qmail Digest 20 Aug 1999 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 734
Topics (messages 29199 through 29260):
Setting maximum attachment sizes
29199 by: "Bongo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29201 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IMAP, PAM... and the home directory?
29200 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29213 by: "David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29215 by: "C. R. Oldham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
former user
29202 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29203 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
humble suggestion from a confused boy
29204 by: "Daniluk, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail-queue wrapper (spam filter)
29205 by: Ben Heilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29207 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SQWebMail or IMP?
29206 by: Martin Paulucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29208 by: Michael Wand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29209 by: "Thomas M. Sasala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29210 by: Martin Paulucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29211 by: Van Liedekerke Franky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29214 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29223 by: Doug Lumpkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29225 by: Adam H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Deliveries failing but qmail thinks success.
29212 by: "C. R. Oldham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29219 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
failure notice (fwd)
29216 by: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SQWebmail and vmailmgrd..
29217 by: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29230 by: "Ol.i Th.uns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Queue growing
29218 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29220 by: Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29224 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29226 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29227 by: Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
access denied to mailbox
29221 by: "Jan Stanik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29250 by: David "A." Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29251 by: David "A." Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pine4 and IMAP4 patches Re: humble suggestion from a confused boy
29222 by: James Smallacombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Performance issues
29228 by: Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29229 by: "Daniluk, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29231 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29232 by: Brad Shelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've been doing some relay testing.
29233 by: Ben Kosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29234 by: Ben Heilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29235 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29236 by: Ben Kosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29239 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29254 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Levine)
29255 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
POP takes >20sec to connect ???
29237 by: Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29238 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29240 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29244 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29246 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29247 by: Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mail Filter of my own
29241 by: "Samar Vijay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29245 by: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
more queue help,
29242 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Wildmat
29243 by: Elric of Melnibone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Copy of all messages from host xxxx
29248 by: "Alain Cocconi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
e-mail daemon timezones
29249 by: "Jeffrey L. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29256 by: Lindsay Haisley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
daemontools binaries (was Re: binaries)
29252 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29253 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29257 by: Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29258 by: Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
fastforward and aliasing to \self
29259 by: Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail-Linux-distribution
29260 by: Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bongo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Probably a simple answer to this - I want to set a limit of 10Mb for >incoming emails - anyone? See: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#databytes -Dave
Hi all: Okay, this is offtopic, sorry, but given the amount of gurus here and the fact that related subjects have been popping up lately, I thought that I would ask: I'm trying to set up a mail server that can handle several virtual domains and allow IMAP access without requiring to add every user to /etc/passwd. My plan is to use David Harris' patched IMAP server with mboxes (no Maildirs due to excessive inode consumption), and use its PAM authentication abilities of the server to authenticate against... well, something (depending on which PAM module I can find; ideally would be against a Postgres database, but would settle for Radius or something else). What I don't know exactly is: in that case, how would the IMAP server know where to find the home directory of the user? Is that something that the PAM module is supposed to supply? Or would the home directory be the one of the user that owns the directories where the mail is stored? (Say: "popuser", which owns /home/mail/, which has the directories of the mail accounts: /home/mail/luser1, /home/mail/megaluser, etc.). In the latter case, how can I make the IMAP server know in which directory to look at? Thanks in advance, Paulo Jan. DDnet.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > I'm trying to set up a mail server that can handle several virtual > domains and allow IMAP access without requiring to add every user to > /etc/passwd. My plan is to use David Harris' patched IMAP server with [[snip]] Somebody asked me about this a few months ago and I gave them a quick run-down on how I thought the solution would be implemented. I've appended that e-mail as a forward. If I were you, I'd avoid the PAM module and just go out to pam to authenticate the unix users.. I think it's best to setup the single uid users in a db or dbm file with some simple format that can be read directly by the imap server. But if you know more about PAM than I do, go for it.. that might be the better way of doing it. I'm not releasing my setup as opens source, but I could consult for someone and setup a single-uid imap maildir or mbox setup. If you are interested, please contact me. - David Harris Principal Engineer, DRH Internet Services -----Original Message----- From: David Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 19, 1999 9:56 PM To: Qmail Subject: RE: imap with single-uid setup? (was: ANNOUNCE: imap-maildir) Yes, it's possible. But it's not very simple as the IMAP server was not setup to have a new authentication method just plug in cleanly like the qmail-pop3d setup. You also have to deal with the fact that the IMAP server is happy to allow the user to open folders not in their home directory, but relies on the UNIX uid permissions. If you don't mind mucking around in the source code, then go for it. The file you wan to start in is "src/osdep/unix/env_unix.c". It's about a thousand lines and from my understanding of the code, you should be able to do all the modifications in just that file. My partner and I are developing an in-house solution to allow each virtual domain user to setup virtual POP/IMAP accounts under one uid, but that is going to be proprietary. Developing it was how I ended up doing the Maildir patch. - David Harris Principal Engineer, DRH Internet Services
David Harris wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > I'm trying to set up a mail server that can handle several virtual > > domains and allow IMAP access without requiring to add every user to > > /etc/passwd. My plan is to use David Harris' patched IMAP server with > [[snip]] > > Somebody asked me about this a few months ago and I gave them a quick run-down > on how I thought the solution would be implemented. I've appended that e-mail > as a forward. Another option depending on your expertise level is to use LDAP and the qmail-ldap patch set. This definitely isn't a plug'n'play solution and still needs some tweaking but I think in the long run it is the most sensible alternative. Those patches are being used in production right now by the author so I think they are pretty stable. -- | Charles R. (C. R.) Oldham | NCA Commission on Schools | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Arizona St. Univ., PO Box 873011,| | V:602/965-8700 F:602/965-9423 | Tempe, AZ 85287-3011 _ | | "I like it!"--Citizen G'Kar | #include <disclaimer.h> X_>|
aw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >One of our former user was playing in many Internet-casinos. All >these casinos send plenty of e-mails on the guy address up to >now. This is bounced back and they bounce it too. I would rather let >the first message to us die in /dev/null. Need advice how to do >it. Should I make a .qmail-user file? How to deal with such problems >If I have more of such former users? If 'formeruser' no longer has an account: echo '#' > ~alias/.qmail-formeruser Else: echo '#' > ~formeruser/.qmail If you have lots of these former users and don't want lots of .qmail files, do: echo '#' > ~alias/.qmail-devnull Then, for each user, add a line to users/assign like: =formeruser:alias:ALIASUID:NOFILESGID:/var/qmail/alias:-:devnull: And, if you want to catch formeruser-*: +formeruser-:alias:ALIASUID:NOFILESGID:/var/qmail/alias:-:devnull: And do: echo '#' > ~alias/.qmail-devnull-default -Dave
aw writes: > One of our former user was playing in many Internet-casinos. All these > casinos > send plenty of e-mails on the guy address up to now. This is bounced > back and they bounce it too. I would rather let the first message to us > die in /dev/null. > Need advice how to do it. Should I make a .qmail-user file? > How to deal with such problems If I have more of such former users? The way to deal with this problem is to block those casinos from sending mail to your domain until they provide a valid return address on their mailings. -- Sam
Title: RE: humble suggestion from a confused boyA lot of people also make functionally equivalent. Perhaps just a central table that has each patch, its latest revision date, its current status, etc. so people can differentiate between them.
