qmail Digest 4 Mar 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 930
Topics (messages 38158 through 38208):
Problems with adresses with hypens
38158 by: Bernat Ginard
38161 by: iv0
SMTP email blocking
38159 by: TAG
38160 by: Petr Novotny
qmail-pop3 spins
38162 by: Uncle George
38163 by: Chris Johnson
38164 by: Uncle George
Re: Qmail List Digest?
38165 by: Fred Lindberg
38205 by: Walt Mankowski
Re: SPAMCONTROL patch
38166 by: Russell Nelson
38181 by: Erwin Hoffmann
38182 by: Chris Johnson
38184 by: Soffen, Matthew
38186 by: Russell Nelson
38200 by: Vincent Schonau
removing a list
38167 by: Dan Barber
38168 by: Chris Johnson
38169 by: Russell Nelson
Maildir imap and vpopmail
38170 by: Derek Smith
38171 by: Paul Schinder
38172 by: iv0
38183 by: Derek Smith
Re: New to Qmail: Questions
38173 by: Vincent Danen
38174 by: Dave Sill
38175 by: Vincent Danen
38177 by: Steve Wolfe
38178 by: Chris Johnson
Re: Unix as it should be (OT)
38176 by: Chris Garrigues
Trailer for every message
38179 by: Jay Moore
More qmail training?
38180 by: Russell Nelson
DNS checks on sending address
38185 by: Jon Rust
help for a newbie
38187 by: Joel Dudley
38189 by: Dave Sill
38202 by: Peter Avalos
Odd mail headers
38188 by: John P. Looney
38190 by: RaTao von J
38192 by: Dave Sill
Re: daemontools
38191 by: vogelke.c17mis.region2.wpafb.af.mil
autorespond
38193 by: Joel Dudley
Re: Encryption and t-shirts
38194 by: Rogerio Brito
More RBL
38195 by: Mark Tippetts
38196 by: Timothy L. Mayo
38199 by: Uwe Ohse
startup script
38197 by: Joel Dudley
38198 by: Steve Wolfe
vpopmail, virtual users and procmail - possible?
38201 by: Peter Bieringer
38208 by: Robert Sander
missing pieces during install
38203 by: MicroSense Computer Works
38204 by: Kai MacTane
Re: can't stop qmail (supervise-scripts)
38206 by: Bruce Guenter
Converting a sendmail rule for anti spamming to Qmail
38207 by: Yusuf Goolamabbas
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
We have a mail server with qmail and vpopmail and all is working right
except that we have an address which is [EMAIL PROTECTED] and another one
which is [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the mails sent to the second address go to
the first. The rest of addresses works right. We have addresses with
hypens, dots and all them work right
What can be the problem?
--
Bernat Ginard Lladó
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kaos.es
Bernat Ginard wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We have a mail server with qmail and vpopmail and all is working right
> except that we have an address which is [EMAIL PROTECTED] and another one
> which is [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the mails sent to the second address go to
> the first. The rest of addresses works right. We have addresses with
> hypens, dots and all them work right
>
> What can be the problem?
>
> --
> Bernat Ginard Lladó
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kaos.es
That's interesting. This is the third report of people having
problem with this. Basicly vpopmail is thinking that abc-def is
an exension of abc. It's easy to tweak the code. Perhaps the
next version of vpopmail should be more clear on the subject
or be configurable to turn it off.
To fix:
Edit vdelivermail.c
Comment out lines 157 to 165 and replace with a single line:
pw_data = vauth_getpw(user, host);
Ken Jones
Hi,
Is there a way of stopping my users from sending to a particular
email???
Thanks ALL
Tonino
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 3 Mar 00, at 14:37, TAG wrote:
> Is there a way of stopping my users from sending to a particular
> email???
You mean particular (outside) address [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Simply put
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:alias-forbidden
in virtualdomains,
|bouncesaying "Don't send anything to that address!"
in ~alias/.qmail-forbidden-default and HUP qmail-send to reread
virtualdomains file.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBOL+jWFMwP8g7qbw/EQKoawCgvuoOWzLwcx32N6tBnIH9anEYeM0An0AM
23V1a8U/yBYwoIEAl/dV0tJA
=OJZg
-----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]
using the mbox2maildir routines, I converted myself. During that process I
ran outta disk space - oh well.
turned off the machine, I went to sleep.
This morning I turned on the machine. Saw that there were some 30000 msgs
of about 144megs of data in my Maildir.
Told netscape ( on a remote unix machine ) to "Get Mesg", which logged into
my account on the qmail/server machine & began processing . Some 45 mins
later( on a 486/66mhz ) It appears that the qmail-pop3 daemon gave up ( ie
that process disappeared ). Now in its place there are 4 qmail-pop3d
daemons spinning in its stead.
The remote mail-reader ( appears to have done nothing ie it didn't read
that ~30000 msgs ), but it regained control back ( ie "get mesg" button is
no longer grey'ed out )
The daemon is on a Redhat(6.1)/linux/i386 box.
gat
Btw: I suppose no-one can tell me why /var/qmail/sendmail <gat@localhost>
fails with qmail.
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 08:45:36AM -0500, Uncle George wrote:
> using the mbox2maildir routines, I converted myself. During that process I
> ran outta disk space - oh well.
> turned off the machine, I went to sleep.
