qmail Digest 19 Jul 2000 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1067
Topics (messages 44907 through 44983):
vpopmail/qmailadmin with fetchmail and maildirsmtp: where to start?
44907 by: michael.renner.gmx.de
smail + qmail
44908 by: Mirek
Re: urgent help required
44909 by: çééí äìôøï
44941 by: Aaron Seelye
load question
44910 by: Jeff Jones
[?!]urgent help needed, thanks in advanced!:)
44911 by: ´¿¬L©ú
serialsmtp errors
44912 by: Gillian Bennett
Re: mail filters
44913 by: William E. Baxter
Re: RBL list
44914 by: Henry Baragar
44915 by: TAG
44916 by: Henry Baragar
44918 by: Bruno Wolff III
44921 by: Chris, the Young One
44925 by: Paul Farber
44932 by: Bruno Wolff III
44934 by: Paul Farber
44935 by: Michael T. Babcock
Re: IPCHAINS and slow POP/SMTP access
44917 by: Bruno Wolff III
44920 by: Aijaz A. Ansari
44927 by: Austad, Jay
44938 by: Doug Oucharek
mail filters 2
44919 by: Matthias Henze
Re: fastforward and alternative alias file
44922 by: Ben Beuchler
Re: questions about performance and setup
44923 by: Austad, Jay
44930 by: markd.bushwire.net
44931 by: Clint Bullock
44933 by: Michael T. Babcock
44936 by: Austad, Jay
44943 by: Bruce Guenter
44945 by: Michael T. Babcock
44948 by: Bruce Guenter
44949 by: markd.bushwire.net
44952 by: Michael T. Babcock
44953 by: Michael T. Babcock
Re: Announcing qmail-autoresponder version 0.90
44924 by: Thomas Erskine
44944 by: Bruce Guenter
44950 by: Bruce Guenter
Netscape Progress Patch
44926 by: Michael T. Babcock
44928 by: Petr Novotny
44940 by: Russell Nelson
44946 by: Michael T. Babcock
Multilog problem
44929 by: Audouy Jérôme
44954 by: Dave Sill
qmailanalog and zoverall.
44937 by: Moragues Ramón, Antonio
44947 by: Michael T. Babcock
44982 by: Moragues Ramón, Antonio
Unable to chdir to maildir
44939 by: Michael T. Babcock
sqwebmail cannot install
44942 by: Jia Rong
"alert: unable to opendir todo"
44951 by: Stephan Riberi
Defining <> as local and not remote
44955 by: Robert Spraggs
44956 by: Aaron L. Meehan
44957 by: Robert Spraggs
44964 by: Aaron L. Meehan
44966 by: Robert Spraggs
How do I stop this spam test from failing?
44958 by: Robert Spraggs
44959 by: Adam McKenna
44960 by: Robert Spraggs
44961 by: Adam McKenna
44962 by: Robert Spraggs
44965 by: Aaron L. Meehan
44967 by: Erwin Hoffmann
many mails to same user
44963 by: Henrik Gemal
44978 by: Russell Nelson
44979 by: Eric Cox
several mail domains on one machine
44968 by: Thomas Haberland
Urgent Help Needed
44969 by: Tony Campisi
44970 by: asantos
44971 by: Gavin Cameron
44972 by: asantos
44973 by: Tony Campisi
44974 by: asantos
| preline procmail
44975 by: Devinder
How to delete mails in smtp queue
44976 by: David
Announcing qmail-autoresponder version 0.91
44977 by: Bruce Guenter
44980 by: Mitul Limbani
now... Supervise problem
44981 by: Audouy Jérôme
44983 by: Audouy Jérôme
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
I run a small internal network. All mails for the
employees are transfered through an isdn dial-up
line. I use fetchmail, qmail therefor, mails are
sent by using maildirsmtp.
Every mail-user needs an own account on this
linux router, which is not needful for the normal
work.
Now I installed vpopmail and qmailadmin to
change this, but I dont know where to start!
How do I have to configure fetchmail to transfer
the mails not to the system users (I fetch mails from a
multidrop mailbox with pop3)?
What else do I have to change? And how should I
handle these users, which still needs a
user account on this router/gateway/mailer as
well as a mailaccount?
Thanks in advance for hints and pointers to the
documentation.
--
|Michael Renner E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|D-72072 Tuebingen Germany |
mail -s "get pgp key" [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
mail -s "get gpg key" [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
|Don't drink as root! ESC:wq
Has anyone anonnced some kind of problem smail--qmail cooperation ?
I can't send mail from host ruuning smail to host with qmail.
Other host running sendmail, exim, qmail can talk to this qmail box.
Also my smail is runinig more then 1 year and I notice no problem with
sending mail to other host. My smail can also send mail to boxes I know
there are running qmail but not to my qmail.
There are logs:
Jul 18 09:47:08 tsk qmail-smtpd[26969]: 24< EHLO bip.biproraf.com.pl.
Jul 18 09:47:08 tsk qmail-smtpd[26969]: 34< MAIL
FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Jul 18 09:47:08 tsk qmail-smtpd[26969]: 26< RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Jul 18 09:47:08 tsk qmail-smtpd[26969]: 4< DATA.
Jul 18 09:47:08 tsk qmail-smtpd[26969]: > DIE_READ
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
in my log file (MTA smail)
07/18/2000 09:47:08: [m13ES5s-000ZwgC] Deferred TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ROUTER:inet_
hosts TRANSPORT:smtp ERROR:(ERR151) transport smtp: 498 protocol error
in reply
from remote SMTP process
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mirek
read LWQ - http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html
follow installation instruction to the letter....
and read some docs, i found out that if you read all the docs, and know
exactly what you want to do, ie what configuration you need, you will be
successfull in understanding the install procedures..
Good Luck
Haim
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: urgent help required
hello list
i have installed redhat linux 6.1 , with sendmail 8.9.3 from rpms
(redhat cd)
i want to remove sendmail and install qmail on this system ,
please tell me exactly how can i do this
thanks & regards
Prashant Desai
rpm -e sendmail , then install qmail as you normally would.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 10:31 PM
Subject: urgent help required
>
> hello list
>
> i have installed redhat linux 6.1 , with sendmail 8.9.3 from rpms
> (redhat cd)
> i want to remove sendmail and install qmail on this system ,
>
> please tell me exactly how can i do this
>
>
> thanks & regards
> Prashant Desai
>
>
>
This question is for those of you who use qmail and vpopmail to handle
virtual domains. I would like to get some information on how many
virtual domains on one box you have and if you also provide web services
off of the same box. I am trying to prevent loading down my server
too much and would like to get a feel for the setup that most of you
have.
Thanks in advance.
Jeff Jones
|
urgent help needed, thanks in advanced!:)
how to use imap+qmail(no sendmail) if
there is no account in imap server?
error log:
Jul 18 19:16:51 imap qmail: 963919011.320736 delivery 30:
failure: Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
|
Hi,
I was wondering if anyone could help with this error. Our mailservers have
a high mail rate and I am new to qmail (SIGH, another newbie).
Config: smtp store - queue the mail for clients then upon reciept of a
dequeue request, smtp push the mail to the clients remote mail server.
the symptoms:
* Clients continually send dequeue requests from their remote mail
servers to our mail servers. They get no mail delivery yet there are no
obvious errors that they see. We get the following error in our maillog:
qmail: 963870062.032644 delivery 320305: success:
serialsmtp:_fatal:_SMTP_cannot_transfer_messages_with_partial_final_lines/se
rialsmtp:_fatal:_SMTP_cannot_transfer_messages_with_partial_final_lines/seri
alsmtp:_fatal:_SMTP_cannot_transfer
_messages_with_partial_final_lines/maildirserial:_fatal:_making_no_progress,
_giving_up/did_0+0+1/
* A qmail-qstat showed a growing queue, with the majority beloning
to the dequeue user (dequeue requests).
* The number of ports in SYN_RECV state escalated markedly
I found that some of the mail messages themselves had not been terminated
with a "\n", and once I appended "\n" to the end of the file the error
disappeared for a few hours, and the clients reported sucessful mail
delivery, but then the error returned and the clients no longer recieved
their mail. Much of the mail like this was mailing list issue.
Thanks, Gillian
The qtools package includes utilities for filtering messages and
conditionally writing messages to a Maildir. For more information,
see:
http://www.superscript.com/qtools/intro.html
Regards,
W.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 09:12:03AM +0200, Matthias Henze wrote:
> i've looked around the doc's and the net and i was not able to find sonme
> good docs on mail filtering. what i want sounds simple: i want to filter
> messages for one user to different folders in the maildir depending on
> headers or what ever.