Cris Daniluk
MicroStrategy> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Guenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 5:46 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: humble suggestion from a confused boy
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 11:39:05PM -0500, Mate Wierdl wrote:
> > I know, none of the above problems are outrageous, but one can spend
> > considerable time on sorting out badly organized patches.
> (Sorry, for
> > picking on the big-todo patc, but I still do not know, which one is
> > the latest, www.qmail.org's or Bruce G's.)
>
> It's certainly not mine -- I had no hand in creating this
> useful piece.
> Whatever the qmail site points to should be authoritative for
> this one.
>
> As far as versioning goes, it would probably be more useful to
> date-stamp unversioned patches, to at least identify at what date the
> patch originated. This way, one could identify chronological order at
> least.
> --
> Bruce Guenter, QCC Communications Corp. EMail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Phone: (306)249-0220 WWW:
http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~bguenter/
Hello all, I have been trying to write a SPAM filter which is a wrapper for qmail-queue, so that it may act on information in the actual email message. Unfortunately, my C skills are not the best. I realize that qmail-smtpd will first feed the email via file desciptor 0 to qmail-queue, then feed the envelop info via file desciptor 1 and terminate with \0\0. However, I do not wish to pull all this feed into memory. (25M messages would be a system killer) I have tried and tried, but the method escapes me. If anyone has some sample code for a wrapper and is willing the share it, I would much appreciate it. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Enter.net - "The Road To The Internet Starts Here!" Ben Heilman - Systems Administration [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Heilman writes: > Hello all, > I have been trying to write a SPAM filter which is a wrapper for > qmail-queue, so that it may act on information in the actual email message. > Unfortunately, my C skills are not the best. I realize that qmail-smtpd will > first feed the email via file desciptor 0 to qmail-queue, then feed the envelop > info via file desciptor 1 and terminate with \0\0. However, I do not wish to > pull all this feed into memory. (25M messages would be a system killer) I have > tried and tried, but the method escapes me. > > If anyone has some sample code for a wrapper and is willing the share > it, I would much appreciate it. I've been working on one for a customer. Give me a few days to work out the particulars of distribution. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
Hi everybody, Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, I need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that with any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other webmail....:) Thanks!!!
On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Martin Paulucci wrote: > Hi everybody, > > Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of > functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read > that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, I > need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get > himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that with > any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. > > Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other webmail....:) > > > Thanks!!! I was checking around with these programs in my own attempts to find a suitable web mail solution, and I just dumped them after somebody showed me this site: http://www.mollymail.com It's free and it connects to any POP server, without any registration or sign up. Michael Wand
Do you like splashing your passwords all over the Internet? > I was checking around with these programs in my own attempts to find a suitable > web mail solution, and I just dumped them after somebody showed me this site: > > http://www.mollymail.com > > It's free and it connects to any POP server, without any registration or sign > up. > > Michael Wand -- +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Thomas M. Sasala, Electrical Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + MRJ Technology Solutions http://www.mrj.com + + 10461 White Granite Drive, Suite 102 (W)(703)277-1714 + + Oakton, VA 22124 (F)(703)277-1702 + +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Hi, What I'm actually looking for is a webmail -hotmail like- server to be installed in my qmail server and use it to give free webmail to my ISP users. So I need to implement some kind of start registration web page so the user can fill and automatically -as hotmail or yahoo- gets an email address.... Bye! > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Martin Paulucci wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > > > Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of > > functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read > > that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, I > > need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get > > himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that with > > any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. > > > > Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other webmail....:) > > > > > > Thanks!!! > I was checking around with these programs in my own attempts to find a suitable > web mail solution, and I just dumped them after somebody showed me this site: > > http://www.mollymail.com > > It's free and it connects to any POP server, without any registration or sign > up. > > Michael Wand
look in the archives, a week or two ago their was a thread about webmail solutions. Franky > ---------- > From: Martin Paulucci[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 5:19 PM > To: Michael Wand; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SQWebMail or IMP? > > Hi, > > What I'm actually looking for is a webmail -hotmail like- server to be > installed in my qmail server and use it to give free webmail to my ISP > users. So I need to implement some kind of start registration web page > so the user can fill and automatically -as hotmail or yahoo- gets an > email address.... > > > Bye! > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Martin Paulucci wrote: > > > Hi everybody, > > > > > > Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of > > > functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read > > > that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, > I > > > need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get > > > himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that > with > > > any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. > > > > > > Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other > webmail....:) > > > > > > > > > Thanks!!! > > I was checking around with these programs in my own attempts to find a > suitable > > web mail solution, and I just dumped them after somebody showed me this > site: > > > > http://www.mollymail.com > > > > It's free and it connects to any POP server, without any registration or > sign > > up. > > > > Michael Wand >
Martin Paulucci wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of > functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read > that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, I > need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get > himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that with > any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. > > Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other webmail....:) > > Thanks!!! >From the admin's i've talked to, who use both IMP and sqwebmail, SqWebmail scales better. Imp has better features but is slower. We will have a GPL page/cgi for adding a user via vchkpw in a few days and put it on our web site. -- Ken Jones mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
I have been loking at web mail solutions for a long time now and I have found no better software than IMP, commercial or open-source. The current development tree includes POP support, which would allow you to interface with vchkpw (and avoids having to apply all of the necessary patches to IMAP for qmail-maildirs). That will be the stable version very shortly. I would suggest checking out the mailing list for more details. -- Doug Lumpkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Martin Paulucci wrote: > Hi everybody, > > Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of > functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read > that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, I > need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get > himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that with > any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. > > Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other webmail....:) > > Thanks!!!
