetime set to 
> 345600 (4 days).  Anyone have any idea why this is happening?

You broke something.  You didn't restart qmail after changing
queuelifetime, or you've got buggy patches applied, or you're incorrect
about how long these messages have been in the queue, or something else
-- stock qmail simply will not do this.
  
> Q. What do the logs say about the messages?
> A. @40003b71c07c05d4d9ec.s:@40003b71ba7b07110754 starting 
> delivery 5: msg 112535 to remote emailTrimmed
> That is all I can find in the qmail-send logs about it

Nope, there's lots more in your logs about that -- like the "new msg"
line, and the delivery result line, and various other things.  Either
post all the relevant lines from your log, or put the whole log
somewhere on the net for an interested party to look at, or hire a qmail
consultant.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
--- 

RE: qmail-queue question

[Richard Underwood]

Edward,

I've had problems with qmail-remote hanging - it had nothing to do
with the queue lifetime, but with some code in qmail-remote failing,
possibly due to an O/S bug.

A fix which works for me is to enable socket keep-alives. This will
kill the socket if it has died after about 2-3 hours. 

I've put a patch on the web at http://www.duff.org/qmail/ 

Richard

-Original Message-
From: Edward McLain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

On a side note, is there any reason that qmail-remote should start up and
then just sit there connected to a remote host for like 6 or 7 hours trying
to send one email?  I get this all the freaking time and I'm just wandering
what exactly the freaking thing is doing? (although this problem only really
seems to occur with mindspring.com, yet if I telnet to port 25 of
mindsprings mail server and send the same message through telnet to the same
user, from the same user as the one qmail's trying to send it works just
fine and I don't get any errors or return codes.)
 

Re: qmail-queue question

[Charles Cazabon]

Edward McLain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[...]
> But I have messages that are getting stuck in the queue sometimes for
> more than 3 weeks.  I have /var/qmail/control/queuelifetime set to
> 345600 (4 days).  Anyone have any idea why this is happening?  

You broke something.  You didn't restart qmail after changing
queuelifetime, or you've got buggy patches applied, or you're incorrect
about how long these messages have been in the queue, or something else --
stock qmail simply will not do this.
  
> Q. What do the logs say about the messages?
> A. @40003b71c07c05d4d9ec.s:@40003b71ba7b07110754 starting
> delivery 5: msg 112535 to remote emailTrimmed
> That is all I can find in the qmail-send logs about it

Nope, there's lots more in your logs about that -- like the "new msg"
line, and the delivery result line, and various other things.  Either
post all the relevant lines from your log, or put the whole log
somewhere on the net for an interested party to look at, or hire a qmail
consultant.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

qmail-queue question

[Edward McLain]

I’ve got a slight problem here and hoping that someone
can help solve this.  Due to a high
volume of stupid users and mailing list addicts on our network (a small isp) we tend to get a lot of
bounced messages, or messages to address that don’t exist or what have
you.  The problem here is that they start
to fill the queue up pretty fast.  Now
this isn’t that big of a problem anymore since I raised our connection
limit way the hell up there.  But I have
messages that are getting stuck in the queue sometimes for more than 3
weeks.  I have /var/qmail/control/queuelifetime
set to 345600 (4 days).  Anyone have any
idea why this is happening?  

 

Just to answer all the simple questions:

Q. Is the file readable by qmail?

A. -rw-r--r--    1 root
qmail  
7 Jul 20 18:06 queuelifetime

 

Q. What do the logs say about the messages?

A. @40003b71c07c05d4d9ec.s:@40003b71ba7b07110754
starting delivery 5: msg 112535 to remote emailTrimmed

    That is all
I can find in the qmail-send logs about it

 

Q. Is it bouncing?

A. Output from mailq | grep 112535 :

31 Jul 2001 01:01:12 GMT  #112535  15511 


 

On a side note, is there any reason that qmail-remote
should start up and then just sit there connected to a remote host for like 6
or 7 hours trying to send one email?  I
get this all the freaking time and I’m just wandering what exactly the
freaking thing is doing? (although this problem only really seems to occur with
mindspring.com, yet if I telnet to port 25 of mindsprings
mail server and send the same message through telnet to the same user, from the
same user as the one qmail’s trying to send it
works just fine and I don’t get any errors or return codes.)

 

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

 

Later,

 

Ed McLain

High Speed Solutions

Re: Maildir/cur folder question

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 08:35:05AM -0700, Randolph S. Kahle wrote:
> I have noticed that sometimes email messages will appear in the
> /Maildir/cur folder that have the format:
> 
> ...;2,

This is normal.

> I believe they also have ownership set to root:root.

This is not normal. You have a misconfiguration or you are using buggy
software.

> When this happens, then email clients (such as Netscape) get "stuck" and
> retrieve the same message over and over again. To "fix" this, I have to
> copy the files back to the /Maildir/new folder, change ownership, and
> remove the ":2," from the file name.
> 
> What is the purpose of the /Maildir/cur folder?

It saves any messages that have been read at least once, but not
deleted.

> Why are email message left in this folder?

Because a client retrieved a message without deleting it.

> Is there a better way to handle this the next time it occurs?

Find out what's wrong with your setup. The behaviour you describe
(especially the root ownership) is not normal.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Maildir/cur folder question

[Randolph S. Kahle]

I have noticed that sometimes email messages will appear in the
/Maildir/cur folder that have the format:

...;2,

I believe they also have ownership set to root:root.

When this happens, then email clients (such as Netscape) get "stuck" and
retrieve the same message over and over again. To "fix" this, I have to
copy the files back to the /Maildir/new folder, change ownership, and
remove the ":2," from the file name.

What is the purpose of the /Maildir/cur folder?

Why are email message left in this folder?

Is there a better way to handle this the next time it occurs?

Randy

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[MarkD]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 02:22:25PM -0400, Philip Mak allegedly wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> 
> > > I am not familiar with the internals of qmail, but from what I have seen,
> > > this would make sense.
> >
> > Yes. This program could then just talk to /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue itself,
> > or talk to /var/qmail/bin/forward.
> 
> Oh, so you're saying if e.g. on mydomain.com I have the file .qmail-pmak
> that says:
> 
> &[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> and someone sends e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the message actually gets
> injected twice into qmail---first time to send to [EMAIL PROTECTED], then
> qmail re-injects it again for delivery to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?

Yep.

The way to do this optimally is to have a program that does the lookup
and then execs /var/qmail/bin/forward (or possibly qmail-queue for a
minor performance gain).


Regards.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Philip Mak]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote:

> > I am not familiar with the internals of qmail, but from what I have seen,
> > this would make sense.
>
> Yes. This program could then just talk to /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue itself,
> or talk to /var/qmail/bin/forward.

Oh, so you're saying if e.g. on mydomain.com I have the file .qmail-pmak
that says:

&[EMAIL PROTECTED]

and someone sends e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the message actually gets
injected twice into qmail---first time to send to [EMAIL PROTECTED], then
qmail re-injects it again for delivery to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:42:14PM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
[snip]
> I am not familiar with the internals of qmail, but from what I have seen,
> this would make sense.

Yes. This program could then just talk to /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue itself,
or talk to /var/qmail/bin/forward.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 03:36:02PM +, MarkD wrote:
[snip]
> It'll be interesting to see how you propose to atomically make such
> queue changes while incurring a worthwhile queueing cost saving.

I have no such proposal. I just feel that with some changes to the
queueing structure, this might be feasible. On a 100mbyte mail, this
saves reading+writing 100mbyte when a mail is forwarded.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Philip Mak]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Adrian Ho wrote:

> Unless the destination address happens to be in a virtual domain on the
> same machine, in which case the standard reinjection actually trumps the
> above by one unneeded SMTP transaction from the machine to itself.
>
> In any case, it sounds to me like we're entering the realm of pinhole
> optimization (or some equivalent concept).  Is the performance boost
> worth the kinks it'll likely introduce in the existing qmail architecture?
> I'm not sure...

Is it really that complicated to get the forwarding alias from a program?
I'm thinking---at the moment when qmail is reading the .qmail-default
file, it can encounter:

&[EMAIL PROTECTED]

At this point, it has the capability of specifying a local or remote
e-mail address to forward the message to. Doesn't it?

So it should also be able to easily run an external program at this point
to determine the e-mail address to forward to.

I am not familiar with the internals of qmail, but from what I have seen,
this would make sense.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Adrian Ho]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:21:29PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:35:32PM +0800, Adrian Ho wrote:
> >   |forward `my-redirector $RECIPIENT`
> 
> That's not what he means. This still reads the message and reinjects
> it.

Oops!  That means it's time to hit the sack.  8-)

But since I'm still (barely) conscious...

> His proposal (which I have been pondering about for months already
> :) means that a program can tell qmail 'send this mail you are trying
> to give to me, to this address' without reinjection. This could save a
> lot of disk bandwidth, IMHO.

Unless the destination address happens to be in a virtual domain on the
same machine, in which case the standard reinjection actually trumps the
above by one unneeded SMTP transaction from the machine to itself.

In any case, it sounds to me like we're entering the realm of pinhole
optimization (or some equivalent concept).  Is the performance boost
worth the kinks it'll likely introduce in the existing qmail architecture?
I'm not sure...