> This morning I turned on the machine. Saw that there were some 30000 msgs
> of about 144megs of data in my Maildir.
> Told netscape ( on a remote unix machine ) to "Get Mesg", which logged into
> my account on the qmail/server machine & began processing . Some 45 mins
> later( on a 486/66mhz ) It appears that the qmail-pop3 daemon gave up ( ie
> that process disappeared ). Now in its place there are 4 qmail-pop3d
> daemons spinning in its stead.
What does "spinning its stead" mean? Is that computer lingo? What makes you
think that those four instances of qmail-pop3d are replacements for the
original one? What makes you think the original one "gave up"?
> The remote mail-reader ( appears to have done nothing ie it didn't read
> that ~30000 msgs ), but it regained control back ( ie "get mesg" button is
> no longer grey'ed out )
This is incomprehensible.
> Btw: I suppose no-one can tell me why /var/qmail/sendmail <gat@localhost>
> fails with qmail.
What did you expect it to do? How is is failing? What *is* /var/qmail/sendmail?
It doesn't exist in a standard qmail installation.
Chris
It means that the ~44min processing done by one qmail-pop3d (stopped/defunct), and
now appear 4 qmail-pop3d spinning ( where the longest running has accumulated ~36
minutes at this moment in time )
Chris Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 08:45:36AM -0500, Uncle George wrote:
> > using the mbox2maildir routines, I converted myself. During that process I
> > ran outta disk space - oh well.
> > turned off the machine, I went to sleep.
> > This morning I turned on the machine. Saw that there were some 30000 msgs
> > of about 144megs of data in my Maildir.
> > Told netscape ( on a remote unix machine ) to "Get Mesg", which logged into
> > my account on the qmail/server machine & began processing . Some 45 mins
> > later( on a 486/66mhz ) It appears that the qmail-pop3 daemon gave up ( ie
> > that process disappeared ). Now in its place there are 4 qmail-pop3d
> > daemons spinning in its stead.
>
> What does "spinning its stead" mean? Is that computer lingo? What makes you
> think that those four instances of qmail-pop3d are replacements for the
> original one? What makes you think the original one "gave up"?
>
> > The remote mail-reader ( appears to have done nothing ie it didn't read
> > that ~30000 msgs ), but it regained control back ( ie "get mesg" button is
> > no longer grey'ed out )
>
> This is incomprehensible.
>
> > Btw: I suppose no-one can tell me why /var/qmail/sendmail <gat@localhost>
> > fails with qmail.
>
> What did you expect it to do? How is is failing? What *is* /var/qmail/sendmail?
> It doesn't exist in a standard qmail installation.
>
> Chris
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 23:29:42 -0500, Walt Mankowski wrote:
>Does this list have a digest? I've tried sending a blank message to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED], but I didn't get a reply.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - see also
http://id.wustl.edu/cgi-ez/ezmlm-cgi/1#b
it's just an ezmlm sublist of the main list.
-Sincerely, Fred
(Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 08:22:07AM -0600, Fred Lindberg wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 23:29:42 -0500, Walt Mankowski wrote:
>
> >Does this list have a digest? I've tried sending a blank message to
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED], but I didn't get a reply.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - see also
> http://id.wustl.edu/cgi-ez/ezmlm-cgi/1#b
>
> it's just an ezmlm sublist of the main list.
Thanks, I couldn't find a link to that anywhere.
Walt
Erwin Hoffmann writes:
> Hi,
>
> the latast version of the SPAMCONTROL patch can be found here:
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Erwin_Hoffmann/
quoting from that file's README.spamcontrol file:
"Since QMAIL by contruction is an OPEN RELAY, some vulnerability may be
experienced not in particular to the QMAIL system itself (which can
stand a heavy load), but for other MTAs which are flooded by
SPAM E-Mail. "
You're kidding, right? qmail is by construction an open relay?? And,
the reason not to be an open relay is because you'll be blocked
because of the spam that (eventually) comes through your site. Spam
is itself not a serious load on anybody's MTA -- not even sendmail.
--
-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.
Hi Russell,
I wrote in the README.spamcontrol:
>"Since QMAIL by contruction is an OPEN RELAY, some vulnerability may be
>experienced not in particular to the QMAIL system itself (which can
>stand a heavy load), but for other MTAs which are flooded by
>SPAM E-Mail. "
>
>You're kidding, right?
==> Am I?
qmail is by construction an open relay??
==> See RFC 2505.
And the reason not to be an open relay is because you'll be blocked
because of the spam that (eventually) comes through your site.
==> Sorry, dont get the point.
Spam is itself not a serious load on anybody's MTA -- not even sendmail.
==> Looking in the Log-files tells me something different.
Pls. have a look into my improved README. I tried to be as specific as
possible. If I am mistaken, pls. correct me.
We have a lot of discussion about that subject in the QMAIL mailinglist
without bringing it to the point.
SPAM and the abuse of SMTP MTAs is a severe problem, because the QMAIL FAQ
is not specific enough at that item. From SYSADMINs who use QMAIL (I am
responsible for an environment with 5000 local users) I know, that making
QMAIL SPAM-proof is not that easy.
I dont know, whether employing TCPSERVER and calling ORBs or others is the
perfect solution. I am always suspicious about other people's "thats the
right way to do".
For the next version of QMAIL it would be a preferred solution to include
the canonical SPAM filters nativeley into QMAIL-SMTPD. The information can
be grepped via the TCPSERVER environment at run-time.
