qmail Digest 3 Apr 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 960
Topics (messages 39433 through 39447):
Re: Poor documentation of anti-spam options?
39433 by: Peter van Dijk
39434 by: Peter van Dijk
39436 by: Patrick Bihan-Faou
39440 by: Chris Hardie
Re: "special" chacters in .qmail filenames
39435 by: Peter van Dijk
run qmail-pop3d under supervise and multilog
39437 by: Irwan hadi
blocking with rbl.maps.vix.com doesn't work ?
39438 by: Irwan Hadi
39439 by: Paul Schinder
Re: Relay based on IP
39441 by: Ricardo D. Albano
39444 by: Chris Johnson
Off Topic - Lotus Notes x Qmail
39442 by: Gustavo Zambon Rozatti
Re: offtopic about installation
39443 by: Peter Samuel
vpopmail, virtual users on virtual domains always gives
'Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name.'
39445 by: Markus Fischer
39446 by: anindya
Re: Need a little insite please
39447 by: Uwe Ohse
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 12:24:43PM -0500, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From: "Peter van Dijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > advertise the e-mail address associated with that user account in the
> MAIL
> > > FROM, nothing prevents you to advertise your "official" email address in
> the
> > > reply-to header.
> >
> > Uhm. You are correct. Nothing prevents you from doing that. But it kinda
> > defeats the purpose of being able to dialin anywhere in the world, POP
> mail
> > off your home-provider and send thru the relay of the ISP you're dialing
> > into.
>
> Well I think that the better answer in this case would be to use your
> home-provider's SMTP relay using either SMTP-after-POP or SMTP AUTH or TLS
> or whatever other scheme that will let you use your *normal* relay.
That is the perfect, alas as yet utopic situation.
> Since you are already accessing you home provider's services (the POP
> account), you should be able to also its mail relay.
'should' indeed.
> Again I am not saying that this is practical today. My only claim is that
> you should be able to use the domain indicated in MAIL FROM to do validity
> checks and possibly reject spam.
ágain 'should'. But you can't enforce this policy until all providers in
the world support this.
Also, since we're talking about denying relaying to somebody who's actually
dialing in to your service, you already have their data (name, address), so
you can get back to them anyway. I think this policy isn worth the trouble.
> > > This amounts to enforcing stricter relay servers: should a server relay
> mail
> > > if the address presented in MAIL FROM does not belong to one of its
> domains
> > > (in addition to does it come from one of the "local" computers, etc.) ?
> >
> > Yes it should. Relaying should be based on IP, either fixed (subnets) or
> > dynamic (SMTP-after-POP), and _nothing_ else.
> >
>
> I think that this is debatable (cf. my comment above).
I hear you.
> If I am an ISP, why should I let somebody use my mail servers to relay
> messages that pretend they are not from one of my users (including any
> virtual domains that I may have) ?
Becuase the person in question is dialling in to _your_ service, and you
are probably making money out of that. They're paying. You provide a
service. The picture is very simple.
> > Anyway, most people here will agree that the rules you are proposing are
> > insane, because you will prevent your customers from using a POP-account
> at
> > another ISP.
>
> When you configure a POP account in your MUA, you usually configure a SMTP
> server along with it. Why not configure that ISP's SMTP server ?
Becuase that ISP is not so stupid as to allow you to relay while you're not
dialling in to them.
> Please note that I am not trying to start a flame war. I just want to have
> strong arguments as to why that method should or should not be used. So far
> we have:
Ah, I appreciate this attitude :)
> - travelling users may be impacted badly by this, unless they always use
> their "home" mail relay (how feasible is it today ? should it be enforced
> ?).
Completely unfeasible. Few ISPs support SMTP-after-POP or other
remote-relay options.
> - this could work with yahoo or hotmail (because the only way you can use
> their relays is via their web interface)
Yeps, although I think it is quite feasible for a yahoo/hotmail user to
send out some mail with their hotmail/yahoo address from a dial-up, for
stuff like big attachments.
