qmail Digest 23 Jan 2000 11:00:02 -0000 Issue 889
Topics (messages 35911 through 35945):
Re: High-load servers
35911 by: Guan Yang
35937 by: Mark Delany
35938 by: Ruben van der Leij
35944 by: Mark Delany
Re: Vdeliver takes too long
35912 by: Li Hong
Re: High-load servers...
35913 by: cmikk.uswest.net
35914 by: cmikk.uswest.net
35915 by: Russ Allbery
35916 by: Petr Novotny
35917 by: cmikk.uswest.net
35918 by: Russ Allbery
35929 by: Timothy L. Mayo
Re: APOP
35919 by: Magnus Bodin
35920 by: J.M. Roth \(iip\)
35927 by: Magnus Bodin
(no subject)
35921 by: ravivr
Web Mail Access
35922 by: Director tecnico del Nodo Nicarao -- Juan Navas
35923 by: J.M. Roth \(iip\)
SMTP AUTH - was: High-load servers...
35924 by: listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski
35928 by: listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski
35931 by: listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski
35942 by: cmikk.uswest.net
Re: Help,-ERR this user has no $HOME/Maildir?
35925 by: Tetsu Ushijima
35926 by: J.M. Roth \(iip\)
The perennial Maildir question, perhaps with a new twist
35930 by: Steve Wolfe
35934 by: Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
Getting error from qmail
35932 by: Patterner
My sister, who just turned 18 is looking for work...
35933 by: bossman
35935 by: Mark Elliott
She deserves 18 e-mails from each of us
35936 by: Gregory J. Forkin
Sorry To All of you !!!! (about My sister...)
35939 by: bossman
defer pop sessions
35940 by: Michael N. Boyiazis
35941 by: Russell Nelson
[Announce] oMail 0.2 - Initial Public Release
35943 by: Olivier M.
problems sending local email with qmail
35945 by: Eric Lalonde
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An crazy idea for infinite scalability and n-1 redundancy:
1. A rackful of SMTP servers, running mini-qmail and qmail-qmqpc, behind
pickdns.
2. A small amount of qmail servers running qmail and qmail-qpqpd.
3. A huge, expensive NetApp.
4. A rackful of POP3 servers, running only qmail-pop3d, behind pickdns.
5. A rackful of SqWebMail servers, behind pickdns.
6. A small amount of replicated MySQL servers running authentication.
Are there any problems with such an arrangement? Is it scalable? Is it
overkill for ~1 million users?
--
Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like
solitary confinement.
One NetApp (regardless of how huge and regardless of how expensive)
means one point of failure, does it not?
Regards.
On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 12:05:48PM +0100, Guan Yang wrote:
> An crazy idea for infinite scalability and n-1 redundancy:
>
> 1. A rackful of SMTP servers, running mini-qmail and qmail-qmqpc, behind
> pickdns.
>
> 2. A small amount of qmail servers running qmail and qmail-qpqpd.
>
> 3. A huge, expensive NetApp.
>
> 4. A rackful of POP3 servers, running only qmail-pop3d, behind pickdns.
>
> 5. A rackful of SqWebMail servers, behind pickdns.
>
> 6. A small amount of replicated MySQL servers running authentication.
>
>
> Are there any problems with such an arrangement? Is it scalable? Is it
> overkill for ~1 million users?
> --
> Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like
> solitary confinement.
On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 04:36:21PM -0800, Mark Delany wrote:
> One NetApp (regardless of how huge and regardless of how expensive)
> means one point of failure, does it not?
Yup. You do have a bunch of uplinks, leaving the building through separate
conduits, multiple power-supplies and backup-generators, and preferably a
second facility in another city? (In case of a meteor-hit.)
The most failure-prone components in a NetApp are redundant, hot-swappable,
or allready there and waiting to kick in (disks..). The rest can be replaced
in less than 5 minutes. (I have seen how a NetApp-engineer swapped a
motherboard in something like three minutes. Do that to a Dell poweredge. :)
Two F760's sharing a shelf is an expensive way of reducing downtime to less
than five minutes. There must be cheaper SPOF's around.
