qmail Digest 31 Mar 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 957
Topics (messages 39283 through 39363):
VERP
39283 by: Martin Renner
39287 by: Magnus Bodin
39288 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
How to make user can pop their messages
39284 by: Irwan Hadi
39292 by: Irwan Hadi
Problem sending mail to virtual domain
39285 by: Irwan Hadi
39294 by: Irwan Hadi
Re: Still can't run qmail from init script
39286 by: Irwan Hadi
39303 by: Mikko Hänninen
39304 by: Adam McKenna
39306 by: Charles Cazabon
39308 by: Dave Sill
qmail-remote processes stuck in ESTABLISHED for more than 36 hours
39289 by: Peter Hunter
qmail delivering to wrong user
39290 by: G.Z.
39293 by: Dave Sill
Re: same username with different domain(SMTP)
39291 by: Dave Sill
can't remove
39295 by: Philip Gabbert
39296 by: Vince Vielhaber
39297 by: Timothy L. Mayo
39299 by: Soffen, Matthew
Re: date of creation of POP/SMTP users
39298 by: ravivr.hss.hns.com
39300 by: Charles Cazabon
Sending email to a specific MX ??
39301 by: Dinesh Punjabi
39302 by: Dave Sill
qmailanalog
39305 by: S.P. Hoeke
39309 by: Dave Sill
39310 by: S.P. Hoeke
39312 by: Dave Sill
39319 by: S.P. Hoeke
39325 by: Dave Sill
39329 by: Jon Rust
39349 by: Charles Cazabon
39351 by: Jon Rust
39352 by: Ronny Haryanto
39353 by: Jon Rust
39355 by: Ronny Haryanto
Re: Problem: 552 max. message size exceeded
39307 by: Dave Sill
39318 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39336 by: Toni Mueller
Re: blank lines in header?
39311 by: Dave Sill
39314 by: Derek B. Noonburg
39315 by: Derek B. Noonburg
Re: adding aliases
39313 by: Dave Sill
Re: Little further
39316 by: Dave Sill
POP Account
39317 by: Hemanta Sharma
39321 by: Dave Sill
39330 by: Hemanta Sharma
39335 by: Dave Sill
39340 by: Hemanta Sharma
Re: Virtual users and domains
39320 by: Dave Sill
offtopic about installation
39322 by: Mate Wierdl
how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
39323 by: Jeremy Hansen
39326 by: Dave Sill
39328 by: Jeremy Hansen
39332 by: John R. Levine
39333 by: Dave Sill
39334 by: Jeremy Hansen
39338 by: Jeremy Hansen
39339 by: Dave Sill
39342 by: Jeremy Hansen
39343 by: Dave Sill
39344 by: Jeremy Hansen
39345 by: Len Budney
39346 by: Jon Rust
39361 by: Ismal Hisham Darus
39362 by: andy huhn
Logging before qmail-send??
39324 by: smanjourides.corp.visto.com
Re: qmailanalog and UNIX basics
39327 by: Len Budney
Recommended IMAP D?
39331 by: Steve Craft
39337 by: Dave Sill
Adding New Users HELP!!!!
39341 by: Christopher Tarricone
Poor documentation of anti-spam options?
39347 by: Chris Hardie
39354 by: Jon Rust
39363 by: Scott D. Yelich
RH upgrade notes
39348 by: Mate Wierdl
39350 by: Ronny Haryanto
Re: Error 550 ?
39356 by: Psabs®
39357 by: Charles Cazabon
tcpserver for windows
39358 by: Laszlo Vecsey
qmail-lspawn # Using qmail-local to deliver messages to ~/Mailbox by default.??./Maibox
39359 by: em9652015
QmailAnalogue
39360 by: Mike Perks
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
Hi.
In several places I was reading about the "VERP (Variable Envelope
Return Path)" feature of qmail.
Unfortunately, I didn't find any information about how to use this
feature.
I have an application, which is communicating directly via SMTP with
qmail. As I am sending to huge lists (up to 28000 recipients) I would
like to use VERP.
Martin
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 02:23:47PM +0200, Martin Renner wrote:
> *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
>
> Hi.
>
> In several places I was reading about the "VERP (Variable Envelope
> Return Path)" feature of qmail.
>
> Unfortunately, I didn't find any information about how to use this
> feature.
>
> I have an application, which is communicating directly via SMTP with
> qmail. As I am sending to huge lists (up to 28000 recipients) I would
> like to use VERP.
http://cr.yp.to/proto/verp.txt
Snip from "man qmail-inject":.
r Use a per-recipient VERP. qmail-inject will append each
recipient address to the envelope sender of the copy going
to that recipient.
m Use a per-message VERP. qmail-inject will append the cur-
rent date and process ID to the envelope sender.
/magnus
--
USELESS --> http://x42.com/
> I have an application, which is communicating directly via SMTP with
> qmail. As I am sending to huge lists (up to 28000 recipients) I would
> like to use VERP.
Set up an ezmlm(-idx) list on the qmail host. Send to the list address via
SMTP. That's it.
Regards, Frank
I;m using qmail-1.03, vpopmail, sqwebmail and qmailadmin.
My question is, how to make user can pop their messages using qmail-pop3d
and vchkpw, although for their username, they must enter their full address
for example : joe%some.domain or [EMAIL PROTECTED] , because we only have 1
IP address.
-------
AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
At 01:55 29/03/2000 -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote:
>I;m using qmail-1.03, vpopmail, sqwebmail and qmailadmin.
>My question is, how to make user can pop their messages using qmail-pop3d
>and vchkpw, although for their username, they must enter their full address
>for example : joe%some.domain or [EMAIL PROTECTED] , because we only have 1
>IP address.
Ah , I got the clue
here
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup your.domain.com \
/home-dir-of-vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
after searching at www.inter7.com/vpopmail
Sorry for the bandwith waste.
-------
AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
I use vpopmail , qmail-1.03 , but when I tried to send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], it bounced back to me, with
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
the MX record has been updated , and also the A record. Should I purt
staff.some.domain at /var/qmail/control/locals ?
Because I found that vpopmail only add the virtual domain to
/virtualdomains and /rcpthosts file.
-------
AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
At 02:05 29/03/2000 -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote:
>I use vpopmail , qmail-1.03 , but when I tried to send an email to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED], it bounced back to me, with
>Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
>the MX record has been updated , and also the A record. Should I purt
>staff.some.domain at /var/qmail/control/locals ?
>Because I found that vpopmail only add the virtual domain to
>/virtualdomains and /rcpthosts file.
ups, sorry again
yesterday I accidentaly add staff.some.domain to /var/qmail/control/locals.
It is a virtual domain.
After I removed it from /var/qmail/control/locals then everything goes to
normal again.
-------
AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
At 23:39 29/03/2000 +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
>Looks like a classic case of having DOS/Windows-style line endings in
>a shell script, instead of Unix-style. Get rid of the ctrl-M characters
>and it should work fine after that. Something like:
>
> tr -d '\r' < oldfile > newfile
>
>... should do the trick, if your favourite editor won't allow you to
>remove them.
>
but when I edited the file with vi, I didn't see any ^M trailer on it ;)
I got the file directly from web.infoave.net/~dsill/qmail-script-dt61.txt,
and I got the file using lynx, so I don't get the file using netscape for
windows first and transfer it to the server.
BTW afterall, because the site is not big enough, I use qmail-init.txt from
chris johnson (CMIIW)
I only run this
ulimit -v 2048
csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
and the tcpserver command.
So I don't use cyclog or multilog, but using the "old" syslog.
>> What shell are you using?
>
>Judging from the output, bash.
yes, thats true.