> - this is insane (this is the point I have trouble with :)
It is also my opinion ;)
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 10:55:09AM +0200, Michael Raff wrote:
[snip]
>
> I own the pobox.co.za domain and am having the same problem. Someone is
> spamming faking a rubbish source address from the @pobox.co.za domain. The
> first line in the headers that gives any smtp info is
>
> Received: from excite.com (209.203.247.83) by adv-www.advancedgroup.co.uk
> (Worldmail 1.3.167); 1 Apr 2000 07:52:43 +0100
Ok. Ignore the excite.com part, that is fake. 209.203.247.83 is actually
some host at lightrealm.com.
adv-www.advancedgroup.co.uk is an open relay, listed in ORBS.
> I am just getting the rejected emails that are sent to non-existent address
> on the spammers send list, and that alone is in the hundreds of emails.
Well, redirect all mail for that garbage address to #
> Can anyone suggest a way I can prevent this? Maybe it is time we blacklist
> all free email domains.
That would have no effect in this case.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
I guess it's time to close the debate on that issue.
I appreciate the main point here which is: that solution could work, except
that today it is not practical to use "remote" relays that correspond to
your main email domain.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter van Dijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 12:24:43PM -0500, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> > Again I am not saying that this is practical today. My only claim is
that
> > you should be able to use the domain indicated in MAIL FROM to do
validity
> > checks and possibly reject spam.
>
> ágain 'should'. But you can't enforce this policy until all providers in
> the world support this.
[...]
> > If I am an ISP, why should I let somebody use my mail servers to relay
> > messages that pretend they are not from one of my users (including any
> > virtual domains that I may have) ?
>
> Becuase the person in question is dialling in to _your_ service, and you
> are probably making money out of that. They're paying. You provide a
> service. The picture is very simple.
This is the key point. Personally, I view a provider's task as giving me
access to the internet (a pipe). The rest (SMTP relays, etc.) is secondary
and I would not mind if the provider told me to use my primary servers for
that. Of course you would have now 2 classes of users: internet connection
and internet connection + services.
I guess that this way of looking at a provider is still a bit new, but
ultimately I think that we will have to move in that direction. There
certainly aren't many technological barriers anymore to do that.
> > When you configure a POP account in your MUA, you usually configure a
SMTP
> > server along with it. Why not configure that ISP's SMTP server ?
>
> Becuase that ISP is not so stupid as to allow you to relay while you're
not
> dialling in to them.
This is the other part of the problem. If I pay somebody to handle my mail,
I expect that he will provide me with a way to do it all the time. We now
have the technology to do it (ranging from SMTP over TLS, SMTP after POP,
tunneling, etc.). I hope that providers will start using them sometime.
Anyway, this is now of topic as far as qmail goes, we agree that we can't do
that now, so let's close the subject.
Patrick.
On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> I guess it's time to close the debate on that issue.
>
Actually, since I asked the original question, I'd like to clarify what I
think the main point is: "The lack of clear and concise documentation
about anti-spam/security options for the novice and/or average qmail
user."
I'm encouraged by the discussion that took place in this thread, but it
will obviously only benefit the folks who happen to be reading the list at
this time, or the folks who happen to find the discussion in an archive
search.
I still think it would be very useful to document the following on the
Qmail site:
1) All of the known issues (philosophical, religious, technical) of
anti-spam options; you've covered most of these in the discussion
2) All of the known solutions for qmail users (including the various
combinations of mailer, filter, and third party setups)
3) Detailed HOWTOs for setting up at least a few of these.
The last seems most relevant and pressing; even after all of this, I still
have no good leads on how to implement any sort of DNS checks for
enveolopes/From addresses.
I would be happy to make an attempt at this documentation, as long as
folks agree that it would be useful, and would be willing to provide
feedback on what I come up with.
Chris
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 10:26:21PM -0500, Mark E. Drummond wrote:
> I am setting up a large number of virtual domains. I have been
> diligently replacing the "." in my .qmail files with ":" but I was
> wondering, are there any other characters that require special
> treatment? What about "-" ? What if I have the following domain:
>
> my-dom.com
>
> would the corrensponding .qmail file for user joe be
>
> .qmail-my-dom:com-joe?
Well that really depends on a couple of factors, one of them being the
contents of your virtualdomains file.
