qmail Digest 31 Jul 2000 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1079
Topics (messages 45827 through 45872):
Re: Want to know your potential multiple recipient savings?
45827 by: Greg Cope
45828 by: Greg Cope
45855 by: richard.illuin.org
45872 by: Greg Cope
Still getting CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily errors
45829 by: Jens Hafsteinsson
45830 by: asantos
45831 by: Jens Hafsteinsson
45849 by: Jens Hafsteinsson
45851 by: Erwin Hoffmann
45852 by: Jens Hafsteinsson
45856 by: asantos
45857 by: asantos
Re: Blocking Spam, badmailfrom not working
45832 by: Hubbard, David
45833 by: Chris, the Young One
45834 by: wolfgang zeikat
45850 by: Erwin Hoffmann
45860 by: Chris Hardie
45861 by: Ben Beuchler
Re: Open letter
45835 by: Bruno Wolff III
Re: bug in qmail-autoresponder version 0.92 ?
45836 by: Bruce Guenter
Re: Sort maildir and send smallest first
45837 by: qmail.col7.metta.lk
45846 by: Peter van Dijk
qmail IMAP & SSL
45838 by: qmail.col7.metta.lk
45847 by: Robin S. Socha
45848 by: Jacob Scott
qlogtools
45839 by: Alex.nder Budiman
Re: [Question about qmail-ldap]
45840 by: Ronny Haryanto
45841 by: Chris, the Young One
45842 by: markd.bushwire.net
Re: invalid characters in a email address?
45843 by: Claus Färber
45844 by: Claus Färber
Qmail with LDAP?
45845 by: Jack Barnett
Asking again: rcpthosts, relaying, and tcp-env 7.6
45853 by: Todd Finney
45859 by: Eric Cox
45863 by: Todd Finney
omail-admin upgrade-work -> php + newest vmailmgr+autoresponder features. any
suggestion before I start ?
45854 by: Olivier M.
Re: From where to get tcpserver
45858 by: Robert Jiang
WEIRD BEHAVIOR WITH MY QMAILd!!
45862 by: Artur D'assumpção
License Question
45864 by: joomy
45865 by: markd.bushwire.net
tai64n -- why?
45866 by: Ben Beuchler
45867 by: markd.bushwire.net
Announcing qmail-autoresponder version 0.93
45868 by: Bruce Guenter
user w/ shell access not receiving mail after running vpopmail
45869 by: Lavender
qmail running; no mail delivery to Maildir
45870 by: Harsha Linux
45871 by: Erwin Hoffmann
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > Well because of performance issue (Management wanted to send all the
> > messages out in quite a short time - for reasons as yet unexplained!) we
>
> I'm sure there are lots of valid reasons, for example it might be
> a late-breaking news email that ages very rapidly. It might be a
> hot-stock pick which needs to get out before the market notices.
No - it was never that urgent - they just wanted it sent yesterday !
>
> > were considereding bining the customised part.
>
> FWIW. I see the trend going in the opposite direction. Customization
> is where the industry is headed so it's likely only a matter of time
> before that requirement comes back.
Well we are now looking at a totaly scalable solution - where we just
add boxes to scale. Generating the emails is simplistic and quick -
injecting into a queue and then processing the queue is the fun part !
Flavour of the month is nolonger emailing speed !
Thanks
Greg
Bruce Guenter wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 02:17:19PM +0000, Greg Cope wrote:
> > My question is thus - When does a host become well connected ?
>
> When the bandwidth required to send its mail is significantly smaller
> than the bandwidth available. That is, if you have to send 100,000 5K
> messages over a 1 hour period, you would need a T1, and you would fill
> it to over 75% capacity.
>
> In general, the concept of "well connected" is dependant on your mail
> volume. If you only have to send a few non-time-sensitive emails a day,
> your 9.6Kb modem is well connected. If you have to pay by the
> kilo/mega/giga-byte of traffic, you're probably not well connected. If
> opening up concurrencyremote connections and sending mail kills your
> link for other applications using the network, you're not well (enough)
> connected.
> --
> Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
Thanks
I'm going to try and measure the real bandwidth our servers have to see
whats going on.
Greg
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
> Well we are now looking at a totaly scalable solution - where we just
> add boxes to scale. Generating the emails is simplistic and quick -
> injecting into a queue and then processing the queue is the fun part !
it is much better if you try the first delivery attempt yourself, possibly
using qmail-remote to send the first message. if the invocation of
qmail-remote fails fally back to injecting the message into a qmail server
If you want to spread the load across outbound servers look at invoking
qmtp to pass the message from your script off to (n) remote qmtp servers.
Richard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
>
> > Well we are now looking at a totaly scalable solution - where we just
> > add boxes to scale. Generating the emails is simplistic and quick -
> > injecting into a queue and then processing the queue is the fun part !
>
> it is much better if you try the first delivery attempt yourself, possibly
> using qmail-remote to send the first message. if the invocation of
> qmail-remote fails fally back to injecting the message into a qmail server
This is a good idea that we had not thought of. (Although we did think
about making our own smtp (outbound) server in perl at one point).
>
> If you want to spread the load across outbound servers look at invoking
> qmtp to pass the message from your script off to (n) remote qmtp servers.
>
> Richard
The email issue is on the back burner at the moment - byt we the techies
feel the need to redo everything so that we have a scalable solution.
Following on from other posts I had come to a similar idea as this - i.e
scaling the SMTP servers (or in this manner qmtp servers). We are also
thinking about scalinging at the other end - i.e having mutiple servers
running the script. If we ever get round to that I drop everyone a line
here.
Thanks
Greg
Hi
I'm still getting CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily errors when I try to
send posts to remote sites after trying for a week to figure out what is
causing it. I've read all the posts I can find about this error, but no one
explains what the error means exactly and how to fix it.
I understand that this is not a qmail problem but rather a DNS error
that should get fixed if you wait a while (hence the temporary suffix).
Well, I'm the DNS admin for my site (and a novice at that) so I just can't
wait and see if the error goes away. I can't see anything wrong with my DNS
setup so I'm out of luck. I do assume the problem is by me, else no one on
the Internet using qmail would be able to send email, right? :)
What I would like to know is what exactly qmail is trying to do. Why is it
doing a CNAME lookup in the first place? Why doesn't it just use the
designated server in the MX records and be done with it? How does a DNS
setup look like that works (the relevant parts)?