--
Ruben
On Sun, Jan 23, 2000 at 01:57:58AM +0100, Ruben van der Leij wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 04:36:21PM -0800, Mark Delany wrote:
>
> > One NetApp (regardless of how huge and regardless of how expensive)
> > means one point of failure, does it not?
>
> Yup. You do have a bunch of uplinks, leaving the building through separate
> conduits, multiple power-supplies and backup-generators, and preferably a
> second facility in another city? (In case of a meteor-hit.)
That's getting carried away actually. If you have a remote facility and a means
of automated cutover, perhaps via DNS, then unit redundancy isn't necessary.
Regards.
|
look at this email
On Wed, Oct 13, 1999 at 04:33:27PM -0700, Jose de Leon
wrote:
> I'm using QMail 1.03, and using tcpserver instead of inetd.
Linux 2.0.xx.
> Some POP3 account users are complaining of slow POP3
authentication. About
> 50% of the time, authentication times
out. I have noticed the problem too,
> but once authenticated,
download of email is quite fast.
This may also be a result of slow DNS
and/or IDENT lookups:
- you may use the -R switch to disable IDENT lookups
(very much recommended,
as most systems do not provide reliable info
anyway).
- you may use the -H switch to disable remote host name
lookups.
This speeds up connections if DNS is slow or broken for the
IPs
your customers come from. It also is useless if the IPs do not
have
PTR records.
Please note that these settings may also be
useful if you start
qmail-smtpd via tcpserver.
> Are there not
enough connections allocated for tcpserver? How can I check
> if
maximum connections are being used?
start your tcpserver with -v switch
and direct its output to a logfile.
There you should see messages
like
tcpserver: status: 2/150
That means that currently
2 out of 150 max tcpservers are active.
The max limit can be increased with
-c<num>, default is 40.
> Or are there settings in QMail itself
I need to change?
No.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet
GmbH
| http://www.Space.Net/ | Yeah, yo
mama dresses
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | you funny and
you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89)
32356-0 | a mouse to delete files
D-80807
Muenchen | Fax: +49
(89) 32356-299 |
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2000 6:18 PM
Subject: Vdeliver takes too long
Hi,
i´m having a problem (i think
so),
the vdeliver process is taking too long to
deliver messages, even small
messages.
i´m using qmail + vpopmail +
qmailadmin.
thanks,
Marcelo
|
On 21 Jan 2000 23:39:13 -0800 , Russ Allbery writes:
> cmikk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Since our mail servers perform relaying for roaming customers, they
> > would have to be open to any IP address. Ofmipd does not allow you to
> > control relaying, last I checked, so that would require some hacking.
>
> Neither does qmail-smtpd, when it comes to that sort of setup.
More explicitly: qmail-smtpd can use control/rcpthosts,
ofmipd does not. Therefore, ofmipd is an open relay,
no matter how you run it, whereas qmail-smtpd is
only open if you set RELAYCLIENT.
> You have
> to front-end either one with something that checks whether to allow
> relaying. What control mechanism are you using? SMTP after POP is pretty
> easy, and I think there's stuff already on the qmail web site implementing
> it.
Well, we use tcpserver's -x option, for a static
list of known customer IPs (e.g. our dial-up pools).
We use a variant of Russ's open-smtp package for
roaming customers.
--
Chris Mikkelson | Problems are posed by fools like me;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | But only Heuristics can search a tree.
On 21 Jan 2000 23:41:08 -0800 , Russ Allbery writes:
> Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Could we see it? I am almost finished writing a simple qmail-queue
> > wrapper that filters the body of the message through qmail-inject. This
> > achieves the same header rewriting that the @fixme trick does, without
> > double delivery. Once I finish it I'll post it.