-------
AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
Irwan Hadi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 29 Mar 2000:
> but when I edited the file with vi, I didn't see any ^M trailer on it ;)
Some versions of vi (notably vim, at least), will be "smart" enough to
handle DOS/Windows-style line endings transparently. Also, less does
the same. So if your editor/viewer doesn't show them, that doesn't
mean they couldn't be there.
> I got the file directly from web.infoave.net/~dsill/qmail-script-dt61.txt,
> and I got the file using lynx, so I don't get the file using netscape for
> windows first and transfer it to the server.
Funny that. I did that and I got the ^M's in that document. Either
the file really has them in there, or the server (what is OSU/2.0
anyway?) adds them. If it's a Windows-based server I could easily
see that happening.
Dave, if you're listening, you might want to look into finding out
why the file has ^M's when downloaded.
Regards,
Mikko
--
// Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
Be nice to other people. They outnumber you 6 billion to one.
dos2unix and unix2dos are available on most systems, if you are running
debian they're in the "sysutils" package.
--Adam
Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dave, if you're listening, you might want to look into finding out
> why the file has ^M's when downloaded.
FWIW, I get the DOS-style line ends when retrieving it with wget on a Linux
box as well.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mikko Hänninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Irwan Hadi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 29 Mar 2000:
>> but when I edited the file with vi, I didn't see any ^M trailer on it ;)
See:
http://www.faqts.com/knowledge-base/view.phtml/aid/1200/fid/223/lang/en
>> I got the file directly from web.infoave.net/~dsill/qmail-script-dt61.txt,
>> and I got the file using lynx, so I don't get the file using netscape for
>> windows first and transfer it to the server.
>
>Funny that. I did that and I got the ^M's in that document. Either
>the file really has them in there, or the server (what is OSU/2.0
>anyway?) adds them. If it's a Windows-based server I could easily
>see that happening.
Last I checked, it was Open VMS.
>Dave, if you're listening, you might want to look into finding out
>why the file has ^M's when downloaded.
I can't seem to convince it to store the scripts in stream-LF mode.
The long-term fix will be to bundle the scripts into a tar file.
-Dave
Emails to one of the subscribers on a mailing list on my machine seem to
get stuck, in the sense that the qmail-remote processes talking to his
machine are shown by netstat as ESTABLISHED but some have been like that
for 36 hours.
Gradually, my quota of qmail-remote processes (50 at present) is being used
up - each email to the list leaves another process stuck like this.
What should I do about it?
Regards,
Peter Hunter
Hi,
I am using qmail plus fastforward. In /etc/aliases I have
firstlist-owner: user1
lastlist-owner: user2
Messages to firslist-owner are delivered to user2, who is the last user
listed in /etc/aliases
Any hints? Thanks...
G.Zezza
"G.Z." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am using qmail plus fastforward. In /etc/aliases I have
>firstlist-owner: user1
>lastlist-owner: user2
>
>Messages to firslist-owner are delivered to user2, who is the last user
>listed in /etc/aliases
>
>Any hints? Thanks...
Run printforward to verify the contents of the alias database. Try
"fastforward -n" to see what fastforward is doing.
Next time, please post the actual contents of /etc/aliases that failed
your test, and include relevant entries from the qmail-send logs.
-Dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I want to configure the same username for different smtp domains.How do I
>achieve this ,
Use a virtual domain for one or both of the domains. Each virtual
domain has its own namespace.
See:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#virtual-domains
-Dave
Ugh.. Everything I send the message back to the email help bot, it
tells me it can't remove me from the list cause my address is not on
the list, but I still get the email. here's a copy of the headers in
a qmail message:
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:58:26 -0600
This clearly shows that it's sending email to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
exactly like that. Here's my response from the ezmlm help bot:
Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
Acknowledgment: The address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is not on this mailing list.
Well... What's going on here? It says that I'm not on the list, but
it clearly shows in the headers that it's getting sent to
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
help..
Philip
--
--
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines
On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Philip Gabbert wrote:
>
> Ugh.. Everything I send the message back to the email help bot, it
> tells me it can't remove me from the list cause my address is not on
> the list, but I still get the email. here's a copy of the headers in
> a qmail message:
>
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:58:26 -0600
>
> This clearly shows that it's sending email to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> exactly like that. Here's my response from the ezmlm help bot:
>
No, it says it's sending to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pop4.net
128K ISDN: $24.95/mo or less - 56K Dialup: $17.95/mo or less at Pop4
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
Which still doesn't tell us what address is subscribed to the list.
Please post the contents of the Return-Path header. The Delivered-To
header is meaningless for this purpose.
On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Philip Gabbert wrote:
>
> >
> > Ugh.. Everything I send the message back to the email help bot, it
> > tells me it can't remove me from the list cause my address is not on
> > the list, but I still get the email. here's a copy of the headers in
> > a qmail message:
> >
> > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> > Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:58:26 -0600
> >
> > This clearly shows that it's sending email to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > exactly like that. Here's my response from the ezmlm help bot:
> >
>
> No, it says it's sending to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
> Vince.
> --
> ==========================================================================
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pop4.net
> 128K ISDN: $24.95/mo or less - 56K Dialup: $17.95/mo or less at Pop4
> Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
> Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> ==========================================================================
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
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
No.. It clearly shows that it is being delivered to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
not to [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's the address that needs to unsubscribe.
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 -
==============================================
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Gabbert [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 10:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: can't remove
>
>
> Ugh.. Everything I send the message back to the email help bot, it
> tells me it can't remove me from the list cause my address is not on
> the list, but I still get the email. here's a copy of the headers in
> a qmail message:
>
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:58:26 -0600
>
> This clearly shows that it's sending email to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> exactly like that. Here's my response from the ezmlm help bot:
>
> Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
>
> Acknowledgment: The address
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> is not on this mailing list.
>
> Well... What's going on here? It says that I'm not on the list, but
> it clearly shows in the headers that it's getting sent to
> '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
>
> help..
>
> Philip
> --
> --
> Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines
Dear all ,
We are having Qmail setup which is having both SMTP/POP clients.
For billing I want to know the date of creation of both POP & SMTP users.
In which I directory I can get this information.Pls kindly suggest me.
Thanks N Rgds,
RAVI.V.R
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear all ,
> We are having Qmail setup which is having both SMTP/POP clients.
>
> For billing I want to know the date of creation of both POP & SMTP users.
> In which I directory I can get this information.Pls kindly suggest me.
ctime of their Maildirs, perhaps?
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to route a given user to an alternate
test qmail server. Is it possible to setup
something on the main MX server to do so.
For example, my main MX is
MX 10 smtp1.mydomain.com and my secondary MX
MX 20 smtp2.mydomain.com.
Can I route specific users (or aliases) email to
always go to an account on smtp2.mydomain.com ?
Thanks!
Dinesh
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
Dinesh Punjabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Can I route specific users (or aliases) email to
>always go to an account on smtp2.mydomain.com ?
Sure, just specify [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the "user" alias on
smtp1.
-Dave
Hello,
I'm wondering if there's a FAQ or HOW-TO with regards to qmailanalog...
The man pages are, for me, not sufficient to get it running :-(
THNX,
Steffan
"S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm wondering if there's a FAQ or HOW-TO with regards to qmailanalog...
>The man pages are, for me, not sufficient to get it running :-(
Have you looked at /usr/local/qmailanalog/doc/*?
-Dave
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 01:51:50PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote:
> "S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I'm wondering if there's a FAQ or HOW-TO with regards to qmailanalog...
> >The man pages are, for me, not sufficient to get it running :-(
>
> Have you looked at /usr/local/qmailanalog/doc/*?
I have no /usr/local/qmailanalog/doc/* :-((
This is wat i DO have, but it's not sufficient :(
/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog
/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog/ACCOUNTING
/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog/MATCHUP
>
> -Dave
Thnx,
Steffan
"S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This is wat i DO have, but it's not sufficient :(
>/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog
>/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog/ACCOUNTING
>/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog/MATCHUP
In what way, specifically, is MATCHUP inadequate?