By the way, I'm not trying to send to anyone at aol. I can't send to
anyone at all that is offsite. Local posts are fine and I can receive
posts.
I'm using qmail 1.03 with the DNS patch that fixes large replies.
You can send replies directly to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] but I can't reply from
there as that's the site I'm trying to fix.
Hope you can help.
Thanks,
Jens
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
From: Jens Hafsteinsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>What I would like to know is what exactly qmail is trying to do. Why is it
>doing a CNAME lookup in the first place? Why doesn't it just use the
>designated server in the MX records and be done with it? How does a DNS
>setup look like that works (the relevant parts)?
Your MX *is* a CNAME, mail.axon.is.
On the other hand, it seems that your problem is not with your domain.
AFAIK, no CNAME lookup of the local domain is needed to send mail. You
should start by checking your /etc/resolv.conf, it seems that qmail can't
get any DNS answers. Do you have a local DNS cache? Perhaps you should
switch to djbdns.
As a quick fix, try the following on your /etc/resolv.conf (saving the
previous contents elsewhere):
search axon.is
nameserver 193.4.58.19
and restart qmail. If you can then send mail, then you don't have a correct
local DNS setup.
Good luck
Armando
> >What I would like to know is what exactly qmail is trying to do. Why is
>it
> >doing a CNAME lookup in the first place? Why doesn't it just use the
> >designated server in the MX records and be done with it? How does a DNS
> >setup look like that works (the relevant parts)?
>
>
>Your MX *is* a CNAME, mail.axon.is.
It did point directly to my mail servers A record, triton.axon.is, but I
changed it to a CNAME just to see if that would change anything (which it
apparently didn't).
>
>On the other hand, it seems that your problem is not with your domain.
>AFAIK, no CNAME lookup of the local domain is needed to send mail. You
>should start by checking your /etc/resolv.conf, it seems that qmail can't
>get any DNS answers. Do you have a local DNS cache? Perhaps you should
>switch to djbdns.
I'm using named 8.2.2 as my primary DNS running on the same machine as the
mail server.
>
>As a quick fix, try the following on your /etc/resolv.conf (saving the
>previous contents elsewhere):
>
>search axon.is
>nameserver 193.4.58.19
>
>and restart qmail. If you can then send mail, then you don't have a correct
>local DNS setup.
>
No, this didn't solve it. Someone said that by putting nameserver 127.0.0.1
in resolv.conf fixed his CNAME problem but that didn't help either.
Surely someone must be using named successfully with qmail?
Or is the resolver misconfigured?
My usual resolv.conf file is like this
search axon.is
namserver 194.144.127.194
Thanks,
Jens
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>From: "asantos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
snip
> >I'm using named 8.2.2 as my primary DNS running on the same machine as
>the mail server.
>
>I don't have the bind documents handy now, but in essence you
>must tell named that it should answer to recursive queries.
>
named does recursive queries by default according to the docs.
> >>As a quick fix, try the following on your /etc/resolv.conf (saving the
> >>previous contents elsewhere):
> >>
> >>search axon.is
> >>nameserver 193.4.58.19
> >>
> >>and restart qmail. If you can then send mail, then you don't have a
>correct
> >>local DNS setup.
> >>
> >
> >No, this didn't solve it. Someone said that by putting nameserver
>127.0.0.1
> >in resolv.conf fixed his CNAME problem but that didn't help either.
>
>
>What you need is a full resolver, and your named is not setup for that. My
>suggestion re 193.4.58.19 was assuming that they were your ISP and that
>they
>provided recursive DNS service... apparentely they don't.
>
>Ok, just for testing, you can replace the address by 194.65.3.20. This is
>an
>ISPs DNS server here in Portugal, and they do accept recursive queries.
Sorry, no luck with that one. This strongly suggest some local configuration
problem, but I just can't put my finger on it.
>
> >Surely someone must be using named successfully with qmail?
> >Or is the resolver misconfigured?
> >My usual resolv.conf file is like this
> >
> >search axon.is
> >namserver 194.144.127.194
>
>
>Sorry, "namserver" or "nameserver" ? That could be it. If not, your
>resolv.conf seems ok.
Oops. Just a typo. It says nameserver in the file.
>
>Also, check that your hint file is ok. Locate the zone entry for type hint
>on /etc/named.conf, check the directory option on the options entry, and
>check that a file named.root (or the name appearing on the zone "."
>section)
>exists and is not empty.
>
Everything in named.conf seems fine. The zone "." looks like this:
zone "." in
{
type hint;
file "db.cache";
};
and the db.cache file contains the root servers.
>I have a couple of qmail's working allright with bind, so that is not the
>problem.
>
Well, if the problem lies with my resolver, are there any tools that I can
use to simulate what qmail is trying to do? ping and nslookup seem t be
working fine.
Maybe some simple source code that I can fiddle with to figure this out?
Jens
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
At 13:50 30.7.2000 GMT, Jens Hafsteinsson wrote:
>
>> >What I would like to know is what exactly qmail is trying to do. Why is
>>it
>> >doing a CNAME lookup in the first place? Why doesn't it just use the
>> >designated server in the MX records and be done with it? How does a DNS
>> >setup look like that works (the relevant parts)?
>>
>>
>>Your MX *is* a CNAME, mail.axon.is.
>
Can't get your MX-Record ...
>It did point directly to my mail servers A record, triton.axon.is, but I
>changed it to a CNAME just to see if that would change anything (which it
>apparently didn't).
>
>>
>>On the other hand, it seems that your problem is not with your domain.
>>AFAIK, no CNAME lookup of the local domain is needed to send mail. You
>>should start by checking your /etc/resolv.conf, it seems that qmail can't
>>get any DNS answers. Do you have a local DNS cache? Perhaps you should
>>switch to djbdns.
>
>I'm using named 8.2.2 as my primary DNS running on the same machine as the
>mail server.
>
>>
>>As a quick fix, try the following on your /etc/resolv.conf (saving the
>>previous contents elsewhere):
>>
>>search axon.is
>>nameserver 193.4.58.19
Try to avoid nameserver statement in resolv.conf
#nameserver 193.4.58.19
search axon.is
cheers.
eh.