>
> This is the entire raison d'阾re of ofmipd, and it already supports tons
> of useful address rewriting rules, and also in the same package from djb
> (mess822) is a replacement qmail-inject that supports the same address
> rewriting mechanisms....
Ofmipd is an open relay; new-inject (the qmail-inject
replacement) could be used, but only in the same
way as an @fixme-hooked script.
What I finally did was interpose some new-inject
code between qmail-smtpd and qmail-queue.
This allows me to take advantage of some of the nice
features of qmail-smtpd (rcpthosts, badmailfrom,
and patches like badrcptto), and still do rewriting.
--
Chris Mikkelson | Vampireware; n, a project capable of sucking the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | lifeblood out of anyone unfortunate enough to be
| assigned to it which never actually sees the light
| of day, but nonetheless refuses to die. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
cmikk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, we use tcpserver's -x option, for a static list of known customer
> IPs (e.g. our dial-up pools). We use a variant of Russ's open-smtp
> package for roaming customers.
You should be able to do both of those with ofmipd. tcpserver -x works
the same way; as long as open-smtp generates a tcpserver rules database,
tcpserver won't accept connections from anyone that you don't want to
allow unlimited relaying to and ofmipd's behavior is pretty much exactly
what you want.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 22 Jan 00, at 9:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well, we use tcpserver's -x option, for a static
> list of known customer IPs (e.g. our dial-up pools).
> We use a variant of Russ's open-smtp package for
> roaming customers.
Well, taking that idea of port redirection more on, you may
1. have the "static" redirection for "local users" IPs
2. have the "temporary" redirection for "roaming users" IPs
3. have the access to the port itself disabled for anyone else
(Ad #2: Adding the IP to the list of port-redirected IPs is the same
type of problems as adding "IP:RELAYCLIENT=''" type of line to
the -x database.)
The "non-authorized" user connects to port 25, running qmail-
smtpd, with no rewriting and no relaying. The "authorized" user, by
connecting to port 25, in fact connects to port 26, running ofmipd,
rewriting and relaying. Direct connect to port 26 is forbidden.
It all only boils down to a question: How fast are you able to reload
the IP-redirection data?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBOInlplMwP8g7qbw/EQJ7/ACgkFPF4nCd5gDyfOhAW32c7yvxfsQAn3en
BFCZmHEVqWI8M7QAgCAEB+6A
=KyR/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
[Tom Waits]
On 22 Jan 2000 08:11:37 -0800 , Russ Allbery writes:
> cmikk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Well, we use tcpserver's -x option, for a static list of known customer
> > IPs (e.g. our dial-up pools). We use a variant of Russ's open-smtp
> > package for roaming customers.
>
> You should be able to do both of those with ofmipd. tcpserver -x works
> the same way; as long as open-smtp generates a tcpserver rules database,
> tcpserver won't accept connections from anyone that you don't want to
> allow unlimited relaying to and ofmipd's behavior is pretty much exactly
> what you want.
I've considered that, but unfortunately it's not that simple:
these servers are also primary MXes for some domains (historical
accident -- fixing this is on my list ;-). Thus, denying smtp
connections from anywhere is out of the question.
--
Chris Mikkelson | Microsoft: Where do you want to go today?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Linux: Where do you want to go tomorrow?
| FreeBSD: Are you guys coming or what?
cmikk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've considered that, but unfortunately it's not that simple: these
> servers are also primary MXes for some domains (historical accident --
> fixing this is on my list ;-). Thus, denying smtp connections from
> anywhere is out of the question.
Ahh... okay, that's a good reason. :)
I have an ulterior motive in pursuing this; I'm considering switching our
primary user SMTP server for PC and Mac clients over to ofmipd from
sendmail and I'm wondering if people have decided not to use it for
reasons that would affect us.
Our bounce and vacation autoresponder server will likely be running qmail
by sometime next week. We're looking at what MTA to use for our POP and
IMAP servers currently, since we've finally offloaded the rewriting and
forwarding logic and they can now be much simpler.
