qmail Digest 3 Nov 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1173
Topics (messages 51494 through 51597):
Re: Prolem (carefully) explained
51494 by: Cyril Bitterich
51495 by: Brett Randall
51499 by: Howard Miller
51501 by: Brett Randall
51502 by: Howard Miller
51503 by: Johan Almqvist
51506 by: Howard Miller
51508 by: Brett Randall
51509 by: Howard Miller
51510 by: Joost van Baal
Local delivery
51496 by: Dewald Strauss
51498 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
Re: maildir2mbox doesn't work
51497 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
51500 by: Howard Miller
Re: World's largest mailing list?
51504 by: Johan Almqvist
Re: Yahoo delivery failure - short test and proposal
51505 by: Rich Feather
51507 by: Brett Randall
51512 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
51514 by: Brett Randall
51516 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
51559 by: Aaron L. Meehan
51563 by: Peter Green
51596 by: Peter van Dijk
Re: Help with username is different from email address.
51511 by: Joost van Baal
51565 by: Eric Walters
51567 by: Joost van Baal
Re: qmail-list fork? (was: [sic] people are definately starting to harvest
emailadresses on th is list...)
51513 by: Jörgen Persson
51532 by: Johan Almqvist
Mail server problems.
51515 by: Rob Hines Jr.
51519 by: Brett Randall
51520 by: Kevin Bucknum
Sorry, me again still confused
51517 by: Howard Miller
51522 by: Howard Miller
51524 by: Brett Randall
Qmail with split distribution servers
51518 by: Darren Honeyball
51523 by: Brett Randall
Re: Problem with Log File
51521 by: Charles Cazabon
51530 by: Schwarz Hans-Juergen
mailtraffic logging, inclusive Subject: field
51525 by: Olivier M.
51531 by: Peter Green
51542 by: Olivier M.
51556 by: Jason Haar
Re: qmail-send sitting idle, doing nothing
51526 by: Chris Johnson
51535 by: Stanislav Grozev
Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/
51527 by: Christophe.Andreoli.nse.de
51528 by: Christophe.Andreoli.nse.de
51534 by: Johan Almqvist
Me yet again - qmailadmin this time
51529 by: Howard Miller
51533 by: Stanislav Grozev
51536 by: Tim Hunter
51553 by: Sean Reifschneider
51591 by: Stanislav Grozev
Re: Return receipt [T2000103100V0]
51537 by: Enrique
51543 by: Tim Hunter
51593 by: OK 2 NET - André Paulsberg
Problem in getting forwarded mails
51538 by: Ruprecht Helms
51540 by: Ruprecht Helms
51551 by: Greg Owen
Can I run multiple qmail-smptd on one install
51539 by: Rob Hines Jr.
51544 by: David Dyer-Bennet
51545 by: Charles Cazabon
51546 by: Matt Brown
51549 by: Greg Owen
command confirmation interface [à la ezmlml]
51541 by: martin langhoff
51557 by: Charles Cazabon
Forwarding
51547 by: Dave Gresham
ANNOUNCE: qrblcheck -- rbl checking for .qmail
51548 by: Jon Rust
Re: Wildcard MX Obsolescence
51550 by: Aaron L. Meehan
51555 by: Aaron L. Meehan
APOP auth using vchkpw-4.9.4 and /etc/passwd (shadow)
51552 by: James Browning
Re: qmail-scanner + which antivirus ?
51554 by: Martin Lesser
qmail-rspswn
51558 by: Erich Zigler
51562 by: markd.bushwire.net
51570 by: Erich Zigler
51587 by: markd.bushwire.net
51589 by: Erich Zigler
RCPTHOSTS Dilemma
51560 by: Anthony Abby
51571 by: David Dyer-Bennet
51574 by: Anthony Abby
vchkpw APOP authentication using /etc/passwd (shadow)
51561 by: James Browning
Re: high performance configs [was: Blocked pipe to qmail-queue]
51564 by: Sean Reifschneider
51568 by: Jeff Mayzurk
51569 by: Jeff Mayzurk
51572 by: Sean Reifschneider
51573 by: Markus Stumpf
51597 by: Peter van Dijk
QMail is't starting....