>>
>>and restart qmail. If you can then send mail, then you don't have a correct
>>local DNS setup.
>>
>
>No, this didn't solve it. Someone said that by putting nameserver 127.0.0.1
>in resolv.conf fixed his CNAME problem but that didn't help either.
>
>Surely someone must be using named successfully with qmail?
>Or is the resolver misconfigured?
>My usual resolv.conf file is like this
>
>search axon.is
>namserver 194.144.127.194
>
>Thanks,
>Jens
>_______________________________________________
_________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>From: Erwin Hoffmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
snip
>
>Can't get your MX-Record ...
>
That's strange. Running dnsmxip axon.is. gives me 194.144.127.194 10 wich
corresponds to my MX record.
snip
> >>
> >>As a quick fix, try the following on your /etc/resolv.conf (saving the
> >>previous contents elsewhere):
> >>
> >>search axon.is
> >>nameserver 193.4.58.19
>
>Try to avoid nameserver statement in resolv.conf
>
>#nameserver 193.4.58.19
>search axon.is
>
Hmm. How do you resolve names then?
Jens
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
From: Jens Hafsteinsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>named does recursive queries by default according to the docs.
Well.. is your installation the default one? ;)
>Sorry, no luck with that one. This strongly suggest some local
configuration
>problem, but I just can't put my finger on it.
Sure, it is a local DNS config problem. See below.
>Oops. Just a typo. It says nameserver in the file.
Damn. Typos are good, you can correct typos :)
>Everything in named.conf seems fine. The zone "." looks like this:
>
>zone "." in
>{
> type hint;
> file "db.cache";
>};
>
>and the db.cache file contains the root servers.
In the right directory? I'm grabing at straws, here, but ...
>Well, if the problem lies with my resolver, are there any tools that I can
>use to simulate what qmail is trying to do? ping and nslookup seem t be
>working fine.
>Maybe some simple source code that I can fiddle with to figure this out?
The main difference between qmail and other software re DNS is that qmail
doesn't give a hoot about the /etc/hosts file. Everything is done through
DNS. As things stand now, I'd dump bind and try djbdns... unless you can get
someone to debug bind for you.
The tests I've done with triton.axon.is using nslookup did ok. It's even
recursive. dnsq concurs, everything seems ok. If this was djbdns, with its
clearer binding to interfaces, I'd say that your DNS server is ok for
outside queries, but not correctly configured for local queries, and point
the proverbial finger at the culprit.
Next thing I'd suspect would be libc upgrade problems... what OS are you
running? I couldn't identify it remotely. It looks like Linux 2.2.14, but...
try to reinstall your libc's.
Did you install qmail from source or using a binary package?
Armando
From: Erwin Hoffmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Can't get your MX-Record ...
I can get it. dnsmx axon.is retrieves triton.axon.is. dnsq mx axon.is
triton.axon.is also works. As does dnsq mx axon.is sprettur.isnet.is. Even
dig @triton.axon.is axos.is mx does.
However, all of this only tells us that the server answers ok to queries
regarding itself... but the CNAME diagnostic relates to a problem with the
recipients domain, not the senders.
Armando
Thanks for responding Chris. I am currently using the MAPS
relays.mail-abuse.org with rblsmtpd, I guess the spam I'm
getting isn't coming from an open relay. Actually, the
spammers usually relay through a valid mail server for their
network that isn't an open relay on the internet, it's just
allowing users who are behind it to go through it. I guess
in this case my best bet would be to forward it to their
admins since I can't block by originating IP...
Thanks,
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris, the Young One [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2000 3:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Blocking Spam, badmailfrom not working
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 02:46:29AM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
! I tried to put @popsite.net in my badmailfrom but that didn't work.
badmailfrom is useless. :-) People can arbitrarily set their envelope
sender anyway.
! Is there any way to block all popsite.net connections? They always seem
! to come from different addresses and subnets.
Look into rblsmtpd, included with the ucspi-tcp package. You can make it
use the MAPS RBL (http://maps.vix.com/rbl/), and you can specify your
own list of addresses (that's IP address, not envelope sender address)
to block.
http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp.html
---Chris K.
--
Chris, the Young One |_ If you can't afford a backup system, you can't
Auckland, New Zealand |_ afford to have important data on your computer.
http://cloud9.hedgee.com/ |_ ---Tracy R. Reed
PGP: 0xCCC6114E/0x706A6AAD |_
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 10:28:10AM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
! I guess
! in this case my best bet would be to forward it to their
! admins since I can't block by originating IP...
By all means complain to their admin.
Why can't you block the bad IP addresses? rblsmtpd, if invoked via
tcpserver, can be made to block any address you want.
Of course, there may be other reasons why you can't block them, such
as if you don't want to block the good senders from that server too,
in which case I understand.
---Chris K.
--
Chris, the Young One |_ If you can't afford a backup system, you can't
Auckland, New Zealand |_ afford to have important data on your computer.
http://cloud9.hedgee.com/ |_ ---Tracy R. Reed
PGP: 0xCCC6114E/0x706A6AAD |_
to contact spammers' mail server administrators i have found it very
useful to have signed up with
http://spamcop.net
via http://spamcop.net/anonsignup.shtml
they provide a form to paste the spam mail into and have all the necessary
DNS/whois lookups done
wolfgang
Hi,
try to use my SPAMCONTROL patch. It gives you REGEX capablility on the MAIL
FROM: name and other stuff.
http://www.fehcom.de/qmail_en.html
cheers.
eh.
At 02:46 30.7.2000 -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
>Hi everyone,
> I've been noticing a lot of spam coming in to users on my qmail
>server from popsite.net addresses. I guess they're just a big dialup
>provider that obviously lets their users relay whatever they want
>through their server. But anyway, the Helo, From, To, and Return-Path
>are all garbage. The only thing that is consistent across emails is the
>path it took to get to me, and it always starts with a popsite.net address.
>I tried to put @popsite.net in my badmailfrom but that didn't work.