We were going through the same process about a week ago. IMP is great, and the features that are in the prerelease-3 are excellent (with PHPLIB support, and future persistant IMAP connections) Only problem is that IMP is a damn resource hog, and probaly wont scale well above about 200 users (at once), at least on our server. SQWebMail is much nicer in that respect, but sqwebmail is lacking many features -- unless you take the dev time on your own. Currently there is an imapd (WA) that has been hacked to work with vchkpw, and is on the vchkpw page. As soon as the new vchkpw is released with MySQL support, adding new users will be a breeze. There are a few commerical webmail packages that are also very nice, but just not free, but not to pricey either (20cents/user). -adam On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Martin Paulucci wrote: > Hi everybody, > > Here I am deciding which webmail I'm going to use, because of > functionality that I have seen, the IMP seems better, but I just read > that there's no way to use it with vchkpw or something simillar. Also, I > need to implement some kind of page that the user could fill and get > himself an email account for free. Which is the way I could do that with > any of those 2 programs I don't know and I can't find it anywhere!. > > Could somebody tell me where to find more info?. Or other webmail....:) > > > Thanks!!! >
Greetings, Using qmail 1.02 on debian slink. Qmail was compiled and installed fromthe debian source package. Debian uses procmail, and furthermore we use UW's imapd with all mailboxes in mbx format. Thus deliveries are handed to procmail, which then hands it over to dmail for delivery in the user's mbx-format INBOX. Due to a stupid error on my part, the filesystem containing the mailboxes was mounted read-only for most of last night. When I came in this morning, after fighting off users with a baseball bat, I found lots of messages like the following in my syslogs: Aug 19 06:32:37 quark qmail: 935069557.167442 new msg 299477 Aug 19 06:32:37 quark qmail: 935069557.167671 info msg 299477: bytes 2961 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 6227 uid 71 Aug 19 06:32:37 quark qmail: 935069557.193555 starting delivery 409: msg 299477 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aug 19 06:32:37 quark qmail: 935069557.193703 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Aug 19 06:32:38 quark dmail[6233]: delivering to cro+INBOX Aug 19 06:32:38 quark dmail[6233]: Verifying safe delivery to /home/cro/INBOX Aug 19 06:32:38 quark dmail[6233]: mbx appending to #driver.mbx/INBOX (file /home/cro/INBOX) Aug 19 06:32:38 quark dmail[6233]: Can't open append mailbox: Read-only file system Aug 19 06:32:38 quark dmail[6233]: message delivery failed to /home/cro/INBOX Aug 19 06:32:38 quark qmail: 935069558.423727 delivery 409: success: procmail:_Error_while_writing_to_"/home/cro/.procmail.from"/did_0+0+1/Can't_open_append_mailbox:_Read-only_file_system/message_delivery_failed_to_/home/cro/INBOX/ That last line is what made me have a heart attack. Qmail thought the delivery was successful, which means the message actually got lost. Now when I researched setting things up this way I had the impression that dmail would return errors to procmail, which would return errors to qmail. What happened? -- | Charles R. (C. R.) Oldham | NCA Commission on Schools | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Arizona St. Univ., PO Box 873011,| | V:602/965-8700 F:602/965-9423 | Tempe, AZ 85287-3011 _ | | "I like it!"--Citizen G'Kar | #include <disclaimer.h> X_>|
"C. R. Oldham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Debian uses procmail, and furthermore we use UW's imapd with all >mailboxes in mbx format. Thus deliveries are handed to procmail, which >then hands it over to dmail for delivery in the user's mbx-format INBOX. > >Aug 19 06:32:38 quark qmail: 935069558.423727 delivery 409: success: >procmail:_Error_while_writing_to_"/home/cro/.procmail.from"/did_0+0+1/Can't_open_append_mailbox:_Read-only_file_system/message_delivery_failed_to_/home/cro/INBOX/ > >That last line is what made me have a heart attack. Qmail thought the >delivery was successful, which means the message actually got lost. > >Now when I researched setting things up this way I had the impression >that dmail would return errors to procmail, which would return errors to >qmail. What happened? This is really a procmail question. What does the .procmailrc look like? If you're not careful, procmail won't return dmail's exit status to qmail-command. -Dave
Has anyone patched either of these programs to work with each other? _ __ _____ __ _________ ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC! _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052 /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------] 11:00am up 27 days, 19:53, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.07, 0.08
Doh, that's what i get for forwarding a bounce. Anyway, has anyone patched sqwebmail and vmailmgrd and got them working together properly? On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote: > >Has anyone patched either of these programs to work with each other? _ __ _____ __ _________ ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC! _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052 /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------] 11:05am up 27 days, 19:58, 3 users, load average: 0.18, 0.14, 0.10
>Doh, that's what i get for forwarding a bounce. Anyway, has anyone patched >sqwebmail and vmailmgrd and got them working together properly? I don't think so, but it would be great. Why doesn't sqwebmail use checkpassword? So you could use vmailmgr's checkpassword... Oliver