-- 
Adrian HoTinker, Drifter, Fixer, Bum   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ListArchive: 
Useful URLs:  
  

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 11:20:37AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
[snip]
> I'm also considering putting in my .qmail-default file:
> 
> |forward `database-lookup $RECIPIENT`
> 
> where database-lookup is a simple C program that connects to MySQL, looks
> up the recipient in the database, and prints it to standard output.


You may want to look at dteq (www.dataloss.nl/software/dteq/) in that
case, which is a commandline mysql query tool


However, using `` allows you no way to detect errors in the query. If
the mysqld is down, where does the mail go?

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[MarkD]

> My rough guess (see grep | wc above) is 7000 deliveries per hour.

About 2 a second, that's not huge, but it's starting to get busy when
you have to invoke multiple programs and establish a socket each time
to your database.

> I see "status: local 10/10" a lot. It goes back down in a few seconds,
> then can come back up in a few seconds too. (Should I increase
> concurrencylocal?)

No. quite the opposite if anything. Think of concurrencylocal as a
peak load that you want qmail to impose on your database - or your
local file system for that matter.

Do you really want to have more than 10 concurrent connections to your
database? Better to keep that number safely within the capabilities of
your system.

I suspect that 10 is a good starting point for your delivery rates and
it's much better to have an occassional local delivery delayed than to
grind your database into dust.

> |forward `database-lookup $RECIPIENT`
> 
> where database-lookup is a simple C program that connects to MySQL, looks
> up the recipient in the database, and prints it to standard output.
> 
> This would be easy to write. It might not be as efficient as fastforward
> due to having to open a new connection to MySQL every time, but if it's
> "efficient enough" I think it's better because then (1) the database is
> always in perfect synch and (2) I don't have to worry about cron jobs to
> synchronize the fastforward db with the MySQL db. I'll have to try it and
> see what happens.

That sounds like a good plan.


Regards.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[MarkD]

> > The qmail architecture does not lend itself well to this though does
> > it? qmail-remote is the only code that knows how to remotely deliver a
> > message and qmail-smtpd would have to be (extensively) modified to
> > call that instead of qmail-queue.
> 
> You are missing the point. We are just saying that a program invoked
> by qmail-local should have a way to communicate back to qmail 'change
> the address to blah', instead of having to reinject it. This would
> then still happen for every recipient like it does now.

Ug. That's even harder and it saves less than half of your queuing
costs!

That approach means that the message changes from a local to a remote
delivery - the queue structure does not lend itself to making this
change easily without incurring most of the cost of a queue
injection. It also likely that the length of the recipient address
will change - again the queue structure is poorly suited to this for
multiple recipient emails as recipients are stored as a series of \0
terminated strings.

It'll be interesting to see how you propose to atomically make such
queue changes while incurring a worthwhile queueing cost saving.


Regards.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 02:50:15PM +, MarkD wrote:
[snip]
> At this stage, periodic rebuilding of a fastforward file sure sounds
> easiest - perhaps triggered by database changes.

A 'select * from ...' followed by a fastforward cdb rebuild should
pose no interesting load when executed, say, every 5 minutes,
depending on volume. For 24.000 aliases (just assuming for now that
you have about as much aliases as users), every minute can be
feasible.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 02:44:08PM +, MarkD wrote:
> > That's not what he means. This still reads the message and reinjects
> > it. His proposal (which I have been pondering about for months already
> > :) means that a program can tell qmail 'send this mail you are trying
> > to give to me, to this address' without reinjection. This could save a
> > lot of disk bandwidth, IMHO.
> 
> The qmail architecture does not lend itself well to this though does
> it? qmail-remote is the only code that knows how to remotely deliver a
> message and qmail-smtpd would have to be (extensively) modified to
> call that instead of qmail-queue.

You are missing the point. We are just saying that a program invoked
by qmail-local should have a way to communicate back to qmail 'change
the address to blah', instead of having to reinject it. This would
then still happen for every recipient like it does now.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[MarkD]

> 24000 total users on a Pentium III 850MHz with 768 MB of RAM (not sure
> how many are active though...at least a couple thousand).

By volume I meant how many emails per hour. Number of users is largely
irrelevant.

> Upon activating this system, the load average of the machine has increased
> from 1-2 to 10! I suspect most of the time is being spent compiling the
> perl script and connecting to the MySQL database, though. If I switch to

If you're doing this per delivery, I'm not surprised. But it should be
easy to measure for sure with vmstat/top/acct, etc.

> fastforward (or if I rewrite the script in C, and use a persistent
> database connection handle somehow, maybe by storing it in an flock'd
> file) maybe the load average will drop back down to normal.

Maintaining a persistent connection across multiple local deliveries
is possible with some skull-hackery and a cooperating peer process,
but it's not easy, it's not possible using flock and it does raise the
issue of multiple deliveries using the same connection at the same
instant.

Tell us more about the deliveries? How many per hour, what is your
concurrencylocal? Are the deliveries keeping up? An unadulterated
snapshot of your qmail log would tell us a lot.

At this stage, periodic rebuilding of a fastforward file sure sounds
easiest - perhaps triggered by database changes.


Regards.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[MarkD]

> That's not what he means. This still reads the message and reinjects
> it. His proposal (which I have been pondering about for months already
> :) means that a program can tell qmail 'send this mail you are trying
> to give to me, to this address' without reinjection. This could save a
> lot of disk bandwidth, IMHO.

The qmail architecture does not lend itself well to this though does
it? qmail-remote is the only code that knows how to remotely deliver a
message and qmail-smtpd would have to be (extensively) modified to
call that instead of qmail-queue.

It would have been a cute touch if DjB had made the interface to
qmail-remote the same as qmail-queue. In fact, one wonders whether all
the inter-program delivery of mail in qmail should use some sort of
common protocol such as that used by qmail-remote. Better yet would be
to universally use QMTP/QMQP between programs.

Anyway, even overcoming the interface obstacles, you have the nasty
problem of inbound multiple recipients to deal with. qmail-remote only
handles multiple recipients if they all happen to be going to the same
domain.

You could simply punt to qmail-queue of course if there is more than
one recipient, but now it's starting to get messy as your delivery
paths will be substantially different for the same recipient simply
depending on whether they are part of an inbound multiple recipient
mail or not.


Regards.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 10:29:31AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
[snip]
> Upon activating this system, the load average of the machine has increased
> from 1-2 to 10! I suspect most of the time is being spent compiling the
> perl script and connecting to the MySQL database, though. If I switch to
> fastforward (or if I rewrite the script in C, and use a persistent
> database connection handle somehow, maybe by storing it in an flock'd
> file) maybe the load average will drop back down to normal.

You can't store persistent database connection handles in flock'd
files.

There are two ways to persistent database connections:
- do your stuff from within qmail (probably not the right spot)
- have your perl/C program connect to a daemon that has a couple of
  persistent connections

But I don't think this will help anything - most of your time is
probably spent compiling perl.

My recommendation is to use fastforward.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Philip Mak]

On 28 Jul 2001, MarkD wrote:

> To answer Philip's question: Yes, that overhead is un[avoidable] as
> there is no standard qmail solution for redirecting mail without it
> going thru the queue at least once.
>
> Having said that your concern about overhead may be misplaced. What
> sort of volume are you expecting on what sort of system?

24000 total users on a Pentium III 850MHz with 768 MB of RAM (not sure
how many are active though...at least a couple thousand).

I currently use .qmail-default to run a perl script which connects to a
MySQL database, performs a lookup on the alias, then opens a pipe to
sendmail to deliver the message.

Upon activating this system, the load average of the machine has increased
from 1-2 to 10! I suspect most of the time is being spent compiling the
perl script and connecting to the MySQL database, though. If I switch to
fastforward (or if I rewrite the script in C, and use a persistent
database connection handle somehow, maybe by storing it in an flock'd
file) maybe the load average will drop back down to normal.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:35:32PM +0800, Adrian Ho wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:28:04AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
> > I wonder if in the future, they'll make an "alias delivery" option in
> > qmail; that is, it calls an external program, but instead of sending the
> > entire message to the program, it just sends the "RCPT TO:" address to the
> > program and the program returns to it which mailbox(es) should be
> > delivered to.
> 
> That's trivially done today -- no extra options required:
> 
>   |forward `my-redirector $RECIPIENT`

That's not what he means. This still reads the message and reinjects
it. His proposal (which I have been pondering about for months already
:) means that a program can tell qmail 'send this mail you are trying
to give to me, to this address' without reinjection. This could save a
lot of disk bandwidth, IMHO.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[MarkD]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:35:32PM +0800, Adrian Ho allegedly wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:28:04AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
> > I wonder if in the future, they'll make an "alias delivery" option in
> > qmail; that is, it calls an external program, but instead of sending the
> > entire message to the program, it just sends the "RCPT TO:" address to the
> > program and the program returns to it which mailbox(es) should be
> > delivered to.
> 
> That's trivially done today -- no extra options required:
>
>   |forward `my-redirector $RECIPIENT`

Nope.

You cut too much out of the original posting. He said:

> So it would still have the overhead of having to read a message from
> qmail, and then write that message back to qmail. That overhead would be
> unavoidable if I'm doing program delivery, I guess.

In other words he doesn't want each mail to go thru the queue twice as
your solution implies.

To answer Philip's question: Yes, that overhead is unavailable as
there is no standard qmail solution for redirecting mail without it
going thru the queue at least once.

Having said that your concern about overhead may be misplaced. What
sort of volume are you expecting on what sort of system?