>Is there any way to block all popsite.net connections? They always seem
>to come from different addresses and subnets.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dave
>
>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Dave,
There's some general info on anti-spam with qmail here:
http://www.summersault.com/chris/techno/qmail/qmail-antispam.html
Hope this helps,
Chris
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, Hubbard, David wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> I've been noticing a lot of spam coming in to users on my qmail
> server from popsite.net addresses. I guess they're just a big dialup
> provider that obviously lets their users relay whatever they want
> through their server. But anyway, the Helo, From, To, and Return-Path
> are all garbage. The only thing that is consistent across emails is the
> path it took to get to me, and it always starts with a popsite.net address.
> I tried to put @popsite.net in my badmailfrom but that didn't work.
> Is there any way to block all popsite.net connections? They always seem
> to come from different addresses and subnets.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
>
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 10:28:10AM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
> Thanks for responding Chris. I am currently using the MAPS
> relays.mail-abuse.org with rblsmtpd, I guess the spam I'm
> getting isn't coming from an open relay. Actually, the
> spammers usually relay through a valid mail server for their
> network that isn't an open relay on the internet, it's just
> allowing users who are behind it to go through it. I guess
> in this case my best bet would be to forward it to their
> admins since I can't block by originating IP...
IIRC, dul.maps.vix.com blocks the popsite spammers.
Ben
--
Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101
Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 11:33:33AM -0700,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The problem with your solution is that server to server encryption
> does not stop government and big corporations from looking at your
> mail on the mail server after it has arrived. Ask any system admin
> how hard it is to scan /var/mail or a users home directory. Answer,
> it's trivial.
It will make it more likely that governments will actually need to get
warrents to look at the mail instead of just scanning stuff at will that
goes through the major exchange points.
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 11:16:35AM +0200, Olivier M. wrote:
> > > PS: the thing with "-s" is ok, but I like the "original" vacation
> > > feature with $SUBJECT in _BODY_ much better : do you plan to add
> > > it to qmail-autorespond ?
> > Reluctantly, yes. Would something like "%S" work for you? That would
> > greatly simplify the parsing logic.
> Then '%SUBJECT' ?
Yes. With two characters, the scanning logic for if the tag crosses a
page is fairly simple. With 8, it's nasty. I don't care if it's "%S",
"$S", "**", or whatever. One character is trivial. Two is simple.
Larger than two gets nasty.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 06:19:00PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> I have considered a similar change, having 2 maildirsmtp's running, one for
> mails under 32kbyte, one for bigger mails. That would do too.
> Looking at how maildirsmtp works, this shouldn't be that hard.
Thanks for your reply,
What do you suggest ?
a script to move the larger mail into a seperate IP and then login
to that IP and get the bigger mail at night ?
or have you something else in mind.
Jacob
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 09:42:53PM +0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 06:19:00PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
>
> > I have considered a similar change, having 2 maildirsmtp's running, one for
> > mails under 32kbyte, one for bigger mails. That would do too.
>
> > Looking at how maildirsmtp works, this shouldn't be that hard.
>
> Thanks for your reply,
>
> What do you suggest ?
> a script to move the larger mail into a seperate IP and then login
> to that IP and get the bigger mail at night ?
> or have you something else in mind.
When you run 'maildirsmtp', that in turn runs maildirserial which runs
tcpclient which runs serialsmtp.
Changing maildirsmtp's operation to, for example, handling bigger messages
in a separate thread, would only require patching/replacing maildirserial
to spawn two tcpclient+serialsmtp's instead of one. Filtering at delivery
seems useless to me because that would mean you spread your mail over 2
Maildirs.
Greetz, Peter.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Peter van Dijk [student:developer:ircoper]
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 07:50:09PM -0700, Jacob Scott wrote:
Hi Jacob
> I would be interested as well. I can help with IMAP SSL if you need it.
I would be interested in a bit of help with IMAP and perhaps SSL also
You obviously have good reasons for installing SSL other wise you would
have not done so.
I would much appreciate to know how important SSL is.
I intend to install Courier IMAP with sqwebmail for a webmail server.
I would also like to know the ports that I am required to keep open in our
firewall for IMAP to work
Jacob
Sri Lanka
* qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 07:50:09PM -0700, Jacob Scott wrote:
>> I would be interested as well. I can help with IMAP SSL if you need
>> it.
> I would be interested in a bit of help with IMAP and perhaps SSL also
I set up courier IMAP under OpenBSD yesterday. It was a matter of
minutes, really.
> You obviously have good reasons for installing SSL other wise you
> would have not done so. I would much appreciate to know how important
> SSL is.
That depends on what you think about sending your love letters via
postcard. In short: if you feel confident using telnet instead of ssh,
you will not need TLS.
> I intend to install Courier IMAP with sqwebmail for a webmail server.
I'm running this for my company. Excellent stuff.
> I would also like to know the ports that I am required to keep open in
> our firewall for IMAP to work
grep imap /etc/services
--
Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/>
SSL is sort of abnormal for email, but important notheless because it
protects user passwords. Now it is unrealistic to think you will be securing
the conntents of your email, because it will go through a plain text SMTP
server somewhere. But IMAP-SSL secures the Password, so it is encrypted
instead of cleartext. Courier-IMAP with SSL is what I run- it uses port 993,
so you would needport 143 (normal imap) 25 (SMTP) and 993 (IMAP SSL) open. I
would reccomend using vpopmail as well, they fit together nicely. If you
read the docs over and have more specific questions, email me.
Jacob
Hi,
Iam to trying qlogtools :) How can i make running to check my log file
?
rgds,
Al.
The list's posting address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please use the mailing list to ask questions.
Ronny
----- Forwarded message from Gao Kai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
> From: "Gao Kai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
> Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:10:04 +0800
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Question about qmail-ldap
>
> Hello,
> Sorry to interrupt your work, I have problem about qmail-ldap, need your help.
> I installed OpenLDAP 1.2.11 and qmail-1.03 with qmail-ldap-1.03-20000701.patch, but
>I can't mail to the virtual user listed in the OpenLDAP database.
> Here is the information about my case.
> My domain name is aegis.com(which is not www.aegis.com, there is nothing to do with
>this site), while my hostname is linux2.aegis.com, following is my DNS file.
>
> aegis.com. IN SOA aegis.com. root.linux2.aegis.com (
> 2000072700
> 10800
> 1800
> 1209600
> 604800 )
> aegis.com. IN NS linux2.aegis.com.