-Dave
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 02:01:11PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote:
> "S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >This is wat i DO have, but it's not sufficient :(
> >/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog
> >/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog/ACCOUNTING
> >/usr/local/share/doc/qmailanalog/MATCHUP
>
> In what way, specifically, is MATCHUP inadequate?
Keep in mind i'm a newbie to qmail and OpenBSD... a lot of this stuff maybe
self-explanatory to the more 'advanced' users.
Specifically I don't know how to "feed your log through" the awk line.
Same goes for "feed the matchup output through any of the" scripts
>
> -Dave
Greetz,
Steffan
"S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Keep in mind i'm a newbie to qmail and OpenBSD... a lot of this stuff
>maybe self-explanatory to the more 'advanced' users.
No problem.
>Specifically I don't know how to "feed your log through" the awk line.
If your log is in a file called "foo", do:
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' foo
That will, of course, output to standard output, so you want to feed
it to matchup:
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' foo | ./matchup
And matchup outputs to standard output, so you'll want to redirect it
to a file, say matchup.out:
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' foo | ./matchup >matchup.out
>Same goes for "feed the matchup output through any of the" scripts
E.g.:
./zoverall <matchup.out
-Dave
Is qmailanalog compatible with multilog? The first part of the
MATCHUP doc file says:
Before using qmailanalog, make sure that your qmail log contains
microsecond timestamps: e.g.,
901967408.113926 new msg 19287
901967408.116537 info msg 19287: bytes ...
Um, nope. I have lines like this:
@4000000038e3b11b21dd6d0c info msg 24695: bytes 70110 from <snip>
@4000000038e3b11b223b82fc starting delivery 26852: msg 24695 to local <snip>
Any good one liners to make this work?
Thanks,
jon
At 2:41 PM -0500 3/30/00, Dave Sill wrote:
>"S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Keep in mind i'm a newbie to qmail and OpenBSD... a lot of this stuff
>>maybe self-explanatory to the more 'advanced' users.
>
>No problem.
>
>>Specifically I don't know how to "feed your log through" the awk line.
>
>If your log is in a file called "foo", do:
>
> awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' foo
>
>That will, of course, output to standard output, so you want to feed
>it to matchup:
>
> awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' foo | ./matchup
>
>And matchup outputs to standard output, so you'll want to redirect it
>to a file, say matchup.out:
>
> awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' foo | ./matchup >matchup.out
>
>>Same goes for "feed the matchup output through any of the" scripts
>
>E.g.:
>
> ./zoverall <matchup.out
>
>-Dave
Jon Rust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is qmailanalog compatible with multilog? The first part of the
> MATCHUP doc file says:
>
> Before using qmailanalog, make sure that your qmail log contains
> microsecond timestamps: e.g.,
>
> 901967408.113926 new msg 19287
> 901967408.116537 info msg 19287: bytes ...
>
> Um, nope. I have lines like this:
>
> @4000000038e3b11b21dd6d0c info msg 24695: bytes 70110 from <snip>
> @4000000038e3b11b223b82fc starting delivery 26852: msg 24695 to local <snip>
Those would be Dan's newer TAI64 timestamps IIRC. One of his packages can
convert the timestamps back and forth, but I can't find it at the moment.
Newer daemontools maybe?
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
At 4:24 PM -0600 3/30/00, Charles Cazabon wrote:
>Jon Rust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Um, nope. I have lines like this:
>>
>> @4000000038e3b11b21dd6d0c info msg 24695: bytes 70110 from <snip>
>> @4000000038e3b11b223b82fc starting delivery 26852: msg 24695 to
>>local <snip>
>
>Those would be Dan's newer TAI64 timestamps IIRC. One of his packages can
>convert the timestamps back and forth, but I can't find it at the moment.
>Newer daemontools maybe?
>
>Charles
tai64nlocal will convert it into something like 2000-03-30
07:56:09.195584500, but qmailanalog doesn't want that either. :-/
Looks like a job for perl.
jon
On 30-Mar-2000, Jon Rust wrote:
> tai64nlocal will convert it into something like 2000-03-30
> 07:56:09.195584500, but qmailanalog doesn't want that either. :-/
> Looks like a job for perl.
I use tai64nfrac.c found on qmail.org.
Ronny
At 4:54 PM -0600 3/30/00, Ronny Haryanto wrote:
>On 30-Mar-2000, Jon Rust wrote:
>> tai64nlocal will convert it into something like 2000-03-30
>> 07:56:09.195584500, but qmailanalog doesn't want that either. :-/
>> Looks like a job for perl.
>
>I use tai64nfrac.c found on qmail.org.
>
> Ronny
I didn't see it there. Using google, I found this:
http://sunsite.auc.dk/qmail/tai64nfrac
Thanks for the tip!
jon
Ah, I forgot that it's not called "tai64nfrac.c" instead just
"tai64nfrac" (although it's a C program). Sorry for the confusion.
IIRC, it is described on the same line as qmailanalog on qmail.org (or
mirrors).
Ronny
On 30-Mar-2000, Jon Rust wrote:
> At 4:54 PM -0600 3/30/00, Ronny Haryanto wrote:
> >On 30-Mar-2000, Jon Rust wrote:
> >> tai64nlocal will convert it into something like 2000-03-30
> >> 07:56:09.195584500, but qmailanalog doesn't want that either. :-/
> >> Looks like a job for perl.
> >
> >I use tai64nfrac.c found on qmail.org.
> >
> > Ronny
>
> I didn't see it there. Using google, I found this:
>
> http://sunsite.auc.dk/qmail/tai64nfrac
>
> Thanks for the tip!
>
> jon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I've got problems with sites that limit their message size.
>One example site uses some kind of sendmail that also logs
>the whole conversation. This is from the remote end:
>
>03-29-2000.00:04:09 SMTPresponder-26115: << DATA
>03-29-2000.00:04:09 SMTPresponder-26115: created temp file:
>/var/spool/MHS2/SMTPresponder-SMTP-in/TEMP.6603.38e18ec9.7fb90.1
>03-29-2000.00:04:09 SMTPresponder-26115: >> 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by
>itself
>03-29-2000.00:19:26 SMTPresponder-26115: size of data portion from 192.168.2.2
>exceeded maximum
>03-29-2000.00:19:26 SMTPresponder-26115: >> 552 message size exceeds maximum message
>size
>03-29-2000.00:19:26 SMTPresponder-26115: 192.168.2.2 did not send <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>,
>message discarded
>
>
>Locally I get:
>
>03-29-2000.00:19:27.702631 delivery 4: deferral:
>Connected_to_192.168.1.1_but_connection_died._(#4.4.2)/
Looks like the remote MTA is sending that 552 message while qmail is
still transmitting data, which I think violates the SMTP protocol. I'm
not an SMTP expert, but I really doubt qmail is misbehaving. Dan is
just too careful to miss something like that.
>I would like to see qmail bouncing this mail immediately stating to
>the sender that the message was too big instead of trying the
>message again and again to no avail except filling the pipe.
It's retrying because the remote end is breaking the connection
prematurely. The remote site should wait until qmail is done sending
the data before it responds with the 552 message.
-Dave
Quoting Dave Sill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Locally I get:
> >
> >03-29-2000.00:19:27.702631 delivery 4: deferral:
>Connected_to_192.168.1.1_but_connection_died._(#4.4.2)/
>
> Looks like the remote MTA is sending that 552 message while qmail is
> still transmitting data, which I think violates the SMTP protocol. I'm
> not an SMTP expert, but I really doubt qmail is misbehaving. Dan is
> just too careful to miss something like that.