Sincerly,
eh.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| fff hh Dr. Erwin Hoffmann |
| ff hh |
| ff eee hhhh ccc ooo mm mm mm Wiener Weg 8 |
| fff ee ee hh hh cc oo oo mmm mm mm 50858 Koeln |
| ff ee eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm |
| ff eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm Tel 0221 484 4923 |
| ff eeee hh hh ccc ooo mm mm mm Fax 0221 484 4924 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 06:24:39PM +0100, Erwin Hoffmann wrote:
> qmail is by construction an open relay??
> ==> See RFC 2505.
If you install qmail as per the included documentation, you won't be running an
open relay. How will looking at RFC 2505 convince anyone otherwise?
> For the next version of QMAIL it would be a preferred solution to include the
> canonical SPAM filters nativeley into QMAIL-SMTPD. The information can be
> grepped via the TCPSERVER environment at run-time.
I don't really understand this, but don't count on qmail2 having a bunch of
spam filtering fluff built in.
Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erwin Hoffmann [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2000 12:25 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Russell Nelson
> Subject: Re: SPAMCONTROL patch
>
> Hi Russell,
>
> I wrote in the README.spamcontrol:
>
> >"Since QMAIL by contruction is an OPEN RELAY, some vulnerability may be
> >experienced not in particular to the QMAIL system itself (which can
> >stand a heavy load), but for other MTAs which are flooded by
> >SPAM E-Mail. "
> >
> >You're kidding, right?
> ==> Am I?
> qmail is by construction an open relay??
>
URL to the RFC 2505: ftp://ftp.opus1.com/rfc/rfc2505.txt
> ==> See RFC 2505.
>
And ? I just looked at it. qmail (when configured correctly) does
1 through 5 (the musts and must nots).
It does 6a and 6b (providing the person sending the
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> address has permission to relay).
qmail does 7a, 7b, It does 8 when you use tcpserver...
> And the reason not to be an open relay is because you'll be blocked
> because of the spam that (eventually) comes through your site.
> ==> Sorry, dont get the point.
> Spam is itself not a serious load on anybody's MTA -- not even sendmail.
> ==> Looking in the Log-files tells me something different.
>
Are you talking Open Relay or SPAM ? They are related but not the
same. By default, qmail is NOT an open relay. If you misconfigure it (by
deleting the /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts file, for example) then all bets
are off.
> Pls. have a look into my improved README. I tried to be as specific as
> possible. If I am mistaken, pls. correct me.
>
> We have a lot of discussion about that subject in the QMAIL mailinglist
> without bringing it to the point.
>
> SPAM and the abuse of SMTP MTAs is a severe problem, because the QMAIL FAQ
> is not specific enough at that item. From SYSADMINs who use QMAIL (I am
> responsible for an environment with 5000 local users) I know, that making
> QMAIL SPAM-proof is not that easy.
>
> I dont know, whether employing TCPSERVER and calling ORBs or others is the
> perfect solution. I am always suspicious about other people's "thats the
> right way to do".
>
There is no "right" solution, only a solution that's "right" for the
person who is implementing it.
> For the next version of QMAIL it would be a preferred solution to include
> the canonical SPAM filters nativeley into QMAIL-SMTPD. The information can
> be grepped via the TCPSERVER environment at run-time.
>
I somehow doubt that it is going to happen. Anti-SPAM is NOT a part of mail
transport, there for I really doubt that DAB would even consider adding it
to Qmail 2.x
Matt Soffen
Web Intranet Developer
http://www.iso-ne.com/
==============================================
Boss - "My boss says we need some eunuch programmers."
Dilbert - "I think he means UNIX and I already know UNIX."
Boss - "Well, if the company nurse comes by, tell her I said
never mind."
- Dilbert -
==============================================
Erwin Hoffmann writes:
> >You're kidding, right?
> ==> Am I?
Apparently.
> qmail is by construction an open relay??
> ==> See RFC 2505.
qmail, when installed according to the instructions, is not an open
relay. Of the recommendations in RFC2505, qmail meets all but 8, 9,
10. By "qmail", I mean qmail and any associated programs supplied by
Dan Bernstein.
> And the reason not to be an open relay is because you'll be blocked
> because of the spam that (eventually) comes through your site.
> ==> Sorry, dont get the point.
Yes, spam can load an open relay. However, nobody with any sense has
an open relay. Why? Because you WILL be reported to ORBS and RSS,
and you WILL be blocked. It only takes one person to report the spam.
> Spam is itself not a serious load on anybody's MTA -- not even sendmail.
> ==> Looking in the Log-files tells me something different.
I've never seen a single system for which spam is a serious percentage
of the traffic. Perhaps there are peaks from time to time, but qmail
handles peaks very well.
> SPAM and the abuse of SMTP MTAs is a severe problem, because the QMAIL FAQ
> is not specific enough at that item. From SYSADMINs who use QMAIL (I am
> responsible for an environment with 5000 local users) I know, that making
> QMAIL SPAM-proof is not that easy.
Making *any* email system spam-proof is impossible. The best you can
do is cut down on the amount of spam by filtering on the source.
qmail has the tools required to do that (tcpserver and rblsmtpd).