Hello list, I think our qmail is ill. It does about 10,000 messages per day, and currently the queue is at 600+ messages in queue: 607 messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0 The queue is usually around 200-300. And a listing of the qmail shows it full of what seem like good msgs. I've sent qmail-send and ALRM, but no help. Nothing catches my attention in the logs, and the trigger is as follows, however the trigger file is 3 hours old, Is that ok? prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Aug 19 10:35 /var/qmail/queue/lock/tri gger I've rebooted, and there don't seem to be any DNS problems. Anyone have any suggestions or can any chalk this up to normal behavior. - eric + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Spark Sistemas - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. Tel: 4702-1958 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
At 01:53 PM Thursday 8/19/99, Eric Dahnke wrote: >Hello list, > >I think our qmail is ill. It does about 10,000 messages per day, and >currently the queue is at 600+ > >messages in queue: 607 >messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0 > >The queue is usually around 200-300. And a listing of the qmail shows it >full of what seem like good msgs. > >I've sent qmail-send and ALRM, but no help. Nothing catches my attention >in the logs, Really? Does qmail try and deliver those 607 messages after the ALRM, and if so, what failure is it logging? Are those failures reasonable or not? If they are reasonable, then you have no problem. If they are not reasonable, what investigation did you make based on the logged messages? > I've rebooted, and there don't seem to be any DNS problems. Anyone have On what basis did you think a reboot would make a difference? On what basis do you think the DNS might be related to your delivery problems? Mark.
> On what basis did you think a reboot would make a difference? I don't know I've heard of more stupid things to do. > On what basis do you think the DNS might be related to your delivery problems? I have just been notified that there are DNS problems in this region. thx - eric
Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >messages in queue: 607 >messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0 > >I've sent qmail-send and ALRM, but no help. Hmm. The ALRM should have scheduled immediate delivery attempts, and the log should show them either succeeding or failing. >Nothing catches my attention >in the logs, and the trigger is as follows, however the trigger file is >3 hours old, Is that ok? trigger is touched when new messages are queued. If you haven't injected a new message in 3 hours, this is normal. >prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Aug 19 10:35 /var/qmail/queue/lock/trigger Looks OK. Try "make check" from the source tree. >I've rebooted, and there don't seem to be any DNS problems. Anyone have >any suggestions or can any chalk this up to normal behavior. Could be normal if messages are coming in faster than they're going out. Check top, vmstat, and iostat. How many qmail-local and qmail-remote processes are running? Do you have qmailanalog installed? -Dave
And your answer to the earlier questions regarding interpretation of the delivery attempts? At 02:22 PM Thursday 8/19/99, Eric Dahnke wrote: > > On what basis did you think a reboot would make a difference? > >I don't know I've heard of more stupid things to do. > > > On what basis do you think the DNS might be related to your delivery > problems? > >I have just been notified that there are DNS problems in this region. > >thx - eric
Hi! I configured qmail with single uid based pop3 boxes as is described in Paul Gregg's HOWTO, but I got this error, when I tried to deliver a message: 935082160.737494 delivery 36: deferral: Unable_to_switch_to_/var/mailboxes/gusto :_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/ I checked configuration, permission, and owners of home directory, but still I don't see, where is a problem. My users/assign: =gusto:pop:63:6:/var/mailboxes/gusto::: . Rights and permissions to gusto's home directory: drwx------ 6 pop mail 512 Aug 19 18:28 gusto Can anybody help me, please? Thanx, -- Jan Stanik [EMAIL PROTECTED] Telenor Internet,s.r.o
Jan Stanik wrote: > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 19 17:21:36 1999 > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm > Precedence: bulk > Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: "Jan Stanik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Telenor Internet Slovakia > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 19:17:39 -0700 > Subject: access denied to mailbox > Priority: normal > X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) > Hi! > > I configured qmail with single uid based pop3 boxes as is > described in Paul Gregg's HOWTO, but I got this error, when I tried > to deliver a message: > 935082160.737494 delivery 36: deferral: > Unable_to_switch_to_/var/mailboxes/gusto > :_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/ > > I checked configuration, permission, and owners of home directory, > but still I don't see, where is a problem. > My users/assign: > > =gusto:pop:63:6:/var/mailboxes/gusto::: > . > > Rights and permissions to gusto's home directory: > drwx------ 6 pop mail 512 Aug 19 18:28 gusto > > Can anybody help me, please? > Thanx, > > > > > -- > Jan Stanik > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Telenor Internet,s.r.o > -- Weekend question, "To milkshake or not to milkshake: that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous gear-shakes, Or to take arms against a sea of joints, And by smoking end them?".
Jan Stanik wrote: > Hi! Hi, first off, appologies for the previous email :P > I checked configuration, permission, and owners of home directory, > but still I don't see, where is a problem. > My users/assign: > > =gusto:pop:63:6:/var/mailboxes/gusto::: > . I take it from this uid 63 is pop and gid 6 is mail? Does it reflect as so with ls -ln? Failing that you did run qmail-newu? H. -- Weekend question, "To milkshake or not to milkshake: that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous gear-shakes, Or to take arms against a sea of joints, And by smoking end them?".