51566 by: Javier Morquecho Morquecho
(Fwd) ezmlm response
51575 by: teep.bedford.net
51578 by: Alex Pennace
51579 by: cfm.maine.com
Relaying
51576 by: net admin
51577 by: Brett Randall
(Fwd) failure notice
51580 by: Phil Barnett
51581 by: Brett Randall
51586 by: Andy Bradford
documentation
51582 by: Gustavo Vieira Goncalves Coelho Rios
51584 by: Markus Stumpf
51585 by: Gustavo Vieira Goncalves Coelho Rios
test
51583 by: ljwsy
TCPSERVER: Unable to Bind to Port
51588 by: Anthony Abby
51595 by: Schwarz Hans-Juergen
QMail and Win NT user auth
51590 by: xxx
qmail as a (special) front-end for exchange
51592 by: Stefan Witzel
assign file automatically replaced... Why??
51594 by: David
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Howard,
Howard Miller wrote:
> my system is set up as
>
> >cat /var/qmail/alias/.qmail*
> howard
> howard
> howard
change this to
&howard
> >cat /var/qmail/rc
> #!/bin/sh
>
> exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
> qmail-start '|dot-forward .forward
> ../Maildir/'
i'd say it should read:
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start '|dot-forward .forward ./Maildir/'
^^^
Note that there is only one dot before the slash.
Ciao,
Cyril
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> my system is set up as
>> >cat /var/qmail/alias/.qmail*
>> howard
>> howard
>> howard
>
> change this to
> &howard
I don't think this is necessary...As far as I know, there are three
rules for dot-qmail's...
1. If it is simply one word, it is delivered to a local user
2. If it contains a path name, it is delivered to a mbox
3. If the last character of the path name is a /, it is delivered to a
Maildir
In any chance, &howard will still work, but I don't believe it is
necessary...
Brett.
--
"At the source of every error which is blamed on the computer you will
find at least two human errors, including the error of blaming it on the
computer.
- Anonymous
Mmmmr....
The extra dot in the rc file was a typing error, but I have changed the
layout to your suggestion.
I did echo to: howard >/var/qmail/qmail-inject again
The log file for this looks like...
@400000003a014cd1031b95ec status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a014d5616ba61dc starting delivery 1: msg 828300 to local
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rketingms.com
@400000003a014d5616bca3fc status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a014d561c0681d4 delivery 1: deferral:
dot-forward:_fatal:_unable_to_re
ad_./Maildir/:_is_a_directory/
@400000003a014d561c088d44 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
It strikes me that dot-forward is complaining that Maildir is a directory,
which is odd as it should be!
What is dot-forward? If it is something to do with local delivery is it
perhaps ignorant of Maildir directories? Should I have a different setup here?
The only explanation I can find is that it enables support for Sendmail
.forward files. Which is fine, but I have no clue what a sendmail .forward
file is. I am new to Unix MTAs completely.
Getting very miserable... can anybody please help!?!?!
Thanks... Howard
PS. If I run mail user@domain, to send to our other mail server (which
worked yesterdat), I now get a message
sendmail: fatal: unable to run qmail-inject
so things seem to be getting worse not better!
At 11:57 02/11/00 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi Howard,
>
>Howard Miller wrote:
>
>>my system is set up as
>> >cat /var/qmail/alias/.qmail*
>>howard
>>howard
>>howard
>
>change this to
>&howard
>
>
>> >cat /var/qmail/rc
>>#!/bin/sh
>>exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
>>qmail-start '|dot-forward .forward
>>../Maildir/'
>
>i'd say it should read:
>
>exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
>qmail-start '|dot-forward .forward ./Maildir/'
>^^^
>Note that there is only one dot before the slash.
>
>Ciao,
>
>Cyril
>
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What is dot-forward? If it is something to do with local delivery is
> it perhaps ignorant of Maildir directories? Should I have a
> different setup here?
Yes...what are you using the dot-forward line for?
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start ./Maildir/
is all you should need (if you are using tcpserver, supervise, etc).
--
"Give no sleep to your eyes,
Nor slumber to your eyelids."
- Proverbs 6:4, NKJV
I did it like this because it is in the HOWTO, I don't understand what
those parameters do!
I am off to try your version, wish me luck!
Thanks, Howard
At 22:41 02/11/00 +1100, you wrote:
>On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > What is dot-forward? If it is something to do with local delivery is
> > it perhaps ignorant of Maildir directories? Should I have a
> > different setup here?
>
>Yes...what are you using the dot-forward line for?
>
>exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
>qmail-start ./Maildir/
>
>is all you should need (if you are using tcpserver, supervise, etc).