Yes, this same thing happens when sending messages larger than 1Mb to
hotmail.com nowadays. There was a good thread about it, if I
remember. The deal was that hotmail is expecting the peer to
implement ESMTP SIZE if it gets "EHLO blah."
Aaron
Hello,
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 11:17:16AM -0800, Aaron L. Meehan wrote:
> Quoting Dave Sill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >Locally I get:
> > >
> > >03-29-2000.00:19:27.702631 delivery 4: deferral:
>Connected_to_192.168.1.1_but_connection_died._(#4.4.2)/
> >
> > Looks like the remote MTA is sending that 552 message while qmail is
> > still transmitting data, which I think violates the SMTP protocol. I'm
> > not an SMTP expert, but I really doubt qmail is misbehaving. Dan is
> > just too careful to miss something like that.
I'm no SMTP expert, too, but my understanding is that your assumption
is correct in that the remote side just cries "STOP" in the middle
of the transfer and expects qmail to send an end of message then.
That software is called "Mail*Hub TurboSendmail", whatever that is.
> Yes, this same thing happens when sending messages larger than 1Mb to
> hotmail.com nowadays. There was a good thread about it, if I
> remember. The deal was that hotmail is expecting the peer to
> implement ESMTP SIZE if it gets "EHLO blah."
So I assume that the qmail-remote also speaks ESMTP if available,
but doesn't send that SIZE message, right? Guess it's time again
to find that hotmail thread.
Anyway, that's a nice hint to follow, thank you!
Best Regards,
--Toni++
"Derek B. Noonburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In response to my last post on this list, I got email from Joseph
>Junkin saying that my mail looked really strange on his system.
Mine too. I see ^M's (carriage returns) at the end of each line.
>Apparently, something is inserting blank lines into the header which
>obviously screws things up.
Which MUA (mailer) are you using?
>I'm using qmail for outgoing mail on my end, he's using qmail for
>incoming mail on his end.
qmail is not the problem. Your MUA is.
>I also noticed that my two previous posts to this list didn't end up
>in the www.ornl.gov archive. Maybe they're being discarded because of
>the same problem?
I'm not sure why they're not being archived. MHonArc isn't giving me
an error message.
-Dave
On 30 Mar, Dave Sill wrote:
> "Derek B. Noonburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>In response to my last post on this list, I got email from Joseph
>>Junkin saying that my mail looked really strange on his system.
>
> Mine too. I see ^M's (carriage returns) at the end of each line.
With some help from a couple of people on this list, I finally tracked
this down a little while ago.
My MUA is adding carriage returns (in addition to the line feeds)
to the ends of some header lines and all of the body lines. This is
causing both the header weirdness and also the double-spacing that
you're seeing. It's definitely a MUA bug. Probably sendmail (before I
switched to qmail) was filtering these out.
I will contact the author, and ask about this. Worst case, I'll have to
dig through the source and fix it myself. Or maybe just write a filter
to sit in front of qmail's sendmail wrapper.
- Derek
On 30 Mar, Dave Sill wrote:
> "Derek B. Noonburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>In response to my last post on this list, I got email from Joseph
>>Junkin saying that my mail looked really strange on his system.
>
> Mine too. I see ^M's (carriage returns) at the end of each line.
With some help from a couple of people on this list, I finally tracked
this down a little while ago.
My MUA is adding carriage returns (in addition to the line feeds)
to the ends of some header lines and all of the body lines. This is
causing both the header weirdness and also the double-spacing that
you're seeing. It's definitely a MUA bug. Probably sendmail (before I
switched to qmail) was filtering these out.
I will contact the author, and ask about this. Worst case, I'll have to
dig through the source and fix it myself. Or maybe just write a filter
to sit in front of qmail's sendmail wrapper.
- Derek
John Conover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is the easiest way to add alias like john: [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" >~alias/.qmail-john.
-Dave
Andy Walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a vanilla qmail install now. Maildirs, that are created correctly,
>and nothing like fast/dotforward installed. My mail still bounces the user
>doesn't exist. There isn't anything in the users directory. My log and
>controls follow:
>
>Mar 28 14:58:41 homer qmail: 954277121.056457 new msg 368925
>Mar 28 14:58:41 homer qmail: 954277121.057089 info msg 368925: bytes 444
>from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 246 uid 7770
>Mar 28 14:58:41 homer qmail: 954277121.147936 starting delivery 5: msg
>368925 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Mar 28 14:58:41 homer qmail: 954277121.148531 status: local 1/10 remote
>0/20
>Mar 28 14:58:41 homer qmail: 954277121.175113 delivery
>5: failure: Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
According to "man qmail-getpw":
qmail-getpw considers an account in /etc/passwd to be a
user if (1) the account has a nonzero uid, (2) the
account's home directory exists (and is visible to qmail-
getpw), and (3) the account owns its home directory.
qmail-getpw ignores account names containing uppercase
letters. qmail-getpw also assumes that all account names
are shorter than 32 characters.
Are these true for user "andy"? If you're not sure, do the following
and post the results:
grep ^andy: /etc/passwd
ls -la ~andy
-Dave
Hi,
I have a domain abc.com, how do i configure qmail so that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dosen't bounce back to the sender?
Also i want to set up a new POP like [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the same
server. How do I do that. I have this entries in my control/virtualdomain
.abc.com:abc
abc.com:abc
hemanta.abc.com:hemanta
.hemanta.abc.com:hemanta
and this entry in control/rcpthost
.abc.com
abc.com
hemanta.abc.com
.hemanta.abc.com
but it dosen't work when i send it from say hotmail or yahoo.
any suggestions
thankx in advance
Hemanta
Hemanta Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a domain abc.com, how do i configure qmail so that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>dosen't bounce back to the sender?
1) echo "#" > ~alias/.qmail-anything
2) echo joe > ~alias/.qmail-default
(1) will swallow all mail sent to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". It won't save it
anywhere, but it won't bounce, either. And it won't catch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2) will forward all mail not handled by a user to
the local user "joe".
>Also i want to set up a new POP like [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the same
>server. How do I do that.
1) using a virtual domain, redirect mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
local user "hemanta", who can retrieve it via POP, assuming a POP
daemon is configured.
2) use a virtual users add-on like vpopmail.
>I have this entries in my control/virtualdomain
>
>.abc.com:abc
>abc.com:abc
>hemanta.abc.com:hemanta
>.hemanta.abc.com:hemanta
Looks OK, assuming it's really in virtualdomains, not virtualdomain.
>and this entry in control/rcpthost
>.abc.com
>abc.com
>hemanta.abc.com
>.hemanta.abc.com
Again, should be rcpthosts, not rcpthost.
Did you restart qmail?
>but it dosen't work when i send it from say hotmail or yahoo.
How does it fail?
-Dave
ok, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is working fine now but here is another problem.
I have a user named hemanta and the email add is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now when I add another user as hemanta_123 and in the user 123 i put
hemanta_123 > .qmail-hemanta and send a mail from hotmail or yahoo it goes
to hemanta instead of going to hemanta_123. How do i make it happen?
My virtualdomains
.123.abc.com:123
123.abc.com:123
My rcpthosts
.123.abc.com
123.abc.com
At 02:33 PM 30/03/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Hemanta Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I have a domain abc.com, how do i configure qmail so that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >dosen't bounce back to the sender?
>
>1) echo "#" > ~alias/.qmail-anything
>2) echo joe > ~alias/.qmail-default
>
>(1) will swallow all mail sent to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". It won't save it
>anywhere, but it won't bounce, either. And it won't catch
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2) will forward all mail not handled by a user to
>the local user "joe".
>
> >Also i want to set up a new POP like [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the same
> >server. How do I do that.