On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 11:39:05PM -0500, Mate Wierdl wrote: : As I was searching for various patches at ftp sites, I got struck by : how many different names patches get --- and how many different : versions there are. For example, there are 5 different versions of : the big-todo patch, and as a test, I'd ask the maintainers if they : know offhand under what name they are posted at their (or others') ftp : site. Tell me about it...I'm trying to figure out just what I need to build Pine 4.1 and IMAP4 for Maildir use, and it ain't that easy to figure out. Ok, there's that Norwegian patch...I go to the FTP site, download the only thing that looks like a patch for Pine 4.1 that isn't an RPM, apply it cleanly, build pine...still no Maildir support...wait, I must need Adam's patches for the c-client library as well...oops, no good, the directory ANSI doesn't appear to exist under imap in the 4.1 source... Is it me, or is this next to impossible for a non-programmer to figure out? : Often happens that the name does not suggest uniquely what package the : patch is supposed to patch (like `rbl.patch' could conceivably patch : at least three packages). It took me a few private emails to some helpful and clueful people to figure out you don't need the damn patches for qmail-1.03, you just download rblsmtpd...it would be nice if the website was updated accordingly. sorry for the rant, but I like to think of myself as pretty resourceful, but that's not proving enough here...
Hello all... I am running qmail-1.03 RH 5.2 AMD 400 128 Mb / on 2GB IDE /home on 6GB IDE D-Link 530 TX PCI 10/100 NIC 1 qmail-smtp 1 qmail-pop3 (for normal pop3) 1 qmail-pop3 (for virtual domains using vchkpw) At most I can have 180 users connected to the modems. I am getting a lot of complaints from people saying they get "cannot find mail.f-tech.net" when they check their mail (pop3). Concurrancylocal and remote are both 100 and tcpserver is also -c100. 0:13 tcpserver -c100 -x /etc/tcprules.d/qmail-pop3d.cdb -u0 -g0 mail.f-tech.net pop-3 qmail-popup mail.f-tech.net checkpassword qmail-pop3d Maildir. What can I do to increase the allowable network connections? Is there anyway to monitor this situation? I've heard a lot of talk about removing the fcsk()? calls from qmail to speed it up. Or even turn off logging? Is there any way to bypass syslog and still keep the delivery info? redirect to stdout and pipe to a file??? Any pointers? Thanks. Paul D. Farber II Farber Technology Ph. 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Title: RE: Performance issuesThat sounds like something completely unrelated to qmail on first hearing, but what message does the mailer give? For example sometimes my mailer will say cannot find the address but I click on details and it will give a completely and totally different response. The summary error is a guess as to what the problem is (most everything is of course Invalid Password).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Farber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 6:50 PM
> To: qmail mailing list
> Subject: Performance issues
>
>
> Hello all...
>
> I am running
>
> qmail-1.03
> RH 5.2
> AMD 400
> 128 Mb
> / on 2GB IDE
> /home on 6GB IDE
> D-Link 530 TX PCI 10/100 NIC
> 1 qmail-smtp
> 1 qmail-pop3 (for normal pop3)
> 1 qmail-pop3 (for virtual domains using vchkpw)
>
> At most I can have 180 users connected to the modems.
>
> I am getting a lot of complaints from people saying they get
> "cannot find
> mail.f-tech.net" when they check their mail (pop3).
>
> Concurrancylocal and remote are both 100 and tcpserver is also -c100.
>
> 0:13 tcpserver -c100 -x /etc/tcprules.d/qmail-pop3d.cdb -u0 -g0
> mail.f-tech.net pop-3 qmail-popup mail.f-tech.net checkpassword
> qmail-pop3d Maildir.
>
> What can I do to increase the allowable network connections? Is there
> anyway to monitor this situation? I've heard a lot of talk
> about removing
> the fcsk()? calls from qmail to speed it up. Or even turn
> off logging?
> Is there any way to bypass syslog and still keep the delivery info?
> redirect to stdout and pipe to a file???
