ed wrote:
In order to accept the mail, the domains in question should exist in:
/v/q/c/virtualdomains
/v/q/c/rcpthosts
Then the domains should also exist in
/v/q/u/assign
Which should also be compiled to a cdb
/v/q/u/cdb
(check that the two have similar information)
Then you
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:15:53 -0500
Rick Macdougall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, if the domain is in /v/q/c/virtualdomains then the smtproutes
file will not be looked at.
My mistake
--
The cup and string to the moon pop is spiking because of TK421 not
being at his post. Verio is playing NFL
hi,
Hi I wanted to setup a scanning relay server.. I explain I'm using
vpopmail 5.4.13 and qmail-1.03 with john simpson 7 combined patch I add
the domains with ./vadddomain domain.com and later add an smtproutes line
(in this control file) as domain.com:mail.domain.com but the mail always
is
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] relay, smtp after pop
At 02:02 PM 3/24/2006, you wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 12:39, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
At 11:47 AM 3/24/2006, Michael Krieger wrote:
unless you're doing it in mysql. which works dandy.
or with Bruce Guenter's relay-ctrl package, which doesn't
On Friday 24 March 2006 07:59, Andrew Simon wrote:
I am running qmail/courier-map/vpopmail 5.4.2 system. It is working well.
However occassionally users get the
553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Its not all the time. They are outside the office when this
On Friday 24 March 2006 09:52, Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
If it doesn't, just tell your users to make sure if they see it happen to
hit send/receive and try again. Or switch to an smtp auth based solution
if it's that big of a problem.
wow, I can't believe I didn't mention this before:
a third
SMTP Authentication seems to be the norm these days, and I'd encourage it. Now if only M$ would make it the default or easier than going into advanced settings when adding an account (and also the port 587 option).-M Jeremy Kitchen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 24 March 2006 09:52,
On Friday 24 March 2006 10:31, Michael Krieger wrote:
SMTP Authentication seems to be the norm these days, and I'd encourage it.
Now if only M$ would make it the default or easier than going into
advanced settings when adding an account (and also the port 587 option).
why use port 587?
Keeping in mind most SMTP uses CRAM-MD5 or some equivalent these days with some portion of challenge/response from the server for authentication details... this of course happens automatically.Some e-mail clients will go kicking and screaming on self-signed certificates, particularly in a
At 10:48 AM 3/24/2006, Michael Krieger wrote:
Keeping in mind most SMTP uses CRAM-MD5 or some equivalent these
days with some portion of challenge/response from the server for
authentication details... this of course happens automatically.
do you have a source for the claim of 'most'? just
I know that it was broken on one of our mail servers a few years ago (where it advertised it but then didn't authenticate properly) and we got 10% of users properly authenticating and 90% of them not (these are if I recall correctly and are of course rough numbers. The general observation I
At 11:04 AM 3/24/2006, you wrote:
I know that it was broken on one of our mail servers a few years ago
(where it advertised it but then didn't authenticate properly) and
we got 10% of users properly authenticating and 90% of them not
(these are if I recall correctly and are of course rough
Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 10:31, Michael Krieger wrote:
SMTP Authentication seems to be the norm these days, and I'd encourage it.
Now if only M$ would make it the default or easier than going into
advanced settings when adding an account (and also the port 587
i don't use smtp auth, so i wouldn't know. i thought you were claiming that most providers these days are doing smtp auth. I was stating that most mail CLIENTS (Outlook, Thunderbird, etc) tend to prefer any mangled authentication method in favour of sending a password in clear text, based
I have my clients use port 587 whenever possible, because I use RBLs on port 25 that block some dynamic address ranges.Is there a better practice for this?I'd also recommend turning of hostname lookups and identd lookups in tcpserver's command line.You may want to look at the REQUIREAUTH patch
To correct myself... Each future POP authentication will update the expire time of the open-smtp entry and rebuild the CDB file again.I don't believe it actually rebuilds the CDB file here, but it does update the open-smtp file with the new timestamp for the expiry. In any case, any
On Friday 24 March 2006 11:36, David Chaplin-Loebell wrote:
Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 10:31, Michael Krieger wrote:
SMTP Authentication seems to be the norm these days, and I'd encourage
it. Now if only M$ would make it the default or easier than going into
advanced
At 11:47 AM 3/24/2006, Michael Krieger wrote:
To correct myself...
Each future POP authentication will update the expire time of the
open-smtp entry and rebuild the CDB file again.