The mail routers are doing both LDAP and special CNAME lookups to route
incoming mail and having persistant LDAP connections to the LDAP servers
(rather than opening and closing connections for each message) is a
requirement long-term due to load (particularly since we're doing Kerberos
binds), so right now we're looking at either Postfix or staying with
sendmail (which is supposed to have persistant LDAP connections soon) for
those systems. I'd like to consider qmail for those systems too, but it
doesn't support LDAP natively and I'm extremely nervous about the idea of
running a production mail system long-term on top of third-party patches.
(And yeah, before anyone asks, having changes in the LDAP directory be
immediately reflected in changes in the user mail forwarding is a
requirement so I can't just dump LDAP into something fastforward can use.)
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
On Sat, 22 Jan 2000, Michael Boman wrote:
> Can any of this qmail-queue wrappers be done so the queue is stored on a
> Network (shared) drive, so each server in a cluster of servers can take
> any of the messages is the queue and send it?
>
> Please advice
> Michael Boman
No, because qmail-queue is NOT the program that maintains the queue.
qmail-send keeps the current state of the queue in memory with the actual
contents residing on disk. qmail-queue simply inserts the message into
the queue and tells qmail-send that it just added a message to the queue.
Nothing more.
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 10:29:31AM +0100, J.M. Roth wrote:
> thanks, great!
> how can I check with f.e. telnet if the APOP authentication is working?
You must manually (preferable through a cmd line program) do the MD5 checksum
computation as RFC1939 <http://rfc1939.x42.com/> states on page 15.
Commandline example:
perl -MDigest::MD5(md5_hex) -le 'print
md5_hex(q(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>tanstaaf))'
/magnus
--
http://x42.com/
ok thanks wow
what i was in fact wondering about
does it run on the same port than pop3 (110) ?
does the normal POP3 authentication still work or will only the APOP thing
work
after I created a user with the -a flag
how do I recognize in fact (from the .vpasswd file or similar) which user
has APOP enabled?
many thanks!!
-- jmr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Magnus Bodin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "J.M. Roth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Juan E Suris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "VCHKPW
LIST" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2000 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: APOP
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 10:29:31AM +0100, J.M. Roth wrote:
> > thanks, great!
> > how can I check with f.e. telnet if the APOP authentication is working?
>
> You must manually (preferable through a cmd line program) do the MD5
checksum
> computation as RFC1939 <http://rfc1939.x42.com/> states on page 15.
>
> Commandline example:
>
> perl -MDigest::MD5(md5_hex) -le 'print
md5_hex(q(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>tanstaaf))'
>
>
> /magnus
>
> --
> http://x42.com/
>
On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 05:55:26PM +0100, J.M. Roth iip" wrote:
> ok thanks wow
>
> what i was in fact wondering about
> does it run on the same port than pop3 (110) ?
yes.
> does the normal POP3 authentication still work or will only the APOP thing
> work after I created a user with the -a flag
> how do I recognize in fact (from the .vpasswd file or similar) which user
> has APOP enabled?
I pass on this question. It seems however that vpopmail's function pw_comp supports
for a "type" which will allow user/pass and APOP to live together or
be exclusively used. But unfortunately vadduser doesn't let you to set this type
to the values 0, 1 or 2 so I don't really understand how this is supposed to
be managed. Via qmailadmin?
Snippet from vpopmail.c: (3.4.11j)
/* Type can be: 0 -- try both APOP and user/passwd
1 -- user/passwd only
2 -- only do an APOP check
If only APOP or PASSWD auth is compiled in (ie, not both), then the
type field is ignored.
*/
/magnus
--
http://x42.com/
SUBSCRIBE
Thanks,
RAVI.V.R
Hi folks,
I would like to know where can I find documentation on how to access a
qmail user Mailbox (Read and send mail) from any browser (Netscape,
Internet explorer, etc.) when they travel outside our country .