>
>1) using a virtual domain, redirect mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
>local user "hemanta", who can retrieve it via POP, assuming a POP
>daemon is configured.
>
>2) use a virtual users add-on like vpopmail.
>
> >I have this entries in my control/virtualdomain
> >
> >.abc.com:abc
> >abc.com:abc
> >hemanta.abc.com:hemanta
> >.hemanta.abc.com:hemanta
>
>Looks OK, assuming it's really in virtualdomains, not virtualdomain.
>
> >and this entry in control/rcpthost
> >.abc.com
> >abc.com
> >hemanta.abc.com
> >.hemanta.abc.com
>
>Again, should be rcpthosts, not rcpthost.
>
>Did you restart qmail?
>
> >but it dosen't work when i send it from say hotmail or yahoo.
>
>How does it fail?
>
>-Dave
Hemanta Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a user named hemanta and the email add is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Now when I add another user as hemanta_123 and in the user 123 i put
>hemanta_123 > .qmail-hemanta
This is incomprehensible. Is the user hemanta_123 or 123? And you put
hemanta_123 in .qmail-hemanta in which directory?
>and send a mail from hotmail or yahoo it goes
>to hemanta instead of going to hemanta_123.
You're sending to which address?
>How do i make it happen?
I'm not sure yet what you want to happen, so telling you how to make
it happen will have to wait.
>My virtualdomains
>.123.abc.com:123
>123.abc.com:123
>
>My rcpthosts
>.123.abc.com
>123.abc.com
Try running qmail-showctl instead of producing fake config files.
-Dave
Sorry for that, OK, here is the thing once again
I have two different users, one want to get email in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
which is no problem and the other one want to get it in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
which is creating the problem
The problem is that when the message is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the
user [EMAIL PROTECTED] get the message instead.
Pls suggest the necessary configs. and the way to do it
Thanks
Hemanta
At 03:29 PM 30/03/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Hemanta Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I have a user named hemanta and the email add is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >Now when I add another user as hemanta_123 and in the user 123 i put
> >hemanta_123 > .qmail-hemanta
>
>This is incomprehensible. Is the user hemanta_123 or 123? And you put
>hemanta_123 in .qmail-hemanta in which directory?
>
> >and send a mail from hotmail or yahoo it goes
> >to hemanta instead of going to hemanta_123.
>
>You're sending to which address?
>
> >How do i make it happen?
>
>I'm not sure yet what you want to happen, so telling you how to make
>it happen will have to wait.
>
> >My virtualdomains
> >.123.abc.com:123
> >123.abc.com:123
> >
> >My rcpthosts
> >.123.abc.com
> >123.abc.com
>
>Try running qmail-showctl instead of producing fake config files.
>
>-Dave
Niall Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've set the DNS entries for the virtual domains
>and they work fine. I've added the domains I wish
>to receive mail for to the rcpthosts and virtualdomains
>files in the control directory.
Did you restart qmail?
>I have a user vmail to which I sent all the mail
>that arrives for the virtual domains.
Does vmail meet the requirements in "man qmail-getpw" to be a valid
qmail user?
>So in the virtualdomains file I have:
>domain1.com:vmail-domain1
>domain2.com:vmail-domain2
>
>and in the home directory of vmail I have
>.qmail-domain1-user1
>.qmail-domain2-user2
That much looks OK.
>This doesn't work for me. Is this the right way to do it?
There are multiple "right" ways to do this. What happens if you do:
cp ~vmail/.qmail-domain1-user1 ~alias/.qmail-vmail-domain1-user1
?
-Dave
Just accidentally, on another list I got a hint for using stow
http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/
I think it could help installing/managing djb packages.
In general, it seems to me one should just install a djb package with
echo /usr/local/stow > conf-home
Mate
--
---
Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis
I'm wondering if it's possible to setup a deferral host in qmail? If a
message gets deferred, then the mail goes to another machine in charge of
just retrying deferred messages instead of clogging up the main mailer
machine.
Someone told me this is possible to do in sendmail. I haven't used
sendmail in years so I don't know first hand, but it's been my impression
that qmail can do anything sendmail can do.
Thanks
-jeremy
Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm wondering if it's possible to setup a deferral host in qmail? If a
>message gets deferred, then the mail goes to another machine in charge of
>just retrying deferred messages instead of clogging up the main mailer
>machine.
No, not out of the box. But it's not necessayr, because qmail doesn't
get bogged down by deferred messages.
>Someone told me this is possible to do in sendmail.
It is.
>I haven't used sendmail in years so I don't know first hand, but it's
>been my impression that qmail can do anything sendmail can do.
Not really... But then, not everything sendmail does is worth doing.
-Dave
Hmm, but qmail does get bogged down by deferrals from my experience. I
can't really see how it cannot, through just the fact that it has to log
future deferred attempts, etc.
If you have a very large amount of mail that's constantly getting new
messages for outgoing, those deferred messages when retried take up a
qmail-remote process that could be dedicated to an actual deliverable mail
instead of retrying something that was deferred and may get deferred again.
I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated to
retrying and not getting new mail. Even when new mail stops, qmail sits
there and tries to deliver deferred mail until queuelifetime is
exceeded. Why not have a host dedicated to those types of mails instead
of bogging down your main mail machine.
In my case it seems lke it would be useful. I'm delivering 1 - 2 million
messages a day and a large percentage of that gets deferred.
-jeremy
> Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I'm wondering if it's possible to setup a deferral host in qmail? If a
> >message gets deferred, then the mail goes to another machine in charge of
> >just retrying deferred messages instead of clogging up the main mailer
> >machine.
>
> No, not out of the box. But it's not necessayr, because qmail doesn't
> get bogged down by deferred messages.
>
> >Someone told me this is possible to do in sendmail.
>
> It is.
>
> >I haven't used sendmail in years so I don't know first hand, but it's
> >been my impression that qmail can do anything sendmail can do.
>
> Not really... But then, not everything sendmail does is worth doing.
>
> -Dave
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
> I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated
> to retrying and not getting new mail.
You may want to try a custom hack. I've heard that some high volume
sites call qmail-remote directly from the application that generates
the mail, then hand off messages that get soft failures. Often it's
enough just to hand them off to normal qmail, but I'd think it'd be
just as easy to pass them to another host using qmqp, using
qmail-qmqpc rather than qmail-queue.
--
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
Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hmm, but qmail does get bogged down by deferrals from my experience.
Not like sendmail does, though. qmail's quadratic backoff on retries
helps, as do its overall higher efficiency and its table of
nonresponding hosts (see "man qmail-tcpto").
>I can't really see how it cannot, through just the fact that it has
>to log future deferred attempts, etc.
Logging with multilog is very cheap.
>If you have a very large amount of mail that's constantly getting new
>messages for outgoing, those deferred messages when retried take up a
>qmail-remote process that could be dedicated to an actual deliverable mail
>instead of retrying something that was deferred and may get deferred again.
>I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated to
>retrying and not getting new mail.
If you've got a spare host, why not split the load? What's the
advantage of shuffling deferred messages from one server to another?
That's a pretty expensive operation, even for qmail.
>Even when new mail stops, qmail sits
>there and tries to deliver deferred mail until queuelifetime is
>exceeded. Why not have a host dedicated to those types of mails instead
>of bogging down your main mail machine.
Most folks don't find deferred messages such a burden. They use up a
few qmail-remote's and some space in the queue, but that's no big
deal. Have you bumped up concurrencyremote to account for deferalls?
>In my case it seems lke it would be useful. I'm delivering 1 - 2 million
>messages a day and a large percentage of that gets deferred.
``Profile. Don't speculate.''
