Hello John! Thanks for your answer.
On 12/9/22 12:30, John Stoffel wrote:
I have a setup on which dovecot is the server in a domain on which mailboxes are
>20GB, some of
them are 150GB or more.
It looks like you're using Maildir format? In any case, please post
more details of your configuration.
Sure. It is a simple setup, with Maildir.
# doveconf -N
auth_debug = no
auth_mechanisms = plain login
auth_verbose = no
debug_log_path = /var/log/syslog/mail.debug
disable_plaintext_auth = no
login_greeting = Hermes.
mail_debug = yes
mail_index_rewrite_max_log_bytes = 1 M
mail_location = maildir:~/Maildir
namespace inbox {
inbox = yes
location =
mailbox Drafts {
special_use = \Drafts
}
mailbox Junk {
special_use = \Junk
}
mailbox Sent {
special_use = \Sent
}
mailbox "Sent Messages" {
special_use = \Sent
}
mailbox Trash {
special_use = \Trash
}
prefix =
}
passdb {
driver = pam
name =
}
protocols = " imap"
service auth {
unix_listener auth-client {
group = Debian-exim
mode = 0660
user = Debian-exim
}
}
service imap {
vsz_limit = 2 G
}
ssl = yes
ssl_cert = </etc/dovecot/dovecot-cert.pem
ssl_client_ca_dir = /etc/ssl/certs
ssl_dh = # hidden, use -P to show it
ssl_key = # hidden, use -P to show it
userdb {
driver = passwd
name =
}
verbose_proctitle = yes
protocol imap {
mail_max_userip_connections = 20
}
When reconfiguring _some_ mailboxes with Outlook 365 (configuring a previously
used mailbox on a
new PC), the process takes too long even if mail visibility on Outlook is 3
months.
So the outlook client can't download and parse the number of messages
on there without breaking? How many messages are there? It's
probably not the size of the mailbox, but the number of messages.
50K mails on some folders... total 5.5M on the whole server. I did discover
which was the problem but I don't have a solution.
Inspecting at INBOX cur directory I did note that the 'ls' command shows the
last file listed is a
file from year 2020, 2019 or whatever not being the last received mail; that
means the
alphabetical ordering of 'ls' is showing past years after the last received
mail, i.e. dovecot
changed the epoch in filename. This only happens with Outlook. Following is an
excerpt of ls:
Sure, 'ls -l' doesn't do any sorting, it just reads the directory
information as returned from the disk and show you the results. If
you want it by time, you need to do:
ls -ltr
to have the newest files be at the end. But how 'ls' sees the
directry entries doen't matter to dovecot.
Newest files are at the end; 'ls' without '-U' or '--sort=none' lists files
ordered alphabetically, so the last entry would be the last mail placed on the
folder because the epoch time is part of the filename in Maildir structure...
-rw-r--r-- 1 coord.ventas ventas 544765 sep 9 10:57
1662769412.M329925P1259441.xyz.com,S=
544765,W=552045:2,
-rw-r--r-- 1 coord.ventas ventas 163491 sep 5 12:14
1662769412.M74257P1259441.xyz.com,S=
163491,W=165846:2,S
-rw-r--r-- 1 coord.ventas ventas 3043536 sep 9 12:02
1662769412.M777084P1259441.xyz.com,S=
3043536,W=3083246:2,
-rw-r--r-- 1 coord.ventas ventas 161002 feb 27 2020
1662874173.M608062P1282222.xyz.com,S=
161002,W=163373:2,S
-rw-r--r-- 1 coord.ventas ventas 2230491 feb 27 2020
1662874176.M281294P1282222.xyz.com,S=
2230491,W=2259506:2,S
-rw-r--r-- 1 coord.ventas ventas 167925 feb 27 2020
1662874176.M741229P1282222.xyz.com,S=
167925,W=170373:2,S
The process of renaming files is continuous until all folder was
reread and renamed every file on it. If I issue 'lsof' (with grep) I
see the file that is being renamed passing through tmp/ directory
and after that, the file is placed under new/ directory (I guess)
and Outlook sees a new email to sync, making the sync process too
long... mails that have been synced are resynced...
Wait what? Can you explain exactly what you're doing here? Why would
O365 client be renaming the file
Ok, I disabled TLS options and inspected the traffic with tcpdump. I did note
unnecesary STORE, EXPUNGE and APPEND operations on previously synced folder. I
guess the whole mailbox is analyzed (from the local cache on .pst file) and
O365 tags as SPAM a large number of innocent emails (including local mails from
the same domain which does not travel through internet to reach the
destination).
Also I'm using port 144 instead of 143 to bypass GData antivirus SPAM checks.
Anyway I completely disabled GData antivirus and none of its services remains
running on these workstations; also starting Outlook with safe mode exhibits
this behavior, so I don't know which feature is this on O365 that rescan all
stored emails but it is beyond the scope of this list because there is no
feature on dovecot that can be enabled to workaround this. I guess this is a
bug on O365.
All mails are retransmitted to the server with the subject modified (tagging
them as SPAM or SPAM suspected) and obviously dovecot stores them with a new
epoch timestamp on filename and that's why I have mails with older timestamp
but with recent epoch time on filename...
Take a look at the timestamp on filenames: 1662769412 corresponds to
"Fri Sep 9 20:23:32 -04 2022" and 1662874176 corresponds to Sun Sep
11 01:29:36 -04 2022 but mails were neither sent nor received on
that dates.
What is Outlook requesting imap server to do and how to avoid this?
What is the outlook client version? What are your connection
settings? Have you looked in the logs on the dovecot server side to
see what they say?
Outlook 365 is version 16.15601.20148 compilation 2208 on one workstation that
exhibits the issue and this same version on another PC on which this issue is
not present...
What working clients are your users using today? Are they working
properly with older clients?
Basically I'm the mail server administrator not the sysadmin on the network.
All users prefer working with O365. I've installed Thunderbird on every PC but
users refuses to use it in favor of using Outlook, unfortunately.
Basically, you have to assume we know nothing and explain your setup
and configuration to us like we're idiots who don't know anything.
Spell out all the details please. :-)
Yes, I'm sorry. I hope with this mail I've clarified the scenario.
Thanks again!
Emilio