Regards.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Adrian Ho]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:28:04AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
> I wonder if in the future, they'll make an "alias delivery" option in
> qmail; that is, it calls an external program, but instead of sending the
> entire message to the program, it just sends the "RCPT TO:" address to the
> program and the program returns to it which mailbox(es) should be
> delivered to.

That's trivially done today -- no extra options required:

  |forward `my-redirector $RECIPIENT`

Sounds like you haven't read "The Big Qmail Picture" by Andre Oppermann
.  Three years old and only 4 pages long, but
still very useful for illuminating the little-known corners of qmail.

-- 
Adrian HoTinker, Drifter, Fixer, Bum   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ListArchive: 
Useful URLs:  
  

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Philip Mak]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Adrian Ho wrote:

> > Hmm, looks like it could work. The "Speed tests" section of
> > http://cr.yp.to/fastforward.html says that it takes only 6 seconds to
> > regenerate an alias db with 5 entries. I could run a cron job every
> > two hours to regenerate the cdb.
>
> I'd be more worried about speed of delivery than speed of DB regeneration.
> Note that it's still a program delivery, albeit done through a more
> efficient program than your existing perlDB script.

Oh, I see now; fastforward is a program that I specify to be called in
.qmail-default. I thought it was a patch to be applied to qmail.

So it would still have the overhead of having to read a message from
qmail, and then write that message back to qmail. That overhead would be
unavoidable if I'm doing program delivery, I guess.

I wonder if in the future, they'll make an "alias delivery" option in
qmail; that is, it calls an external program, but instead of sending the
entire message to the program, it just sends the "RCPT TO:" address to the
program and the program returns to it which mailbox(es) should be
delivered to. Then again, this could turn out to be an ugly piece of
'feature creep'.

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Adrian Ho]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 05:34:59AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
> Hmm, looks like it could work. The "Speed tests" section of
> http://cr.yp.to/fastforward.html says that it takes only 6 seconds to
> regenerate an alias db with 5 entries. I could run a cron job every
> two hours to regenerate the cdb.

I'd be more worried about speed of delivery than speed of DB regeneration.
Note that it's still a program delivery, albeit done through a more
efficient program than your existing perlDB script.

As an aside, has anyone done any performance comparisons between
fastforward and .qmail-forwarding for large numbers of aliases (>10,000)?

> My question about fastforward is: Will my existing .qmail-* files stop
> working?

fastforward is traditionally invoked in ~alias/.qmail-default, so unless
you have some other delivery instructions already in that file, everything
else should still work.

-- 
Adrian HoTinker, Drifter, Fixer, Bum   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ListArchive: <http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=qmail>
Useful URLs: <http://cr.yp.to/qmail.html> <http://www.qmail.org>
 <http://www.lifewithqmail.org/> <http://qmail.faqts.com/>

Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Peter van Dijk]

On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 05:34:59AM -0400, Philip Mak wrote:
[snip]
> My question about fastforward is: Will my existing .qmail-* files stop
> working? If so, how can I make the ezmlm aliases still work? e.g. one of

Yes, they will work. fastforward will just sit in .qmail-default and
handle anything that's not being handled by their own .qmail file.

Greetz, Peter
-- 
Against Free Sex!   http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html

Fastforward question (was Re: Mail Forwarding Service)

[Philip Mak]

On 28 Jul 2001, Frank D. Cringle wrote:

> Use fastforward - http://cr.yp.to/fastforward.html
>
> Periodically dump the relevant parts of your MySQL database into the
> cdb that fastforward uses.

Hmm, looks like it could work. The "Speed tests" section of
http://cr.yp.to/fastforward.html says that it takes only 6 seconds to
regenerate an alias db with 5 entries. I could run a cron job every
two hours to regenerate the cdb.

My question about fastforward is: Will my existing .qmail-* files stop
working? If so, how can I make the ezmlm aliases still work? e.g. one of
my .qmail files for posting to an announcement list says:

|egrep -i "^From:.*([EMAIL PROTECTED])" || (echo "Permission denied."; exit 100)
|/usr/local/bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-reject
|/usr/local/bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-send '/home/ptscb/lists/buildreferrals'
|/usr/local/bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-warn '/home/ptscb/lists/buildreferrals' || exit 0

I don't think this would work in /etc/aliases, which is supposed to be one
entry per line.

Re: relay question (was: badmailfrom the right way)

[Charles Cazabon]

Philipp Lopaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> how can i deny mail from outside with envelope
> FROM: 123@mydomain
> RCPT: 456@mydomain
> (in the case 123 and 456 are valid mailboxes)
> 
> currently i have tcpserver with RELAYCLIENT and
> an entry in badmailfrom: @mydomain
> 
> is this optimal?

No -- qmail will then refuse any envelope senders in your domain.

> can qmail end the session after MAIL FROM: ?

Only with patches you'll find at qmail.org or in the list archives.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

relay question (was: badmailfrom the right way)

[Philipp Lopaur]

i know i have asked this before, but got no responses yet,
so i simplify my question a little bit and hope for an answer.

how can i deny mail from outside with envelope
FROM: 123@mydomain
RCPT: 456@mydomain
(in the case 123 and 456 are valid mailboxes)

currently i have tcpserver with RELAYCLIENT and
an entry in badmailfrom: @mydomain

is this optimal?
can qmail end the session after MAIL FROM: ?
(now it does after RCPT TO)

my setup:

INTERNET
|
QMAIL SERVER (2 Interfaces, qmail-1.03 - qmailqueue and spamcontrol patch)
|
PRIVATE NETWORK

i am switching to qmail from sendmail because got sick of 
obscure .cf files. qmail is cleaner in design than sendmail and therefore
easier to understand. -> security benefit. 

thanks

btw. topic of the mailinglist is QMAIL right ?

--
Philipp Lopaur

ONE QUESTION

[Linux]

Hi all.

There is a method to create an user on a qmail server and this user can reached
only via internal hosts?
I explain me better.
I have user1, user2, user3, user4 on a qmail server.
user1 and user2 should receive e-mail from outside and from inside, but user3
and user4 only from inside.
If someone send an email to user3 or user4 qmail should reply "no such user
here".
I must use only one server for this
There's a way?

Thanks

QUESTION: Is badmailfrom the right way ?

[Philipp Lopaur]

Hi

i have following setup:

INTERNET
|
LINUX QMAIL SERVER (2 Interfaces, internal mail.intra.xxx.com, external
mail.xxx.com)
|
PRIVATE NETWORK
|
Exchange Server

server should accept all mails for *@xxx.com and route it to Exchange Server
i dont want *@mail.xxx.com emails to be accepted, alerts or similar local
originated
mail should go to a local account or to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

So i have following configfiles

control/smtproutes:
xxx.com:exchange

control/me:
mail.xxx.com

control/defaultdomain:
xxx.com

contol/localiphost:
xxx.com

control/locals:
mail.xxx.com
localhost

control/rcpthosts:
xxx.com

control/badmailfrom:
xxx.com

i also have configured tcpserver to ,RELAYCLIENT="" in the case the ip
address
is of my local private subnet.

i am running qmail-1.03 with SPAMCONTROL and QMAILQUEUE patch.
i also run qmail-scanner.

MY PROBLEM:

i HAVE TO dissallow mails with originator in internet (external interface),
with envelope

MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

headers should also be checked against this

QUESTION:

is badmailfrom the right way to do this ?

is there a way to deny the message after the MAIL FROM: ?
currently it is denied after RCPT TO:

are my configfiles optimal for my case ? how can i tune them for optimal
function?

what configfiles are redundant ?

i found out that this is a common problem with many internet smtp sites!
this should make it into the ./config script, and into the FAQ!

thanks in advance

--
Philipp Lopaur

Re: Newbie question

[Johan Almqvist]

* Per-Fredrik Pollnow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010726 09:40]:
> I have been looking around on the Inet to see if I could find anything
> about how I secure qmail pop3 service, but I don't have a ??? and I don't
> find a ???..
> I was wondering if anyone have some good ideas what to use or where I can
> find some information about securing qmail pop3 etc. (Right now I'm using
> qmail-pop3d on OpenBSD).

[Please wrap your lines so that I don't have to]

qmail-pop3d is secure. However, POP isn't secure, as the passwords are
sent in clear text... But qmail-pop3d can use APOP (a basic challenge-
response mechanism) if configured with a matching checkpassword. But even
with APOP, a man-in-the-middle attack is possible...

POP over SSL is one possible solution... One way to accomplish this is by
using "stunnel".

-Johan
-- 
Johan Almqvist
http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/

 PGP signature

Re: Newbie question

[Dushyanth Harinath]

qmail-pop3d is far secure..but using it with inet is not recommended...use
qmail-pop3d with tcpserver..check the FAQ regarding this...

regards
dushyanth

> Hi,
> 
> I have been looking around on the Inet to see if I could find anything
> about how I secure qmail pop3 service, but I don't have a ??? and I
> don't find a ???.. I was wondering if anyone have some good ideas what
> to use or where I can find some information about securing qmail pop3
> etc. (Right now I'm using qmail-pop3d on OpenBSD).
> 
> Thanks
> 
> //Per


-- 
Dushyanth Harinath
Archean Infotech Limited
Ph No:091-040-3228666,6570704,3228674
http://www.archeanit.com



-
This email was sent using SquirrelMail.
   "Webmail for nuts!"
http://squirrelmail.org/

Newbie question

[Per-fredrik Pollnow (EPK)]

Hi,

I have been looking around on the Inet to see if I could find anything about how I 
secure qmail pop3 service, but I don't have a ??? and I don't find a ???..
I was wondering if anyone have some good ideas what to use or where I can find some 
information about securing qmail pop3 etc. (Right now I'm using qmail-pop3d on 
OpenBSD).

