For example:
A user's quota is 1M, and some mails are in its Inbox, and I was checked
its directory, the maildirsize file is there.
When I changed this user's quota to 3M, after a mail come in, the
quota's total number is same as before. Who knows how to solve this
problem?
How did you change quota?
Tonino
At 27/03/03 27/03/03 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For example:
A user's quota is 1M, and some mails are in its Inbox, and I was checked
its directory, the maildirsize file is there.
When I changed this user's quota to 3M, after a mail come in, the
quota's
I have copied the vdelivermail binary over from the working Solaris 2.7
machine onto my non-working Solaris 2.8 machine... it acts identical.
Any Ideas? Please?
-jim
- Original Message -
From: Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 3:20 AM
Subject:
On Wednesday 26 March 2003 08:53 pm, Moshe Jacobson wrote:
On 27 Mar 2003, Jonas Pasche wrote:
That's not a bug, but the first occurence of the balanced tree feature
of vpopmail that applies both to the number of domains and to the number
of users in a given domain.
I have a little beef
Hi baby_moon,
A user's quota is 1M, and some mails are in its Inbox, and I was checked
its directory, the maildirsize file is there.
When I changed this user's quota to 3M, after a mail come in, the
quota's total number is same as before. Who knows how to solve this
problem?
It's not a
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 09:41, you wrote:
I have copied the vdelivermail binary over from the working Solaris 2.7
machine onto my non-working Solaris 2.8 machine... it acts identical.
If you have no pipes in the command, does vdelivermail work as normal?
Marcus
--
Marcus Williams -
If you have no pipes in the command, does vdelivermail work as normal?
yes, it does. No problems.
Thanks for your reply,
jim.
PS sorry for sending the first email directly to you, marcus -- 5:30am and i
copy-and-pasted the wrong address :-/
Jonas,
On Saturday, March 15, 2003, at 02:04:04 [GMT +0100] (which was 02:04
where I live) you wrote:
JP Thanks, but that's useless until you tell us to which file it should be
JP applied ;-)
You're quite right. Sorry for the late response.
JP You should use the unified diff format (diff -u)
I'm not exactly sure when it quit but I've noticed that authentications
via vchkpw are no longer logged. Vpopmail is configured as follows and
my pop3 daemon is qmail, run as shown below. I've also attempted
logging via syslog (rather than multilog) and I still get no
authentication logging.
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 10:29, you wrote:
If you have no pipes in the command, does vdelivermail work as normal?
yes, it does. No problems.
Okay bearing in mind I'm no Solaris expert so someone else may want to
jump in here - what output do you get if you do something like:
Hi baby_moon,
A user's quota is 1M, and some mails are in its Inbox, and I was checked
its directory, the maildirsize file is there.
When I changed this user's quota to 3M, after a mail come in, the
quota's total number is same as before. Who knows how to solve this
Apparently a server named ns1.inter7.com is doing the delivery for
the vchkpw mailing list. This wouldn't be a problem except that it
doesn't have reverse DNS.
I started blocking connections to my mail server from servers who don't
have DNS and my vpopmail and qmailadmin list traffic stopped.
On Thursday 27 March 2003 14:35, you wrote:
Could someone provide details of what vlimits patch does.
I have seen some interesting threads about it
thanks
Matt.
basically it lets you limit the usage of a vpopmail controlled domain.
this means:
limit the max no of pop
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 10:21, Matt Simerson wrote:
Apparently a server named ns1.inter7.com is doing the delivery for
the vchkpw mailing list. This wouldn't be a problem except that it
doesn't have reverse DNS.
I started blocking connections to my mail server from servers who don't
have
You'll be losing a lot more legit mail than just this list if you do
that.
Agreed. There is no rule that demands reverse DNS. It's a nicety and that's
it.
Regards,
Andrew
Title: RE: [vchkpw] Inter7 mail server doesn't have reverse DNS!
We currently run our hosted systems requiring reverse DNS and haven't really had any complaints about mail not being received. While there's no rule requiring reverse DNS, systems without it are much more likely to be spam
It is becoming more and more prevalent that ISPs are
denying recipt of e-mails that do not have a reverse
DNS on their e-mail domains. Mainly because of so
many spammers using forged headers.