> linux2 IN A 192.168.2.150
> www IN CNAME linux2
> ftp IN CNAME linux2
> mail IN CNAME linux2
> nt-wks IN A 192.168.1.100
> aegis.com. IN MX 10 mail
>
> The following is my slapd.conf
>
> include /usr/local/etc/openldap/slapd.at.conf
> include /usr/local/etc/openldap/slapd.oc.conf
> schemacheck on
> pidfile /usr/local/var/slapd.pid
> argsfile /usr/local/var/slapd.args
> database ldbm
> suffix "dc=aegis, dc=com"
> rootdn "cn=Manager, dc=aegis, dc=com"
> rootpw secret
> directory /usr/local/var/openldap-ldbm
>
> I add the following LDIF file into my OpenLDAP database.
>
> dn: dc=aegis, dc=com
> dc: aegis
> o: Aegis Studio
> objectclass: organization
> objectclass: dcObject
>
> dn: cn=Manager, dc=aegis, dc=com
> cn: Manager
> sn: Manager
> objectclass: person
>
> dn: cn=user, dc=aegis, dc=com
> uid: user
> mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> mailHost: mail.aegis.com
> homeDirectory: /home/email/user/
> mailMessageStore: /home/email/user/Maildir/
> userPassword: pass
> mailQuota: 8000000S,100C
> accountStatus: active
> objectclass: qmailUser
>
> Before that, I add following into slapd.oc.conf, and restarted OpenLDAP.
> object class qmailUser
> requires
> objectClass,
> mail,
> mailMessageStore,
> uid,
> userPassword
> allows
> mailAlternateAddress,
> qmailUser,
> qmailUID,
> qmailGID,
> mailQuota,
> mailForwardingAddress,
> mailHost,
> deliveryProgramPath,
> deliveryMode,
> mailReplyText,
> qmailDotMode,
> accountStatus,
> mailGroup
>
> I setup some ~control/ldap* files to let qmail work, all is following.
>
> dirmaker: /var/qmail/bin/create_homedir
> ldapbasedn: dc=aegis, dc=com
> ldapcluster: 0
> ldapdefaultdotmode: ldaponly
> ldapdefaultquota: 8000000S,1000C
> ldaplocaldelivery: 0
> ldaplogin: cn=Manager, dc=aegis, dc=com
> ldapmessagestore: /home/email/
> ldappassword: secret
> ldaprebind: 0
> ldapserver: mail.aegis.com
>
> Following is my /var/qmail/bin/create_homedir.
>
> #!/bin/sh
> mkdir -m 700 -p $1
>
> I installed qmail-1.03 under the construction of "Life with qmail", it works well
>without OpenLDAP before and it also works well with vpopmail.
>
> Now, I send one email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is defined in the OpenLDAP database,
>the server eat the mail and bounce it saying:
>
> Subject: failure notice
>
> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.aegis.com.
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
>
> Surely, I uncommented -DAUTOMAILDIRMAKE and -DAUTOHOMEDIRMAKE macro when compile
>qmail-ldap.
>
> Here is my /var/qmail/rc file.
>
> #!/bin/sh
>
> # Using splogger to send the log through syslog.
> # Using qmail-local to deliver messages to ~/Mailbox by default.
>
> exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
> qmail-start ./Maildir/
>
> Another thing is that when I user /var/qmail/bin/qmail-ldaplookup file to queue
>email address with the command "./qmail-ldaplookup -m [EMAIL PROTECTED]", it always
>failed which I can find the entry by ldapsearch utility. Finally, I read the source
>code and find it failed to fatch QMAILUID and QMAILGID from the entry. I commented
>these lines and it works. I don't know whether there is something like that
>preventing me from sending email.
>
> Very thanks for your patient to read it all, I really need help. Any advice is
>appreciated.
>
> Regards,
> Gao Kai
----- End forwarded message -----
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 12:42:47PM -0500, Ronny Haryanto wrote:
! The list's posting address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
! Please use the mailing list to ask questions.
Wow, isn't it nice to know that I wasn't the only one who received
that message. :-) I'll bet that the sender of that message harvested
the sender addresses off this list...
---Chris K.
--
Chris, the Young One |_ If you can't afford a backup system, you can't
Auckland, New Zealand |_ afford to have important data on your computer.
http://cloud9.hedgee.com/ |_ ---Tracy R. Reed
PGP: 0xCCC6114E/0x706A6AAD |_
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 05:48:00AM +1200, Chris, the Young One wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 12:42:47PM -0500, Ronny Haryanto wrote:
> ! The list's posting address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ! Please use the mailing list to ask questions.
>
> Wow, isn't it nice to know that I wasn't the only one who received
> that message. :-) I'll bet that the sender of that message harvested
> the sender addresses off this list...
I got it twice, aint I the lucky one?
Regards.
Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> Could someone give me a list of characters (ascii) which are NOT
> valid in a e-mail address...We had a problem with a user interface, and
> want to add code to prevent occurance from happening again...
Most likely, the problem is with the user interface which does not
accept valid addresses (or addresses that could be made valid by quoting
them correcltly).
Actually, nearly any ASCII character is allowed in the local part of
email addresses as long as it has been quoted ("") or escaped (\x)
correctly.
Claus
--
http://www.faerber.muc.de
Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> Could someone give me a list of characters (ascii) which are NOT
> valid in a e-mail address...We had a problem with a user interface, and
> want to add code to prevent occurance from happening again...
Most likely, the problem is with the user interface which does not
accept valid addresses (or addresses that could be made valid by quoting
them correcltly).
Actually, nearly any ASCII character is allowed in the local part of
email addresses as long as it has been quoted ("") or escaped (\x)
correctly.
Claus
--
http://www.faerber.muc.de
Qmail is working with LDAP though the patch at: http://www.nrg4u.com/
What I was looking for was "complete configuration" though LDAP. For
example, all users, all virtual domains, all aliases, all relayes, etc be
able taken from LDAP. For example, if I wanted to add a aliases, add it in
though LDAP, restart qmail and that aliases takes effect. Non of the users
have valid accounts (though /etc/passwd) on the system, everything is taken
from ldap. Any ideas on this, a howto or document explaining this would be
great.