Thanks

//Per

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[alexus]

inter7 told me that 1000 of users not having this problem

although it very same time there are was few users who said otherwise...

so ... whatever...

some people doesn't have problems .. probably who uses linux.. maybe inter7
was able to fully tested on linux only.. I don't know..

so like I said whatever.. should I forward all those e-mails that I'm
getting to you so you can tell them that they are stupid and can't figure
something out? and they having  lack of logical thinking skills? huh?

let's just drop this whole thing.. I don't really care

like I said I'm not against of inter7.. their products is great..and I never
said otherwise.. everyone have bugs.. its just some people acknowledge them
and some people don't.. heh as everyone saying microsoft claims those bugs
as a features:) heh..

- Original Message -
From: "John Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question


>
> >
> > even though I didn't had very pleasant experience with inter7 I still
> > get trying to help all of people who search their mailing list and who
> > send me e-mails because of those bugs ( just trying to follow open
> > source license) ..
> >
> > so robin so you can go and ... yourself
>
>
> Well now. I found the info and documentation from Inter7 to be
> straightforward. Installed. Tweaked. Worked. Works great.
>
> So seems to me that it is technical and logical thinking skills that
> are lacking on your part.
>
> MOST Sincerely,
>
> John Chapman
>

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[John Chapman]

> 
> even though I didn't had very pleasant experience with inter7 I still
> get trying to help all of people who search their mailing list and who
> send me e-mails because of those bugs ( just trying to follow open
> source license) ..
> 
> so robin so you can go and ... yourself


Well now. I found the info and documentation from Inter7 to be 
straightforward. Installed. Tweaked. Worked. Works great.

So seems to me that it is technical and logical thinking skills that 
are lacking on your part.

MOST Sincerely,

John Chapman

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[alexus]

man..

I was asked question on this list.. I replay, I suggested something.. how
did we get to all this?

even though I didn't had very pleasant experience with inter7 I still get
trying to help all of people who search their mailing list and who send me
e-mails because of those bugs ( just trying to follow open source license)
..

so robin so you can go and ... yourself

and for future references.. if you have something to say tell it to me
inperson and not on the list

I don't think this is an appropriate place to discuss this kind of things

- Original Message -
From: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 5:05 AM
Subject: Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question


> On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 04:15:49AM -0400, alexus wrote:
>
> Dear alexus,
>
> > let me just end my lines with that even though looks like inter7 is
> > bunch of  i'm sure they are still a good people:)
>
> Let me begin my assessment of your ad hominem attack with an exec
> summary: you suck.
>
> Having proven over an extended period of time that your are an
> incompetent luser with the technical expertise of an amoeba, you are
> now publicly attacking members of a company that offers a whole host
> of free software (very good software at that).
>
> Now, apart from the fact that you do not leave the impression of being
> able to assess inter7's technical expertise due to the fact that your
> technical understanding does not extend beyond clicking on setup.exe,
> I have also yet to see someone using their MUA in the way you do and
> yet be able to competently run a mail server.
>
> It may come as a surprise to you, but this is not the correct place to
> discuss your intellectual shortcomings, your very own non-qmail
> related technical problems (like, not wasting everyone's bandwidth
> (for which some people have to pay, you know?) with your luser
> software) or your personal problems with some help-desk staff
> somewhere on this planet.
>
> And while we're at it: 3rd party patches, MySQL and all of inter7's
> software do not belong here, either. "Not belong" as in "go read the
> instructions on cr.yp.to and then unsubscribe or - preferably - die".
> --
> Robin S. Socha - Your Worst Network Nightmare(tm).
> `In Germany, they are not referred to as network administrators. They
> prefer to be called "Sons Of The Third Reich".' (Kate: www.katewerk.com)
>

Re: question about local mail and fqdns

[Dave Sill]

"Dahnke, Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>... On the numerous development and production web servers it
>is always nice to put qmail on them and I configure it with the
>./config-fast nextsource.com because receiving mailers want a fqdn when they
>receive messages from these hosts. But the eternal problem is that messages
>to our own domain; to root, or postmaster, or [EMAIL PROTECTED] will
>never leave the system because qmail treats them as local.

Why don't you just empty control/locals?

>Do I HAVE to register all the development servers as fqdns and configure via
>./config-fast dev1.nextsource.com ?

No, but you could. And why would you use config-fast?

>And if I do this are messages to *@nextsource.com no longer treated
>as local?

Yes.

-Dave

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[Robin S. Socha]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 04:15:49AM -0400, alexus wrote:

Dear alexus,

> let me just end my lines with that even though looks like inter7 is
> bunch of  i'm sure they are still a good people:)

Let me begin my assessment of your ad hominem attack with an exec
summary: you suck.

Having proven over an extended period of time that your are an
incompetent luser with the technical expertise of an amoeba, you are
now publicly attacking members of a company that offers a whole host
of free software (very good software at that). 

Now, apart from the fact that you do not leave the impression of being
able to assess inter7's technical expertise due to the fact that your
technical understanding does not extend beyond clicking on setup.exe,
I have also yet to see someone using their MUA in the way you do and
yet be able to competently run a mail server.

It may come as a surprise to you, but this is not the correct place to
discuss your intellectual shortcomings, your very own non-qmail
related technical problems (like, not wasting everyone's bandwidth
(for which some people have to pay, you know?) with your luser
software) or your personal problems with some help-desk staff
somewhere on this planet.

And while we're at it: 3rd party patches, MySQL and all of inter7's
software do not belong here, either. "Not belong" as in "go read the
instructions on cr.yp.to and then unsubscribe or - preferably - die".
-- 
Robin S. Socha - Your Worst Network Nightmare(tm).
`In Germany, they are not referred to as network administrators. They
prefer to be called "Sons Of The Third Reich".' (Kate: www.katewerk.com)

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[alexus]

its not even near like that

i do know what open source means

and inter7 also offering a commercial support.. which only showed me and my
company that inter7 doesn't really handle it on professional level .. maybe
i'm wrong.. its just my opinion and i can't say that their products is bad..
i really like their products and use most of them .. apparantly there is two
different departments with different people who developed this software and
who suppoorts it.. its just when i was keep telling them about their bugs
they didn't seem to want to accept that .. and people keep e-mailing me with
this specific issues that i've tryed to discuess with inter7 on their
mailing lists.. and instead of fixing those problems not only inter7 refuses
to acknowledge them they also basically asked me and other folks whoever was
activly discussing this issue to take this matter some place else due to we
were making a bit more traffic with their mailing lists then its usually is
which is almost nothing .. if you'd sign up on their courier imapd or
sqwebmail .. those lists are almost dead.. and when we start discussin them
for uknown to me reasons inter7 wasn't very happy about all that... also
some people (i'm not going say their names) at inter7 doesn't seem to know
basics as well.. one of the bugs was related to mysql .. user permitions and
such.. their suggests was to use root.. apparantly not everyone seems to
like that idea.. so people wanted to create another user with right
privilages and use this user instead.. inter7 had no clue how all privilages
in mysql works.. anyway.. i'm sure its very boring for most of the people
and its not really related to our subject... so i'll stop.. let me just end
my lines with that even though looks like inter7 is bunch of  i'm
sure they are still a good people:)

- Original Message -
From: "Dushyanth Harinath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question


> a perfect example of the saying "A bad craftsman blames his tools"...its
> really painful to see people using open source products without knowing
> what the word "Open source" means.
>
> regards
> dushyanth
>
> > unfortunately I didn't had quite pleasure experience with inter7
> >
> > they doesn't really "enjoying" with support of their products.. I found
> > at least 2 bugs and when I was pointing it out for them it took me
> > quite a while to convince them that this is a bug.. they fixed one bug
> > in new development version and refuse to accept that they have one more
> > bug.. which I keep getting e-mails from other's people who looked at
> > archive.. and inter7 wants to kick us out from their list 'cause
> > supposedly I was making too much traffic while explain them and the
> > whole list about those glitches in their software...
>
> > so unless you know exactly what you doing I'd suggest you think twice
> > before installing any of inter7's product.. other then that I think
> > inter7 have a great products and very shitty support, my company called
> > them to make commercial support for one of their products.. it seems to
> > us that either they don't know nothing about those products themselves
> > or else I don't know...
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question
> >
> >
> >> hello alexus
> >>
> >> Could u tell me how to do it via vpopmail?Are there some doc about
> >> it?I
> > search inter7.com website but get nothing about it.
> >> please tell me detail.
> >> thanks a lot
> >>
> >> best regard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >can someone suggest me place where to look how to make qmail smtp
> >> >auth?
> >> >
> >> >i was able to do it via vpopmail but i'm sure there is more "native"
> > way:)
> >> >
> >> >- Original Message -
> >> >From: "Keary Suska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >To: "Qmail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:07 PM
> >> >Subject: SMTP Auth Patch Question
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the
> > various
> >> >> SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard
> >> >> information
> > to
> >> >> compare them.
> >> >>
> >> >> Keary Suska
> >> >> Esoteritech, Inc.
> >> >> "Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> tengteng
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --
> Dushyanth Harinath
> Archean Infotech Limited
> Ph No:091-040-3228666,6570704,3228674
> http://www.archeanit.com
>
>
>
> -
> This email was sent using SquirrelMail.
>"Webmail for nuts!"
> http://squirrelmail.org/
>
>
>

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[Dushyanth Harinath]

a perfect example of the saying "A bad craftsman blames his tools"...its
really painful to see people using open source products without knowing 
what the word "Open source" means.

regards
dushyanth

> unfortunately I didn't had quite pleasure experience with inter7
> 
> they doesn't really "enjoying" with support of their products.. I found
> at least 2 bugs and when I was pointing it out for them it took me
> quite a while to convince them that this is a bug.. they fixed one bug
> in new development version and refuse to accept that they have one more
> bug.. which I keep getting e-mails from other's people who looked at
> archive.. and inter7 wants to kick us out from their list 'cause
> supposedly I was making too much traffic while explain them and the
> whole list about those glitches in their software...