--- Nick Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We currently run our hosted systems requiring
reverse DNS
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 10:35 AM, Ron Guerin wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 10:21, Matt Simerson wrote:
Apparently a server named ns1.inter7.com is doing the delivery for
the vchkpw mailing list. This wouldn't be a problem except that it
doesn't have reverse DNS.
I started blocking
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 10:55, Nick Harring wrote:
We currently run our hosted systems requiring reverse DNS and haven't
really had any complaints about mail not being received. While there's
no rule requiring reverse DNS, systems without it are much more likely
to be spam originators in my
Hi Ken,
That was a bad of me. I put the wrong password in the vmysql.h file. But now
I've corrected it and recompiled and I have granted permissions to the user
on the mysql vpopmail database. But mysql is now doing the run away game
and it's no more authenticating anything from vpopmail command
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 11:05, Nick Harring wrote:
Rather than questioning why we would refuse to accept from
non-reversible hosts, why don't we ask why anyone would set a host up
without reverse DNS?
Rather than question why you've deliberately broken your mail server, I
should explain to you
I make a new install of qmailadmin but now I can't login with any
account.
Where are the config files for password of vpopmail and/or qmail and/or
qmailadmin.
It's not me who makes the first install.
I found on the disk running openbsd :
/var/qmail
/var/vpopmail
/var/www/cgi-bin/qmailadmin
Just because I feel like a smart-ass today..
I suppose the rule about top posting is 'posted' right next to the
reverse DNS one?
Look at that.. now it's all out of order.. :P
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 10:12, Ron Guerin wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 11:05, Nick Harring wrote:
Rather than
Oh my, Nick top-posted. Quickly, someone call out the firing squad.
Where you choose to reply to in a message body is a matter of personal
preference. It is NOT a breach of email etiquette to prefer a way other
than your personal preference. In a list thread, many tend to prefer a
top-post
On Tuesday, March 25, 2003, at 04:25 PM, Robin Bowes wrote:
I'm about to release a new 5.3.20 devel version.
Does anyone have any patches they would like to submit?
No, but would it be difficult to move mysql options from vmysql.h to
configure options, e.g.
./configure \
At 08:01 AM 03-27-2003, Ron Guerin wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 10:55, Nick Harring wrote:
We currently run our hosted systems requiring reverse DNS and haven't
really had any complaints about mail not being received. While there's
no rule requiring reverse DNS, systems without it are much more
I don't want to be rude or anything... but what does this thread have to
do with vpopmail?
Please take your holy wars elsewhere.
The original poster should've emailed the people at Inter7 rather than
this list.
Rick
At 08:12 AM 03-27-2003, Ron Guerin wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 11:05, Nick Harring wrote:
Rather than questioning why we would refuse to accept from
non-reversible hosts, why don't we ask why anyone would set a host up
without reverse DNS?
Rather than question why you've deliberately broken
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:22, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
rather than trumping up your argument with etiquette fascism, how about
pointing out a relevant RFC that backs up your [baseless] opinion that a
mailserver must accept messages from a site without reverse DNS?
Please, spare me your
At 09:32 AM 03-27-2003, Ron Guerin wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:22, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
rather than trumping up your argument with etiquette fascism, how about
pointing out a relevant RFC that backs up your [baseless] opinion that a
mailserver must accept messages from a site without
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:40, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
translation: i don't know the RFC's, I have no basis for claiming that
other's mailserver are broken, and I'll continue to evade directly
confronting my error and apologizing for my mistaken claim by pretending to
take 'the high road'
At 09:43 AM 03-27-2003, Ron Guerin wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 12:40, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
translation: i don't know the RFC's, I have no basis for claiming that
other's mailserver are broken, and I'll continue to evade directly
confronting my error and apologizing for my mistaken claim
The Mail server that does the scanning needs to have the MX and you will
need to edit the
smtproutes file to forward mail for all domains to the second server...
-John
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 8:13 AM
Subject:
diversion. in short: the original claim was baseless. No mailserver is
broken for refusing messages from sites that have no in-addr.arpa in place.
Please.
No mailserver is broken for refusing messages from sites run by [ethnic
group].