I don't believe it actually rebuilds the CDB file here, but it does
update the open-smtp file with the new
unless you're doing it in mysql. which works dandy.You sure about that?the MySQL open relay database would speed up the cleanup of old entries and the updates making that pretty quick, but ultimately it needs to make that a cdb file that sets relayclient for tcpserver to execute qmail-smtpd
At 01:05 PM 3/24/2006, you wrote:
unless you're doing it in mysql. which works dandy.
You sure about that?
the MySQL open relay database would speed up the cleanup of old entries
and the updates making that pretty quick, but ultimately it needs to make
that a cdb file that sets relayclient
no, no cdb rebuilding at all. this is with the patches to do so of course. my vpopmail tcp.smtp.cdb file hasn't been touched in just over three years. Good to know- thanks for the correction.of course, i have lots more mysql transactions going on all the time, but have had no performance
On Friday 24 March 2006 12:39, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
At 11:47 AM 3/24/2006, Michael Krieger wrote:
To correct myself...
Each future POP authentication will update the expire time of the
open-smtp entry and rebuild the CDB file again.
I don't believe it actually rebuilds the CDB file
At 02:02 PM 3/24/2006, you wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 12:39, Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
At 11:47 AM 3/24/2006, Michael Krieger wrote:
unless you're doing it in mysql. which works dandy.
or with Bruce Guenter's relay-ctrl package, which doesn't involve any
overly-specific hacks to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I don't think you're reading this right... seems to be forged to me,
unless your mail server is at 80.8.104.163 and it is hosted in france.
What I'd start doing is publishing SPF records. It might help some with
the joe-job.
- -Myron
Hello Group,
Myron,
So do you think they're just using MY e-mail address as their 'reply-to' for their
spam? Here's another piece of one, with a snippet question below:
Received: from scanri1.uhc.com ([10.85.124.102])
by UHCNH006.UHC.COM (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.12)
with ESMTP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I assume you're running qmail right? I say it's forged everything past the
(host-81-190-14-183.rzeszow.mm.pl [81.190.14.183]) mark. All the headers
after that point were generated by the 81.190.14.183 ip address. Because
you don't trust that
On Thursday 09 September 2004 02:24 pm, Myron Davis wrote:
[snip 150k of quoted text and sigs]
Please folks, trim your messages when you reply. sending a giant email to
1000 people really kills our upstream :)
-Jeremy
--
Jeremy Kitchen ++ Systems Administrator ++ Inter7 Internet
OK Myron,
I see what you're saying about these being forged... so the bottom-line is I can't do
ANYthing about it, right? I mean: I'm getting 100 postmaster error e-mails PER DAY
like these! All because spammers are forging their 'reply-to' addresses as 'ME', so I
get the error returns...
On Thursday 09 September 2004 05:17 pm, Fred Colclough wrote:
OK Myron,
I see what you're saying about these being forged... so the bottom-line is
I can't do ANYthing about it, right? I mean: I'm getting 100 postmaster
error e-mails PER DAY like these! All because spammers are forging
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There is one thing you can do, it won't help too much, but publish SPF
records. http://spf.pobox.com, then any mailer which understands spf
records will not accept mail from the false machine because your SPF
records did not grant them permission.
On Thursday 09 September 2004 06:35 pm, Myron Davis wrote:
There is one thing you can do, it won't help too much, but publish SPF
records. http://spf.pobox.com, then any mailer which understands spf
records will not accept mail from the false machine because your SPF
records did not grant
On Monday 06 September 2004 08:38 am, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote:
I have compiled vpopmail 5.4.6 with mysql support.
the configure says:
tcpserver file = /home/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp
open_smtp file = /home/vpopmail/etc/open-smtp
the relay table is stored in mysql
how can i use
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Tim Hasson wrote:
Tim,
Are you using tcpserver -x ~vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb in your qmail-smtpd run
file? If yes, then proceed..
I was using tcp.smtp.cdb in vpopmail for roaming users until I upgraded to
5.2.1 w/ mysql, so i ended up also applying matt simerson's
Greetings,
I'm running vpopmail+qmail+mysql on RedHat 7.3.
Everything seems to be working fine except for roaming user POP
authentication.
I've tried a number of different tcpserver configs I've found in the docs
and through googling, but none seem to solve the problem.
Are you using tcpserver -x ~vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb in your qmail-smtpd run
file? If yes, then proceed..
I was using tcp.smtp.cdb in vpopmail for roaming users until I upgraded to
5.2.1 w/ mysql, so i ended up also applying matt simerson's mysql patch to
tcpserver (or ucscpi package -- as
35 matches
Mail list logo