>--
>"Give no sleep to your eyes,
>Nor slumber to your eyelids."
>
>- Proverbs 6:4, NKJV
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:31:16AM -0800, Howard Miller wrote:
> Mmmmr....
> The extra dot in the rc file was a typing error, but I have changed the
> layout to your suggestion.
Give us the rc file again.
> dot-forward:_fatal:_unable_to_re
> ad_./Maildir/:_is_a_directory/
>
> It strikes me that dot-forward is complaining that Maildir is a directory,
> which is odd as it should be!
It means that dot-forward (the program) is trying to read Maildir (the
dir) as .forward (the file). I guess your command-line aruments to
dot-forward are jumbled.
> What is dot-forward? If it is something to do with local delivery is it
> perhaps ignorant of Maildir directories? Should I have a different setup here?
Replace the entire quoted string that contains dot-qmail with ./Maildir/
> The only explanation I can find is that it enables support for Sendmail
> .forward files. Which is fine, but I have no clue what a sendmail .forward
> file is. I am new to Unix MTAs completely.
Good! No sendmail-isms to confuse you.
> sendmail: fatal: unable to run qmail-inject
ls -lsa qmail-inject, please.
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
OK!!! Progress
with the new stripped down /var/qmail/rc file it works providing the
message is sent through SMTP.
qmail-inject still doesn't work. If I echo to it the message just vanishes.
If I use mail (via the sendmail wrapper I presume) I get an error.
Anyway...
root@sql:/var/qmail/bin > ls -lsa qmail-inject
4 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root qmail 31 Nov 2 11:58 qmail-inject
..any bright ideas.
I am off now to try and implement POP3 and virtual users. I have of course
only a vague idea of what I am doing so you will all no doubt be hearing
from me!
Thanks for all the help so far, its appreciated!
Howard
PS. I sooo wish I can spelt problem correctly in the subject line
>On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:31:16AM -0800, Howard Miller wrote:
> > Mmmmr....
> > The extra dot in the rc file was a typing error, but I have changed the
> > layout to your suggestion.
>
>Give us the rc file again.
>
> > dot-forward:_fatal:_unable_to_re
> > ad_./Maildir/:_is_a_directory/
> >
> > It strikes me that dot-forward is complaining that Maildir is a directory,
> > which is odd as it should be!
>
>It means that dot-forward (the program) is trying to read Maildir (the
>dir) as .forward (the file). I guess your command-line aruments to
>dot-forward are jumbled.
>
> > What is dot-forward? If it is something to do with local delivery is it
> > perhaps ignorant of Maildir directories? Should I have a different
> setup here?
>
>Replace the entire quoted string that contains dot-qmail with ./Maildir/
>
> > The only explanation I can find is that it enables support for Sendmail
> > .forward files. Which is fine, but I have no clue what a sendmail .forward
> > file is. I am new to Unix MTAs completely.
>
>Good! No sendmail-isms to confuse you.
>
> > sendmail: fatal: unable to run qmail-inject
>
>ls -lsa qmail-inject, please.
>
>-Johan
>--
>Johan Almqvist
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> OK!!! Progress
>
> with the new stripped down /var/qmail/rc file it works providing the
> message is sent through SMTP.
>
> qmail-inject still doesn't work. If I echo to it the message just
> vanishes. If I use mail (via the sendmail wrapper I presume) I get
> an error.
That's because you overwrote it, fool! Remember when you tried to echo
something > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject? Well, you overwrote the file
with that (I was hoping it was a typo). Reinstall that file. In the
future, use | instead of >.
Brett.
--
"Microsoft Works."
- Oxymoron
Dooooh!
Did you ever have one of those days??
Well spotted that man... thanks.
HM
At 23:35 02/11/00 +1100, you wrote:
>On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > OK!!! Progress
> >
> > with the new stripped down /var/qmail/rc file it works providing the
> > message is sent through SMTP.
> >
> > qmail-inject still doesn't work. If I echo to it the message just
> > vanishes. If I use mail (via the sendmail wrapper I presume) I get
> > an error.
>
>That's because you overwrote it, fool! Remember when you tried to echo
>something > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject? Well, you overwrote the file
>with that (I was hoping it was a typo). Reinstall that file. In the
>future, use | instead of >.
>
>Brett.
>--
>"Microsoft Works."