Tonino,
The RBL uses DNS, so if your DNS server is local then it is caching copies
of the RBL list locally.
Henry
TAG wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a way of keeping a local copy of the RBL lists and using those
> instead of trying to get it from the remote site - should this not speed
> things up - I also know that the list is updated all the time - but can
> some of you peoples please comment...
>
> Thanks
>
> Tonino
begin:vcard
n:Baragar;Henry
tel;cell:416-453-5626
tel;work:416-453-5626
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.instantiated.on.ca
org:Instantiated Software Inc.
adr:;;130 Banff Road;Toronto;Ontario;M4P 2P5;Canada
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Principal
fn:Henry Baragar
end:vcard
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Henry Baragar wrote:
>
> Tonino,
>
> The RBL uses DNS, so if your DNS server is local then it is caching copies
> of the RBL list locally.
>
> Henry
>
> TAG wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there a way of keeping a local copy of the RBL lists and using those
> > instead of trying to get it from the remote site - should this not speed
> > things up - I also know that the list is updated all the time - but can
> > some of you peoples please comment...
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Tonino
ok - thanks then!!
Tonino
Tonino,
I think I spoke too soon (only on my first cup of coffee)... Specific entries
will have been cached if they have been seen before, but not necessarily the
whole list. However, you can use DNS to get the complete list: see
http://maps.vix.com/rbl/usage.html.
Henry
> Henry Baragar wrote:
> >
> > Tonino,
> >
> > The RBL uses DNS, so if your DNS server is local then it is caching copies
> > of the RBL list locally.
> >
> > Henry
> >
> > TAG wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Is there a way of keeping a local copy of the RBL lists and using those
> > > instead of trying to get it from the remote site - should this not speed
> > > things up - I also know that the list is updated all the time - but can
> > > some of you peoples please comment...
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Tonino
>
> ok - thanks then!!
>
> Tonino
begin:vcard
n:Baragar;Henry
tel;cell:416-453-5626
tel;work:416-453-5626
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.instantiated.on.ca
org:Instantiated Software Inc.
adr:;;130 Banff Road;Toronto;Ontario;M4P 2P5;Canada
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Principal
fn:Henry Baragar
end:vcard
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:04:59PM +0200,
TAG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a way of keeping a local copy of the RBL lists and using those
> instead of trying to get it from the remote site - should this not speed
> things up - I also know that the list is updated all the time - but can
> some of you peoples please comment...
To get the RBL list you need to go through some extra steps. The last time
a checked you needed to sign an agreement not to hold MAPS liable for
problems. Also note that when keeping a local copy of the list, you have
to worry about what happens when MAPS takes some set of addresses off
the list.
There are ways to get complete copies of some other RBL styled lists.
You might try looking at the primary web site for each list you are
interested in to see what their policies are.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 08:49:48AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
! There are ways to get complete copies of some other RBL styled lists.
Indeed. DJB himself said as much on the dns list:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?m=95836494819286
---Chris K.
--
Chris, the Young One |_ but what's a dropped message between friends?
Auckland, New Zealand |_ this is UDP, not TCP after all ;) ---John H.
http://cloud9.hedgee.com/ |_ Robinson, IV
PGP: 0xCCC6114E/0x706A6AAD |_
No, RBL onlt requires that you do that if you want certian levels of
filtering (namely DNS).
uscpi-tcp-88 has RBL built in.. www.qmail.org
Paul Farber
Farber Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph 570-628-5303
Fax 570-628-5545
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:04:59PM +0200,
> TAG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there a way of keeping a local copy of the RBL lists and using those
> > instead of trying to get it from the remote site - should this not speed
> > things up - I also know that the list is updated all the time - but can
> > some of you peoples please comment...
>
> To get the RBL list you need to go through some extra steps. The last time
> a checked you needed to sign an agreement not to hold MAPS liable for
> problems. Also note that when keeping a local copy of the list, you have
> to worry about what happens when MAPS takes some set of addresses off
> the list.
>
> There are ways to get complete copies of some other RBL styled lists.
>
> You might try looking at the primary web site for each list you are
> interested in to see what their policies are.
>
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 10:44:49AM -0400,
Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, RBL onlt requires that you do that if you want certian levels of
> filtering (namely DNS).
>
> uscpi-tcp-88 has RBL built in.. www.qmail.org
But this program does a remote lookup each time. The original question
asked about getting a complete copy of the database to speed up lookups.
The part I was zeroing in on was that you needed to sign a waiver to use
the RBL. That is incorrect. You need to sign a waiver if you get the
zone file via DNS zone transfers.
I'm using RBL now and didn't sign a thing.... but I don't use the zone
file.
Paul Farber
Farber Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph 570-628-5303
Fax 570-628-5545
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 10:44:49AM -0400,
> Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, RBL onlt requires that you do that if you want certian levels of
> > filtering (namely DNS).
> >
> > uscpi-tcp-88 has RBL built in.. www.qmail.org
>
> But this program does a remote lookup each time. The original question
> asked about getting a complete copy of the database to speed up lookups.
>
If you use a caching nameserver, frequent domains will automatically be
cached for a given amount of time. If you read the entire website for the
RBL (or other related lists) you'll find that they have subscription options
... basically you'd set yourself up as a slave server that downloads the
list. This isn't really practical in my experience because it is a large
amount of bandwidth to download the lists periodically ...
TAG wrote:
> Is there a way of keeping a local copy of the RBL lists and using those
> instead of trying to get it from the remote site - should this not speed
> things up - I also know that the list is updated all the time - but can
> some of you peoples please comment...
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:08:36AM -0700,
Doug Oucharek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've searched the archives on this topic and though there are a lot of
> people who have reported this issue, I have not really seen a solution yet.
>
> I have a Linux box (Redhad 5.?) which I use as a firewall/server/NAT
> machine. One ethernet card is connected to an ADSL modem and has a fixed IP
> address. The other ethernet card is connected to a mini-hub and has the
> address of 192.168.1.1. I have a set of Mac's connected to the hub with
> addresses 192.168.1.100 and up.
Have you tried running tcpdump to look at the network traffic? You can
use this to see if your packet routing appears to be correct and that
you haven't made a mistake in your ipchains rules.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:08:36AM -0700, Doug Oucharek wrote:
...
> I've got Qmail running just great for both SMTP and POP!! However, as soon
> as I activate my firewall (using ipchains), sending or receiving email from
> a local machine takes over 3 minutes!!
>
> In the archives, some people have speculated that this is a DNS issue or a
> problem with auth. I have TCP port 113 (auth) opened to the world (local
...
I have had similar problems for one of two reasons:
a) DNS lookups were failing because port 53 was blocked out (make sure to
include UDP packets as well)
ipchains -A bad-dmz -s 0/0 53 -p tcp -j ACCEPT
ipchains -A bad-dmz -s 0/0 53 -p udp -j ACCEPT
b) ICMP messages were being blocked.
ipchains -A forward -p icmp -j ACCEPT
I don't remember, but I think this is mentioned in the ipchains HOWTO at
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/IPCHAINS-HOWTO.html
Hope this helps.
Aijaz.
--
=== = Aijaz Ansari. ENoor Creations, Inc.
====== Internet Software and Hosting
= === www.enoor.com 847-980-1601
Since ipchains is a not really a firewall but a packet filter, you need to
make sure you have the line:
ipchains -A input -s 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 -d <your public IP>/255.255.255.255 -p
6 -j ACCEPT ! -y
Make sure your firewall also accepts all packets from 192.168.1.0/24 also.
Ipchains configs are sorta off topic, so if you have any other questions
just email me instead of the list. Check these 2 things though, you
probably already have them, but make sure. Chances are you don't even need
the ipchains rules with the masquerade though, depends on what's running on
the firewall box. You machines behind it are inherently protected by the
fact that you're using port address translation for net access to them.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Oucharek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 3:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IPCHAINS and slow POP/SMTP access
Hello,
I've searched the archives on this topic and though there are a lot of
people who have reported this issue, I have not really seen a solution yet.
I have a Linux box (Redhad 5.?) which I use as a firewall/server/NAT
machine. One ethernet card is connected to an ADSL modem and has a fixed IP
address. The other ethernet card is connected to a mini-hub and has the
address of 192.168.1.1. I have a set of Mac's connected to the hub with
addresses 192.168.1.100 and up.
I've got Qmail running just great for both SMTP and POP!! However, as soon
as I activate my firewall (using ipchains), sending or receiving email from
a local machine takes over 3 minutes!!