> so unless you know exactly what you doing I'd suggest you think twice
> before installing any of inter7's product.. other then that I think
> inter7 have a great products and very shitty support, my company called
> them to make commercial support for one of their products.. it seems to
> us that either they don't know nothing about those products themselves
> or else I don't know...
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question
> 
> 
>> hello alexus
>>
>> Could u tell me how to do it via vpopmail?Are there some doc about
>> it?I
> search inter7.com website but get nothing about it.
>> please tell me detail.
>> thanks a lot
>>
>> best regard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >can someone suggest me place where to look how to make qmail smtp
>> >auth?
>> >
>> >i was able to do it via vpopmail but i'm sure there is more "native"
> way:)
>> >
>> >- Original Message -
>> >From: "Keary Suska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >To: "Qmail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:07 PM
>> >Subject: SMTP Auth Patch Question
>> >
>> >
>> >> Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the
> various
>> >> SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard
>> >> information
> to
>> >> compare them.
>> >>
>> >> Keary Suska
>> >> Esoteritech, Inc.
>> >> "Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> tengteng
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
Dushyanth Harinath
Archean Infotech Limited
Ph No:091-040-3228666,6570704,3228674
http://www.archeanit.com



-
This email was sent using SquirrelMail.
   "Webmail for nuts!"
http://squirrelmail.org/

Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[alexus]

look for "roaming"

unfortunately I didn't had quite pleasure experience with inter7

they doesn't really "enjoying" with support of their products.. I found at
least 2 bugs and when I was pointing it out for them it took me quite a
while to convince them that this is a bug.. they fixed one bug in new
development version and refuse to accept that they have one more bug.. which
I keep getting e-mails from other's people who looked at archive.. and
inter7 wants to kick us out from their list 'cause supposedly I was making
too much traffic while explain them and the whole list about those glitches
in their software...

so unless you know exactly what you doing I'd suggest you think twice before
installing any of inter7's product.. other then that I think inter7 have a
great products and very shitty support, my company called them to make
commercial support for one of their products.. it seems to us that either
they don't know nothing about those products themselves or else I don't
know...

- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question


> hello alexus
>
> Could u tell me how to do it via vpopmail?Are there some doc about it?I
search inter7.com website but get nothing about it.
> please tell me detail.
> thanks a lot
>
> best regard
>
>
>
>
> >can someone suggest me place where to look how to make qmail smtp auth?
> >
> >i was able to do it via vpopmail but i'm sure there is more "native"
way:)
> >
> >- Original Message -
> >From: "Keary Suska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Qmail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:07 PM
> >Subject: SMTP Auth Patch Question
> >
> >
> >> Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the
various
> >> SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard information
to
> >> compare them.
> >>
> >> Keary Suska
> >> Esoteritech, Inc.
> >> "Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"
> >>
> >>
>
>
> tengteng
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[Lukas Beeler]

On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 05:28:16PM -0400, alexus wrote:
> can someone suggest me place where to look how to make qmail smtp auth?
look at http://www.qmail.org
> 
> i was able to do it via vpopmail but i'm sure there is more "native" way:)
what do you mean with that ?
> 
> 
> 
> > Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the various
> > SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard information to
> > compare them.
> > 
> > Keary Suska
> > Esoteritech, Inc.
> > "Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"
> > 
> > 
> 

-- 
--/-/-- Lukas Beeler  [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---\-\--
  \ \  My HomePage: http://www.projectdream.org>  / /

Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[alexus]

can someone suggest me place where to look how to make qmail smtp auth?

i was able to do it via vpopmail but i'm sure there is more "native" way:)

- Original Message - 
From: "Keary Suska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Qmail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:07 PM
Subject: SMTP Auth Patch Question


> Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the various
> SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard information to
> compare them.
> 
> Keary Suska
> Esoteritech, Inc.
> "Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"
> 
> 

Re: SMTP Auth Patch Question

[Lukas Beeler]

On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 03:07:38PM -0600, Keary Suska wrote:
> Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the various
> SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard information to
> compare them.
There are several patches available, the best is, i think, the one listed at
qmail.org that was produced by Eric M. Johnston. You can use any 
checkpassword you want, so its really easy to authenticate against a vmailmgr 
list or similar


> 
> Keary Suska
> Esoteritech, Inc.
> "Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"
> 

-- 
--/-/-- Lukas Beeler  [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---\-\--
  \ \  My HomePage: http://www.projectdream.org>  / /

SMTP Auth Patch Question

[Keary Suska]

Does anyone have comments, recommendations, or warnings over the various
SMTP Auth patches available? I can't seem to find any hard information to
compare them.

Keary Suska
Esoteritech, Inc.
"Leveraging Open Source for a better Internet"

Re: question about local mail and fqdns

[Lukas Beeler]

On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 04:04:37PM -0400, Dahnke, Eric wrote:
> 
> Hello Qmailers,
> 
> I'm an avid user, and put qmail on every server whenever possible. But for
> years I've had a nagging problem. Suppose our company, nextsource.com, is a
> web development shop with an exchange or notes server for people's internal
> and incoming mail. On the numerous development and production web servers it
> is always nice to put qmail on them and I configure it with the
> ./config-fast nextsource.com because receiving mailers want a fqdn when they
you could either have put up /var/qmail/control/defaultdomain and 
/var/qmail/control/defaulthost that would have the same effect, and wouldnt cause 
this problem..
now, you have two possibilities to fix this..
either
change defaultdomain, defaulthost, me, locals and rcpthosts 
or
change locals and rcpthosts
both solutions will solve your problem, but the first one is much cleaner..

> receive messages from these hosts. But the eternal problem is that messages
> to our own domain; to root, or postmaster, or [EMAIL PROTECTED] will
> never leave the system because qmail treats them as local.
> 
> 
> Do I HAVE to register all the development servers as fqdns and configure via
> ./config-fast dev1.nextsource.com ? And if I do this are messages to
> *@nextsource.com no longer treated as local?
> 
> 
> Many thx. - Eric

-- 
--/-/-- Lukas Beeler  [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---\-\--
  \ \  My HomePage: http://www.projectdream.org>  / /

question about local mail and fqdns

[Dahnke, Eric]

Hello Qmailers,

I'm an avid user, and put qmail on every server whenever possible. But for
years I've had a nagging problem. Suppose our company, nextsource.com, is a
web development shop with an exchange or notes server for people's internal
and incoming mail. On the numerous development and production web servers it
is always nice to put qmail on them and I configure it with the
./config-fast nextsource.com because receiving mailers want a fqdn when they
receive messages from these hosts. But the eternal problem is that messages
to our own domain; to root, or postmaster, or [EMAIL PROTECTED] will
never leave the system because qmail treats them as local.


Do I HAVE to register all the development servers as fqdns and configure via
./config-fast dev1.nextsource.com ? And if I do this are messages to
*@nextsource.com no longer treated as local?


Many thx. - Eric

.qmail-default question...

[David Gartner]

Hey all...

I'm curious.  If you have a postmaster-type account called virtuals and all messages 
go there, then re-routed from
there using .qmail files how would you do something like this:

(in virtualdomains)
isp1.net:virtuals-isp1

(in /home/virtuals)

(.qmail-isp1-user1)
user1

(.qmail-isp1-user2)
user512

**(.qmail-isp1-default)
~/Maildir/

If the .qmail files don't define where a user should go, have qmail attempt to deliver 
to a system user with the same
username.  Possible?  Thanks again...

David Gartner

fixcrio question

[Perry Macdonald]

I have been fighting a problem with SMTP delivery that appears to be a
CR-LF issue.  I am able to have qmail accept mail from many Dell
desktop/workstations running w2k/Outlook2k, but on two Dell laptops, I
cannot. I can send email using Netscape if I hit cancel while wainting
for the SMTP transaction to complete.

I have tried fixcrio and have had no change in the recordio output.  Can
someone tell me why?


Here is my /service/smtpd/run script  ...