>
>- Oxymoron
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:35:54PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > qmail-inject still doesn't work. If I echo to it the message just
> > vanishes. If I use mail (via the sendmail wrapper I presume) I get
> > an error.
>
> That's because you overwrote it, fool! Remember when you tried to echo
> something > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject? Well, you overwrote the file
> with that (I was hoping it was a typo). Reinstall that file. In the
> future, use | instead of >.
Or: don't do things as root when you don't need root's permissions.
BTW, Howard, you said you were gonna implement POP3 and virtual users.
I wouldn't do this while sending and receiving "normal" mail is not
yet working.
--
. .
Joost van Baal . .
. . http://mdcc.cx/
. .
Hi ppl,
I have a secondary MX for a domain "dex.co.za"
pointing to my qmail box. The primary MX points to
an Exchange server, the Exchange server is
on our local LAN.
I created a virtual domain for "dex.co.za" on the qmail box.
Is it possible that I can forward the email received for
"dex.co.za" locally over the LAN??
(meaning that I forward to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
I tried this, but it does not work.
Any suggestions welcome
Regards
Dewald
> I created a virtual domain for "dex.co.za" on the qmail box.
Don't do that. dex.co.za has to go only into /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts.
> Is it possible that I can forward the email received for
> "dex.co.za" locally over the LAN??
Yes, you may use the MX from DNS or better (for DNS outages) put an entry
into /var/qmail/control/smtproutes:
dex.co.za:[ip-addr-of-exchange-server]
Regards, Frank
> >MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir/
> >MAIL=$HOME/mbox
> >MAILTMP=$HOME/.mailtemp
> >maildir2mbox
> Error. MAILTMP not set (or something like that)
Did you ever hear about the difference between environment variables and
shell variables?
You need to do
export MAILDIR
export MAIL
export MAILTMP
Regards; Frank
Yes,yes,yes, I have been made to look stupid with this one quite enough
thank you.
It does work, I agree! In my haste, the exports when clean out of my head.
Stoopid!!!
Unix - too much to remember!
Howard
At 12:13 02/11/00 +0100, you wrote:
> > >MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir/
> > >MAIL=$HOME/mbox
> > >MAILTMP=$HOME/.mailtemp
> > >maildir2mbox
> > Error. MAILTMP not set (or something like that)
>
>Did you ever hear about the difference between environment variables and
>shell variables?
>
>You need to do
>
>export MAILDIR
>export MAIL
>export MAILTMP
>
>Regards; Frank
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 07:46:08AM -0000, John Conover wrote:
> Its not exactly a qmail question, but does anyone know how many email
> addresses are on the world's largest mailing list, and the OS/HW/MTA
> it runs on? Average messages per day?
What do you mean by the world's largest? Most addresses subscribed, most
postings per day, largest postings? Something else?
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
Count me in. I'm seeing the same problem.
Peter van Dijk wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 06:47:43PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> [snip]
> > I am putting forward a proposal that, to help ourselves, our staff,
> > and the hundreds of thousands of Yahoo Mail patrons, we should contact
> > Yahoo and pester them to get their system working. These failures are
> > all too common on their global system, and have been occurring for
> > months now.
> >
> > Please give me any feedback, flames, comments, etc, and if they are
> > personal, direct them to me personally. If they are useful for others
> > to see (not just for your ego but for general list education about
> > this problem), post them to the list.
>
> I have logfiles with several deferred deliveries, either 'connected to
> blah but connection died' or just plainly 'wasnt able to establish an
> SMTP connection'.
>
> My co-worker who does the old sendmail boxes reports several
> (Deferred: Connection timed out with pop.yahoo.nl.)
> in the sendmail queue.
>
> Yahoo is actually mentioned in a memo in my Palm PDA as a very good
> reason for a distributed concurrencyremote (one that doesn't dedicate
> all concurrency to a single remote host, not even by accident). This
> refers to the march 2000 'incident' (incidents don't last for weeks, do
> they?) where people actually had problems with yahoo *taking up all
> concurrencyremote* with deferrals that took a long time to happen.
>
> I'll support your cause. What can I do?
>
> Greetz, Peter
> --
> dataloss networks
> '/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
> 'Het leven is een stuiterbal, maar de mijne plakt aan t plafond!' - me
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Count me in. I'm seeing the same problem.