I'm also looking for information that allow me to access ezmlm lists from
a browser too.
Juan Navas
Nodo Nicarao
Managua, Nicaragua
www.inter7.com/sqwebmail
-- jmr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Director tecnico del Nodo Nicarao -- Juan Navas"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2000 6:40 PM
Subject: Web Mail Access
> Hi folks,
>
> I would like to know where can I find documentation on how to access a
> qmail user Mailbox (Read and send mail) from any browser (Netscape,
> Internet explorer, etc.) when they travel outside our country .
>
> I'm also looking for information that allow me to access ezmlm lists from
> a browser too.
>
> Juan Navas
> Nodo Nicarao
> Managua, Nicaragua
>
>
>relaying. What control mechanism are you using? SMTP after POP is pretty
>easy, and I think there's stuff already on the qmail web site implementing
>it.
There is atleast one smtp client from redmond that never does POP before
SMTP if there is something to send prefering to do POP after SMTP :).
Because of that we (large ISP with roaming customers) can not use it.
The right thing is to use SMTP AUTH but the only patch available leaves
much things to improve.
POP before smtp also stinks because you have to recreate an "allowed IP's
list" after every POP connection and this also is performace killer.
Actualy i'll be paid to enhance the SMTP AUTH patch to support more
authentication types so you can expect it next month if time permits.
BTW: Has anybody hacked on SMTH AUTH??
At 19:09 2000-01-22 , Guan Yang wrote:
>listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski wrote:
> > Actualy i'll be paid to enhance the SMTP AUTH patch to support more
> > authentication types so you can expect it next month if time permits.
>
>I thought the SMTP AUTH patch used checkpassword, so you could use any
>checkpassword otherwise supported by qmail-pop3d.
I'm not sure about that. I mean, i'm sure that it uses checkpassword but
i'm not sure it can be used that way because various smtp authentication
uses various greetings messages and handshake. it's not only a matter of
obfuscating password in this way or another. as far as i know check
password accepts user and password and return true or false on verification.
If i'm wrong then it's better for us :)
Kris
At 20:29 2000-01-22 , Sam wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Jan 2000, listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski wrote:
>
> > Actualy i'll be paid to enhance the SMTP AUTH patch to support more
> > authentication types so you can expect it next month if time permits.
>
>I'm curious - what mail client out there is capable of using anything
>besides LOGIN? Is there anything out there that can AUTH itself with
>CRAM-MD5?
f.e. latest Eudora (4.2.)
Also Netscape has switched the auth type i don't remember the name but
between 4.0 and 4.7 there were 2 different types of auth around.
Also Outlook expres suports 2 differenty types i.e. 4.0 don't work with
qmail-smtp-auth patch while 5.0 does.
The Bat works.
I don't know what exact method each app uses but i have tested the all as a
part of my job.
> > BTW: Has anybody hacked on SMTH AUTH??
>
>Yes, but not with Qmail. Hence my interest.
Do you have any code ready? we can icorporate this into existing
qmail-smtp-auth patch to get it to work with all client. Note that Cram-md5
will require us to store passwords in separate format (md5 or clear) not it
DES as usual.
Kris
On Sat, 22 Jan 2000 18:57:10 +0100 , listy-dyskusyjne Krzysztof Dabrowski writes:
>
> >relaying. What control mechanism are you using? SMTP after POP is pretty
> >easy, and I think there's stuff already on the qmail web site implementing
> >it.
>
> There is atleast one smtp client from redmond that never does POP before
> SMTP if there is something to send prefering to do POP after SMTP :).
> Because of that we (large ISP with roaming customers) can not use it.
Actually, we (a large ISP with roaming customers)
do just fine -- we just make it clear when you sign
up that you must POP before sending mail, unless
you are using one of our dial-ups.
> The right thing is to use SMTP AUTH but the only patch available leaves
> much things to improve.
> POP before smtp also stinks because you have to recreate an "allowed IP's
> list" after every POP connection and this also is performace killer.