What percentage of messages are deffered? How many attempts, on
average, does it take to deliver them? How much burden would be
shifted by delivering them to a fallback host after the first
deferral? Would a fallback host configuration be more
efficient/faster/more effective than a dual-host configuration?
-Dave
Actually I've though of that and it would be easy enough, but the amount
of error handling for failed messages would seem to be the real trick to
calling qmail-remote directly. It would definitely make it fast, but I
think there's enough in qmail that I don't want to reinvent the wheel in a
lot of cases.
I though about using qmqpc somehow to do what I want, but hmm...not sutre
how to really piece it together or plan it logically.
-jeremy
> > I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated
> > to retrying and not getting new mail.
>
> You may want to try a custom hack. I've heard that some high volume
> sites call qmail-remote directly from the application that generates
> the mail, then hand off messages that get soft failures. Often it's
> enough just to hand them off to normal qmail, but I'd think it'd be
> just as easy to pass them to another host using qmqp, using
> qmail-qmqpc rather than qmail-queue.
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
My remote concurrency is 500, so that's not a problem. In what I've seen
and you have to understand, I'm just an admin here, I really have nothing
to do with the "quality" of the mail addresses that come through
here. That's a story within itself, but out of 2 million emails, 40% of
those on average are deferred. That's a lot of emails sitting getting
retried, I've often seen my remote concurrency consist completely of
deferral retries, especially of for some reason qmail need to be restarted
or something...so if it has to sort through 800,000 mails that may get
deferred again, that's wasted time and resources.
There are a number of things I know I can do, nothing is balanced
currently, but what I think would be nice is have the deferral host be
load balanced across a few deferral machines, keeps those messages off the
main mailers and we don't really care what happens to the deferred
messages as long as they don't restrict outgoing mail.
I know I have options, but a deferral host just seems like it would be a
"nice thing" to have available.
-jeremy
> Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Hmm, but qmail does get bogged down by deferrals from my experience.
>
> Not like sendmail does, though. qmail's quadratic backoff on retries
> helps, as do its overall higher efficiency and its table of
> nonresponding hosts (see "man qmail-tcpto").
>
> >I can't really see how it cannot, through just the fact that it has
> >to log future deferred attempts, etc.
>
> Logging with multilog is very cheap.
>
> >If you have a very large amount of mail that's constantly getting new
> >messages for outgoing, those deferred messages when retried take up a
> >qmail-remote process that could be dedicated to an actual deliverable mail
> >instead of retrying something that was deferred and may get deferred again.
> >I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated to
> >retrying and not getting new mail.
>
> If you've got a spare host, why not split the load? What's the
> advantage of shuffling deferred messages from one server to another?
> That's a pretty expensive operation, even for qmail.
>
> >Even when new mail stops, qmail sits
> >there and tries to deliver deferred mail until queuelifetime is
> >exceeded. Why not have a host dedicated to those types of mails instead
> >of bogging down your main mail machine.
>
> Most folks don't find deferred messages such a burden. They use up a
> few qmail-remote's and some space in the queue, but that's no big
> deal. Have you bumped up concurrencyremote to account for deferalls?
>
> >In my case it seems lke it would be useful. I'm delivering 1 - 2 million
> >messages a day and a large percentage of that gets deferred.
>
> ``Profile. Don't speculate.''
>
> What percentage of messages are deffered? How many attempts, on
> average, does it take to deliver them? How much burden would be
> shifted by delivering them to a fallback host after the first
> deferral? Would a fallback host configuration be more
> efficient/faster/more effective than a dual-host configuration?
>
> -Dave
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My remote concurrency is 500, so that's not a problem.
500 is not a magic number guaranteed to be sufficient in all
applications.
>In what I've seen
>and you have to understand, I'm just an admin here, I really have nothing
>to do with the "quality" of the mail addresses that come through
>here. That's a story within itself, but out of 2 million emails, 40% of
>those on average are deferred. That's a lot of emails sitting getting
>retried,
They're only retried when their schedule says it's time to retry them.
>I've often seen my remote concurrency consist completely of
>deferral retries,
That right there says that your concurrencyremote probably isn't high
enough.
>especially of for some reason qmail need to be restarted
>or something...
Restarts are exceptional.
>so if it has to sort through 800,000 mails that may get
>deferred again, that's wasted time and resources.
Yeah, avoid restarts.
>I know I have options, but a deferral host just seems like it would be a
>"nice thing" to have available.
Ah, but qmail was engineered. Dan doesn't throw in every feature that
``just seems like it would be a "nice thing" to have available''. It's
conceivable that a fallback host feature could make sense in some
applications, but I suspect Dan weighed the pros and cons and decided
it wasn't worth the effort.
You can: implement it yourself, switch to a mailer that supports it,
or consider other options with qmail such as calling qmail-remote
directly and queuing to a fallback host if that fails.
-Dave
So it can't be done is what you're saying. I haven't really seen any good
arguments as to why it shouldn't be done, but obviously the DJ cronies
aren't going to argue his logic. It's frustrating for someone like me who
can recognize the many advantages of qmail, even with this little set back
it kills sendmail, but when you run into a feature that seems to be useful
(I'm sure I'm ot theonly one), then you're screwed because Dan says so.
-jeremy
> Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >My remote concurrency is 500, so that's not a problem.
>
> 500 is not a magic number guaranteed to be sufficient in all
> applications.
>
> >In what I've seen
> >and you have to understand, I'm just an admin here, I really have nothing
> >to do with the "quality" of the mail addresses that come through
> >here. That's a story within itself, but out of 2 million emails, 40% of
> >those on average are deferred. That's a lot of emails sitting getting
> >retried,
>
> They're only retried when their schedule says it's time to retry them.
>
> >I've often seen my remote concurrency consist completely of
> >deferral retries,
>
> That right there says that your concurrencyremote probably isn't high
> enough.
>
> >especially of for some reason qmail need to be restarted
> >or something...
>
> Restarts are exceptional.
>
> >so if it has to sort through 800,000 mails that may get
> >deferred again, that's wasted time and resources.
>
> Yeah, avoid restarts.
>
> >I know I have options, but a deferral host just seems like it would be a
> >"nice thing" to have available.
>
> Ah, but qmail was engineered. Dan doesn't throw in every feature that
> ``just seems like it would be a "nice thing" to have available''. It's
> conceivable that a fallback host feature could make sense in some
> applications, but I suspect Dan weighed the pros and cons and decided
> it wasn't worth the effort.
>
> You can: implement it yourself, switch to a mailer that supports it,
> or consider other options with qmail such as calling qmail-remote
> directly and queuing to a fallback host if that fails.
>
> -Dave
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So it can't be done is what you're saying.
In my first reply I said it couldn't be done "out of the box".
qmail is highly modular, though, so a fairly simple qmail-inject
wrapper like John Levine suggested could be used to implement this
functionality: try to send the message directly with qmail-remote. If
that succeeds, you're done. If it fails, queue the message on your
fallback server. This isn't rocket science.
>I haven't really seen any good
>arguments as to why it shouldn't be done,
I haven't seen any good arguments as to why it *should* be done. Dan
shuns features that *might* work.
>but obviously the DJ cronies aren't going to argue his logic.
I'm not a DJB crony, but I'm not above second guessing him at
times. :-)
>It's frustrating for someone like me who
>can recognize the many advantages of qmail, even with this little set back
>it kills sendmail, but when you run into a feature that seems to be useful
>(I'm sure I'm ot theonly one), then you're screwed because Dan says so.
Oh, and with other MTA's you're not at the whim of the developer? If
you wish for a sendmail or PostFix feature, it will come to pass,
even against the will of the author? Fascinating. I didn't know
that. That would certainly explain how many "features" made it into
sendmail, though. :-)
-Dave
You're cocky and absolutely useless.
Thanks
-jeremy
> Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >So it can't be done is what you're saying.