It's simply not possible to eliminate spam in the long term by
filtering on any characteristics of the mail itself. I've been
getting spammed ever since spam first existed. Recently even *I* have
been fooled for a moment into thinking that the spam was a legitimate
piece of email. Over time, all spam will come to be like that. The
more you filter on content, the faster that time will come.
Ignore economics at your peril.
--
-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.
At 06:24 PM 3/3/00 +0100, Erwin Hoffmann wrote:
>I wrote in the README.spamcontrol:
>
>>"Since QMAIL by contruction is an OPEN RELAY, some vulnerability may be
>>experienced not in particular to the QMAIL system itself (which can
>>stand a heavy load), but for other MTAs which are flooded by
>>SPAM E-Mail. "
At <URL:http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Erwin_Hoffmann/spam.htm>,
you write:
Even if you use (e.g. QMAIL as) a restricted SMTP relay SPAMMERS may
manipulate either the SENDER (MAIL FROM:) or the RECIPIENT (RCPT TO:)
address of E-Mails, making your MTA believe
1) that this E-Mail is originated by itself,
2) accepting it and send the SPAM E-Mail to a third party (target) MTA,
which in turn sees this E-Mail to originate from your MTA/Domain,
3) turning your MTA effectively into a host for SPAM E-Mails.
Now, I haven't read (all of) the source to qmail - but for my (pretty
straightforward) qmail/rblsmtpd installation, this is simply *not* true.
AFAIK, qmail doesn't *care* about SENDER when deciding wether or not to
relay:
[vinces@xs3 vinces]$ telnet my.example.com 25
Trying 192.168.1.1...
Connected to my.example.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 my.example.com qmail-1.03 NO UCE NO UNSOLICITED EMAIL ESMTP
ehlo xs3.xs4all.nl
250-my.example.com qmail-1.03 NO UCE NO UNSOLICITED EMAIL
250-PIPELINING
250 8BITMIME
MAIL FROM: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 ok
RCPT TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
quit
221 amstel.schonau.net qmail-1.03 NO UCE NO UNSOLICITED EMAIL
Connection closed by foreign host.
[vinces@xs3 vinces]$
xs3 is xs3.xs4all.nl, a shell account with my ISP. my.example.com is my
mailserver, and yes, example.com is in rcpthosts (obscured to protect the
innocent - me; otherwise this is a verbatim copy of the session).
./control/badmailfrom doesn't exist on my system.
Spammers only comply with ./control/smtpgreeting when forced to do so by
rblsmtpd, by the way.
>For the next version of QMAIL it would be a preferred solution to include
>the canonical SPAM filters nativeley into QMAIL-SMTPD. The information
can
>be grepped via the TCPSERVER environment at run-time.
Ugh. I'm sure many people disagree (see also: 'Unix as it should be' ;-)
BTW, some of the suggestions in RFC 2505 are just plain worthless; items
like 7a and 7b for example will only work for as long as Rule #3 (Spammers
are stupid) applies. I'm seeing more and more spam with legitimate from
addresses; some spammers are less stupid than others, apparently. Also, RFC
2505 doesn't *require* a 4xx response; it just sais it's more appropriate
for many situations.
The #5.7.1 code is defined by RFC 1893, by the way, which says "it's only
useful as a permanent error". Go figure.
I still can't figure out how you can administer email for 5000 users and
claim that email is an open relay by construction.
Can we get back to the T-shirt thread now?
Vince.
Hi,
I'm new to Qmail (bet you get that alot). Just wondering if
there is a command to remove a list, or if it is as simple as
removing the directory?
thanks,
Dan B
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 09:30:06AM -0500, Dan Barber wrote:
> I'm new to Qmail (bet you get that alot). Just wondering if
> there is a command to remove a list, or if it is as simple as
> removing the directory?
You mean an ezmlm list? Remove the directory and the associated .qmail-* files.
Chris
Dan Barber writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to Qmail (bet you get that alot). Just wondering if
> there is a command to remove a list, or if it is as simple as
> removing the directory?
You mean an ezmlm list? Remove the directory and the associated
.qmail files.
--
-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.
Hi,
I want to have imapd use Maildir format maildrops and use vchpw also.
Does anyone do this, are there patches available for imap-maildir (or
another imap server) or is there another method of implementing this?
Thanks in advance,
Cheers,
Del.
At 2:57 PM +0000 3/3/00, Derek Smith wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I want to have imapd use Maildir format maildrops and use vchpw also.
>
>Does anyone do this, are there patches available for imap-maildir (or
>another imap server) or is there another method of implementing this?
Sounds like you should check out: <http://www.inter7.com/courierimap/>
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Cheers,
>
>Del.
--
--
Paul J. Schinder
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 693
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Derek Smith wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I want to have imapd use Maildir format maildrops and use vchpw also.
>
> Does anyone do this, are there patches available for imap-maildir (or
> another imap server) or is there another method of implementing this?
You can try http:/www.inter7.com/courier-imap. Someone sent me
a modified wu-imap server. Let me know if you want to try the
wu-imap
Ken Jones
Ken,
Does this work with Netscape? I was under the impression that Netscape has
a broken IMAP implementation.
If this is the case then what alternatives are out there, and what do other
people on the group use?
Regards,
Derek.
iv0 wrote:
> Derek Smith wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to have imapd use Maildir format maildrops and use vchpw also.
> >
> > Does anyone do this, are there patches available for imap-maildir (or
> > another imap server) or is there another method of implementing this?