Well, I'm not really after an army of followers, but I would more like
to see people taking some degree of initiative, giving the list
information on what the problem would be, e-mail addresses of people
we can talk to at Yahoo, whether or not this is a good idea, and other
information which I haven't thought of yet :) A petition isn't going
to be anything...we actually need to talk to Yahoo, but I haven't the
foggiest about how to get in contact with the right department
there...
Brett.
--
Smash forehead on keyboard to continue
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:28:53PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Count me in. I'm seeing the same problem.
>
> Well, I'm not really after an army of followers, but I would more like
> to see people taking some degree of initiative, giving the list
> information on what the problem would be, e-mail addresses of people
> we can talk to at Yahoo, whether or not this is a good idea, and other
> information which I haven't thought of yet :) A petition isn't going
> to be anything...we actually need to talk to Yahoo, but I haven't the
> foggiest about how to get in contact with the right department
> there...
How about giving them numbers?
bash# /servers/mail2/bin/qmail-qread | grep "remote.*yahoo" | wc -l
873
bash# egrep
"128.11.69.53|128.11.22.91|216.136.129.15|128.11.68.59|216.115.107.17|128.11.22.89|216.136.129.16|216.136.129.17|128.11.69.54|216.136.129.18|128.11.69.55|128.11.22.90"
/servers/mail2/logs/qmail/* | egrep "connection_died|temporarily_unavailable" | wc -l
2170
I'd say 2170 failed deliveries in 17 hours (the aproximate timespan covered
by my logs) is bad enough. 873 messages in queue is not nice, either. And
this is one of 7 relays, all of which have this kind of values.
RC
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
| Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
PGP signature
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How about giving them numbers?
See? :) This is the kind of unexpected response which is good to
gather up before we talk to Yahoo... By the way, I'm not against
Yahoo, I just think their sysadmins need a good kick up the rear and
maybe even a good kick out...
Brett.
--
"Bubble Memory, n.: A derogatory term, usually referring to a person's
intelligence. See also vacuum tube."
- The Devil's Dictionary to Computer Studies
On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 12:34:24AM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > How about giving them numbers?
>
> See? :) This is the kind of unexpected response which is good to
> gather up before we talk to Yahoo... By the way, I'm not against
> Yahoo, I just think their sysadmins need a good kick up the rear and
> maybe even a good kick out...
Me neither. But whatever is going on in there, I hope they're aware of it.
If not... well... We could give them a wake up call...
Values like these:
--------
bash# egrep
"128.11.69.53|128.11.22.91|216.136.129.15|128.11.68.59|216.115.107.17|128.11.22.89|216.136.129.16|216.136.129.17|128.11.69.54|216.136.129.18|128.11.69.55|128.11.22.90"
/servers/mail2/logs/qmail/* | egrep "connection_died|temporarily_unavailable" | wc -l
2213
bash# egrep
"128.11.69.53|128.11.22.91|216.136.129.15|128.11.68.59|216.115.107.17|128.11.22.89|216.136.129.16|216.136.129.17|128.11.69.54|216.136.129.18|128.11.69.55|128.11.22.90"
/servers/mail2/logs/qmail/* | grep "accepted_message" | wc -l
429
--------
are NOT good. This shows a 19.38% delivery success rate. (OK, I probably
have multiple failures per message. But still, it's a 5 connections to 1
delivery rate.) How are we supposed to explain this to our customers?
"Blame Yahoo!"?
RC
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
| Tel: +351 2 1010 0000 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
PGP signature
Quoting Peter van Dijk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 06:47:43PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> [snip]
> > I am putting forward a proposal that, to help ourselves, our staff,
> > and the hundreds of thousands of Yahoo Mail patrons, we should contact
> > Yahoo and pester them to get their system working. These failures are
> > all too common on their global system, and have been occurring for
> > months now.
> >
> > Please give me any feedback, flames, comments, etc, and if they are
> > personal, direct them to me personally. If they are useful for others
> > to see (not just for your ego but for general list education about
> > this problem), post them to the list.
>
> I have logfiles with several deferred deliveries, either 'connected to
> blah but connection died' or just plainly 'wasnt able to establish an
> SMTP connection'.
I'm seeing a lot of this junk, lately, as well:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry, I wasn't able to establish an SMTP connection. (#4.4.1)
I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long.
lots o' messages from reply.yahoo.com, which never seems to accept
our SMTP connections, and which is sending email to long-dead accounts.
Typical.