In the archives, some people have speculated that this is a DNS issue or a
problem with auth. I have TCP port 113 (auth) opened to the world (local
and internet) and am still having a problem. I suspect that there must be
some other port I need to open up. Does anyone have a suggestion of where I
can go from here? I am a bit new to Qmail and not too familiar with the
debugging tools.
By the way, I do not have DNS active on my Linux box and am relying on my
ISP's DNS server (they have my domain name set up in their server).
Doug
This was the solution!! When I allowed access to the DNS port (53), I
specified destination only (-d 0/0). Adding another rule for the source did
the trick!! Thanks big time!
Doug
> From: "Aijaz A. Ansari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:07:47 -0500
> To: Doug Oucharek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: IPCHAINS and slow POP/SMTP access
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:08:36AM -0700, Doug Oucharek wrote:
> ...
>> I've got Qmail running just great for both SMTP and POP!! However, as soon
>> as I activate my firewall (using ipchains), sending or receiving email from
>> a local machine takes over 3 minutes!!
>>
>> In the archives, some people have speculated that this is a DNS issue or a
>> problem with auth. I have TCP port 113 (auth) opened to the world (local
> ...
>
> I have had similar problems for one of two reasons:
> a) DNS lookups were failing because port 53 was blocked out (make sure to
> include UDP packets as well)
>
> ipchains -A bad-dmz -s 0/0 53 -p tcp -j ACCEPT
> ipchains -A bad-dmz -s 0/0 53 -p udp -j ACCEPT
> b) ICMP messages were being blocked.
>
> ipchains -A forward -p icmp -j ACCEPT
>
> I don't remember, but I think this is mentioned in the ipchains HOWTO at
> http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/IPCHAINS-HOWTO.html
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Aijaz.
>
>
> --
> === = Aijaz Ansari. ENoor Creations, Inc.
> ====== Internet Software and Hosting
> = === www.enoor.com 847-980-1601
>
>
>
>
>
hi,
thanks for the feedback. after having a closer look i've discoverd that i
do not need to know how to filter messages with qmail but how to filter
messages at user level with qmail in conjuction vpopmail - any suggestions ?
Matthias Henze
MH458-RIPE
MHC SoftWare GmbH voice: +49-(0)9533-92006-0
Fichtera 17 fax: +49-(0)9533-92006-6
96274 Itzgrund/Germany e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------
------------- http://www.mhcsoftware.de -----------
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 11:05:22AM +0200, Petr Novotny wrote:
> I must be missing something: I want to have an alternative aliases
> file to be used by a user controlling a few virtual domains.
Yup.
> I know how I would _use_ such a file:
> $cat ~user/.qmail-default
> |fastforward -d ./alternative-aliases.cdb
> $
>
> The question is: How do I _create_ such a file? According to the
> manpage, newaliases has /etc/aliases hardcoded in it. What's the
> alternative? (Except, of course, creating the file as /etc/aliases.cdb
> and then moving it somewhere; I don't want to give that used write
> permissions into /etc, obviously.)
setforward is the real major program in fastforward. newaliases is just
a wrapper that preserves some <shudder> sendmail compatibility.
man setforward
--
Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MAILER-DAEMON (612)-321-9290 x101
Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
I did some benchmarking using a standard 7200 RPM disk and a 128MB ramdisk.
The machine was not using any swap, so there was no chance of the ramdisk
accidentally making it to disk.
In short, performance on it sucked. The throughput was about 10% less than
IDE, but seeks/sec were 5-10 times more. However, the CPU was maxed at 100%
during tests to the ramdisk.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 12:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: questions about performance and setup
Steve Wolfe wrote:
> > With all of the emails I recieved, I get the impression that I'm going
to
> > I/O bound instead of processor or memory bound. How much disk will be
> > sufficient for the queue? 1GB? More?
>
> It's not so much a matter of disk size (I don't think you'll have a 1
gig
> queue!),
You could quite easily get a 1 Gig queue, even if you don't run into the
obvious problem of temporary loss of network connectivity. Say you've
got 200,000 subscribers and you generate your messages twice as fast
as qmail can send them, then when you've finished generating the
messages you've still got 100,000 in the queue. If the messages are
10Kb each, that's 1 Gb.
> > (I can put 2GB of ram in the box)? Linux has support for making a disk
in
> > memory, putting a filesystem on it and mounting it. Wouldn't this take
> > care of I/O problems?
>
> That's about as good of I/O as you can get, I would imagine. ; ) As
> another author stated, the largest gain would be in writes, but that's
where
> the largest expenditure is anyway. Just make dang, dang sure that your
> machine is NOT going to have any hiccups or lose power while the queue is
> full, or you'll instantly lose it all.
What if you put the 2 Gb RAM in the box, but let Linux use it as a disk
cache?
I'm not sure how the disk caching under Linux works, but if you create a
file
and then delete it before it actually gets written to disk, is there any
disk
activity required?
Sure, the disks will be thrashing away, trying to keep up, but would the I/O
actually block if there was still room in the disk cache?
- Oliver.
> What if you put the 2 Gb RAM in the box, but let Linux use it as a disk cache?
> I'm not sure how the disk caching under Linux works, but if you create a file
> and then delete it before it actually gets written to disk, is there any disk
> activity required?
> Sure, the disks will be thrashing away, trying to keep up, but would the I/O
> actually block if there was still room in the disk cache?
Yes it will block. That's the whole point of the fsync() calls embedded within
qmail. The code wants to be sure that data is on disk before proceeding. The
only caveat is that some file systems may *lie* about the results of their
fsync() and tell the process that the data has been placed on disk when it
still sits in memory. In that sort of scenario you may well gain, especially
if the I/O queue is subsequently sorted by cylinder prior to sending to the
disk.
As others have said, it's the cost of seeking - the amount of data is
often trivial. Thus the concept of zeroseek which is pretty similar to
what a journalling file system is trying to do on a more general level.
Regards.
"Hubbard, David" wrote:
> know what you're getting into on the Dell boxes if you choose
> to run linux. I've got a Dell PE2400 dual that runs linux
> and you're going to be at the mercy of Dell and Adaptec on
> when you upgrade your kernel because they have some sorry
> proprietary drivers for their RAID controllers that are
> tailored to a specific kernel version and redhat sub-revision.
> If you can put up with that, then Redhat Linux/Qmail on a
> Dell runs very fast, I'm happy with mine. But at the same
Just for the record, it depends on the RAID controller that you purchase
from Dell. The PERC 2/DC and 2/SC (Dual Channel and Single Channel) are
just AMI MegaRAID controllers with open source drivers included in the
standard kernels.
The PERC 3/Si (and maybe the PERC 2/Si?) are the Adaptec RAIDPort
controllers with closed-source drivers. You have to wait for Adaptec/Dell
to release new precompiled modules that can only be used with specific
kernels that Redhat releases. But, the PERC 3/Si is much cheaper than the
2/DC if you are on a budget, need RAID, and don't care about having the
latest kernel. You can probably get a better DPT card for around the same
price, though. (Note: Adaptec now owns DPT)
I have a Dell 2450 with PERC 2/DC controller and 18GB mirrored disks
running linux with Qmail. Compiled latest standard kernel with no problem,
and the machine runs like a champ.
Later ;)
--
S. Clint Bullock
Network Administrator
University of Georgia
Office of the Vice President for Research
626 Boyd GSRC
Athens, GA 30602-7411
(706) 542-5936
(706) 542-5638 FAX
begin:vcard
n:Bullock;Clint
tel;fax:(706) 542-5946
tel;work:(706) 542-5936
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.ovpr.uga.edu
org:University of Georgia;Office of the Vice President for Research
adr:;;626 Boyd GSRC;Athens;GA;30602-7411;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Network Administrator
fn:Clint Bullock
end:vcard
Nothing wrong with 100% CPU usage. It just means that the kernel was able to
soak the CPU with work ... which is good. Maxing out your performance on a RAM
disk at 75% CPU usage means your system has a problem somewhere.
As for performance though, I'd be interested in seeing the actual numbers from
the ramdisk test to check against my 10k RPM disk stats.
"Austad, Jay" wrote:
> I did some benchmarking using a standard 7200 RPM disk and a 128MB ramdisk.
> The machine was not using any swap, so there was no chance of the ramdisk
> accidentally making it to disk.
>
> In short, performance on it sucked. The throughput was about 10% less than
> IDE, but seeks/sec were 5-10 times more. However, the CPU was maxed at 100%
> during tests to the ramdisk.
>As for performance though, I'd be interested in seeing the actual numbers
from
>the ramdisk test to check against my 10k RPM disk stats.
I used bonnie++ to test it. I'll post the results sometime today, when I
get some time.