>
> You can try http:/www.inter7.com/courier-imap. Someone sent me
> a modified wu-imap server. Let me know if you want to try the
> wu-imap
>
> Ken Jones
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Uwe Ohse wrote:
> > SMTP daemon is listening to port 1025. My old SMTP server forward
> > *@bbs.freezer-burn.org to bbs.freezer-burn.org:1025 (basically the same
> > as localhost:1025). Is there a way to do this with Qmail? Can I do a
>
> See the qmail-remote manual page:
> /var/qmail/control/smtproutes
> bbs.freezer-burn.org:bbs.freezer-burn.org:1025
Awesome, thank you!!
> > the messages he writes on a per-user basis? Ie. I have a robot that sends
> > mail to a mailing list and I don't want mail going back to it because
> > it'll just resend it to the list and I've got a vicious circle on my
> > hands. All other users I would want to have their messages echoed back to
> > them. Is this possible somehow as well?
>
> don't subscribe the robot to the mailing list.
But that means I have to leave the list open for anybody to send to,
right? It can't be a members-only list then? I'd prefer not to do that,
but if I don't have a choice then I don't have a choice. Or perhaps
there's an accept/deny rule for unsubscribed people attempting to send
mail to the list (I don't want other robots/spammers able to send mail to
the list, only legitimate subscribers), so I can deny all except for one
specific email address (the robot) and allow all members... is something
like this possible?
Thank you for your help!
--
OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net
Freezer Burn BBS: telnet://bbs.freezer-burn.org . ICQ: 54924721
Webmaster for the Linux Portal Site Freezer Burn: http://www.freezer-burn.org
Vincent Danen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > the messages he writes on a per-user basis? Ie. I have a robot that sends
>> > mail to a mailing list and I don't want mail going back to it because
>> > it'll just resend it to the list and I've got a vicious circle on my
>> > hands. All other users I would want to have their messages echoed back to
>> > them. Is this possible somehow as well?
Subscribe the robot to the list with an address that doesn't cycle
back to the list. Set the envelope return path on the robot's
submissions to this address. E.g.:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] resends submissions to the list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to either a different mailbox or is
thrown away
Messages from "robot" to the list have return path of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Messages from the list to robot go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Dave
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Dave Sill wrote:
> Vincent Danen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > the messages he writes on a per-user basis? Ie. I have a robot that sends
> >> > mail to a mailing list and I don't want mail going back to it because
> >> > it'll just resend it to the list and I've got a vicious circle on my
> >> > hands. All other users I would want to have their messages echoed back to
> >> > them. Is this possible somehow as well?
>
> Subscribe the robot to the list with an address that doesn't cycle
> back to the list. Set the envelope return path on the robot's
> submissions to this address. E.g.:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] resends submissions to the list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to either a different mailbox or is
> thrown away
>
> Messages from "robot" to the list have return path of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Messages from the list to robot go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm... I never thought about that... That would definately work. Thank
you for the idea!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net
Freezer Burn BBS: telnet://bbs.freezer-burn.org . ICQ: 54924721
Webmaster for the Linux Portal Site Freezer Burn: http://www.freezer-burn.org
> Subscribe the robot to the list with an address that doesn't cycle
> back to the list. Set the envelope return path on the robot's
> submissions to this address. E.g.:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] resends submissions to the list
Even better, it pipes it to a program which will grep the message for
references to itself, run that through Eliza, and send it back to the list.
: )
steve
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 08:47:52AM -0700, Vincent Danen wrote:
> But that means I have to leave the list open for anybody to send to,
> right? It can't be a members-only list then? I'd prefer not to do that,
> but if I don't have a choice then I don't have a choice. Or perhaps
> there's an accept/deny rule for unsubscribed people attempting to send
> mail to the list (I don't want other robots/spammers able to send mail to
> the list, only legitimate subscribers), so I can deny all except for one
> specific email address (the robot) and allow all members... is something
> like this possible?
There have been a number of suggestions, but I think the easiest and most
correct way of doing this is to subscribe the robot's e-mail address to
dir/allow. Look at the -u option in the ezmlm-make man page.
This may require ezmlm-idx; I don't know because I don't have the vanilla ezmlm
installed.
Chris
> From: Jon Rust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:36:56 -0800
>
> Heh, I have that book. I picked it up one day after struggling to get
> ClearCase running on HPUX 8 (or was it 9?) for about 2 weeks. Not
> good for the UNIX newbie. It will really unnecessarily skew your
> opinion against the OS. So many of the UNIX "features" they listed
> were out of date, even back then (1994). It took me several years to
> get over some of the bias I picked up in that book. :-)
>
> And they never offered a solution for all of UNIX's short-comings. If
> a better OS can be made, why hadn't it? More of a "Whiner's Handbook"
> than anything, but still pretty funny in some parts. Hmm... I think
> I'll try to find it tonight...
Well, it does require some context. First off, although the book was
published in 1994, most of the stuff in it was about 5 years old even then.
As far as why a better OS hadn't been made? Well, that's also part of the
context. It's kinda a VHS beats Betamax or Microsoft beat Apple kind of
thing. The *reason* most of us were griping about Unix so much is because we
had been using better OSes and had to switch to Unix because our favorite OSes
lost market share. I was a Lisp Machine administrator and before that worked
for Symbolics. The Symbolics LispM was a great OS sold by a company that had
no concept of marketing whatsoever. We used to talk about how the system was
ten years ahead of the rest of the industry. Well, 15 years later, there are
still things that it did better than anything out there. It's a terrible
shame that it didn't get the opportunity to evolve into the era of the world
wide web.