Not necessarily: I hacked open-smtp to touch a
(per-IP) file whenever someone authed from a roaming
IP. I then placed an extra command in the qmail-smtpd
pipeline that would check the timestamp on this
file, and if it was "young" enough, set RELAYCLIENT.
So far, no performance problems -- and it even works
on clusters of mail relays, if you share the set of
files via NFS.
--
Chris Mikkelson | Setting delivery schedules is easy enough using the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | I Ching, astrology, psychic hotlines, or any of the
| well-known scatomantic and necromantic methodologies.
| Meeting your prophetic deadlines, though, is another
| bowl of entrails. -- Stan Kelly-Bootle
michael writes:
> +OK <2123.948385520@/bin/checkpassword>
Note that qmail-popup presents ``/bin/checkpassword'' as the
domain part of the timestamp in this banner.
> qmail-popup $HOST $CHKPASS $COMMAND Maildir \
So it's likely that $HOST is not set.
--
Tetsu Ushijima
try $HOSTNAME instead of $HOST
the command SET gives you a list of the environment
-- jmr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tetsu Ushijima" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2000 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Help,-ERR this user has no $HOME/Maildir?
> michael writes:
> > +OK <2123.948385520@/bin/checkpassword>
>
> Note that qmail-popup presents ``/bin/checkpassword'' as the
> domain part of the timestamp in this banner.
>
> > qmail-popup $HOST $CHKPASS $COMMAND Maildir \
>
> So it's likely that $HOST is not set.
>
> --
> Tetsu Ushijima
>
I'm sure that this question is sure to be glossed over, because it's about
the "unable to scan $HOME/Maildir" - but this is weird, at least to me.
I have one address (We'll call it "A") that I can pop in and check email
for on the real domain (codon.com), and I can pop in and check email for any
user on virtual domains using vchkpwd. However, other than "A", I cannot
get pop mail for any other user of the principle domain, with the error
message "Unable to scan $Home/Maildir".
I can't find any differences in the setup for the different users. Here's
the line I'm using to start the pop3 daemon...
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" tcpserver 0 pop-3 \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup codon.com /virtuals/mail/bin/vchkpw \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
More info:
-----------
Home dirs:
# grep A /etc/passwd
A:x:500:100:Steve Wolfe:/home/A:/bin/bash
# grep B /etc/passwd
B:x:509:100::/home/B:/bin/bash
Both home directories are correct.
---------
Maildir:
both users have ~/Maildir, ~/Maildir/new, ~/Maildir/current, and
~/Maildir/tmp. All are 0700, and owned by {username}.users
What should I be looking for?
steve
* Steve Wolfe (Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 02:12:04PM -0700)
> both users have ~/Maildir, ~/Maildir/new, ~/Maildir/current, and
> ~/Maildir/tmp. All are 0700, and owned by {username}.users
>
>
> What should I be looking for?
It should be:
# Make a maildir.
ssm@hastur: ssm $/var/qmail/bin/maildirmake Maildir
Check permissions
ssm@hastur: ssm $find Maildir/ -ls
215090 1 drwx------ 5 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/
215099 1 drwx------ 2 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/tmp
215101 1 drwx------ 2 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/new
215102 1 drwx------ 2 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/cur
And it is "cur", not "current".
--
SSM - Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
Trust the Computer, the Computer is your Friend
Hi all....well, I *had* everything working smoothly, but I went and loused it
up and now I'm having some troubles with qmail again. Here's what I get:
alert: cannot start: unable to switch to queue directory.
I've looked through the archives, and I checked the permissions on the queue
directory and they're
drwxr-x--- 11 qmailq qmail
Which seems to be correct....Anyone have any other ideas?
chris
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
My sister, who just turned 18 is looking for work...
she says she wants to be in movies(XXX) What do you think?
http://www.exit69.com/members/cum/mysister.htm
WHAT THE HELL IS THIS? IF YOU HAPPENED TO READ THE NAME OF THE NEWSGROUP,
YOU MIGHT NOTICE IT'S NOT ONE OF YOUR PORN GROUPS!!! DO NOT POST HERE!