Thanks,
Jack
Humor or Insanity?
http://www.geekweb.org
Hi again,
No one seems to have an answer on this, which leads me to believe that my
question is either (1) a dumb question well covered in a doc somewhere, or
(2) an extremely difficult question that has everyone stumped. Could
someone at least clue me in on which one it is?
thanks,
Todd
I'm trying to set up a virtual pop server, and I've run into a problem that
I can't solve. I've been talking with a knowledgeable friend and qmail
advocate, and I have him stumped. He recommended that I forward my problem
to this list, in the hope of finding a solution.
Rather than restate everything and probably get something wrong, my
discussion with him follows.
qmail is running, I can inject mail into it and it will be delivered. I
also have a few accounts set up on it, and mail is being properly delivered
to them. I can also mail directly from the command line on the machine.
The problem: domain.org is the domain that is set up on qmail.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is a valid account on the system. If I try to send mail
to any host not listed in control/rcpthosts, it
bounces with a 553, "sorry that domain isn't in my list of allowed
rcpthosts".
I thought, "That looks suspiciously like a FAQ". Sure enough. question
5.4 seemed relevant, reproduced here for reference:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.4. How do I allow selected clients to use this host as a relay? I see
that qmail-smtpd rejects messages to any host not listed in
control/rcpthosts.
Answer: Three steps. First, install tcp-wrappers, available separately,
including hosts_options. Second, change your qmail-smtpd line in
inetd.conf to
smtp stream tcp nowait qmaild /usr/local/bin/tcpd
/var/qmail/bin/tcp-env /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
(all on one line) and give inetd a HUP. Third, in tcpd's hosts.allow,
make a line setting the environment variable RELAYCLIENT to the empty
string for the selected clients:
tcp-env: 1.2.3.4, 1.2.3.5: setenv = RELAYCLIENT
Here 1.2.3.4 and 1.2.3.5 are the clients' IP addresses. qmail-smtpd
ignores control/rcpthosts when RELAYCLIENT is set. (It also appends
RELAYCLIENT to each envelope recipient address. See question 5.5 for an
application.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I found a message in the mail archives that says that removing rcpthosts
will open up the machine, but this is of course not a solution. I moved
rcpthosts as a test, and all messages are delivered properly.
My /etc/inetd.conf line reads:
smtp stream tcp nowait qmaild /usr/sbin/tcpd /var/qmail/bin/tcp-env
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
and my /etc/hosts.allow line reads:
tcp-env: 209.218.13.127: setenv = RELAYCLIENT
209.218.13.127 is the ip address of my linux box here at home, behind which
my Windows box running Eudora (crash.domain.com) lives.
Looking at tcpdmatch, I can't understand why this is being declined:
[root@sonata tcp_wrappers_7.6]# /usr/sbin/tcpdmatch -d tcp-env
209.218.13.127
client: address 209.218.13.127
server: process tcp-env
access: granted
Let's see if I understand what you are doing.
You have a machine which I will call mail.domain.org. You have setup
qmail as the MTA. If you use a program on that machine to send mail from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it works. If you go over
to otherDomain.com and send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it gets delivered.
Correct so far?
This is correct.
Now you take a windows box, crash.otherDomain.com, and you configure
Eudora to get mail from mail.domain.org through POP3, and to use
[EMAIL PROTECTED] as the sender, and that mail.domain.org will be your
SMTP
host.
This doesn't work. Right?
I can pop mail off the server using the [EMAIL PROTECTED] account just
fine with Eudora. Mail sent to any valid address in domain.org is
delivered properly. The problem comes in sending mail to any domain not
listed in control/rcpthosts from any @domain.org account, when the mail
originates from the Windows box. mail.domain.org refuses to accept the
message for delivery with the mentioned error.
(
Here's a handy chart in case anyone is having a problem following that
mess:
The domain other.com is in control/rcpthosts. The domain other2.com is
not.
Originating Machine Sender Recipient Result
mail.domain.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] success
mail.domain.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] success
mail.domain.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] success
crash.other.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] success
crash.domain.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] success
crash.domain.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] success
crash.domain.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] failure
)
Things to note:
1. qmail does not include a POP3 or IMAP daemon. Tell qmail to use
mailboxes instead of maildirs and use any daemon, or let qmail use maildirs
and get a POP3 or IMAP daemon that understands them.
I'm running the qmail-pop3d daemon, and it appears to be working fine.
2. qmail doesn't want to be insecure out of the box, so it doesn't allow
relaying. What you want is to set up relaying for the relevant external
boxes that you want to use mail.baldmonkey.org as their smarthost.
That's what I think I'm doing by adding that odd line to
/etc/hosts_allow. I'm referencing question 5.4 in the FAQ, which seems to
address my problem.
I think that the problem might be that I don't have hosts_options enabled
in my tcp-wrappers. I'm running a 7.6 RedHat RPM, and I don't know if
hosts_options is enabled or not. I'm assuming that it is not, based on the
docs in the source distribution. Unfortunately. I can't get version 7.5
to compile, and I can't find version 8.
This is the error that I get after running 'make linux' on the 7.6 dist:
-DBROKEN_SO_LINGER -Dvsyslog=myvsyslog -DALWAYS_HOSTNAME -c diag.c
cc -O -DFACILITY=LOG_MAIL -DHOSTS_ACCESS
-DPARANOID -DGETPEERNAME_BUG -DBROKEN_FGETS -DLIBC_
CALLS_STRTOK -DDAEMON_UMASK=022 -DREAL_DAEMON_DIR=\"/usr/sbin\"
-DPROCESS_OPTIONS -DSEVERITY=LOG_
INFO -DRFC931_TIMEOUT=10 -DHOSTS_DENY=\"/etc/hosts.deny\"
-DHOSTS_ALLOW=\"/etc/hosts.allow\"
-DBROKEN_SO_LINGER -Dvsyslog=myvsyslog -DALWAYS_HOSTNAME -c percent_m.c
percent_m.c:17: conflicting types for `sys_errlist'
/usr/include/stdio.h:553: previous declaration of `sys_errlist'
make[1]: *** [percent_m.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/tcp_wrappers_7.6'
make: *** [linux] Error 2
That's everything. I again apologize for the length of the post, but I
wanted to include every snippet of information that I have so far. I've
just subscribed to the list, so if anyone who replies could be so kind as
to cc me so I don't miss any messages, I'd appreciate it.