See some of my entries in the book for more opinions on this topic (although
they are 11 years ago now).
And yes, there is a lot of whining in the book.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues virCIO
http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ http://www.virCIO.Com
+1 512 432 4046 +1 512 374 0500
4314 Avenue C
O- Austin, TX 78751-3709
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
I want to add a trailer to all outgoing list messages for every list
created.
I used ezmlm-make - t to create a list, however I never see the
trailer from DIR/text/trailer appended to any of the lists messages.
Any Ideas?
Thanx,
Jay
I'm off to Dallas this week to do some private qmail training, then
off to Turkey to do some qmail consulting. Do you want me to set up a
qmail training session in your city? Send me nominations.
--
-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.
What are the recommended ways of doing a DNS check on the sending
domain before accepting mail?
I see only 1 patch listed at qmail.org, and it wasn't well received
(according to my search through the archives). Comments?
jon
|
I just installed qmail and attempted to set up
pop3d. I start qmail and get the following erroe:
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already
in use
dunno why it says this.machine is on a LAN with a
public IP and one NIC. I can telnet into the POP at port 110 so it is
running but I dont like error messages. Thanks.
- Joel
|
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Dudley) wrote:
>I just installed qmail and attempted to set up pop3d. I start qmail
>and get the following erroe:
>
>tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already in use
>
>dunno why it says this.machine is on a LAN with a public IP and one
>NIC. I can telnet into the POP at port 110 so it is running but I
>dont like error messages. Thanks.
You ran tcpserver on the pop3 port while it (or inetd) was already
running and listening to that port.
-Dave
|
Joel.
This error means that when you ran tcpserver, something else was already
listening on port 110. `netstat -an | grep LISTEN` to see which ports are being
listened on. Make sure you remove anything in inetd.conf, then -HUP
inetd.
Pete
Avalos
TheShell Administrator
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS/ED/B
d-(+) s:+> a-- C++$ UBLO++++$ P+ L++++ E- W+ N+ o? K? w(++) !O M- V- PS+ PE++
Y+ PGP++ t+@ 5 X- R- tv+ b++ DI- D-- G e>+++ h-- r++ y++
------END GEEK
CODE BLOCK------
I just installed qmail and attempted to set up
pop3d. I start qmail and get the following erroe:
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already
in use
dunno why it says this.machine is on a LAN with a
public IP and one NIC. I can telnet into the POP at port 110 so it is
running but I dont like error messages. Thanks.
- Joel
|
I'm setting up a webmail system, with qmail/courier IMAP at the backend.
One of my users today setup mail so his from: lines had more detail. It
should look like:
From: User O'Surname <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Instead, it's;
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?User=D3_Sur?=
name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What can cause header's to be wierdly encoded like that ? It's only
cosmetic; mails still get around, but some mail clients break up the name
completely (so it would be from [EMAIL PROTECTED], and to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
plus a load of parts of the "full name", with "@domain.com" added to it.
Received: from gate.fv.digiserve.ie (HELO digiserve.ie) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by gpo.fv.digiserve.ie with SMTP; 3 Mar 2000 18:33:21 -0000
Received: (from nobody@localhost)
by digiserve.ie (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA26466
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Mar 2000 18:33:21 GMT
X-Authentication-Warning: oracle1.fv.digiserve.ie: nobody set sender to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 18:33:21 +0000
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?User_=D3_Sur?=
name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: mail problems
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.0-cvs
Kate
--
"The fool must be beaten with a stick, for an intelligent person
the merest hint is sufficient" -- Zen Master Greg
Hi,
these headers are being added by you MUA. When some of the headers contain
8-bit caracters the MUA is responsible (RFC rule - mail headers are 7-bit
only) for MIME encoding them.
Your webmail client should encode/decode them when necessary.
the format is easy =?CODE-PAGE?ENCODING-TYPE?STRING?=
.....................^^^^^^^^^.^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^^^^^^..
There's a RFC for this, look it up ;)
In other words: this has nothing to do with qmail/courier
regards,
ratao
On 03-Mar-2000 John P. Looney wrote:
> I'm setting up a webmail system, with qmail/courier IMAP at the backend.
>
> One of my users today setup mail so his from: lines had more detail. It
> should look like:
>
> From: User O'Surname <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Instead, it's;
>
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?User=D3_Sur?=
> name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> What can cause header's to be wierdly encoded like that ? It's only
> cosmetic; mails still get around, but some mail clients break up the name
> completely (so it would be from [EMAIL PROTECTED], and to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> plus a load of parts of the "full name", with "@domain.com" added to it.
>
> Received: from gate.fv.digiserve.ie (HELO digiserve.ie) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> by gpo.fv.digiserve.ie with SMTP; 3 Mar 2000 18:33:21 -0000
> Received: (from nobody@localhost)
> by digiserve.ie (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA26466
> for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Mar 2000 18:33:21 GMT
> X-Authentication-Warning: oracle1.fv.digiserve.ie: nobody set sender to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 18:33:21 +0000
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?User_=D3_Sur?=
> name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: mail problems
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.0-cvs
>
> Kate
>
>
> --
> "The fool must be beaten with a stick, for an intelligent person
> the merest hint is sufficient" -- Zen Master Greg
----------------------------------
E-Mail: RaTao von J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 03-Mar-2000
Time: 19:22:30
----------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm setting up a webmail system, with qmail/courier IMAP at the backend.