>
> In my first reply I said it couldn't be done "out of the box".
>
> qmail is highly modular, though, so a fairly simple qmail-inject
> wrapper like John Levine suggested could be used to implement this
> functionality: try to send the message directly with qmail-remote. If
> that succeeds, you're done. If it fails, queue the message on your
> fallback server. This isn't rocket science.
>
> >I haven't really seen any good
> >arguments as to why it shouldn't be done,
>
> I haven't seen any good arguments as to why it *should* be done. Dan
> shuns features that *might* work.
>
> >but obviously the DJ cronies aren't going to argue his logic.
>
> I'm not a DJB crony, but I'm not above second guessing him at
> times. :-)
>
> >It's frustrating for someone like me who
> >can recognize the many advantages of qmail, even with this little set back
> >it kills sendmail, but when you run into a feature that seems to be useful
> >(I'm sure I'm ot theonly one), then you're screwed because Dan says so.
>
> Oh, and with other MTA's you're not at the whim of the developer? If
> you wish for a sendmail or PostFix feature, it will come to pass,
> even against the will of the author? Fascinating. I didn't know
> that. That would certainly explain how many "features" made it into
> sendmail, though. :-)
>
> -Dave
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You're cocky and absolutely useless.
And you're a jerk.
Actually, Dave is arguably one of the most useful people around when
it comes to qmail. Until the long-awaited O'Reilly book comes out, his
"Life with qmail" is pretty much the qmail bible.
If you don't understand what he's telling you, then go ahead and ask
questions--but you really ought to be respectful or at least polite.
As Dave said, this isn't rocket science.
Finally, Dave is correct that Dan won't add any "feature that seems to
be useful" to qmail. Remember, the SMTP server is one of the primary entry
routes for crackers, thanks to Eric Allman. Dan will not risk security or
reliability for any old feature you dream up. As Dan said before:
In general, I'm not going to blindly copy sendmail features---even
useful features. I want to understand what problem they're trying to
solve; then I'll provide the best solution for that problem.
Len.
--
On the bright side, if a local user notices the system slowing down,
he can monitor the drop directory, decide that it's probably a spammer,
and destroy all new messages, without bothering to wake up the sysadmin.
``It's not a security disaster; it's an anti-spam feature!''
-- Dan Bernstein, about Postfix
At 4:08 PM -0500 3/30/00, Jeremy Hansen wrote:
>You're cocky and absolutely useless.
>
>Thanks
>-jeremy
Whoa, you're so far off base now, I'd guess you just lost all
interest from anyone else worthwhile on the list.
Dave Sill has been, and continues to be, a tremendous support
resource on the list and through LWQ. Just because he didn't give the
answer you wanted doesn't mean he's "absolutely useless".
Take a deep breath, play some Q3A or whatever, and realize that he
and John Levine have pointed you in the right direction.
jon
> Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > You're cocky and absolutely useless.
dave is cocky and useless ? haha .. i don't know whether this is a
joke or what .. he is the one who i think make 90% of my qmail server
works .. and LWQ .. gees first time i try .. everything works to the
perfection.
*salute* you dave..
Ismal Hisham Mohd Darus
Asst. Manager, System Support
John Hancock Life Insurance (Malaysia) Berhad
Hear hear!! We appreciate your work, Dave.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ismal Hisham Darus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 11:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
>
>
> > Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > You're cocky and absolutely useless.
>
> dave is cocky and useless ? haha .. i don't know whether this is a
> joke or what .. he is the one who i think make 90% of my qmail server
> works .. and LWQ .. gees first time i try .. everything works to the
> perfection.
>
> *salute* you dave..
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ismal Hisham Mohd Darus
> Asst. Manager, System Support
> John Hancock Life Insurance (Malaysia) Berhad
Okay, I've read the docs and man pages, but still want to know if I Got
It...
First chain:
tcpserver | qmail-smptd | qmail-queue
Second chain:
qmail-send | qmail-rspawn | qmail-local | splogger
(same for remote)
This means log1() (see qsutil.h) works anywhere in the second chain (because
it gets piped to splogger), but not in the first chain (no splogger). Do I
have this right?
How would I add qmail logging to the first chain (pre-qmail-send)?
Thanks,
- Scott
"S.P. Hoeke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Specifically I don't know how to "feed your log through" the awk line.
> Same goes for "feed the matchup output through any of the" scripts
You ``feed a file through'' a program when you arrange for the file to
be the input of the program. Three obvious ways of doing that are:
1. Input redirection:
awk 'SCRIPT' < FILE
2. Pipes:
cat FILE | awk 'SCRIPT'
3. Command line arguments:
awk 'SCRIPT' FILE
Option #3 only works for programs which take a file as an argument, but
most programs do. For example, awk, perl, sed, grep, more, less, tail,
head, etc., all take a file as an argument. I have a silly personal
prejudice against using #3: for operating on a single file, I usually
use #1 instead; for operating on many files, I usually use #2 instead.
Using #2 for a single file will win you Don Libes's "Useless Use of Cat
Award". It wastes a whole process over solution #1. For multiple files,
however, #2 is a useful use of cat.
The fundamental concept of UNIX is the "filter". Any program which reads
from the standard input, does something, and writes to the standard output
is a filter. They can be assembled in "pipelines", which are probably
the single most powerful concept in UNIX (though probably originally a
MULTICS concept).
To advance out of newbie-hood, you need "The UNIX Programming Environment"
by Kernighan and Pike. Buy it, read it, live it. It's $34.00 US from
<http://www.us.buy.com/books/product.asp?sku=30014507>. Kernighan, by the
way, is the "K" in AWK, one of the authors of the C language, and one of
the inventors of UNIX.
Len.
--
The pitiful state of "secure code" is shocking. (Actually, I
just wrote an essay on the topic. Get a copy for yourself at:
<http://www.counterpane.com/pitfalls.html>.
-- Bruce Schneier
I am 95% complete on my qmail install on RH6.1 Linux (AlphaAXP). I have the
imapd from the RH build and was wondering if this is the "best" or "most
used" by the folks on here. I don't want to do POP at all. Thanks.
"Steve Craft" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am 95% complete on my qmail install on RH6.1 Linux (AlphaAXP). I have the
>imapd from the RH build and was wondering if this is the "best" or "most
>used" by the folks on here. I don't want to do POP at all. Thanks.
The imapd included with Red Hat probably won't work with qmail--unless
you're delivering to mbox-format mailboxes in a central spool
directory.
For qmail solutions, see:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#pop-imap-servers
Also, there's Sam Varshavchik's courier-imap, which, for no good
reason, isn't listed in LWQ.
-Dave
I am having a problem adding new users to my mail server. The mail
server is mail.pds2k.com. When I use the program vadduser to add a user
to the email server I can setup the clients computer to send and recieve
e-mail. The problem is the e-mail goes out but if I send a message from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it comes to me (default /
postmaster) and does not go to the end user. If I put a .qmail-newuser
and put in the file
./newuser/Maildir/
They will now get thier e-mail. It seams as though the place where they
passwords are located is ok 'cause I do not get an error when they try
to authenticate but E-mail to newuser's address does not get to him. I
have a work-around right now but I do not what to do that in the future.
Folks,
I've been observing what seems to be a lack of clear and concise
documentation about anti-spam/security options for the novice and/or
average qmail user.
In my particular situation, I've recently moved to the tcpserver/rblsmtpd
way of doing things, and now I'm interested in blocking mail based on
invalid/bad-DNS hosts in envelopes/From: headers.