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael T. Babcock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 10:41 AM
To: Austad, Jay; Qmail Mailing List
Subject: Re: questions about performance and setup
Nothing wrong with 100% CPU usage. It just means that the kernel was able
to
soak the CPU with work ... which is good. Maxing out your performance on a
RAM
disk at 75% CPU usage means your system has a problem somewhere.
As for performance though, I'd be interested in seeing the actual numbers
from
the ramdisk test to check against my 10k RPM disk stats.
"Austad, Jay" wrote:
> I did some benchmarking using a standard 7200 RPM disk and a 128MB
ramdisk.
> The machine was not using any swap, so there was no chance of the ramdisk
> accidentally making it to disk.
>
> In short, performance on it sucked. The throughput was about 10% less
than
> IDE, but seeks/sec were 5-10 times more. However, the CPU was maxed at
100%
> during tests to the ramdisk.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:23:00PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Bruce Guenter writes:
> > The faster seek time, the better (which is the motivation behind DJB's
> > ingenious zeroseek proposal).
>
> I've been thinking about how you would do that. If you really want no
> seeks, then you would have to keep small messages in memory, and only
> write them out to a circular queue. You'd write out a checkpoint
> whenever a message is safely delivered. The problem is messages that
> aren't safely delivered. When you wrapped around to them, you'd have
> to read them out into another queue.
>
> The other problem I anticipate zeroseek having is the guarantee of a
> seekable file on qmail-local's stdin.
I believe the premise of zeroseek is that none of the queue files will
ever be sync'd, and as such they will typically only exist in the cache
(since their queue lifetime will be less than 30 seconds). They still
exist in the filesystem, but a modern OS will not cause them to get
flushed until either memory pressure or aging pushes them out of the
cache.
The only way to get truely zero seek performance is to use a
log-structured file system on a clean disk. Otherwise, you will seek
occasionally to write out some dirty metadata. Even if you pre-allocate
your log file on a regular filesystem, you will seek occasionally (once
a second, AFAICT) to update the utime in the inode.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
Is UTIME necessary in a mail queue? If a logging filesystem were mounted on a
separate disk (or network array, etc.) specifically for the mail queue,
shouldn't it be mounted without UTIME?
Bruce Guenter wrote:
> The only way to get truely zero seek performance is to use a
> log-structured file system on a clean disk. Otherwise, you will seek
> occasionally to write out some dirty metadata. Even if you pre-allocate
> your log file on a regular filesystem, you will seek occasionally (once
> a second, AFAICT) to update the utime in the inode.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:25:36PM -0400, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> Is UTIME necessary in a mail queue? If a logging filesystem were mounted on a
> separate disk (or network array, etc.) specifically for the mail queue,
> shouldn't it be mounted without UTIME?
You cannot mount without mtime (I misspelt it -- utime is the syscall)
AFAIK. You can mount without atime (access time). mtime is changed
every time the file is modified. ctime is changed every time the inode
is modified (file size change, permissions, etc.) atime is changed
every time the file is accessed.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:25:36PM -0400, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> Is UTIME necessary in a mail queue? If a logging filesystem were mounted on a
> separate disk (or network array, etc.) specifically for the mail queue,
> shouldn't it be mounted without UTIME?
Do you mean atime or mtime? In either case, not all Unixen allow such
mount options. Sepcifically Solaris only has noatime. I'd be surprised
though if the OS wants to update the directory once a second to get
an atime/mtime on disk for an opened file. Maybe once a minute which
is not an unreasonable cost for zeroseek.
This is probably something that's more appropriately discussed on
the zeroseek list. The bottom line though is that when qmail-queue
exits(0), the email must be phsyically on disk which means there
must be at least one fsync() - no choice whatsoever.
The zeroseek question is all about how you minimize the number
of fsyncs and how you structure the queue so that the fsync() incurs
a minimal seek on disk. Oh and combine that with appropriate security
access to that queue structure and your done!
Regards.
>
> Bruce Guenter wrote:
>
> > The only way to get truely zero seek performance is to use a
> > log-structured file system on a clean disk. Otherwise, you will seek
> > occasionally to write out some dirty metadata. Even if you pre-allocate
> > your log file on a regular filesystem, you will seek occasionally (once
> > a second, AFAICT) to update the utime in the inode.
>
To be honest, I'm not aware of being able to disable UTIME either, although NOATIME
is an option on Linux as well. I asked because it occured to me that this meta data
is not terribly useful to mail servers (as the times necessary are stored in the
data files themselves). Being able to shut these off may or may not reduce
performance penalties of fsync()'s. Might be an issue for the ReiserFS or EXT3
people to think about.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:25:36PM -0400, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> > Is UTIME necessary in a mail queue? If a logging filesystem were mounted on a
> > separate disk (or network array, etc.) specifically for the mail queue,
> > shouldn't it be mounted without UTIME?
>
> Do you mean atime or mtime? In either case, not all Unixen allow such
> mount options. Sepcifically Solaris only has noatime. I'd be surprised
> though if the OS wants to update the directory once a second to get
> an atime/mtime on disk for an opened file. Maybe once a minute which
> is not an unreasonable cost for zeroseek.
Yes, sorry ... utime.
But as I said in the other message ... it would be nice.
Bruce Guenter wrote:
> You cannot mount without mtime (I misspelt it -- utime is the syscall)
> AFAIK. You can mount without atime (access time). mtime is changed
> every time the file is modified. ctime is changed every time the inode
> is modified (file size change, permissions, etc.) atime is changed
> every time the file is accessed.
On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Olivier M. wrote:
[snip]
> > - suggestion : I really miss this feature from vacation in your autoresponder:
> >
> > If the string $SUBJECT appears in the .vacation.msg file,
> > it is replaced with the subject of the original message
> > when the reply is sent.
> >
> > Maybe you want to take it on your todolist ? :)
>
> Sounds reasonable. I had been thinking of some way of putting the
> original subject into the response. The other way I was thinking of
> doing it would be a command-line option to add the original subject to
> the reply with a given prefix.
It's be nice to have not just the subject, but the date, sender and
possibly the message-id and recipient.
> --
> Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
>
--
"Life is much too important to be taken seriously."
Thomas Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (613) 998-2836
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 10:42:35AM -0400, Thomas Erskine wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> > Sounds reasonable. I had been thinking of some way of putting the
> > original subject into the response. The other way I was thinking of
> > doing it would be a command-line option to add the original subject to
> > the reply with a given prefix.
> It's be nice to have not just the subject, but the date, sender and
> possibly the message-id and recipient.
The original sender gets added as a "To:" line, the date is
auto-generated as is the message-id, and the original recipient can be
emulated by putting a "From:" line and "Return-Path:" into the message
file. Why in the world would you want to copy the original date and
message-id into the new message header?
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 01:14:06PM -0400, Thomas Erskine wrote:
> >The original sender gets added as a "To:" line, the date is
> >auto-generated as is the message-id, and the original recipient can be
> >emulated by putting a "From:" line and "Return-Path:" into the message
> >file. Why in the world would you want to copy the original date and
> >message-id into the new message header?
> Not into the header, but into the body of the reply.
You can already copy the original message into the reply, optionally
limiting its size.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
Are there any downsides to using the Netscape Messenger progress patch?
In other words, does it violate the standards in such a way as to
potentially break any other clients?
Reminder of what patch does:
replaces "okay();" in qmail-pop3d.c with
puts("+OK ");
put(strnum,fmt_ulong(strnum,m[i].size));
puts(" octets\r\n");
Thanks!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 18 Jul 00, at 10:54, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> Are there any downsides to using the Netscape Messenger progress
> patch?
You're supporting broken technology.
> In other words, does it violate the standards in such a way as
> to potentially break any other clients?
No, unless they're broken. (Of course, if you have to choose
between supporting broken client 1 and broken client 2, well, tough
luck...)
> Reminder of what patch does:
> replaces "okay();" in qmail-pop3d.c with
> puts("+OK ");
> put(strnum,fmt_ulong(strnum,m[i].size));
> puts(" octets\r\n");
Well, yeah. "+OK" field is mandatory, the rest is optional and can
be anything. Netscape is brain-dead to parse the comment and try
to make anything of it. My Pegasus can show me downloading
progress, without need to parse a comment... Go figure.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBOXRikVMwP8g7qbw/EQIbngCbB8GkW4bUaEnHkoVRaTP7eaI65YcAn3G/
+r/rz4zNIQZJT1QPFKZB6upF
=r+Hs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
[Tom Waits]
Petr Novotny writes:
> Well, yeah. "+OK" field is mandatory, the rest is optional and can
> be anything. Netscape is brain-dead to parse the comment and try
> to make anything of it.