>
> One of my users today setup mail so his from: lines had more detail. It
>should look like:
>
> From: User O'Surname <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Instead, it's;
>
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?User=D3_Sur?=
> name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> What can cause header's to be wierdly encoded like that ?
Probably the MUA (webmail?) being extra careful 'cause of the single
quote character.
User O'Surname should try configuring it to use:
"User O'Surname" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (User O'Surname)
-Dave
>> On Thu, 02 Mar 2000 16:33:11 -0500,
>> clifford thurber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
C> I am installing the daemontools package and reading the docs. I was
C> wondering if anyone is using this to monitor other services besides
C> qmail and if so anyone had any recomendations on configurations.
I'm using daemontools + tcpserver to handle FTP services. We use the
FreeBSD version of "ftpd" ported to Solaris, with all syslog()
information going to stdout and then being handled by a modified version
of cyclog. A modified version of the startup script from "Life with
qmail" is used to start and stop the server.
As soon as I'm happy with the script and logging setup, I'll do the same
for telnet, pop, etc. and then shoot inetd in the head.
--
Karl Vogel
ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What was the best thing before sliced bread? --George Carlin
|
How do I install autorespond?? When I unpack
the tarball all I get is autorespond.c and a few other files.
- Joel
|
On Mar 02 2000, Greg Owen wrote:
> The only problem I see with this is that using all three icons
> means increased colors per shirt, which usually costs more.
The problem I see with some suggestions is that the shirt will
end up looking like a newspaper... :-)
[]s, Roger...
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/
Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hey,
I've been distracted from developing a qmail test-bed with the following
Sendmail problem, and I'm concerned about the same problem in qmail.
We're using the popauth hack (for roaming users) and the DUL-RBL. This
works great, unless a popauth-OK'ed address is in the DUL. The DUL is
checked first. Since checks end with a reject on matches to the rbl, the OK
in popauth.db is never seen, and all outgoing mail from the user bounces,
even though they've authenticated via POP.
I understand that things flow in the opposite direction here, but it seems
like the problem remains-- at least according to my rudimentary knowledge of
qmail. First, tcpserver checks tcp.smtp.cdb and passes the connection with
x.x.x.x:allow,RELAYCLIENT="". Later in the pipe we encounter instances of
rblsmtpd. $RBLSMTPD is not set, so a lookup is done, and matched against
the DUL, and the mail is rejected. rblsmtpd doesn't care about the status
of $RELAYCLIENT, and the message never reaches qmail-smtpd, because the pipe
has already closed.
If I were using a simple /etc/tcp.smtp file, I'd gather the answer would be
to modify lines to read x.x.x.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",RBLSMTPD="". Perhaps
this is a solution for customers using our dial-ups. But I'm concerned with
roaming users. I'm using Vpopmail with --enable-roaming-users, and this
adds its own lines to the cdb.
Would I need to modify the Vpopmail source to add the RBLSMTPD=""
assignment? Am I imagining bogymen and there's no problem? Or is there a
problem, but with a simple solution I've missed?
Thanks,
Mark Tippetts
This is a problem as you specified it. You need to modify vpopmail to add
the RBLSMTPD="" entry and things will work as you want them to.
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Mark Tippetts wrote:
> Hey,
>
>
> I've been distracted from developing a qmail test-bed with the following
> Sendmail problem, and I'm concerned about the same problem in qmail.
>
> We're using the popauth hack (for roaming users) and the DUL-RBL. This
> works great, unless a popauth-OK'ed address is in the DUL. The DUL is
> checked first. Since checks end with a reject on matches to the rbl, the OK
> in popauth.db is never seen, and all outgoing mail from the user bounces,
> even though they've authenticated via POP.
>
> I understand that things flow in the opposite direction here, but it seems
> like the problem remains-- at least according to my rudimentary knowledge of
> qmail. First, tcpserver checks tcp.smtp.cdb and passes the connection with
> x.x.x.x:allow,RELAYCLIENT="". Later in the pipe we encounter instances of
> rblsmtpd. $RBLSMTPD is not set, so a lookup is done, and matched against
> the DUL, and the mail is rejected. rblsmtpd doesn't care about the status
> of $RELAYCLIENT, and the message never reaches qmail-smtpd, because the pipe
> has already closed.
>
> If I were using a simple /etc/tcp.smtp file, I'd gather the answer would be
> to modify lines to read x.x.x.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",RBLSMTPD="". Perhaps
> this is a solution for customers using our dial-ups. But I'm concerned with
> roaming users. I'm using Vpopmail with --enable-roaming-users, and this
> adds its own lines to the cdb.
>
> Would I need to modify the Vpopmail source to add the RBLSMTPD=""
> assignment? Am I imagining bogymen and there's no problem? Or is there a
> problem, but with a simple solution I've missed?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Tippetts
>
---------------------------------
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 Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 04:42:02PM -0500, Mark Tippetts wrote:
> Would I need to modify the Vpopmail source to add the RBLSMTPD=""
> assignment? Am I imagining bogymen and there's no problem? Or is there a
> problem, but with a simple solution I've missed?