I believe I speak for everyone.
----- Original Message -----
From: "bossman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: sunsite.mail.qmail
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2000 2:55 PM
Subject: My sister, who just turned 18 is looking for work...
> My sister, who just turned 18 is looking for work...
> she says she wants to be in movies(XXX) What do you think?
>
> http://www.exit69.com/members/cum/mysister.htm
>
I don't usually chime in, but I agree with Mark. Since this is an email
sotware list, I think that we should teach people like hotmail a lesson
about prudent use of email and accounts.
This might also be a good test of the their email server.
Sorry about my post to your newsgroup. It was meant to be posted in
dk.binaer.erotik. Once again sorry for the inconvience !!!!
Greetings,
Using Russell's suggestion, I am able to defer mail to certain
users using our hacked qmail-getpw...
I'd like to do the same w/ people POP'ing mail. We have a script
which gives the impression of no mail, but that replaces everything
after pop3 on the tcpserver line for when we want to do it for all
users (and seems to run as root?).
The problem is I don't know until after qmail-popup which user
is checking mail. So if I could avoid checkpassword for the
affected users (after reading a control file) and just return
"no mail", that would be great, while the rest I'd send through
checkpassword and on to qmail-pop3d w/o delay.
If that is not possible, I have also played w/ checkpassword so
that it sets an environment variable telling to look or not look
for mail. So a script after checkpassword might work too. I'm
able to get the env var into a script, but telling some users
they have no mail has been elusive.
We have our maildir's owned by mailq and grab our password info
from a database. User directories are located w/ a hash algorithm.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
--
mike b. ---------------------------------------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.sprynet.com/~boyiazis/mikehome.htm
"I propose we leave math to the machines and go play outside." Calvin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Michael N. Boyiazis writes:
> If that is not possible, I have also played w/ checkpassword so
> that it sets an environment variable telling to look or not look
> for mail.
If the user's Maildir is not available, have the checkpassword switch
to a "nomailbox" user whose Maildir is always empty.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
oMail 0.2
---------
A PHP/perl based qmail+vmailmgrd Maildomain Administration Web interface
oMail is a web front end to qmail/vmailmgrd. It can be used by domain
owners to easily administer their mail accounts without bothering the
sysadmin. Working features: manage mailboxes (pop3) and aliases,
change passwords, support for french, englich and german. Planed
features: autoresponder support, single user administration interface,
webmail.
URLs:
Download: ftp://omail.omnis.ch/omail/omail-0.2.tar.gz
Homepage: ftp://omail.omnis.ch/omail/
Changelog: ftp://omail.omnis.ch/omail/omail/ChangeLog
Please note that it is currently Alpha-state software.
There are some screenshots available under
ftp://omail.omnis.ch/omail/screenshots/
Enjoy! Comments are of course welcome!
Olivier
I am trying to set up qmail on the network twilight.daylightfading.org.
I am at the point in the INSTALL files where I am trying to send an email to
myself via qmail-inject. However, this is failing.
When I try
echo to: Mason | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject
the following error lines appear in /var/log/maillog:
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.260998 new msg 198762
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.263002 info msg 198762: bytes 811
from <> qp 3236 uid 517
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.267310 starting delivery 27: msg
198762 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.268783 status: local 1/10 remote
0/20
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.297786 delivery 27: failure:
Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.300358 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.314548 bounce msg 198762 qp 3239
Jan 22 21:53:59 twilight qmail: 948606839.315908 end msg 198762
Qmail then bounces the email to the postmaster. I see it says that there is
no mailbox here by that name, however, that should not be the case, as I am
logged into the user as Mason at the time of mail attempt.
If anyone has any idea of what I have neglected to do, or what I have done
wrong, please let me know.
Eric