Only after scouring the mailing list archive was I able to determine that
that "DENYMAIL" patch is the apparently recommended way of doing this, and
of course everyone says "get it from the qmail website". There's no
mention of "DENYMAIL" on the main qmail page, and the only link to "an
anti-spam patch" (in the "Yet More Qmail Addons" section) is broken. I
was finally able to find this link
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/5799/qmail-uce.html
which appears to be the DENYMAIL patch, but I had to use lots of third
party search engines to find it, and I'm still not sure of what I've got.
Whether or not this particular example is valid, it definitely seems like
one has to do a lot of work to figure out the best way to set up a secure
(but not draconian) and spam-unfriendly (but not malicious) qmail system.
I realize that mail system administrators are supposed to be knowledgable
about their software and resourceful in finding new features, but it also
seems that offering a concise guide to the available options and how to
use them would benefit many folks.
I've been using and refining qmail for several years now, and while I can
usually find what I want in one doc or another, it always takes a long
time to figure out what conventionally works and what is conventionally
recommended. I just wonder if one should have to spend so much time
searching the mailing list archives.
I know this is a sensitive subject, and that in many cases it depends on
your "philosophy of mail delivery" (to use ORBS or not, to block at system
level or user level, etc), but I wonder if anyone else has thoughts on
what is probably a frustrating situation for many? Spam and privacy are
big issues nowadays, and it seems to the qmail project's advantage to
address them adequately.
And, of course, I would love it if anyone had a bold and decisive document
about how to patch qmail with DENYMAIL.
Thanks for your time,
Chris
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
Chris,
I'm in the exect same place. Finally implemented rblsmtpd, and would
now like to reject addresses with fake domains. I found this:
http://qmail.area.com/qmail-1.03-mfcheck.3.patch, but have not yet
tried it. I was hoping to get some feedback from list on it, but
apparently no one here uses it.
Please let me know what you find out.
Thanks,
jon
At 4:35 PM -0500 3/30/00, Chris Hardie wrote:
>Folks,
>
>I've been observing what seems to be a lack of clear and concise
>documentation about anti-spam/security options for the novice and/or
>average qmail user.
>
>In my particular situation, I've recently moved to the tcpserver/rblsmtpd
>way of doing things, and now I'm interested in blocking mail based on
>invalid/bad-DNS hosts in envelopes/From: headers.
>
>Only after scouring the mailing list archive was I able to determine that
>that "DENYMAIL" patch is the apparently recommended way of doing this, and
>of course everyone says "get it from the qmail website". There's no
>mention of "DENYMAIL" on the main qmail page, and the only link to "an
>anti-spam patch" (in the "Yet More Qmail Addons" section) is broken. I
>was finally able to find this link
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/5799/qmail-uce.html
>which appears to be the DENYMAIL patch, but I had to use lots of third
>party search engines to find it, and I'm still not sure of what I've got.
>
<snip>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
We all know the qmail documentation is perfect.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBOORj81pGPE+AF6qBAQFChgP/ctdvtjCI4sEZSrMpjgVbunb8VX2y3Dzz
kTegfYBUs6v95NLoPCyK+npe+f+FCVwD0wy3EX655ACC29HCpxeuMxaT5U5MpC8F
Ywkg4h3uXZ0B+wKYc03zyQ1XLOfDmlnFUOkVhdGZvBapBBNcvdMLA7/oJA+9KNEv
2nIKUsXisrQ=
=zNwX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Just the usual warning when you upgrade your Rh system to 6.2:
sendmail is installed no matter what, messing up your links in
/usr/lib, and /usr/sbin.
So here what you need to do:
after the upgrade is finished, boot into single user mode (at the lilo
prompt, type `linux 1' or similar). It is really important that you
do not just boot into runlevel 3 5 or 2.
Otherwise the sendmail binary will be started, and will be accepting mail!
So now just do
rpm -e sendmail
ln -s ../../var/qmail/bin/sendmail /usr/sbin
ln -s ../../var/qmail/bin/sendmail /usr/lib
and then reboot.
If after the upgrade, you accidentally boot into runlevel 3 or 5 (or
you do not know how to boot into runlevel 1), sendmail will be
running. You need to stop it first, because the removal of the
package does not stop sendmail. Then proceed as above.
Unless somebody explain to me why, I find it exceptionally stupid
that the sendmail rpm does not stop sendmail upon removal. Apparently,
RH finds this OK. Indeed, see what they say about upgrading to
postfix at
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/howto/RH-postfix-HOWTO/x93.html
Mate
On 30-Mar-2000, Mate Wierdl wrote:
> [...]
> and then reboot.
That's overkill. Simply switching to runlevel 3 (or 5 or whatever)
should be sufficient, e.g.:
/sbin/init 3
Ronny
this is a message test with error :
>From MAILER-DAEMON Thu Mar 30 06:20:50 2000
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 874 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2000 06:20:50 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 871 invoked for bounce); 30 Mar 2000 06:20:50 -0000
Date: 30 Mar 2000 06:20:50 -0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at serv.psabs.com.br.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Connected to 200.192.52.29 but sender was rejected.
Remote host said: 550 You are not allowed to send mail to us.
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 867 invoked by uid 0); 30 Mar 2000 06:20:44 -0000
Date: 30 Mar 2000 06:20:44 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: teste
dsdsasa
ssasa
I'm use the nsloockup e this returns :
> server 200.213.239.60
Default Server: [200.213.239.60]
Address: 200.213.239.60
> wurth.com.br
Server: [200.213.239.60]
Address: 200.213.239.60
wurth.com.br internet address = 200.213.239.59
wurth.com.br internet address = 200.213.239.60
wurth.com.br preference = 0, mail exchanger = wurth-web.wurth.com.br
wurth.com.br preference = 10, mail exchanger =
wurth-web2.wurth.com.br
wurth.com.br nameserver = wurth-web.wurth.com.br
wurth.com.br nameserver = wurth-web2.wurth.com.br
wurth.com.br
origin = wurth-web.wurth.com.br
mail addr = root.wurth-web.wurth.com.br
serial = 2000032803
refresh = 3600 (1H)
retry = 900 (15M)
expire = 1209600 (2W)
minimum ttl = 43200 (12H)
wurth.com.br nameserver = wurth-web.wurth.com.br
wurth.com.br nameserver = wurth-web2.wurth.com.br
wurth-web.wurth.com.br internet address = 200.213.239.59
wurth-web2.wurth.com.br internet address = 200.213.239.60
computer with ip 200.213.239.59-60 is under the firewall !!
(firewall - 200.213.239.59 and 60)-----(masq with portfw)---> (wurth-web
- 192.168.0.5)
sorry my bad english , again :)
[]'s
Psabs® <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this is a message test with error :
[...]
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Connected to 200.192.52.29 but sender was rejected.
> Remote host said: 550 You are not allowed to send mail to us.
Is your machine an open relay, or in a dialup pool? This could be a rejection
due to the other end using RBL, DUL, ORBS, etc.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm wondering if anyone has managed to port tcpserver/tcpclient to
windows, natively with mingw32 ideally.
Should I just write it from scratch, using winsock? I'd like to pass raw
pcm data over a socket connection so I have a multi-platform use for
something like this. Theres no headers or protocol to follow for
tcpserver/tcpclient, its just a straight tcp connection, right?
The code had a bunch of #ifdef's in it and didn't seem straitforward, last
time I checked, and I had trouble getting it to compile with
cygwin32.
If anyone has native tcpserver.exe and tcpclient.exe binaries, this would
be ideal!
Hi,
I have problem, while I try ps ax show this,
qmail-lspawn # Using qmail-local to deliver messages to ~/Mailbox by
default.??./Maibox
How I can turn off this option?
Thanks,
Alex
Hello,
I am new to qmail and was trying to use the qmailanalogue script package.
Are there any internet resource pages that would help with showing the
command lines to extract the info..
Thanks in advance,
Mike
=========================
Mike Perks
Parksville, BC Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================