Yup. This is 100% Netscape brain damage. They can and should have
gotten the information from a different command.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok |
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Is Unix compatible with
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | Linux?
Does anyone know if this behaviour persists in Mozilla?
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org
Russell Nelson wrote:
> Petr Novotny writes:
> > Well, yeah. "+OK" field is mandatory, the rest is optional and can
> > be anything. Netscape is brain-dead to parse the comment and try
> > to make anything of it.
>
> Yup. This is 100% Netscape brain damage. They can and should have
> gotten the information from a different command.
hello,
i try to install Qmail, but i have a problem when i launch the script
svscan before launching qmail
Multilog: ...can't acces to the directories /var/log/qmail/qmail-send
Multilog: ...can't acces to the directories /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
this error print infinite messages on the term ... and it is'nt pretty to
read ;)
i haven't forget the qmail log directory with the righ access:
chown qmaill /var/log/qmail
chown qmaill /var/log/qmail/*
but it is'nt working :(
someone can help me please ...
Dji.
P.S : the solution not seems to be in the FAQ...
--
Audouy Jérôme - 3rd year student in E.S.S.I. (Ecole Supérieure en Sciences
Informatiques)
e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www : http://djidji.citeweb.net
Audouy Jérôme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i try to install Qmail, but i have a problem when i launch the script
>svscan before launching qmail
>
>Multilog: ...can't acces to the directories /var/log/qmail/qmail-send
>Multilog: ...can't acces to the directories /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
>
>this error print infinite messages on the term ... and it is'nt pretty to
>read ;)
>
>i haven't forget the qmail log directory with the righ access:
>
>chown qmaill /var/log/qmail
>chown qmaill /var/log/qmail/*
Access to /var/log/qmail/qmail-send requires more than just the
correct owner. The mode on the directory has to be right, as does the
mode of all of the parent directories.
Do:
ls -ld / /var /var/log /var/log/qmail /var/log/qmail/*
and post the results.
-Dave
Hi,
I run a qmail server and I want know the total number of bytes sent
trought it, y use qmailanalog 0.70 and gawk 3.0.4, but instead of show the
total bytes in completes messages show a nunmber like this 1.983e+10, I
tried use gawk and mawk, the server is a Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 on a PII
450, anyone know whats the problem?.
Completed messages: 203516
Recipients for completed messages: 249900
Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 262893
Average delivery attempts per completed message: 1.29176
Bytes in completed messages: 1.983e+10
Bytes weighted by success: 3.26035e+10
Average message qtime (s): 187.789
Total delivery attempts: 277221
success: 248610
failure: 3155
deferral: 25456
Total ddelay (s): 41635824.792378
Average ddelay per success (s): 167.474457
Total xdelay (s): 6424254.748057
Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 23.173767
Time span (days): 15.0111
Average concurrency: 4.95331
Is awk perhaps using an output format that uses scientific notation when the
number (mbytes) is too large? Should you change "print mbytes" to "printf
("%d", mbytes)" ???
Moragues Ramón, Antonio wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I run a qmail server and I want know the total number of bytes sent
> trought it, y use qmailanalog 0.70 and gawk 3.0.4, but instead of show the
> total bytes in completes messages show a nunmber like this 1.983e+10, I
> tried use gawk and mawk, the server is a Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 on a PII
> 450, anyone know whats the problem?.
>
> Completed messages: 203516
> Recipients for completed messages: 249900
> Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 262893
> Average delivery attempts per completed message: 1.29176
> Bytes in completed messages: 1.983e+10
> Bytes weighted by success: 3.26035e+10
> Average message qtime (s): 187.789
>
> Total delivery attempts: 277221
> success: 248610
> failure: 3155
> deferral: 25456
> Total ddelay (s): 41635824.792378
> Average ddelay per success (s): 167.474457
> Total xdelay (s): 6424254.748057
> Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 23.173767
> Time span (days): 15.0111
> Average concurrency: 4.95331
Hi,
I do it with:
printf("Bytes in completed messages: %.0f\n", mbytes)
printf("Bytes weighted by success: %.0f\n", rbytes)
Thanks
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> Is awk perhaps using an output format that uses scientific notation when the
> number (mbytes) is too large? Should you change "print mbytes" to "printf
> ("%d", mbytes)" ???
>
> Moragues Ramón, Antonio wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I run a qmail server and I want know the total number of bytes sent
> > trought it, y use qmailanalog 0.70 and gawk 3.0.4, but instead of show the
> > total bytes in completes messages show a nunmber like this 1.983e+10, I
> > tried use gawk and mawk, the server is a Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 on a PII
> > 450, anyone know whats the problem?.
> >
> > Completed messages: 203516
> > Recipients for completed messages: 249900
> > Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 262893
> > Average delivery attempts per completed message: 1.29176
> > Bytes in completed messages: 1.983e+10
> > Bytes weighted by success: 3.26035e+10
> > Average message qtime (s): 187.789
> >
> > Total delivery attempts: 277221
> > success: 248610
> > failure: 3155
> > deferral: 25456
> > Total ddelay (s): 41635824.792378
> > Average ddelay per success (s): 167.474457
> > Total xdelay (s): 6424254.748057
> > Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 23.173767
> > Time span (days): 15.0111
> > Average concurrency: 4.95331
>
I'm using vpopmail and qmailadmin to create and delete domains & users.
Is it not creating a directory somewhere???
Log output:
Jul 18 23:10:30 web qmail: 963976230.829313 starting delivery 434: msg
49123 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jul 18 23:10:30 web qmail: 963976230.857739 delivery 434: deferral:
Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/
Hi all:
now i have a problem when install sqwebmail,
I use vpopmail+mysql+sqwebmail,and have installed vopopmail4.8.4+mysql. i think it is
ok.
then there is some problem when i install sqwebmail0.37.
i run ./configure --enalbe-authvchkpw --without-authpam
--without-authuserdb --without-authpwd --without-authshadow
--enable-webpass=no
then run make
there is some error massage like this:
...
/usr/local/vpopmail-4.8.4/vauth.c 537:undefined reference to 'mysql_free_result'
/home/vpopmail/lib/libvpopmail.a vuth.o):infunction'vopen_smtp_relay':
/usr/local/vpopmail-4.8.4/vauth.c 563:undefined reference to 'mysql_query'
/usr/local/vpopmail-4.8.4/vauth.c 584:undefined reference to 'mysql_query'
.
.
.
make[1]:***[authvchkpw] Error 1
make:***[all-recursive] Error 1
/usr/local/vpopmail-4.8.4 is the path i unzip the tar file
/home/vpopmail is the path i install
even if i delete the path /usr/local/vpopmail-4.8.4 ,the error is the same.
i install mysql with rpm file.
mysql lib path: /usr/lib/mysql
mysql include path: /usr/include/mysql
i reinstall Redhat6.2+qmail+mysql+vpopmail, it is all ok.
when i install sqwebmail, it is the same error.
i am very vey anxious and will appreciate for ur help.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi
I have got following problem: QMail doesn't deliver mail. This error is written
in /var/log/mail every 10 seconds:
Jul 18 18:43:18 serverbox qmail: 963938598.822295 alert: unable to opendir
todo, sleeping...
Jul 18 18:43:28 serverbox qmail: 963938608.832287 alert: unable to opendir
todo, sleeping...
Jul 18 18:43:38 serverbox qmail: 963938618.842284 alert: unable to opendir
todo, sleeping...
here is some more information:
"ls -l /var/qmail/queue | grep todo"
drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 4096 Jul 18 18:39 todo
"ls -l /var/qmail/queue/todo"
drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 4096 Jul 18 18:23 ./
drwxr-x--- 11 qmailq qmail 4096 Jul 18 17:48 ../
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq root 48 Jul 18 17:50 211303
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq root 48 Jul 18 17:53 211305
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq root 48 Jul 18 17:54 211307
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq root 48 Jul 18 17:59 211312
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq root 48 Jul 18 17:59 211314
these 5 files have been created after I did (5 times) : "echo to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject"
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq nofiles 50 Jul 18 18:22 211316
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq nofiles 48 Jul 18 18:22 211318
-rw-r--r-- 2 qmailq nofiles 48 Jul 18 18:23 211320
these three files have been created, after I sent mail from a email account on
an other host.
Thanks in advance,
Stephan
Hello all,
I was wondering if I could get some help with a small problem I have.
I have configured my qmail, and it is running fine. I have made sure that
it is not an open relay, but I found one small glitch that I would like to fix.