#!/bin/sh
. /usr/share/qmail/run-functions

# If rblsmtpd is installed, process rbltimeout rbldomains, and
antirbldomains
if [ -x /usr/bin/rblsmtpd ]; then
 readdefault domains antirbldomains ""
 for domain in $domains; do
  rblopts="$rblopts -a $domain"
 done
 readdefault domains rbldomains ""
 for domain in $domains; do
  rblopts="$rblopts -r $domain"
 done
 readdefault timeout rbltimeout 60
 if [ -n "$rblopts" ]; then
  rbl="/usr/bin/rblsmtpd -t $timeout $rblopts"
 fi
fi

# Start daemons.
readdefault concurrency concurrencysmtpd 80

MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
do_ulimits

exec envuidgid qmaild \
tcpserver -DHRUvX -c "$MAXSMTPD" -l "`head -1 /var/qmail/control/me`" \
 -x /etc/tcpcontrol/smtp.cdb 0 smtp \
 /usr/bin/fixcrio recordio qmail-smtpd

produces  this for a simple test message containing the text "123" with
no CR after "3"

Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.277389 tcpserver: status: 6/100
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.278395 tcpserver: pid 14409 from
192.168.1.67
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.278555 tcpserver: ok 14409
fs1.cam.lucix.com:192.168.1.2:25 :192.168.1.67::1161
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.282055 14409 > 220
fs1.cam.lucix.com ESMTP?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.282812 14409 < HELO macdonaldpacam?

Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.282879 14409 > 250
fs1.cam.lucix.com?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.290626 14409 < MAIL FROM:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.290685 14409 > 250 ok?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.291244 14409 < RCPT TO:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.291301 14409 > 250 ok?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.291748 14409 < DATA?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.293227 14409 > 354 go ahead?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.336658 14409 < From: "Perry
Macdonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.450084 14409 < To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.533753 14409 < Subject: Test?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.569682 14409 < Date: Tue, 17 Jul
2001 07:28:19 -0700?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.605494 14409 < Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.649039 14409 < MIME-Version: 1.0?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.683426 14409 < Content-Type:
text/plain;?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.718507 14409 <
?charset="iso-8859-1"?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.754382 14409 < Cont+
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.790261 14409 <
ent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.826140 14409 < X-Priority: 3
(Normal)?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.862016 14409 < X-MSMail-Priority:
Normal?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.897895 14409 < X-Mailer: Microsoft
Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.933772 14409 < Importance: Normal?
Jul 17 07:28:20 fs1 smtpd: 995380100.969653 14409 < X-MimeOLE: Produced
By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400?
Jul 17 07:28:21 fs1 smtpd: 995380101.005531 14409 < ?
Jul 17 07:28:21 fs1 smtpd: 995380101.041405 14409 < 123+


I removing the fixcrio by changing /svc/smtp/run to


#!/bin/sh
. /usr/share/qmail/run-functions

# If rblsmtpd is installed, process rbltimeout rbldomains, and
antirbldomains
if [ -x /usr/bin/rblsmtpd ]; then
 readdefault domains antirbldomains ""
 for domain in $domains; do
  rblopts="$rblopts -a $domain"
 done
 readdefault domains rbldomains ""
 for domain in $domains; do
  rblopts="$rblopts -r $domain"
 done
 readdefault timeout rbltimeout 60
 if [ -n "$rblopts" ]; then
  rbl="/usr/bin/rblsmtpd -t $timeout $rblopts"
 fi
fi

# Start daemons.
readdefault concurrency concurrencysmtpd 80

MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
do_ulimits

exec envuidgid qmaild \
tcpserver -DHRUvX -c "$MAXSMTPD" -l "`head -1 /var/qmail/control/me`" \
 -x /etc/tcpcontrol/smtp.cdb 0 smtp \
 recordio qmail-smtpd

and an then issue 

/svc -d  /service/smptd/
/svc -u  /service/smptd/

Then I get the identical response (note the 123+ at the end) ...


Jul 17 07:32:07 fs1 smtpd: 995380327.180846 tcpserver: status: 1/100
Jul 17 07:32:07 fs1 smtpd: 995380327.181987 tcpserver: pid 14465 from
192.168.1.67
Jul 17 07:32:07 fs1 smtpd: 995380327.182147 tcpserver: ok 14465
fs1.cam.lucix.com:192.168.1.2:25 :192.168.1.67::1163
Jul 17 07:32:07 fs1 smtpd: 995380327.184464 14465 > 220
fs1.cam.lucix.com ESMTP?
Jul 17 07:32:07 fs1 smtpd: 995380327.185177 14465 < HELO macdonaldpacam?

Jul 17 07:32:07 fs1 smtpd: 9953

Re: supervise question

[David Dahl]

I think i know what is wrong...

here is the output of svstat /service/*:
(i ran this as an unpriveleged user)
=

svstat /service/*
/service/log: unable to open supervise/ok: access denied
/service/qmail-pop3d: unable to open supervise/ok: access denied
/service/qmail-send: unable to open supervise/ok: access denied
/service/qmail-smtpd: unable to open supervise/ok: access denied
/service/run: unable to chdir: not a directory
/service/supervise: unable to chdir: access denied


I have some files in /service that are not soposed to be there...


This was my first try setting up qmail...  my second try was much 
better (on another linux mandrake machine), it has none of these 
problems.

my next step is vmailmgr and oMailadmin...  any pitfalls to be aware 
of?  I have already read the howto and some of the docs...


Thanks!

David Dahl



>On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 04:47:00PM -0500, David Dahl wrote:
>>  This is in /var/log/messages and syslog
>>  [...]
>>  i'm not sure what all of this means...
>
>That looks like a report from Mandrake's security manager (I assume that's
>what you're running on that box).
>
>Check the output of:
>
>   svstat /service/*
>
>If you see one or more services up for 0 seconds, that's the service you
>want to check out -- it's failing to start properly.
>
>--
>Adrian HoTinker, Drifter, Fixer, Bum   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Archived @:  
>Useful URLs:  
>   


-- 

Re: supervise question

[Adrian Ho]

On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 04:47:00PM -0500, David Dahl wrote:
> This is in /var/log/messages and syslog
> [...]
> i'm not sure what all of this means...

That looks like a report from Mandrake's security manager (I assume that's
what you're running on that box).

Check the output of:

svstat /service/*

If you see one or more services up for 0 seconds, that's the service you
want to check out -- it's failing to start properly.

-- 
Adrian HoTinker, Drifter, Fixer, Bum   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archived @:  
Useful URLs:  
  

Re: supervise question

[Lukas Beeler]

At 16:47 15.07.2001 -0500, David Dahl wrote:

>This is in /var/log/messages and syslog
>
>Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : Security Warning: There is modifications for 
>port listening on your machine :
>Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : -  Opened ports : tcp0  0 
>*:ndmp  *:* LISTEN  26231/perl
>Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : -  Opened ports : tcp0  0 
>*:smtp  *:* LISTEN 28443/tcpserver
>Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : -  Opened ports : udp0  0 
>*:ndmp  *:* 26231/perl
>Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : - Closed ports  : tcp0  0 
>*:smtp  *:* LISTEN 5711/tcpserver
>
>
>i'm not sure what all of this means...
hmm, iam not really sure what produces this output, probably a firewall 
programm are something like that.
What kind of OS are you running ? Which firewall software are you using ?
does qmail itself work ?
what's the output of supervise running in foreground ?
-- 
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: supervise question

[David Dahl]

This is in /var/log/messages and syslog

Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : Security Warning: There is modifications 
for port listening on your machine :
Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : -  Opened ports : tcp0  0 
*:ndmp  *:* LISTEN  26231/perl
Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : -  Opened ports : tcp0  0 
*:smtp  *:* LISTEN 
28443/tcpserver
Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : -  Opened ports : udp0  0 
*:ndmp  *:* 26231/perl
Jul 13 04:01:19 mckenna : - Closed ports  : tcp0  0 
*:smtp  *:* LISTEN 
5711/tcpserver


i'm not sure what all of this means...



>yes, it is
>check your logs, probably a process controlled by supervise isn't 
>running properly..  Iv'e got the problem, that supervise write's 
>it's error messages only to tty1. try to run svscan from commandline 
>without backgrounding it, and check the output
>
>At 14:35 15.07.2001 -0500, David Dahl wrote:
>
>>--
>>when i look at my processes i get two lines like this:
>>#ps -aux
>>
>>root 12102  0.0  0.0 00 ?Z02:14   0:00 
>>[supervise ]
>>
>>Has anyone seen this before, and is it a problem?

-- 

Re: supervise question

[Lukas Beeler]

yes, it is
check your logs, probably a process controlled by supervise isn't running 
properly..  Iv'e got the problem, that supervise write's it's error 
messages only to tty1. try to run svscan from commandline without 
backgrounding it, and check the output

At 14:35 15.07.2001 -0500, David Dahl wrote:

>--
>when i look at my processes i get two lines like this:
>#ps -aux
>
>root 12102  0.0  0.0 00 ?Z02:14   0:00 [supervise 
>]
>
>Has anyone seen this before, and is it a problem?
>
>Regards,
>
>David Dahl

-- 
Lukas "Maverick" Beeler / Telematiker
Project: D.R.E.A.M / every.de - Your Community
Web: http://www.projectdream.org
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

supervise question

[David Dahl]

-- 
when i look at my processes i get two lines like this:
#ps -aux

root 12102  0.0  0.0 00 ?Z02:14   0:00 
[supervise ]

Has anyone seen this before, and is it a problem?

Regards,

David Dahl

Re: question about autoresponder varient

[Arjen van Drie]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 08:49:08PM -0400, Steve wrote:
>
>I would like to implement a feature that sends a brief email to another
>email address when mail arrives for a user.  I think it can be handled
>from the .qmail file but I was hoping someone could give me some pointers.

I'm using

http://untroubled.org/qmail-autoresponder/

and I' happy :)


If the other email address is a static one it won't help you though.
then |piping to a script from a .qmail file would be more your thing
to do.