>
> Any pointers?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Paul D. Farber II
> Farber Technology
> Ph. 570-628-5303
> Fax 570-628-5545
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >1 qmail-pop3 (for normal pop3) >1 qmail-pop3 (for virtual domains using vchkpw) > >I am getting a lot of complaints from people saying they get "cannot find >mail.f-tech.net" when they check their mail (pop3). Are these normal or virtual users? What happens when you telnet to the pop3 port and do a manual session? >What can I do to increase the allowable network connections? Up the -cNNN parameter to tcpserver. >Is there anyway to monitor this situation? "ps -ef | grep tcpserver", or something like that. >I've heard a lot of talk about removing the fcsk()? calls from qmail >to speed it up. That would only help if the queue is the bottleneck, but a clogged queue wouldn't slow/prevent pop connections. And it's a very drastic measure. >Or even turn off logging? Are you using syslog (splogger)? Is it gobbling CPU time and/or I/O? If so, switch to cyclog from daemontools (see LWQ). If not, it's probably not a problem (yet). >Is there any way to bypass syslog and still keep the delivery info? >redirect to stdout and pipe to a file??? cyclog. -Dave
On Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 03:20:48PM -0400, Dave Sill wrote: > Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Or even turn off logging? > > Are you using syslog (splogger)? Is it gobbling CPU time and/or I/O? > If so, switch to cyclog from daemontools (see LWQ). If not, it's > probably not a problem (yet). > > >Is there any way to bypass syslog and still keep the delivery info? > >redirect to stdout and pipe to a file??? One way to check the logging factor, real quick, is to reconfigure syslog so it doesn't sync. He's running Linux, so the this should work to at least see if it makes a difference: mail.*;*.!=warn -/var/log/mail and kill -HUP <PID of syslogd> If that helps, then certainly logging is part of the speed issue. -- Brad Shelton On Line Exchange http://online-isp.com
I just got this little note from our ISP saying that qmail is allowing this backdoor relay method through. Instead of relaying (which I don't want), it tries to deliver the message to our internal server. This isn't so good. I'd like to refuse outright anything like this, so how would I go about doing so? -----Original Message----- From: Tom J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 11:32 AM To: Ben Kosse Subject: Re: Follow up on Relay testing FROM TOM JONES >>> RSET <<< 250 flushed >>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[206.153.245.13]> <<< 250 ok >>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <<< 250 ok Uh oh, host appeared to accept a message for relay. The host may reject this message internally, however At 10:38 AM 8/19/99 -0700, you wrote: >Just checking to get a timeline on when you'll be done testing >206.153.245.13 for relay abusability. > >-- >Ben Kosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >PC Technician >Coldwater Creek Inc. >Voice/Voice Mail: 208-265-7114 Fax: 208-265-3209 > > > ******************************** Tom Jones Digital Marketing, Inc (DMI Computers) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ********************************
Hello, I believe if you remove control/percenthack and SIGHUP qmail-send it will correct your problem. On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, you wrote: > I just got this little note from our ISP saying that qmail is allowing this > backdoor relay method through. Instead of relaying (which I don't want), it > tries to deliver the message to our internal server. This isn't so good. I'd > like to refuse outright anything like this, so how would I go about doing > so? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 11:32 AM > To: Ben Kosse > Subject: Re: Follow up on Relay testing > > > FROM TOM JONES > > >>> RSET > <<< 250 flushed > >>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[206.153.245.13]> > <<< 250 ok > >>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <<< 250 ok > > > Uh oh, host appeared to accept a message for relay. > The host may reject this message internally, however > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 10:38 AM 8/19/99 -0700, you wrote: > >Just checking to get a timeline on when you'll be done testing > >206.153.245.13 for relay abusability. > > > >-- > >Ben Kosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >PC Technician > >Coldwater Creek Inc. > >Voice/Voice Mail: 208-265-7114 Fax: 208-265-3209 > > > > > > > ******************************** > Tom Jones > Digital Marketing, Inc (DMI Computers) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ******************************** -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Enter.net - "The Road To The Internet Starts Here!" Ben Heilman - Systems Administration [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Kosse writes: > I just got this little note from our ISP saying that qmail is allowing this > backdoor relay method through. Instead of relaying (which I don't want), it > tries to deliver the message to our internal server. This isn't so good. I'd > like to refuse outright anything like this, so how would I go about doing > so? ORBS is being stupid. They think that just because email is accepted via an SMTP server, it's going to be delivered. That has *never* been the case, and gee, it still isn't. Tell ORBS to get lost. Let them list you. If anybody complains that they tried to send you mail and got a message from ORBS, tell them how stupid ORBS is being. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
Actually, ORBS hasn't listed us. That e-mail touched precicely 3 systems: the client, the one I'm building, and our internal Exchange box. It ended up in our *INTERNAL* e-mail server as an undeliverable message. qmail tried to send it to someone inside our network who didn't exist. What I'd like to do is just outright refuse the messages. > -----Original Message----- > From: Russell Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 1:18 PM > To: 'Qmail' > Subject: Re: I've been doing some relay testing. > > > Ben Kosse writes: > > I just got this little note from our ISP saying that qmail > is allowing this > > backdoor relay method through. Instead of relaying (which > I don't want), it > > tries to deliver the message to our internal server. This > isn't so good. I'd > > like to refuse outright anything like this, so how would I > go about doing > > so? > > ORBS is being stupid. They think that just because email is accepted > via an SMTP server, it's going to be delivered. That has > *never* been > the case, and gee, it still isn't. > > Tell ORBS to get lost. Let them list you. If anybody complains that > they tried to send you mail and got a message from ORBS, tell > them how > stupid ORBS is being. > > -- > -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com > Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government > schools are so > 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that > any rank amateur > Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo > them. Homeschool! >