Many thanks,
Todd Finney
Todd Finney wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> No one seems to have an answer on this, which leads me to believe that my
> question is either (1) a dumb question well covered in a doc somewhere, or
> (2) an extremely difficult question that has everyone stumped. Could
> someone at least clue me in on which one it is?
Hi Todd,
I couldn't find anything in your post that looked any different than
the FAQ - the answer to the FAQ should fix your problem. Why don't
you post your hosts.allow (inetd) or tcp.smtp (tcpwrappers) file.
Here's the relevent line from my home box:
tcp-env: 192.168., 127.0.0. : setenv = RELAYCLIENT
I'm using inetd for SMTP - if you're using tcpwrappers the tcp.smtp
file would be different but similar:
192.168.0.0:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
(those are the example lines - I don't use them so I don't know if
they're correct) Basically, anytime one of your local machines
connects to the SMTP port, set RELAYCLIENT before running qmail-smtpd.
Eric
I'd like to thank those on the list who pointed me in the right direction,
notably away from tcp-env and over to tcpwrappers. Half an hour later, it
works like a charm.
thanks again,
Todd
Hi,
So, omail-admin (web administration tool for vmailmgr+qmail based systems)
ist getting quite old! During the next days I will work on a new version,
with will support the newest php interface, qmail-autoresponder, and will get
the rid of the current complicated and maybe insecure suid-perl wrapper.
I will also use PHP4-session management, to also get rid of the
current mysql-based system.
If you have any suggestion or feature request, it's the right moment!
So please have a look at http://omail.omnis.ch/ or test the
demo on http://admin.omnis.ch/omail/ (test.com + test as passwd),
tell me what you'd like me to add/change, or if you want to participate.
Some things:
- will need PHP4 and the newest version of vmailmgr (www.vmailmgr.org)
- should be usable by a domain administrator (all rights)
but also by a single user (password change, maybe adding of forwarders/autoresp)
- multilanguage (at least en, fr, de)
- secure...
- maybe quota support (one given domain -> right to create one pop account and 5
aliases for example)
(but how... ? maybe just a flat text file in /var/qmail/control would do the thing)
- later, why not webmail ? (but wouldn't work yet without suid rights : currently not
able to read mails or subjects using the vcommands)
comments welcome! :)
Regards,
Olivier
--
_________________________________________________________________
Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
PGP signature
http://cy.yp.to/ucspi-tcp.html
Good luck.:P
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2000 9:20 PM
Subject: From where to get tcpserver
> Dear friends and gurus,
>
> Could anybody tell me that from where to get the tar or rpms for
> tcpserver for qmail,
> because i need to run qmail with tcpserver not with inetd.
> i m working on RH 6.2.
>
> thanx in advance
>
> Tejal Shah
Hi I need some help with qmail!! I've been running qmail and it's
been working ok! vhosts,
everything.
Today I've setted a NameServer Cause I've changed to a real domain
, example: example.com,
and i've changed hostname too.
In order to work well i've changed all files in /var/qmail/control
domain: example.com
hostname: galileu
Problem:
If I send , LOCALY, a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or even
[EMAIL PROTECTED], it will
work with no problems!!
In the other way, if ill do the same thing remotly only
[EMAIL PROTECTED] will work!! Everything
else , [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] will give
this error.
194.210.xx.xx_does_not_like_recipient./Remote_host_said:_553_sorry,_that_domain_isn't_in_my
_list_of_allowed_rcpthosts_(#5.7.1)/Giving_up_on_194.210.xx.xx./
And I have this,
[root@sarrazola control]# cat defaultdomain
example.com
[root@sarrazola control]# cat locals
localhost
galileu.example.com
example.com
galileu
[root@sarrazola control]# cat me
galileu.example.com
[root@sarrazola control]# cat rcpthosts
localhost
galileu
galileu.example.com
example.com
[root@sarrazola control]#
Has you can see I can't resolve the problem... And I dont
understand it...
Please help!!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear All,
Sorry if I post to the wrong
list.
I have some question about license of
virus scan software.
If
1. I use qmail + amavis + McAfee on server that has 10,000
user.
2. I
config amavis to scan virus every incoming/outgoing e-mail.
The question is ....
1. Do I have to purchase 10,000 license of McAfee
VirusScan ? That should be very very expensive.
2. Do I have to pay for Amavis or Qmail ? (I think
I don't have to)
Any suggestion ?
Joomy.
|
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 10:58:34AM +0700, joomy wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Sorry if I post to the wrong list.
>
> I have some question about license of virus scan software.
> If
> 1. I use qmail + amavis + McAfee on server that has 10,000 user.
> 2. I config amavis to scan virus every incoming/outgoing e-mail.
>
> The question is ....
> 1. Do I have to purchase 10,000 license of McAfee VirusScan ? That should be very
>very expensive.
Have you considered asking your MCAfee sales rep?
> 2. Do I have to pay for Amavis or Qmail ? (I think I don't have to)
There are no license fees for qmail.
Regards.
I understand from DJB's website that TAI is a better way to deal with
time functions than the typical unix localtime(). However, it seems to
make a lot of things really awkward when it is used as the time stamp in
a log file.
Any particular idea why DJB chose to use it for output in multilog? It
seems to me that all it accomplishes is adding extra steps to gleaning
any useful info from the logs...
Ben
--
Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101
Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 11:06:38PM -0500, Ben Beuchler wrote:
> I understand from DJB's website that TAI is a better way to deal with
> time functions than the typical unix localtime(). However, it seems to
> make a lot of things really awkward when it is used as the time stamp in
> a log file.
Really? If I want to tail a log file, eg, I go like this:
tail ../someservice/current | tai64nlocal
and it all looks fine for humans.
> Any particular idea why DJB chose to use it for output in multilog? It
> seems to me that all it accomplishes is adding extra steps to gleaning
> any useful info from the logs...
Well, there are two issues here. One is the use of that particular
form of timestamp and the granularity of the timestamp. The granularity
of syslog is a second which is no where near good enough for timing
events that occur at sub-second rates. Knowing the author of syslog, I
can guess why he thought that a second was plenty accurate enough for
his MTA. But in the real world of modern computing, events happen
more briefly.