-- 

Grtz, 

Arjen.

Re: question about autoresponder varient

[Foo Ji-Haw]

I implement autoresponder via procmail (with formail). With procmail, you
can customise your autoresponder (based on the sender, for example).

- Original Message -
From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, 11 July, 2001 8:49 AM
Subject: question about autoresponder varient


>
> I would like to implement a feature that sends a brief email to another
> email address when mail arrives for a user.  I think it can be handled
> from the .qmail file but I was hoping someone could give me some pointers.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
>
>

question about autoresponder varient

[Steve]

I would like to implement a feature that sends a brief email to another
email address when mail arrives for a user.  I think it can be handled
from the .qmail file but I was hoping someone could give me some pointers.

Thanks,

Steve

Re: Life-with-qmail question

[Greg White]

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:52:28PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote:
> It's me again,
> 
> who has another newbie question. Like some of you suggested I'm now reading
> "Life with qmail" instead "Running qmail". I got to the point in the
> document where the author describes the qmailctl script. But I don't really
> understand what to do with it... I understand the script and I figured out
> that it needs an argument. But the author wants me to put it into
> /var/qmail/bin and to create a link to my init.d directory as far as I
> understood him. At first I'm not sure what my init.d dir on my FreeBSX box
> is. Isn't it /usr/local/etc/rc.d? If I'm right then I don't understand why
> to create a link because the script expects an argument and FreeBSD is just
> executing the link at startup _without_ any arguments AFAIK. What do I
> misunderstand?
> 

If you're running FreeBSD-4.3, or FreeBSD-stable, scripts in
/usr/local/etc/rc.d are executed with a 'start' argument. Cannot recall
exactly when this was implemented, but it was sometine between
4.1-RELEASE and 4.3. IIRC, this should work just fine with the qmailctl
script.* Alternatively, you could avoid the link thing altogether and
simply call '/var/qmail/bin/qmailctl start' from
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/qmail.sh. (Scripts that parse no arguments still
work just fine.)


* see /etc/rc and /etc/rc.shutdown -- rc.shutdown also runs '*.sh stop'
in the local startup directories.

> Please more enlightenment,
> -Moritz
> 

Start from 'man man' and work outwards. ;)

-- 
Greg White

Re: Life-with-qmail question

[Charles Cazabon]

Moritz Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I got to the point in [Life with qmail] 
> where the author describes the qmailctl script. But I don't really
> understand what to do with it... I understand the script and I figured out
> that it needs an argument.

The script serves two purposes:  it's a single-point control script for the
sysadmin to use to do various common tasks (qmailctl cdb, qmailctl stop, etc),
and it's suitable for use as a SysV-style init script.  Your BSD doesn't use a
SysV-style init system, so ignore the second use for now.

> But the author wants me to put it into
> /var/qmail/bin and to create a link to my init.d directory as far as I
> understood him.

Skip the init.d link; FreeBSD doesn't use SysV-style init.

Instead, you want to put a line in (IIRC) /etc/rc.d/rc.local that contains
something like "/var/qmail/bin/qmailctl start".

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

Re: Life-with-qmail question

[Henning Brauer]

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:52:28PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote:
> /var/qmail/bin and to create a link to my init.d directory as far as I
> understood him. At first I'm not sure what my init.d dir on my FreeBSX box
> is. 

BSD has no such thingy (and this is a Good Thing(tm) ). BSD systems start
all daemons throug /etc/rc and /etc/rc.local. 
FreeBSD complicated things by adding something sysv-init-like, but 
don't ask me if the expected start/stop in $1 is privided to the scripts.

Just add these lines to /etc/rc.local:

PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/bin
svscan /service &

(assuming you have the supervise dirs in /service).

-- 
* Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de *
* Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany   *
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Life-with-qmail question

[Moritz Schmitt]

It's me again,

who has another newbie question. Like some of you suggested I'm now reading
"Life with qmail" instead "Running qmail". I got to the point in the
document where the author describes the qmailctl script. But I don't really
understand what to do with it... I understand the script and I figured out
that it needs an argument. But the author wants me to put it into
/var/qmail/bin and to create a link to my init.d directory as far as I
understood him. At first I'm not sure what my init.d dir on my FreeBSX box
is. Isn't it /usr/local/etc/rc.d? If I'm right then I don't understand why
to create a link because the script expects an argument and FreeBSD is just
executing the link at startup _without_ any arguments AFAIK. What do I
misunderstand?

Please more enlightenment,
-Moritz

Re: Question MX ..cjk

[Will Yardley]

you should make sure that one server is configured to be a backup. 
there's no way to make email go to BOTH machines; if you set them to
equal weights, they will (in theory) each get about half the mail.  you
shouldn't do this unless you know what you are doing.  you could also
setup one as a backup mail exchanger.

for most purposes, it's better to use one MX record and one mail
machine.  most other mail machines will keep trying if your machine is
down; whereas if the backup machine is misconfigured (which is easy to
do) it will deliver to there; however if the backup machine isn't
configured right, it will deliver it there instead of queuing it and
delivering it to the preferred machine.

basically keep it simple unless you really, really need a backup mail
exchanger.
doing anything involving keeping redundant copies of mail or load
balancing is pretty complex to do...
i would suggest just using one machine and backup regularly.

w
Constantine Koulis wrote:
> 
> Hello.
> I want my emails to go to my both emails Servers.. for backup reasons
> MX1 and MX2.
> 
> How i do that...
> 
> _
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

RE: Question MX ..cjk

[Mike Culbertson]

> I want my emails to go to my both emails Servers.. for backup reasons
> MX1 and MX2.

You cannot accomplish this with your MX records.
If you add two or more machines as MX records, with the same priority, they 
will be treated like round-robin DNS entries and mail will flow to both 
servers...back and forth between the two, not each mail going to both.  That 
is generally best used when you have mail relays or a similar setup where 
mail does not reside on the machines listed in the MX records.
If one has a higher priority (lower number), it will be preferenced by 
outside mail systems, and will receive the majority of the mail for your 
domain.  No matter what you do, however, there is no DNS entry that will 
cause an outside machine to send a message to more than one server instead of 
just one.

Best bet for you most likely is to set up some kind of auto-forward system 
where each machine will send a copy to the other whenever it receives a mail. 
This may be a little tricky to do, but I would imagine it is possible.  Or 
even better, maybe just use cron to automatically tar up the maildirs, or 
some other backup strategy.

Mike Culbertson

Re: Question MX ..cjk

[Frank Tegtmeyer]

"Constantine Koulis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I want my emails to go to my both emails Servers.. for backup reasons
> MX1 and MX2.

Create mx records for both of them. If one of them should be preferred
give it a lower preference than the other.

Regards, Frank

RE: Quick question re maildir

[David Talkington]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Joshua Nichols wrote:

>> weeks, and as part of the planning process am wondering if the
>> general consensus is that the "maildir" method is the way to
>> go.  Appreciate comments/advice.
>
>Absolutely.
>
>Check the archives, there's alot of info there about the benefits of
>Maildirs.  Recently, someone posted some excellent statistics on Maildir v.
>mbox.

I don't remember the post, but was this the information to which it
referred?

http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir

It's a very thorough set of benchmarks.  Good reading.

- -d

- -- 
David Talkington
http://www.spotnet.org

PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6

iQEVAwUBO0Usor1ZYOtSwT+tAQGixAgAo2BnWtUxHXuvA9odsoa/OmE8wshYfhBe
k0ePargg81ft0/pPMv1uoVD/DaecExh/Fyj0QyNv1TuWcHNFgxWaALt11FTnSQif
Tj3hM2lVmtRoSISHN/IDWKbHqS4HLohMNHa6D/AzQx3QlZO1HVq9jX7Fow8PszQe
FL5OmHAJPN83uEvNdO+MnRxKDi9710R8HNc2KwGqALnMJTX5tmTnp8dEx5yh1P3Z
s8nSru49H29dFAqw2/YfwIj4Hw/QffwWmCNlfitB3VWtInHvwhxSlcsobmAuyFGZ
PqPCoj8LZj5J6Wbbaosqd0kekFz9uZ5CKjH1f/r9B+a8IAV0F5PYig==
=S5LR
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Quick question re maildir

[Charles Cazabon]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Maildirs are incredibly easy to manipulate with shell or Perl or
> Python, more reliable than mailbox, and can be locked over NFS.

Small correction:  Maildirs need no locking, even over NFS.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

Re: Quick question re maildir

[dsr]

On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:30:52PM +1200, Steve Reed wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Thanks for the great help from this group in the past.  I plan 
> to begin the migration process to qmail in the coming days and 
> weeks, and as part of the planning process am wondering if the 
> general consensus is that the "maildir" method is the way to 
> go.  Appreciate comments/advice.

Basically, the only reasons not to go to maildir are shell users
who are set in their ways (and have been for years).

Maildirs are incredibly easy to manipulate with shell or Perl or
Python, more reliable than mailbox, and can be locked over NFS.

Shell users will generally fall into the mutt or emacs camps; you
should wean your Pine users anyway; you already know if you have
a population of mh users.

POP users will never notice the difference, except that when someone
mails them a 400MB PowerPoint preso, you can ls their maildir, note
the 400MB monstrosity, and delete it or move it for them without
disturbing any other mail.