I have been successful stopping relaying to outside hosts using tcpserver,
but any message starting with a <> Message ID can be delivered to an
outside host. I would like to stop this. I realize the importance of having
the Null Message headers for bounces, but I would like to stop the ability
to send from my server to an outside site without a Message ID.
Thanks for your help.
Quoting Robert Spraggs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I have been successful stopping relaying to outside hosts using tcpserver,
> but any message starting with a <> Message ID can be delivered to an
Do you mean anything with a null return path? qmail doesn't give a
whit what's in the message-id, nor does it relay to anywhere just
because the return path is null. Only connections that have
RELAYCLIENT set or to recipients in rcpthosts are accepted for relay.
If this is really the behavior you see, you need to provide
information on your qmail setup--any patches, addons, etc that you
have applied or using that may cause this sort of behavior. The
results of qmail-showctl and the IP address of the server in question
would be nice, too, so others can test it. Results of your relay
tests (telnet to port 25, for example) may be helpful.
To be sure, I've never seen such behavior by stock qmail, so something
is rotten in Denmark. :)
Aaron
I am using the out-of-the-box configuration of qmail 1.0.3.
Here is an excerpt from my syslog:
Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.748782 new msg 2654625
Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.748946 info msg 2654625: bytes 1426
from <> qp 17024 uid 7774
Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.760341 starting delivery 9163: msg
2654625 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.760460 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Jul 11 13:43:31 noif qmail: 963348211.448284 delivery 9163: success:
216.102.143.2_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_OK/
Jul 11 13:43:31 noif qmail: 963348211.448695 end msg 2654625
I would have thought that this message should have failed since it is not
in my rcpthosts, or listed in my tcp.smtp.cbd file, and therefore not
considered local.
Here is my tcp.smtp:
192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT""
:allow
My rcpthosts contains the all of my domains. The locals file contains all
of the local domains that I want delivered to.
Maybe I am asking the question in the wrong manner.
Thanks for the help.
At 11:59 AM 7/18/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Quoting Robert Spraggs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I have been successful stopping relaying to outside hosts using tcpserver,
> > but any message starting with a <> Message ID can be delivered to an
>
>Do you mean anything with a null return path? qmail doesn't give a
>whit what's in the message-id, nor does it relay to anywhere just
>because the return path is null. Only connections that have
>RELAYCLIENT set or to recipients in rcpthosts are accepted for relay.
>If this is really the behavior you see, you need to provide
>information on your qmail setup--any patches, addons, etc that you
>have applied or using that may cause this sort of behavior. The
>results of qmail-showctl and the IP address of the server in question
>would be nice, too, so others can test it. Results of your relay
>tests (telnet to port 25, for example) may be helpful.
>
>To be sure, I've never seen such behavior by stock qmail, so something
>is rotten in Denmark. :)
>
>Aaron
Quoting Robert Spraggs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I am using the out-of-the-box configuration of qmail 1.0.3.
> Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.748946 info msg 2654625: bytes 1426
> from <> qp 17024 uid 7774
> Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.760341 starting delivery 9163: msg
> 2654625 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I would have thought that this message should have failed since it is not
> in my rcpthosts, or listed in my tcp.smtp.cbd file, and therefore not
> considered local.
>
> Here is my tcp.smtp:
> 192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT""
> :allow
Hmm, well the output of tcpserver's logfile would help more with
determining whether this connection comes from an IP address that is
allowed relaying. Second, that rule 192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT"" is
not formatted properly. It should be RELAYCLIENT="" -- although I
must say the formatting error would not cause unauthorized relay.
It would seem you're obfuscating your IP addresses, or else really
using reserved IP space?
If the IP address isn't in your rules file and setting RELAYCLIENT,
with stock qmail and a working tcpserver with rules, I can only think
of one thing: the message is accepted by another mail server in the
192.168.2.0/24 network with your qmail server as its smarthost.
There's no other way to relay through stock qmail if you have a
rcpthosts file present. RELAYCLIENT *has* to be set, period. So,
what was the IP address of the connection that initiated that mail
transfer? Don't obfuscate, show us the real stuff, and the tcpserver
logs.
Aaron
Unfortunately I do not have the tcpserver logfiles. The tcp.smtp error is
my bad typing again. As for not giving you the rest, I'm a lazy typer as
well, I only gave you the last lines. sorry.
I was thinking( I know a dangerous concept :-) ) would putting the
following in the tcp.smtp.cbd file be as effective:
127.0.0.1:allow
199.175.103.1:allow <--- the IP of the mail host --->
That would make sure that only local messages would be delivered, right?
Thanks again for the help.
At 12:58 PM 7/18/00 -0700, Aaron L. Meehan wrote:
>Quoting Robert Spraggs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I am using the out-of-the-box configuration of qmail 1.0.3.
>
> > Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.748946 info msg 2654625: bytes 1426
> > from <> qp 17024 uid 7774
> > Jul 11 13:43:10 noif qmail: 963348190.760341 starting delivery 9163: msg
> > 2654625 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > I would have thought that this message should have failed since it is not
> > in my rcpthosts, or listed in my tcp.smtp.cbd file, and therefore not
> > considered local.
> >
> > Here is my tcp.smtp:
> > 192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT""
> > :allow
>
>Hmm, well the output of tcpserver's logfile would help more with
>determining whether this connection comes from an IP address that is
>allowed relaying. Second, that rule 192.168.2.:allow,RELAYCLIENT"" is
>not formatted properly. It should be RELAYCLIENT="" -- although I
>must say the formatting error would not cause unauthorized relay.
>
>It would seem you're obfuscating your IP addresses, or else really
>using reserved IP space?
>
>If the IP address isn't in your rules file and setting RELAYCLIENT,
>with stock qmail and a working tcpserver with rules, I can only think
>of one thing: the message is accepted by another mail server in the
>192.168.2.0/24 network with your qmail server as its smarthost.
>
>There's no other way to relay through stock qmail if you have a
>rcpthosts file present. RELAYCLIENT *has* to be set, period. So,
>what was the IP address of the connection that initiated that mail
>transfer? Don't obfuscate, show us the real stuff, and the tcpserver
>logs.
>
>Aaron
I have been put on the RSS and ORBS list because this test keeps failing:
>>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[199.175.103.1]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[199.175.103.1]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> DATA
<<< 354 go ahead
>>> (message body)
<<< 250 ok 962278341 qp 3683
/var/local/maps/rss/bin/rly: relay accepted - final response code 250
Is there any way to configure Qmail to stop this type of mail from being
accepted?
I know that even though it allows the message, that it may not necessarily
work, because it fails at a later stage. I have tested with ORBS and the
test comes back as allowing the message to process, but the message never
actually gets delivered, so I know that it is not acting as a relay. It
would be nice for the test to fail so that these spam controllers have
absolutely no reason to put someone on the list.
Thanks.
You don't get added to ORBS unless they receive a relayed mail back from you.
In addition, you don't get added to RSS unless someone has forwarded them a
piece of UCE which has been relayed through your server. So you have some
sort of problem or misconfiguration besides what you have pasted here which is
allowing spammers to relay through your host.
--Adam
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:27:11PM -0700, Robert Spraggs wrote:
> I have been put on the RSS and ORBS list because this test keeps failing:
>
> >>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[199.175.103.1]>
> <<< 250 ok
> >>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[199.175.103.1]>
> <<< 250 ok
> >>> DATA
> <<< 354 go ahead
> >>> (message body)
> <<< 250 ok 962278341 qp 3683
> /var/local/maps/rss/bin/rly: relay accepted - final response code 250
>
> Is there any way to configure Qmail to stop this type of mail from being
> accepted?
>
> I know that even though it allows the message, that it may not necessarily
> work, because it fails at a later stage. I have tested with ORBS and the
> test comes back as allowing the message to process, but the message never
> actually gets delivered, so I know that it is not acting as a relay. It
> would be nice for the test to fail so that these spam controllers have
> absolutely no reason to put someone on the list.
>
> Thanks.
>
I know. I had a misconfiguration problem earlier, and I am trying to
rectify the situation. I was wondering if it was possible to setup the
qmail so I do not have this problem in the future. I figure that if I
disable that feature in the qmail, then I should knock out about 99% of the
possible ways that a spammer could use my system as a relay again.
Wrong thinking?
Thanks.
At 03:33 PM 7/18/00 -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
>You don't get added to ORBS unless they receive a relayed mail back from you.
>
>In addition, you don't get added to RSS unless someone has forwarded them a
>piece of UCE which has been relayed through your server. So you have some
>sort of problem or misconfiguration besides what you have pasted here which is
>allowing spammers to relay through your host.