No mailserver is broken for refusing messages from sites
- Original Message -
From: Matt Simerson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 7:21 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] Inter7 mail server doesn't have reverse DNS!
I started blocking connections to my mail server from servers who don't
have DNS and my vpopmail and
Hi,
I know on my mail server that approx 32% of the spam that I personally
receive have no reverse DNS entries. I just checked on the last 200 of them
and that's where the 32% comes from. Oh, let me qualify that statement by
saying that I don't list ISP mail servers or what appear to be real ISP
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Nick Harring wrote:
Rather than questioning why we would refuse to accept from non-reversible
hosts, why don't we ask why anyone would set a host up without reverse DNS?
Because they're not running DJBDNS. :)
ducks
C
Nicholas Harring
System Administrator
Webley
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 10:22 AM, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
rather than trumping up your argument with etiquette fascism, how
about pointing out a relevant RFC that backs up your [baseless]
opinion that a mailserver must accept messages from a site without
reverse DNS?
ever heard of
Question...
Would 208.32.76.233 pass the test?
It has a revers ptr, but some mail servers block it claiming it does not
have one.
~jb
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 01:18 PM, Rick Updegrove wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Matt Simerson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 7:21 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] Inter7 mail server doesn't have reverse DNS!
I started blocking connections to my mail
[snip]
::If it's true that spammers don't have reverse DNS on their IP
::addresses, I wouldn't mind seeing the MTA adding a header like
::X-Possible-Spam: Host 209.218.8.2 does not have reverse DNS. and even
::X-Possible-Spam: Host 209.218.8.2 resolves to spam.com which does not
::resolve to
Hi,
I have just went to a third party machine (my friends) in which i had no
part of compiling or installing qmail/vpopmail.
he is running on Solaris 2.8 without any of the patches i have, and the
symptom is identical.
I also appoligize in advance for this rather large message going to the
At 10:04 AM 03-27-2003, you wrote:
diversion. in short: the original claim was baseless. No mailserver is
broken for refusing messages from sites that have no in-addr.arpa in place.
Please.
No mailserver is broken for refusing messages from sites run by [ethnic
group].
No mailserver is broken
Would 208.32.76.233 pass the test?
It has a revers ptr, but some mail servers block it claiming it does not
have one.
I dunno, I don't block mail from servers with no reverse DNS, or whose reverse
DNS does not map to the same name as its forward DNS. :-)
Regards,
Andrew
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 01:35 PM, Tom Collins wrote:
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 10:22 AM, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
rather than trumping up your argument with etiquette fascism, how
about pointing out a relevant RFC that backs up your [baseless]
opinion that a mailserver must
those are all true. the term in contention is broken. obviously, if a
mailserver is refusing messages from sites with even IP addresses
(whatever those are, how is an IP address even or odd?) *and the reason for
that refusal is not known*, then it's broken. If it's been purposely
configured
others think about blocking based on DNS. I haven't done it in quite a
few years.
Haven't done what, started a flamewar? :-)
(honestly, that is meant to be funny, not an attack)
Regards,
Andrew
Title: RE: [vchkpw] Inter7 mail server doesn't have reverse DNS!
As the only other person on this apparently doing this, I thought I'd just weigh in briefly (again) with regards to why we do it. For those folks who're worried about the sanctity of my users email, don't be. My users understand
Hi there, I have 3 server with vpopmail
And in my script to start qmail I have:
csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc '
env - PATH=/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin \
tcpserver -H -R -x /home/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
-c20 -u201 -g90 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 /dev/null
env -
lol ya all :-)
btw matt simerson, if you code hacks to make your smtpd do more loging like
you said before that you have made it do logging of what kinds of blocks it
does, please feel free to publish them if you like, if not allready,
Greetings /Raboo
P.S. this is probibly one of the top ten
Hi guys..
Would you please to stop this 'holy war'
It wasting my bandwith.
thanks..
--
best regards
made [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi baby_moon,
A user's quota is 1M, and some mails are in its Inbox, and I
was
checked
its directory, the maildirsize file is there.
When I changed this user's quota to 3M, after a mail come in,
the
quota's total number is same as before. Who knows how to solve
52 matches
Mail list logo