-dsr-

RE: Quick question re maildir

[Joshua Nichols]

> weeks, and as part of the planning process am wondering if the
> general consensus is that the "maildir" method is the way to
> go.  Appreciate comments/advice.

Absolutely.

Check the archives, there's alot of info there about the benefits of
Maildirs.  Recently, someone posted some excellent statistics on Maildir v.
mbox.


--joshua.

Quick question re maildir

[Steve Reed]

Hi all,

Thanks for the great help from this group in the past.  I plan 
to begin the migration process to qmail in the coming days and 
weeks, and as part of the planning process am wondering if the 
general consensus is that the "maildir" method is the way to 
go.  Appreciate comments/advice.

Cheers,

Steve

Re: question about email redirection with vpopmail

[Ken Jones]

> jcarreiro wrote:
> 
> hello
> my qmail server with vpopmail works just fine ...
> 
> I have some email redirections working in .qmail-xx files in each
> domain folder.
> for redirection i use: "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> 
> now, how to do to keep the message in the user box and send a copy
> to another address ??
> 
> many thanks.

Add a second line to the .qmail- file with a full path
the the users Maildir

For example:

&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/home/vpopmail/domains/somedomain/someuser/Maildir/

Ken Jones

question about email redirection with vpopmail

[jcarreiro]

hello
my qmail server with vpopmail works just fine 
...
 
I have some email redirections working in 
.qmail-xx files in each domain folder.
for redirection i use: "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
 
now, how to do to keep the message in the user box 
and send a copy to another address ??
 
many thanks.
 
 
 

Re: LWQ question..cjk

[Ruprecht Helms]

>Hi Constantine,


>... Maildir mailboxes should be created with the maildirmake program that 
>comes with qmail. E.g., "maildirmake ~/Maildir".

>...
>
>THAT MEANS THAT FOR EVERY VIRTUAL USER I HAVE TO DO MAILDIRMAKE
>and what is SKELETON?

no why. I have installed qmail with real life users using the grabtool that 
takes the users from the /etc/passwd. Before building the database I have 
edited the generated file and have through out all users, that mustn't have 
a mailbox.

I have given the right 701 for the maildirectories to grant a good security 
for it.

Regards,
Ruprecht

Re: LWQ question..cjk

[Vincent Schonau]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 06:24:42PM +0300, Constantine Koulis wrote:

[...]

> Note: qmail-local can deliver mail to maildir mailboxes, but it can't create 
> them. Maildir mailboxes should be created with the maildirmake program that 
> comes with qmail. E.g., "maildirmake ~/Maildir". Be sure to run maildirmake 
> as the owner of the maildir, not as root. Your useradd or adduser command 
> might support a "skeleton" directory, e.g. /etc/skel, where you can create a 
> maildir that will be copied for all new users.
 
> THAT MEANS THAT FOR EVERY VIRTUAL USER I HAVE TO DO MAILDIRMAKE

Please don't yell. For every (virtual or otherwise) user you have to
specifiy a delivery method. If you want to deliver the mail to your virtual
users locally, yes, you have to do maildirmake for each of them. This can of
course easily be automated if you have a database of your virtual users
somewhere.

If you don't deliver the mail locally, you do have to specify some delivery
method, e.g. through .qmail files.

> and what is SKELETON?

On some systems, when you do a 'useradd' that creates a home directory, the
useradd program will copy the files in /etc/skel to the newly created home
directory. You don't need this for virtual users.


Vince.

 

Re: LWQ question..cjk

[John Groseclose]

At 6:24 PM +0300 7/3/01, Constantine Koulis wrote:

>THAT MEANS THAT FOR EVERY VIRTUAL USER I HAVE TO DO MAILDIRMAKE
>and what is SKELETON?

Not at all. It means you have to create a Maildir in /etc/skel, which 
is the "reference" directory for useradd to create new user 
directories. Then, every time you run a useradd, it'll use a copy of 
/etc/skel to create their new user directory, with the files set to 
be owned by the new user.

Files and directories like Maildir and public_html (assuming you want 
your users to have web pages) can be put in /etc/skel to reduce your 
workload when creating users. Are you the primary administator for 
that machine?

man useradd explains this fairly well.
-- 
John Groseclose
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: LWQ question..cjk

[Charles Cazabon]

Constantine Koulis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the LWQ is says the following :
> 
>   Note: qmail-local can deliver mail to maildir mailboxes, but it can't
>   create them. Maildir mailboxes should be created with the maildirmake
>   program that comes with qmail. E.g., "maildirmake ~/Maildir". Be sure to
>   run maildirmake as the owner of the maildir, not as root. Your useradd or
>   adduser command might support a "skeleton" directory, e.g. /etc/skel,
>   where you can create a maildir that will be copied for all new users.
> 
> THAT MEANS THAT FOR EVERY VIRTUAL USER I HAVE TO DO MAILDIRMAKE

Stop shouting.  And the answer to that depends on how you're using virtual
users -- if you're using a virtual domain manager of some sort (i.e.
vmailmgr), this may not be a necessary step.  Consult the documentation for
your virtual domain manager package for details.

> and what is SKELETON?

/etc/skel, which is copied for each new system account you create.  It's a
template for an "empty" home directory for a system user.  Note /etc/skel does
not apply for virtual mail users, as they are not system users.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

LWQ question..cjk

[Constantine Koulis]

Hi all.
i am instaling for the 20th time the LINUX 7.0 +qmail+courier-imap+vmailmgr 
but dont want to make mistakes again so i followed the maildirmake HOWTO 
that is in the /doc/ directory but i have a question.
In the LWQ is says the following :


Note: qmail-local can deliver mail to maildir mailboxes, but it can't create 
them. Maildir mailboxes should be created with the maildirmake program that 
comes with qmail. E.g., "maildirmake ~/Maildir". Be sure to run maildirmake 
as the owner of the maildir, not as root. Your useradd or adduser command 
might support a "skeleton" directory, e.g. /etc/skel, where you can create a 
maildir that will be copied for all new users.

THAT MEANS THAT FOR EVERY VIRTUAL USER I HAVE TO DO MAILDIRMAKE
and what is SKELETON?
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Re: tcpserver: relay iface question

[Henning Brauer]

On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 09:50:07PM +0200, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> Thus spake GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > How can I tell tcpserver to relay clients connected
> > from an interface instead of ip addresses?
> 
> You bind one tcpserver on each interface and give the one on the
> relay-enabled interface a rule set that always matches.

If, and only if, you make sure no traffic for this interface can come in
through the other interface.

I think charles suggestion is easier. 

-- 
* Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de *
* Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany   *
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: tcpserver: relay iface question

[Felix von Leitner]

Thus spake GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> How can I tell tcpserver to relay clients connected
> from an interface instead of ip addresses?

You bind one tcpserver on each interface and give the one on the
relay-enabled interface a rule set that always matches.

It's that easy.

Re: tcpserver: relay iface question

[Charles Cazabon]

GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> How can I tell tcpserver to relay clients connected from an interface
> instead of ip addresses?

You can wildcard IP addresses on byte boundaries -- i.e., the following entry:

  10.10.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""

would allow the 16-bit subnet 10.10.x.x to relay.  This should probably be
good enough.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
---

tcpserver: relay iface question

[GARGIULO Eduardo INGDESI]

Hi all.

How can I tell tcpserver to relay clients connected
from an interface instead of ip addresses?

--yapedu

Re: YALQ (Yet another LDAP Question)

[Andrew J Herbert]

Aah, now this is an interesting thing, I can run qmail-getpw from the
command line, and it finds all the correct information, using the LDAP
lookup (this is using regular qmail with nss_ldap), the permissions on the
users home directory look OK (owned by user 700) as does the Maildir and
there is a .qmail file (owned by user 644) which contains ./Maildir/ so
why isn't mail being delivered?

Suggestions anyone?

herbie

__
This is an email, an electronic Post-It note. 
Keep your Inbox tidy and dispose of it in a timely fashion.

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Charles Cazabon wrote:

> Andrew J Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > How does qmail look up local users anyway? Why won't it work with
> > nss_ldap?
> 
> If the qmail-users mechanism is configured, that's used -- `man qmail-users`
> for details.  Fallback is qmail-getpw, which relies on the system's
> implementation of the getpwnam() function.
> 
> stock qmail doesn't know anything about LDAP.  I don't know if LDAP-patched
> qmail gets user information in a different way.  If not, you could dump your
> LDAP users information through qmail-pw2u and qmail-newu to use the
> qmail-users mechanism.
> 
> Charles
> -- 
> ---
> Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
> ---
> 

Re: YALQ (Yet another LDAP Question)

[Mike Jackson]

Andrew J Herbert wrote:
 
> 1. We use Eudora as a mail client, it's not my choice unfortunately, and
> it thrashes Courier, whilst UW doesn't break a sweat, due to the odd
> way Eudora implements mail filters (using UID's).

Yes, I have encountered this with 2-3 of my users who just refuse to
leave Eudora. It's not a problem with this number, but if everybody used
it then it would be.
 
> 2. We have to have people having logons in the system, this isn't just
> email we're talking about, hence why I said I want to use real users, and
> not virtual users. Also we run a web based front end to procmail for mail
> filtering that has to be 'grannied' in.

Fine if people log on then, but they don't need to have their maildir
stored in their home directory. Set your global pine configuration to
use IMAP instead of accessing an mbox. This takes away fast text
grepping, but provides alot of ease for administration. Qmail-LDAP will
work in this environment.

Regards,
Mike