>
>--Adam
>
>On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:27:11PM -0700, Robert Spraggs wrote:
> > I have been put on the RSS and ORBS list because this test keeps failing:
> >
> > >>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[199.175.103.1]>
> > <<< 250 ok
> > >>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[199.175.103.1]>
> > <<< 250 ok
> > >>> DATA
> > <<< 354 go ahead
> > >>> (message body)
> > <<< 250 ok 962278341 qp 3683
> > /var/local/maps/rss/bin/rly: relay accepted - final response code 250
> >
> > Is there any way to configure Qmail to stop this type of mail from being
> > accepted?
> >
> > I know that even though it allows the message, that it may not necessarily
> > work, because it fails at a later stage. I have tested with ORBS and the
> > test comes back as allowing the message to process, but the message never
> > actually gets delivered, so I know that it is not acting as a relay. It
> > would be nice for the test to fail so that these spam controllers have
> > absolutely no reason to put someone on the list.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:34:27PM -0700, Robert Spraggs wrote:
> I know. I had a misconfiguration problem earlier, and I am trying to
> rectify the situation. I was wondering if it was possible to setup the
> qmail so I do not have this problem in the future. I figure that if I
> disable that feature in the qmail, then I should knock out about 99% of the
> possible ways that a spammer could use my system as a relay again.
The only way qmail relays a message is if RELAYCLIENT is (explicitly) set, or
if the RCPT domain is in rcpthosts. That is the ONLY way qmail will relay a
message. There are no vulnerabilities in qmail which allow spammers to relay
messages through your server if it is configured properly. If you want to be
removed from ORBS/RSS then you should inform them that your servers have been
secured.
I have been running qmail for years along with many other people on this list
and I have never had trouble with ORBS or RSS.
--Adam
But why does qmail allow for this type of address to be accepted as ok?
RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[199.175.103.1]>
What normal use would there be for such a message construct?
I'm sorry for the questions, but I need to make sure that I will not be
used as a relay again, and I would like to know more about how it was used
in the first place.
Thanks again.
At 03:43 PM 7/18/00 -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:34:27PM -0700, Robert Spraggs wrote:
> > I know. I had a misconfiguration problem earlier, and I am trying to
> > rectify the situation. I was wondering if it was possible to setup the
> > qmail so I do not have this problem in the future. I figure that if I
> > disable that feature in the qmail, then I should knock out about 99% of
> the
> > possible ways that a spammer could use my system as a relay again.
>
>The only way qmail relays a message is if RELAYCLIENT is (explicitly) set, or
>if the RCPT domain is in rcpthosts. That is the ONLY way qmail will relay a
>message. There are no vulnerabilities in qmail which allow spammers to relay
>messages through your server if it is configured properly. If you want to be
>removed from ORBS/RSS then you should inform them that your servers have been
>secured.
>
>I have been running qmail for years along with many other people on this list
>and I have never had trouble with ORBS or RSS.
>
>--Adam
Quoting Robert Spraggs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> But why does qmail allow for this type of address to be accepted as ok?
>
> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[199.175.103.1]>
>
> What normal use would there be for such a message construct?
Back in the day with sendmaul, this would send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] via 199.175.103.1. Nowadays, I'd say use is pretty
much restricted to spammers who try to get around anti-relay
configurations, and who are often successful due to MTA bugs and
admin-induced holes, hence the need to test servers for such flaws.
qmail will bounce the mail after it fails to find a local user named
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]". qmail accepts all local deliveries unless not
allowed by badmailfrom or similiar. Like Adam said, it's nothing for
you to worry about, since the relay tester will never get a reply
back.
Aaron
Hi,
this is an old problem.
Apply the SPAMCONTROL patch
http://www.fehcom.de/qmail_en.html
and put "spamtest*" in badmailpatterns.
That'll do.
cheers.
eh.
At 12:27 18.7.2000 -0700, Robert Spraggs wrote:
>I have been put on the RSS and ORBS list because this test keeps failing:
>
> >>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[199.175.103.1]>
> <<< 250 ok
> >>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[199.175.103.1]>
> <<< 250 ok
> >>> DATA
> <<< 354 go ahead
> >>> (message body)
> <<< 250 ok 962278341 qp 3683
> /var/local/maps/rss/bin/rly: relay accepted - final response code 250
>
>Is there any way to configure Qmail to stop this type of mail from being
>accepted?
>
>I know that even though it allows the message, that it may not necessarily
>work, because it fails at a later stage. I have tested with ORBS and the
>test comes back as allowing the message to process, but the message never
>actually gets delivered, so I know that it is not acting as a relay. It
>would be nice for the test to fail so that these spam controllers have
>absolutely no reason to put someone on the list.
>
>Thanks.
>
>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| fff hh http://www.fehcom.de Dr. Erwin Hoffmann |
| ff hh |
| ff eee hhhh ccc ooo mm mm mm Wiener Weg 8 |
| fff ee ee hh hh cc oo oo mmm mm mm 50858 Koeln |
| ff ee eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm |
| ff eee hh hh cc oo oo mm mm mm Tel 0221 484 4923 |
| ff eeee hh hh ccc ooo mm mm mm Fax 0221 484 4924 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
What is the easiest way to acomplish this forwarding in qmail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Do I really have to have 5 .qmail files???????
Isn't there a way to say:
[bla1|bla2]@gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[kill|spam]@gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Henrik Gemal, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webmail Evangelist
Tele Danmark Internet
http://gemal.dk/card/
Henrik Gemal writes:
> What is the easiest way to acomplish this forwarding in qmail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> @gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Do I really have to have 5 .qmail files???????
Yup. Don't worry about it, it's only 5 files. When it grows to a
thousand, then you might want to consider using a .qmail-default and
fastforward.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok |
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Is Unix compatible with
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | Linux?
Henrik Gemal wrote:
>
> What is the easiest way to acomplish this forwarding in qmail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> @gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Do I really have to have 5 .qmail files???????
>
> Isn't there a way to say:
> [bla1|bla2]@gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [kill|spam]@gemal.dk -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Hi Henrik!
Do these users actually exist? Or to be more precise: Is
there any reason for these users to have valid accounts?
If not, then you could do the following:
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ~alias/.qmail-bla1
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ~alias/.qmail-bla2
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ~alias/.qmail-kill
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ~alias/.qmail-spam
for the first four. Not sure if "@gemal.dk" would be
delivered at all - maybe to the account in
~alias/.qmail-default?
Eric
Hi,
I got real confused about reading many different sources about how to setup
and configure Qmail, but can't solve my problem at all:
I need to run several different mail domains on one machine, but any one with
different user accounts.
Sample:
mail.one.com (users A, B, C)
mail.two.com (users D, E, F)
mail.three.de (users G, H and A, D)
Of course a mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is not allowed, and so on. Any mail domain
has it own user base.
Qmail is installed and seems to run fine. But no matter what I tried I can
send mail to user A in any configured domain, not only to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I also tried fastforward, no changings.
Thanks for any help,
Thomas
This evening I attempted to bring up my companys qmail server. Things are
not going well.
I installed these packages
checkpassword-0.81
daemontools-0.70
qmail-1.03
ucspi-tcp-0.88
I am starting POP in a different way. I created a
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run file like this:
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
mailperson.cardinalservices.com \
/usr/local/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1
I made sure that 'pop3' is in /etc/services
stopped sendmail - /etc/rc.d/init.d/sendmail stop
made my aliases for postmaster and such.
I removed these lines from /etc/inetd.conf
completely REMOVED these lines
# do not uncomment smtp unless you *really* know what you are doing.
# smtp is handled by the sendmail daemon now, not smtpd. It does NOT
# run from here, it is started at boot time from /etc/rc.d/rc#.d.
#smtp stream tcp nowait root /usr/bin/smtpd smtpd
#nntp stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd in.nntpd
pop-2 stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd ipop2d
#pop-3 stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd ipop3d
pop-3 stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd popper -sR
#pop-3 stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd in.qpopper
imap stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd imapd
and rebooted the server. After reboot I do a ps waux | grep qmail
qmaild /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u 771 -g 730
0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t !tai64nlocal /var/log/qmail
qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t !tai64nlocal /var/log/qmail/smtpd
qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t !tai64nlocal /var/log/qmail/pop3d
qmailq qmail-clean
qmailr qmail-rspawn
qmails qmail-send
root supervise qmail-send
root supervise qmail-smtpd
root supervise qmail-pop3d
root /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
mailperson.cardinalservice
s.com /usr
root qmail-lspawn ./Maildir/
As I attempt to gather my mail through Outlook Express, it prompts me for
password. I try multiple accounts with no luck. My password is rejected.