Anyway, to answer your question: only the . is special.
This is because DJB was worried about malicious persons mailing to
blah-../../.. and stuff like that. In fixing that, he figured out the /
might actually come in handy: you could have a .qmail-/ dir with all your
virtual stuff in that dir. Therefore, the . was made special.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
If I want to run the qmail-pop3 daemon under supervise and multilog, based
on LWQ howto, can I just create .. (because there is already
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/ and /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd
directory)
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run
#!/bin/sh
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -v -c100 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
the.domain.of.server \
/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
and
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/log/run
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t
/var/log/qmail/pop3d
Can then I log all the connection to the POP3 server ?
I want to run pop3d under supervise too, because now, when I want to stop
the qmail daemon by
. /etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail stop
and when I turn it on , the POP3 daemon which I put in the init script is
still active.
So I need to turn it off first by
ps -aux | grep tcpserver
kill -9 PID of tcpserver of POP3
and run again . /etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail start
Ps: maybe Dave should put in his LWQ howto , how to run qmail pop3d under
supervise too ;)
I use this syntax at
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run file
[irwan@server qmail-smtpd]$ cat run
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 3000000 \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -c 100 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
-u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp \
/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -t 60 -b -r rbl.maps.vix.com -r relays.mail-abuse.org \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
Why the test is fail ?
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 19769 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2000 21:50:55 +0700
Received: from linux.crynwr.com (192.203.78.39)
by 202.147.253.25 with SMTP; 2 Apr 2000 21:50:55 +0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 14:51:9 -0000
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Status: U
X-UIDL: 954687056.19771.server.bpkpenabur.or.id
Uh-oh, your RBL block is not working!
But the RSS blocking is work
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 19780 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2000 21:51:04 +0700
Received: from ns1.crynwr.com (HELO ns.crynwr.com) (192.203.178.14)
by 202.147.253.25 with SMTP; 2 Apr 2000 21:51:04 +0700
Received: (qmail 23121 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2000 14:50:58 -0000
Date: 2 Apr 2000 14:50:58 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Your RSS test report
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status: U
X-UIDL: 954687065.19782.server.bpkpenabur.or.id
Testing your RSS block. See http://www.crynwr.com/spam/ for more info
Here's how the conversation looked from rrss.crynwr.com.
Note that some sites don't apply the RSS block to postmaster, so
I use your envelope sender as the To: address.
I connected to 202.147.253.25 and here's the conversation I had:
220 rblsmtpd.local
helo rrss.crynwr.com
250 rblsmtpd.local
mail from:<>
250 rblsmtpd.local
rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
553 Open relay problem - see
<URL:http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?192.203.178.70>
Terminating conversation
-------
AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
At 6:36 AM -0700 4/2/00, Irwan Hadi wrote:
>I use this syntax at
>/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run file
>
>[irwan@server qmail-smtpd]$ cat run
>#!/bin/sh
>QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
>NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
>exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 3000000 \
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -c 100 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
> -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp \
>/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -t 60 -b -r rbl.maps.vix.com -r
>relays.mail-abuse.org \
>/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
>
>
>Why the test is fail ?
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: (qmail 19769 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2000 21:50:55 +0700
>Received: from linux.crynwr.com (192.203.78.39)
> by 202.147.253.25 with SMTP; 2 Apr 2000 21:50:55 +0700
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 14:51:9 -0000
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Status: U
>X-UIDL: 954687056.19771.server.bpkpenabur.or.id
>
>Uh-oh, your RBL block is not working!
Where did you get the rblsmtpd that you're using? Older versions did
not allow more than one -r. I'm not sure what happened when you had
more than one with the old version. The current version, which comes
with the current ucspi-tcp distribution, does allow more than one -r.
Did this only happen one time? Maybe rbl.maps.vix.com is down or unreachable.