Once you accept that the current mainstream logging system isn't
giving sufficiently useful timestamps, then any change is going to
carry some level of awkwardness. What DjB has done is pick a timestamp
that has some pretty useful characteristics. Importantly, he has chosen
one which is as close to absolute as is possible and one which is
easy to use with date arithmetic.
Regards.
Version 0.93 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 0.93
- Fixed an off-by-one bug in the rate limiting logic (again).
- Fixed an off-by-one bug in the Delivered-To checking code.
- The output writing routine will now substitute "%S" in the
autoresponse message with the original message's subject.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
qmail-autoresponder
Rate-limited autoresponder for qmail
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version 0.93
2000-07-30
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 insert the original subject into the response.
- Can copy original message into response.
- Can use links in the rate-limiting data directory to limit inode usage
to a single inode.
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. Any
instance of "%S" in MESSAGE_FILE will be replaced with the original
subject.
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
Hi,
I compiled and ran vpopmail successfully but then I noticed that the user
w/ shell acount does not receive any more mail. I check
/var/qmail/control/locals and there is no entry in it. After adding
hostname.domain.com in it then the user w/ user account start receiving
mails again (after kill -HUP <qmail-send id>). But then, the virtual user
do not receive mails anymore. I am not defining vitual domain here (as
when I compile vpopmail). The entry in virtualdomains:
hostname.domain.com:hostname.domain.com.
Is there any way that I could make user w/ shell acoount and virtual users
receive mails ???
Thanks
Hi,
I installed qmail in this order..
MySQL Version 3.22.32
tcpserver (ucspi-tcp-0.88)
qmail-1.03
qmail was working fine. Mails were being deleiverd to Mailbox file.
I switched to Maildir format according to instructions in qmail's
INSTALL.maildir file. I logged in as root and executed :
./maildirmake ~user1/Maildir
echo ./Maildir/ > ~user1/.qmail
for all the users (have only a few users...for testing)
I also excuted:
./maildirmake /etc/skel/Maildir
echo ./Maildir/ > /etc/skel/.qmail
so that all new users are created with proper Maildirs.
Step-4 of qmail's INSTALL file says...
4. Read INSTALL.ctl and FAQ. Minimal survival command:
And according to the FAQ file...
According to FAQ's question 5.1:
5.1. How do I run qmail-smtpd under tcpserver?
I setup in inet.conf file the following (since I have tcpserver
installed)
tcpserver -u 7770 -g 2108 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
(I have replaced 7770 and 2108 with my qmaild uid and nofiles gid)
According to FAQ's question 5.3:
5.3. How do I set up qmail-pop3d?
I setup in /etc/inetd.conf the following...
tcpserver 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup YOURHOST \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
(Since I have tcpserver installed) I've replaced YOURHOST with my host
name. I have also installed the checkpassword programs.
Now, I can connect to my system on port 25 using telnet and send local
mails using SMTP commands. But mails are not being delivered to mailbox
or Maildir.
I checked the file /var/log/maillog file. But it
says...Unable_to_open_./Maildir
Jul 31 12:04:28 Linux qmail: 965025268.328030 status: local 1/10 remote
0/20
Jul 31 12:04:28 Linux qmail: 965025268.422942 delivery 25: deferral:
Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/
Jul 31 12:04:28 Linux qmail: 965025268.423060 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
What could be wrong? Please help
With regards,
Harsha
Hi,
At 12:22 31.7.2000 +0530, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I installed qmail in this order..
>
>MySQL Version 3.22.32
>tcpserver (ucspi-tcp-0.88)
>qmail-1.03
>
>qmail was working fine. Mails were being deleiverd to Mailbox file.
>
>I switched to Maildir format according to instructions in qmail's
>INSTALL.maildir file. I logged in as root and executed :
>
> ./maildirmake ~user1/Maildir
Check persmissions of Maildir. They have to belong to the owner and not root!
Example:
orion# ls -la Maildir
total 5
drwx------ 5 erwin users 512 Jan 16 2000 .
drwxr-xr-x 6 erwin users 1024 Jun 2 14:14 ..
drwx------ 2 erwin users 512 Jan 16 2000 cur
drwx------ 2 erwin users 512 Jul 30 13:00 new
drwx------ 2 erwin users 512 Jul 30 13:00 tmp
> echo ./Maildir/ > ~user1/.qmail
>
>for all the users (have only a few users...for testing)
>
>I also excuted:
>
> ./maildirmake /etc/skel/Maildir
> echo ./Maildir/ > /etc/skel/.qmail
>
>so that all new users are created with proper Maildirs.
>
>Step-4 of qmail's INSTALL file says...
>
>4. Read INSTALL.ctl and FAQ. Minimal survival command:
>
>And according to the FAQ file...
>
>According to FAQ's question 5.1:
>5.1. How do I run qmail-smtpd under tcpserver?
>
>I setup in inet.conf file the following (since I have tcpserver
>installed)
>
> tcpserver -u 7770 -g 2108 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
>
>(I have replaced 7770 and 2108 with my qmaild uid and nofiles gid)
>
>According to FAQ's question 5.3:
>5.3. How do I set up qmail-pop3d?
>
>I setup in /etc/inetd.conf the following...
>
> tcpserver 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup YOURHOST \
> /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
>
>(Since I have tcpserver installed) I've replaced YOURHOST with my host
>name. I have also installed the checkpassword programs.
>
>Now, I can connect to my system on port 25 using telnet and send local
>mails using SMTP commands. But mails are not being delivered to mailbox
>or Maildir.
You have enable qmail's local delivery to Maildir which is triggered via
the rc script.
Example:
#!/bin/sh
# Using splogger to send the log through syslog.
# Using qmail-local to deliver messages to ~/Maildir/ .
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail
>
>I checked the file /var/log/maillog file. But it
>says...Unable_to_open_./Maildir
>
> Jul 31 12:04:28 Linux qmail: 965025268.328030 status: local 1/10 remote
>0/20
> Jul 31 12:04:28 Linux qmail: 965025268.422942 delivery 25: deferral:
>Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/
> Jul 31 12:04:28 Linux qmail: 965025268.423060 status: local 0/10 remote
>0/20
>
>What could be wrong? Please help
Cheers.
eh.
>
>With regards,
>Harsha
>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