Ben Kosse writes: > Actually, ORBS hasn't listed us. That e-mail touched precicely 3 systems: > the client, the one I'm building, and our internal Exchange box. It ended up > in our *INTERNAL* e-mail server as an undeliverable message. qmail tried to > send it to someone inside our network who didn't exist. What I'd like to do > is just outright refuse the messages. Qmail has no facility for refusing messages based on the local part of the recipient. You could use the qmail-queue wrapper I've been writing, and consult a CDB of valid email addresses, but of course if you have *any* .qmail*-default files, it's impossible to tell if email is deliverable without examining them. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
>I just got this little note from our ISP saying that qmail is allowing this >backdoor relay method through. Instead of relaying (which I don't want), it >tries to deliver the message to our internal server. This isn't so good. I'd >like to refuse outright anything like this, so how would I go about doing >so? That's not ORBS, it's the relay tester at mail-abuse.com, home of the RBL. Tell your ISP that there's a reason I made it say "The host may reject this message internally, however" because qmail and some other MTAs accept anything with a valid domain after the at-sign and sort out the mailbox part later. When I have a chance, I'm planning to do some pattern matching on the responses to figure out what MTA the target system is using and skip tests that are likely to give false positives. Incidentally, the full version of that tester lives at http://www.abuse.net/relay.html and if you're a registered abuse.net user, it will send a test message for you so you can see whether it actually relays or not. Don't get cute, everything's logged and rate-limited. Regards, John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 >-----Original Message----- >From: Tom J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 11:32 AM >To: Ben Kosse >Subject: Re: Follow up on Relay testing > > >FROM TOM JONES > >>>> RSET ><<< 250 flushed >>>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[206.153.245.13]> ><<< 250 ok >>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ><<< 250 ok > > >Uh oh, host appeared to accept a message for relay. >The host may reject this message internally, however -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 [EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
John R. Levine writes: > Incidentally, the full version of that tester lives at > http://www.abuse.net/relay.html and if you're a registered abuse.net > user, it will send a test message for you so you can see whether it > actually relays or not. Don't get cute, everything's logged and > rate-limited. Why not arrange it so that it's invoked by sending email from the host in question? I'd be happy to throw you the perl code. The worst that you could do is arrange for your own host to be mailbombed. That would be ... counter-productive. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
When connecting to my pop server, it takes between 20-30 seconds to connect. After connecting, everything is fast. I have tested my client with pop servers on other machines and I don't experience this delay (i.e. it is a server problem). The server is on a T1 line through MCI. My client machine is on a OC-3 connection. Telnet to the server has no delay on connecting. Server: RedHat 5.2 qmail-1.03 Client: Eudora Pro 4.0 Anyone have ideas on what to check??? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Lundquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------
Mark wrote: > > When connecting to my pop server, it takes between 20-30 seconds to > connect. After connecting, everything is fast. I have tested my client > with pop servers on other machines and I don't experience this delay (i.e. > it is a server problem). > > The server is on a T1 line through MCI. My client machine is on a OC-3 > connection. Telnet to the server has no delay on connecting. > > Server: > RedHat 5.2 > qmail-1.03 > > Client: > Eudora Pro 4.0 > > Anyone have ideas on what to check??? > run the pop server with tcpserver and use the -H and -R options man tcpserver for details -- Ken Jones mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
Mark writes: > When connecting to my pop server, it takes between 20-30 seconds to > connect. Check to see if your client has reverse DNS set up. Delays in connecting are almost always DNS-related. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
Mark writes: > When connecting to my pop server, it takes between 20-30 seconds to > connect. After connecting, everything is fast. I have tested my client > with pop servers on other machines and I don't experience this delay (i.e. > it is a server problem). Either you have forward/reverse DNS problem, or you're hitting the max number of connections set by tcpserver. -- Sam
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Sam wrote: > Mark writes: > > When connecting to my pop server, it takes between 20-30 seconds to > > connect. After connecting, everything is fast. I have tested my client > > with pop servers on other machines and I don't experience this delay (i.e. > > it is a server problem). > Either you have forward/reverse DNS problem, or you're hitting the max > number of connections set by tcpserver. My qmail smtp does this.... I believe the list list blamed it on tcpd doing some sort of reverse/ident check. I don't have tcpd on my pop, though, so I'm not sure what the problem might be with your setup. :-/ Scott -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBN7yUFh4PLs9vCOqdAQFH4AQAj1PJWDGibGdiLJ1iLlMgi8KssbTP+U/4 9UeuO1rNjWMuKoUnzWeXMRav0Wa9zcvEj6qzwtvNiDTgixxRIT6/wSMAOXIhz0qV QEI3xwl5wivF2RGmZ9od0u7GGhSHzIHJW9TTNgo74pvJ938avobM8RPkz9ZjxEo3 IxfsNUK2LLw= =X41B -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
At 05:32 PM Thursday 8/19/99, Scott D. Yelich wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > >On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Sam wrote: > > Mark writes: > > > When connecting to my pop server, it takes between 20-30 seconds to > > > connect. After connecting, everything is fast. I have tested my client > > > with pop servers on other machines and I don't experience this delay > (i.e. > > > it is a server problem). > > Either you have forward/reverse DNS problem, or you're hitting the max > > number of connections set by tcpserver. > >My qmail smtp does this.... I believe the list list blamed it on tcpd >doing some sort of reverse/ident check. I don't have tcpd on my pop, >though, so I'm not sure what the problem might be with your setup. So how is qmail-pop3d invoked? Note that tcpserver has the -R option to turn off ident checking. By default it is on! Mark.
On Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 04:34:30PM +0100, Samar Vijay wrote: > I am thinking of writing a Mail Filter of my own. Can I use the CDB file that > Qmail uses for user authentication? Yes. Download ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/software/cdb-0.55.tar.gz. According to the README file, "The C source files are in the public domain; you may use them as you wish." > Is there any API dicumented ot something? Not that I know of, but there's almost nothing to the API and you can figure it out by looking at some source code. Chris
Hello, I thought I had this licked, but our queue is at 1200. ps ax shows the following: 387 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 388 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote BNA.COM.AR [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 389 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 390 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 391 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 392 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 393 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 394 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 395 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 396 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 397 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 398 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote BNA.COM.AR [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 399 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 400 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 401 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 402 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 403 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote bna.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 405 ? S 0:00 qmail-remote altec.com.ar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] But there are only 3 messages in the entire queue with the letters bna in them. And this ps snapshot has shown these same messages for hours and hours now? Sending qmail-send an ALRM does no good. No messages fly past in the maillog indicating failure type. ALRM has no effect on the queue. I've run make check from the source tree, and the ../queue/lock/trigger file is current with proper permissions. Remote concurrency is pegged at 20/20. Would increasing this help? How do I do that. We had national DNS problems here for the last day or two, but I'm told that is fixed. We run qmail under tcpserver with pop and smtp concurrency at 150. The logs show nothing abnormal except that qmail is seriously favoring the delivery of local messages. You have to watch for a long time before it finally processes a remote message. Anyone seen anything like this before? thx - eric
Has anyone updated the Wildmat patch to work with qmail 1.03? -- "Try not the patience of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." --- Elric, Babylon 5 Public PGP Available by Finger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint16 = FC F6 32 8D 9A CC 2A E5 02 FD 54 0F 35 9F 27 C2
Hello, I'm searching a .qmail-default configuration for keeping copy of all messages sended from a host xxxx I've try to use mess822, but I don't know the right way to do it. Do you have an idea ? tia Alain Cocconi [EMAIL PROTECTED] CIPAC S.A. Phone : (687) 24.38.70 B.P. 2694 - 98846 NOUMEA CEDEX Fax : (687) 27.12.70 Nouvelle Caledonie - New-Caledonia - NC ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Fight Spam! Join EuroCAUCE: http://www.euro.cauce.org/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How do I tell qmail (or maybe it's fetchmail) what time zone I am in? My hardware clock is on UTC (clock -au is run a boot time). The date command reports the correct time zone. This is on my laptop, so UTC seems the best choice for the hardware clock. My ISP is in Texas (CDT). Some part of my system, according to the e-mail headers is using UTC, some EDT. I've cut and pasted the first part of the headers. I guess fetchmail is using EDT, qmail is using UTC, I am in PDT at the moment. TIA, Jeff Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 476 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Aug 1999 19:35:49 -0000 Received: from pop.texas.net by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.0.5) for jeff@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 19 Aug 1999 15:35:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ns.gbnet.net (ns.gbnet.net [194.70.126.10]) by mw5.texas.net (2.4/2.4) with SMTP id MAA12004 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Aug 1999 12:39:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 4942 invoked by uid 610); 19 Aug 1999 17:36:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 3886 invoked from network); 19 Aug 1999 17:33:12 -0000 Received: from zero.sector13.org ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by ns.gbnet.net with SMTP; 19 Aug 1999 17:33:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 27352 invoked by uid 2003); 19 Aug 1999 17:33:36 -0000
Thus spake Jeffrey L. Taylor on Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 07:50:40PM CDT > How do I tell qmail (or maybe it's fetchmail) what time zone I am in? > My hardware clock is on UTC (clock -au is run a boot time). The date > command reports the correct time zone. This is on my laptop, so UTC > seems the best choice for the hardware clock. My ISP is in Texas > (CDT). Some part of my system, according to the e-mail headers is > using UTC, some EDT. I've cut and pasted the first part of the > headers. I guess fetchmail is using EDT, qmail is using UTC, I am in > PDT at the moment. Qmail always uses UTC. It's hard coded in. -- Lindsay Haisley | "Everything works | PGP public key FMP Computer Services | if you let it" | available at [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (The Roadie) | <http://www.fmp.com/pubkeys> http://www.fmp.com | |
Mate, do your RPMs include daemontools binaries? I have looked for the license to daemontools, but it is not in the daemontools tarball, and it is not on the daemontools web page. What is the license for redistributing daemontools? Dave
Mate, do your RPMs include daemontools binaries? I have looked for the license to daemontools, but it is not in the daemontools tarball, and it is not on the daemontools web page. What is the license for redistributing daemontools? Dave
On 19 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Mate, do your RPMs include daemontools binaries? > > I have looked for the license to daemontools, but it is not in the > daemontools tarball, and it is not on the daemontools web page. What > is the license for redistributing daemontools? the daemontools binaries are included, they are, like all DJB software other than Qmail itself, under PD (not GPL). Don't ask me how I know that, maybe an old discussion here, but I do know that there are no LICENSE readme files in the packages or on DJB's site. Russ? could there be a little note about licensing on qmail.org? it's very confusing to a lot of people, especially now that GPL is in the news, it should be strictly mentioned on the page that Qmail and friends are not.
Ira Abramov wrote: > readme files in the packages or on DJB's site. Russ? could there be a > little note about licensing on qmail.org? it's very confusing to a lot of > people, especially now that GPL is in the news, it should be strictly > mentioned on the page that Qmail and friends are not. This would be very much appreciated by me for one. I am trying to put together a small commercial distro ( another RedHat clone) and would like to have qmail as a drop in replacement. What am I allowed to use for this and what am I not. Kevin -- _ _ / / (_)__ __ ____ __ [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / Systems Administator /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ ...... http://www.oceania.net ......
I started seeing a problem with handling the aliases by fastforward. some of our users had in the old sendmail host a few aliases set up in a way that the entire company mail is CC:ed to an aditional user, sometimes two. consider the following example: user1: \user1, \mon1, \mon2 user2: \user2, \mon1, \mon2 user3: \user3, \mon1, \mon2 user4: \user4, \mon1, \mon2 mon1: \mon1, \mon2 mon2: \mon2, \mon1 now sendmail looks up the aliases file first, the messages get delivered locally and don't end up in an alias loop. with Qmail, even if I force ~alias match before local delivery I'll have a loop problem. I can't specify a file delivery since they are not owned by alias' UID ofcourse, and fastforward won't do a file delivery anyway. also, this is going to switch from a UID-per-mailbox setup to a single-UID delivery system. in either case users do not have a homedir to put .qmail files in it. the way I see it now I'll have to hand over the alias resolution to a local agent I'll write (the one that will lookup the database for authentication and delivery instructions) and give up on fastforward completely. am I being too drastic?
Ira Abramov wrote: > > > BeroLinux already did that, then Qmail disappeared when it was merged into > Mandrake Linux. I sugest you switch to Mandrake as a platform (I love it. > it's also recompiled for Pentium entirely) and ask them to add a legal > Qmail binary distro into their install process, and make Sendmail an > option and not a must. I'll join in to that request if you do... This is what I am hoping to achieve, A legal qmail binary, not in their distrobution, in my own Kevin