>
>
>But the RSS blocking is work
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: (qmail 19780 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2000 21:51:04 +0700
>Received: from ns1.crynwr.com (HELO ns.crynwr.com) (192.203.178.14)
> by 202.147.253.25 with SMTP; 2 Apr 2000 21:51:04 +0700
>Received: (qmail 23121 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2000 14:50:58 -0000
>Date: 2 Apr 2000 14:50:58 -0000
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Your RSS test report
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Status: U
>X-UIDL: 954687065.19782.server.bpkpenabur.or.id
>
>Testing your RSS block. See http://www.crynwr.com/spam/ for more info
>
>Here's how the conversation looked from rrss.crynwr.com.
>Note that some sites don't apply the RSS block to postmaster, so
>I use your envelope sender as the To: address.
>
>I connected to 202.147.253.25 and here's the conversation I had:
>
>220 rblsmtpd.local
>helo rrss.crynwr.com
>250 rblsmtpd.local
>mail from:<>
>250 rblsmtpd.local
>rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>553 Open relay problem - see
><URL:http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?192.203.178.70>
>Terminating conversation
>
>
>-------
>AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
--
--
Paul J. Schinder
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 693
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a kind of access list at IP level, my qmail server is an inbound
relay for my domain, but also I need to work as an open relay for some nets
(my customers), if I make a filter like you say any connections from the
world may be denied.
RDA.-
>At 17:50 31/03/2000 -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>>How can I set qmail to accept relaying from a set of IPs ?
>>I wan't to set qmail to accept relaying from some local nets.
>then you must run qmail under tcpserver
>first make a file named tcp.smtp
>put in this file all of your IPs which have the permission to use the mail
>server
>for eg:
>192.168.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>if you want to make relay from 192.168.1.1 to 192.168.1.20 then
>192.168.1-20:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>at the last line put
>:allow
>
>After that read selected relaying documentation at www.qmail.org/top.html
>
>>
>>RDA.-
>
>-------
>AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 08:40:26PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>
> This is a kind of access list at IP level, my qmail server is an inbound
> relay for my domain, but also I need to work as an open relay for some nets
> (my customers), if I make a filter like you say any connections from the
> world may be denied.
No they wouldn't. See http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html
Chris
|
Does anyone
has already integrated Notes and Qmail on the same domain?
On my work we
have 2 mail servers MS-Mail and Lotus Notes and we'll migrate them both to one
bigger running Qmail (after a happy experience on a branch office), but I'll do
this one at a time the first will be MS-Mail (no problems at this part, the
MS-Mail SMTP gateway just worked fine).
The problem
is that the Notes server is the one that sends and receives internet mail and it
must keep working until everyone was changed from one server to the other (It
will take a few weeks). When I setup Qmail and Notes with the same domain Notes
just ignores any message from the Qmail machine, if i setup different domains
between them it just works fine.
If someone
has any idea please help me, I already convinced my boss, who hated Linux and
free software, to switch from his Windows NT runnig Notes to Linux running
Qmail. Now I got to make it work :)
Thank's
Gustavo Z. Rozatti
|
On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Mate Wierdl wrote:
> 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
I do just that (except for qmail). I install into (for example)
/pkgs/daemontools-0.70
/pkgs/qmailanalog-0.70
/pkgs/gzip-1.2.4
...
Then use graft (a stow like utility but better in my opion. 'cause I
wrote it) to make a symlink tree into /usr/local/bin etc.
Graft is written in perl and is available from
ftp://ftp.eserv.com.au/pub/tools/graft
Regards
Peter
----------
Peter Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical Consultant or at present:
eServ. Pty Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +61 2 9206 3410 Fax: +61 2 9281 1301
"If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Hello,
I'm running debian frozen (potato) with deb's mail and vpopmail
set up from source.
I'm locally runing bind so for testing I set up a domain
'testdomain.com' in bind and with vadddomain testdomain.com.
Bt no mail for testdomain.com gets received, I always get back
'Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name.' :(
ls -l ~vpopmail/domains/testdomain.com/
total 6
drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 1024 Apr 3 05:14 mfischer
drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 1024 Apr 3 05:14 postmaster
-rw------- 1 vpopmail vchkpw 190 Apr 3 05:14 vpasswd
-rw------- 1 vpopmail vchkpw 2282 Apr 3 05:14 vpasswd.cdb
cat /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
testdomain.com:testdomain.com
grep testdomain /var/qmail/control/users/assign
+testdomain.com-:testdomain.com:1002:1002:/home/vpopmail/domains/testdomain.com:-::
uid and gid are also right.