/* possibly-skip-rblsmtpd.c */
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int i=atoi(argv[1]);
argv++;
if (getenv("RELAYCLIENT")) while (i) { argv++; i--; }
argv++;
execv(argv[0],argv);
_exit(1);
}
insert it into the (rbl)smtpd call:
# path number-of-arguments-to-skip
/hacks/possibly-skip-rblsmtpd 3 \
/var/qmail/bin/rblsmtpd -r rbl.maps.vix.com \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
Regards, Uwe (not using any RBL)
|
Hello all,
Can someone send me their
working qmail startup script that uses tcpserver for both smtp and
pop3d??? Thanks a bunch.
- Joel
|
<<
Can someone send me their working qmail startup script that uses
tcpserver for both smtp and pop3d??? Thanks a bunch.
>>
Here's a sample.
I'm sending it partly as assistance, partly because I'd love to hear if
I'm doing anything wrong. : )
Be sure to put in your domain name. My lines are long, I chopped them
here to avoid odd wrapping. I'm also using vpopmail's vchkpw, you'll have
to modify that line for your particular password checker. Shoot, since I'm
thinking of things to change, you'll also have to use your correct UID and
GID numbers as well. While we're at it, this might not work on anything
but Linux. That enough to worry about?
steve
----------------------------------------------------------
#!/bin/sh
#
# qmail This shell script takes care of starting and stopping qmail.
#
# Source function library.
. /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions
# Source networking configuration.
. /etc/sysconfig/network
# Check that networking is up.
[ ${NETWORKING} = "no" ] && exit 0
[ -f /var/qmail/bin/sendmail ] || exit 0
# See how we were called.
case "$1" in
start)
# Start daemons.
echo -n "Starting qmail: "
PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH"; export PATH
qmail-start "`cat /var/qmail/control/dot-qmail`" splogger qmail &
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u502 -g501 0 smtp \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" tcpserver 0 pop-3 \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup domain.com /virtuals/bin/vchkpw \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
echo "qmail"
touch /var/lock/subsys/qmail
;;
stop)
# Stop daemons.
echo -n "Shutting down qmail: "
killproc qmail-send
killproc tcpserver
#killproc qmail-pop3d
echo
rm -f /var/lock/subsys/qmail
;;
*)
echo "Usage: qmail {start|stop}"
exit 1
esac
exit 0
Hi,
I'm still new to qmail :-(, therefore one question:
is it possible to use procmail for a user in a virtual domain? If yes, how?
I'm looking for a solution of following problem (at qmail, on sendmail it
will work):
Virtual pop accounts (in same virtual domain):
peter
list4peter
Major incoming virtual user alias for all e-mails (normal and maillists):
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now procmail should sort out all e-mails from maillists and forward them to
"list4peter". At the moment, this works well on a sendmail-based system,
but I want to move it to qmail.
Thanks for answers,
Peter
On Sat, Mar 04, 2000 at 12:30:00AM +0100, Peter Bieringer wrote:
> Now procmail should sort out all e-mails from maillists and forward them to
> "list4peter". At the moment, this works well on a sendmail-based system,
> but I want to move it to qmail.
Just subscribe to all list with adresses like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You do not need procmail for mailinglists with qmail.
Greetings
--
Robert Sander www.gurubert.de
I am missing some pieces that are needed to
compile the functions etc prior to installing qmail.
where do I get
ld-linux.so.2
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
libresolv.so.2(GLIBC_2.0)
When I install the functions and Daemon tools do
I just do
rpm --recompile filename.rpm to
install
as you can tell I am new to linux
|
At 3/3/2000 04:51 PM -0800, MicroSense Computer Works wrote or quoted:
>
>where do I get
>ld-linux.so.2
>libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
>libresolv.so.2(GLIBC_2.0)
You should be able to find those on the Linux install CD. Since you're
using rpm, you're probably using Red Hat, so look in RedHat/RPMS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
house wizard /n./
A hacker occupying a technical-specialist, R&D, or systems position
at a commercial shop. A really effective house wizard can have influ-
ence out of all proportion to his/her ostensible rank and still not
have to wear a suit.
On Tue, Feb 29, 2000 at 12:28:34AM +0100, Smoerk wrote:
> 1. I cannot stop qmail or qmail-smtpd. The init.d script says it's
> already down and if I try to kill it, it's restarted (by supervise)?
> Did I install something wrong or do you know how I could stop it?
How did you start it? Did you kill or restart svscan?
> 2. qmail-smtpd does not care about /etc/tcprules/smtp.cdb. I cannot
> send mails localy via smtp, because the smtp does not relay. I put
> 127.0.0.1:allow, RELAYCLIENT=""
Is the above space in the file itself? Do local clients send to
127.0.0.1, or do they send to the address of one of your other network
interfaces? What does the rest of the smtp.rules file say?
> in smtp.rules and make a new smtp.cdb with tcprules, but it doesn't
> help. Is there anything I have to configure, before smtp.cdb is used?
Nope. Just run tcprules (or maketcprules, which rebuilds everything in
/etc/tcpcontrol).
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
I came across this. Can I get similar functionality in Qmail. If so, how
Comments on whether this is appropiate or not is also welcome
http://www.harker.com/sendmail/local-msg-id-ruleset.html
--
Yusuf Goolamabbas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