That's odd. I just checked the line in the above script
/usr/local/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1
I did a 'locate checkpassword' and it showed it in /bin, and I changed the
script, but my password still isn't good. Any Ideas?
On top of that, I got the convert-and-create script from qmail.org.
I chmod 755 it. When I run it , I get this:
Bareword found where operator expected at /var/qmail/bin/convert-and-create
line 8, near "/var/spool"
(Missing operator before pool?)
syntax error at /var/qmail/bin/convert-and-create line 8, near "/var/spool"
Execution of /var/qmail/bin/convert-and-create aborted due to compilation e
rrors.
Anyone ever come across this one? Any help is appreciated
tony.campisi
From: Tony Campisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
Shouldn't that be
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
? Notice the dash in the name of the service.
Armando
According to /etc/services on a FreeBSD box...
# Updated from RFC 1700, ``Assigned Numbers'' (October 1994). All ports
# are included.
pop2 109/tcp postoffice #Post Office Protocol - Version 2
pop3 110/tcp #Post Office Protocol - Version 3
pop3s 995/tcp
No dashes
Gavin
[]-----------------------------------+------------------------------------[]
| Gavin Cameron | ITworks Consulting |
| Ph : +61 3 9642 5477 | Level 8, 488 Bourke Street |
| Fax : +61 3 9642 5499 | Melbourne, Victoria |
| Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Australia, 3000 |
[]-----------------------------------+------------------------------------[]
On Wed, 19 Jul 2000, asantos wrote:
> From: Tony Campisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
>
>
> Shouldn't that be
>
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
>
> ? Notice the dash in the name of the service.
>
> Armando
>
>
>
>
From: Gavin Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>According to /etc/services on a FreeBSD box...
>
># Updated from RFC 1700, ``Assigned Numbers'' (October 1994). All ports
># are included.
>
>pop2 109/tcp postoffice #Post Office Protocol - Version 2
>pop3 110/tcp #Post Office Protocol - Version 3
>pop3s 995/tcp
>
>No dashes
Of course, but notice that Tony has dashes in the deleted inetd.conf lines.
Also, it is fairly common (as in Debian GNU/Linux) to have the dashes...
even if wrongly. Such is life.
Anyway, he must make doubly sure that the spelling in /etc/services matches
the one in the run script, or better yet write 110 instead of pop3 or pop-3.
Armando
> From: Tony Campisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
> Shouldn't that be
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
> ? Notice the dash in the name of the service.
In my /etc/services file it says:
pop3 110/tcp
pop-3 110/tcp
I've been using 'pop3' during my testing on another machine and it worked
good. My server was down for 3 hours, so I panicked and put sendmail back on
until I can figure out what happened.
Thanks guys for answering. Armando, I'm gonna try to write 110 instead of
pop3 or pop-3 next time.
...oh! the shame
tony.campisi
From: Tony Campisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Thanks guys for answering. Armando, I'm gonna try to write 110 instead of
>pop3 or pop-3 next time.
No prob.
May I suggest you keep sendmail up and run the smtp and pop services on
other ports for testing purposes?
Armando
Hi guys
I installed qmail on a local machine last night and i am trying to process
my mails using procmail.
I have added | preline procmail in my ~user/.qmail file
When the the new mail arrives procmail is spawned and the mail is processed
and sento the appropriate folder
However everyone who has logged into the machine get a warning..
*******
ourserv procmail[21174]: Couldn't rename bogus "/var/spool/mail/anand" into
"/var/spool/mail/BOGUS.Y5eB"
*******
Now why is this happening.. As i can make out this is a typical sendmail
response to a ln in /var/spool/mail/user.. How do i disable this .. We are
using procmail v3.11pre7.
Regards,
Devinder
Hello
everyone.
Now my qmail pill up too many mails in smtp queue.
How to delete these mails,
so that can let new mails can be send out?
Thanks.
Sincerely yours,
David
00-7-19 9:17:29
Version 0.91 of qmail-autoresponder is now available at:
http://em.ca/~bruceg/qmail-autoresponder/
See the documentation there for more details,
or join the mailing list by sending an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Development versions of qmail-autoresponder are available via anonymous CVS.
Set your CVSROOT to ":pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/CVS",
login with an empty password, and check out the qmail-autoresponder module.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in version 0.91
- Added an option to insert the original subject into the reply.
- Simplified the header scanning logic.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
qmail-autoresponder
Rate-limited autoresponder for qmail
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version 0.91
2000-07-18
This is a simple program to automatically respond to emails.
It is based on some ideas (but little or no code) from a similar
autoresponder by Eric Huss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and ideas presented
in the qmail mailing list.
Features:
- Limits rate of automatic responses (defaults to a maximum of one
message every hour).
- Will not respond to nearly every type of mailing list or bulk email.
- Will not respond to bounce messages or MAILER-DAEMON.
- Bounces looping messages.
- Can copy original message into response.
- Uses links in the rate-limiting data directory to preserve inodes.
Usage:
Put "|qmail-autoresponder MESSAGE_FILE DIRECTORY" into your ".qmail"
file before other delivery instructions. MESSAGE_FILE is a
pre-formatted response, including headers, and DIRECTORY is the
directory into which rate-limiting information will be stored.
This program is Copyright(C) 2000 Bruce Guenter, and may be copied
according to the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL) Version 2 or a later
version. A copy of this license is included with this package. This
package comes with no warranty of any kind.
PGP signature
Hey Bruce,
I installed qmail-autoresponder but i m like in a fix, dont know wat to do..
according to the insturction i put this in my .qmail-default file..
============================================================================
==
"username | qmail-autoresponder /path/to/auto.txt"
============================================================================
==
and the auto.txt file is containing..
============================================================================
==
Thanks for contacting me, your mail has been noted and would be responded
ASAP.
-Mitul Limbani
============================================================================
==
But the mail is not being autoresponded...
the qmail-autoresponder file is in the path for the user... or should i user
absolute path to it ?
and the user owns the file .qmail-default and auto.txt
permission are
rw-r--r-- for auto.txt
rw-r--r-- for .qmail-default
and i also tried it by creating a file called .qmail-username but in vain...
can u help me regarding the same or may be can u send accross your sample
files it could be of much help...
Anticipating your prompt reply,
Regards,
-Mitul Limbani
(mitul 2 mitul.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Guenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 10:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Announcing qmail-autoresponder version 0.91
Version 0.91 of qmail-autoresponder is now available at:
http://em.ca/~bruceg/qmail-autoresponder/
See the documentation there for more details,
or join the mailing list by sending an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Development versions of qmail-autoresponder are available via anonymous CVS.
Set your CVSROOT to ":pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/CVS",
login with an empty password, and check out the qmail-autoresponder module.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Changes in version 0.91
- Added an option to insert the original subject into the reply.
- Simplified the header scanning logic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
qmail-autoresponder
Rate-limited autoresponder for qmail
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version 0.91
2000-07-18
This is a simple program to automatically respond to emails.
It is based on some ideas (but little or no code) from a similar
autoresponder by Eric Huss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and ideas presented
in the qmail mailing list.
Features:
- Limits rate of automatic responses (defaults to a maximum of one
message every hour).
- Will not respond to nearly every type of mailing list or bulk email.
- Will not respond to bounce messages or MAILER-DAEMON.
- Bounces looping messages.
- Can copy original message into response.
- Uses links in the rate-limiting data directory to preserve inodes.
Usage:
Put "|qmail-autoresponder MESSAGE_FILE DIRECTORY" into your ".qmail"
file before other delivery instructions. MESSAGE_FILE is a
pre-formatted response, including headers, and DIRECTORY is the
directory into which rate-limiting information will be stored.
This program is Copyright(C) 2000 Bruce Guenter, and may be copied
according to the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL) Version 2 or a later
version. A copy of this license is included with this package. This
package comes with no warranty of any kind.
> Access to /var/log/qmail/qmail-send requires more than just the
> correct owner. The mode on the directory has to be right, as does the
> mode of all of the parent directories.
arf, it was a stupid problem, the default mode for the directory
/var/log was 700 :p
thanks :)
@++
Dji.
--
Audouy Jérôme - 3rd year student in E.S.S.I. (Ecole Supérieure en Sciences
Informatiques)
e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www : http://djidji.citeweb.net / http://www.essi.fr/~audouy
oups, no supervise problem ... problem solved :)
--
Audouy Jérôme - 3rd year student in E.S.S.I. (Ecole Supérieure en Sciences
Informatiques)
e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www : http://djidji.citeweb.net / http://www.essi.fr/~audouy