Local delivery to users works fine!
If any additional information is needed its no problem.
Here are the startup scripts:
echo -n "Starting mail-transfer agent: qmail"
sh -c "start-stop-daemon --start --quiet --user qmails \
--exec /usr/sbin/qmail-send \
--startas /usr/sbin/qmail-start -- \"$alias_empty\" $logger &"
# prevent denial-of-service attacks, with ulimit
ulimit -v 4096
sh -c "start-stop-daemon --start --quiet --user qmaild \
--exec /usr/bin/tcpserver -- \
-u qmaild -g 65534 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 smtp \
/usr/sbin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | $logger -t qmail -p mail.notice &"
# Uncomment the following lines to automatically start
# the pop3 server
sh -c "/usr/bin/tcpserver -g1002 -u1002 \
0 pop3 /usr/sbin/qmail-popup `hostname`.`dnsdomainname` \
/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/sbin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &"
But these are the standard debian entries. Only pop3 ist modified
to meet vpopmails needs
thanks for your time,
Markus
--
Markus Fischer, http://josefine.ben.tuwien.ac.at/~mfischer/
EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key: http://josefine.ben.tuwien.ac.at/~mfischer/C2272BD0.asc
PGP Fingerprint: D3B0 DD4F E12B F911 3CE1 C2B5 D674 B445 C227 2BD0
- Free Software For A Free World -
Hi Markus,
quick check: is testdomain.com in /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts?
and what is the contents of your /var/qmail/control/{default|locals|me}?
The output of /var/qmail/bin/qmail-showctl might be helpful also.
Also what happens if you telnet to localhost 110 and enter
POP commands manually?
--Anindya
On Mon, 3 Apr 2000, Markus Fischer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm running debian frozen (potato) with deb's mail and vpopmail
> set up from source.
>
> I'm locally runing bind so for testing I set up a domain
> 'testdomain.com' in bind and with vadddomain testdomain.com.
>
> Bt no mail for testdomain.com gets received, I always get back
> 'Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name.' :(
>
> ls -l ~vpopmail/domains/testdomain.com/
> total 6
> drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 1024 Apr 3 05:14 mfischer
> drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 1024 Apr 3 05:14 postmaster
> -rw------- 1 vpopmail vchkpw 190 Apr 3 05:14 vpasswd
> -rw------- 1 vpopmail vchkpw 2282 Apr 3 05:14 vpasswd.cdb
>
> cat /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
> testdomain.com:testdomain.com
>
> grep testdomain /var/qmail/control/users/assign
> +testdomain.com-:testdomain.com:1002:1002:/home/vpopmail/domains/testdomain.com:-::
>
> uid and gid are also right.
> Local delivery to users works fine!
>
> If any additional information is needed its no problem.
>
> Here are the startup scripts:
>
> echo -n "Starting mail-transfer agent: qmail"
> sh -c "start-stop-daemon --start --quiet --user qmails \
> --exec /usr/sbin/qmail-send \
> --startas /usr/sbin/qmail-start -- \"$alias_empty\" $logger &"
>
> # prevent denial-of-service attacks, with ulimit
> ulimit -v 4096
> sh -c "start-stop-daemon --start --quiet --user qmaild \
> --exec /usr/bin/tcpserver -- \
> -u qmaild -g 65534 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 smtp \
> /usr/sbin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | $logger -t qmail -p mail.notice &"
>
> # Uncomment the following lines to automatically start
> # the pop3 server
> sh -c "/usr/bin/tcpserver -g1002 -u1002 \
> 0 pop3 /usr/sbin/qmail-popup `hostname`.`dnsdomainname` \
> /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/sbin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &"
>
> But these are the standard debian entries. Only pop3 ist modified
> to meet vpopmails needs
>
>
> thanks for your time,
> Markus
>
>
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 01:57:02PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > See http://www.ohse.de/uwe/misc/backupmx.txt for why i dislike
> > backup mail servers.
>
> 'file not found.'
Ugh. Fixed.
Regards, Uwe