The inet-access list has a regular contributor from Yahoo, by the name
of Derek Balling. I can't find his official yahoo address, but he
posts to Usenet as dredd <at> megacity.org (he has some posts in
alt.sysadmin.recovery, perhaps he will be able to empathize with us
:).
We only handle around 5,000 deliveries, local and remote, per day,
yet there are dozens of queued messages to yahoo.com. Quite annoying.
Aaron
also sprach aaron:
> The inet-access list has a regular contributor from Yahoo, by the name
> of Derek Balling. I can't find his official yahoo address, but he
> posts to Usenet as dredd <at> megacity.org (he has some posts in
> alt.sysadmin.recovery, perhaps he will be able to empathize with us
> :).
Yeah, *that's* who I was thinking of...
His address:
dballing
(that little at-thingy)
yahoo-inc.com
> We only handle around 5,000 deliveries, local and remote, per day,
> yet there are dozens of queued messages to yahoo.com. Quite annoying.
Ditto. :(
/pg
--
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
>| Could someone tell me what are the advantages of kernel threads.
>| Do they have faster context switches?
>User level threads are faster.
I believe that WinNT has now taken user level threads, and called
them "fibers", so they now have "processes", "threads", and "fibers".
I expect an announcement of "single-chain polymers" to come next. (The
silliest thing is, I think I know how to do them.)
(Seen on comp.os.linux.development.system)
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:28:53PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Count me in. I'm seeing the same problem.
>
> Well, I'm not really after an army of followers, but I would more like
> to see people taking some degree of initiative, giving the list
> information on what the problem would be, e-mail addresses of people
> we can talk to at Yahoo, whether or not this is a good idea, and other
> information which I haven't thought of yet :) A petition isn't going
> to be anything...we actually need to talk to Yahoo, but I haven't the
> foggiest about how to get in contact with the right department
> there...
Yahoo has been blocked from sending us mail at one time, after
continuous spamruns *from their webinterface*. Mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or all similar things you can think of did not work, not even when we
warned them we'd block them from mailing to several thousands of
domains.
Even getting on the phone did not help. We talked to real techies, got
called 'fuckheads' for *no* apparent reason whatsoever.
I do think we got some phonenumbers left. I'll talk to a coworker that
handles abuse (quite the BOFH :) and see if he got anything from that
incident.
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
'/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
'Het leven is een stuiterbal, maar de mijne plakt aan t plafond!' - me
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 03:47:41PM -0600, Eric Walters wrote:
> I am using the maildir format with qmail. I am also using virtualdomains to
> host different domains. All users are remote. I am using the freebsd UNIX
> local usernames and passwords for authentication. I am attempting to use
> the virtualdomains file for storing email addresses in the format
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:jdoe. I cannot get mail delivered to the local
> /home/jdoe/Maildir.
This let's jdoe control the local email adress john:
in /var/qmail/users/assign:
+john-:jdoe:uid:gid:/home/jdoe:-:john:
(make sure to run qmail-newu after editing this file.)
jdoe can do:
jdoe $ echo '&jdoe' > .qmail-john
to get the john mail delivered using his default delivery instruction. (jdoe
could also choose to get the john mail delivered to a specific mailbox, or
whatever.)
--
Joost
Let me make sure I understand correctly. If I use the assign method, do I
still need to create an .qmail-user file in jdoe's directory? Do I only
have to do this if he wants it to forward to another local or remote
address?
With the assign method, how does it handle multiple John@domain accounts?
In other words I have a John@domain1 and a John@domain2. I assume it can
differentiate based on the fact that the virtualdomains file has the
john@domain1:jdoe so it converts this to jdoe-john, treats the domain as
local, and will deliver to jdoe's Maildir directory. If I have a
John@domain2 :jjones it would deliver to the jjones Maildir. Right? :|
Is using the assign file the only way to accomplish my goal or is there
another solution?
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Joost van Baal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 7:21 AM
To: Eric Walters; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help with username is different from email address.
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 03:47:41PM -0600, Eric Walters wrote:
> I am using the maildir format with qmail. I am also using virtualdomains
to
> host different domains. All users are remote. I am using the freebsd
UNIX
> local usernames and passwords for authentication. I am attempting to use
> the virtualdomains file for storing email addresses in the format
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:jdoe. I cannot get mail delivered to the local
> /home/jdoe/Maildir.
This let's jdoe control the local email adress john:
in /var/qmail/users/assign:
+john-:jdoe:uid:gid:/home/jdoe:-:john:
(make sure to run qmail-newu after editing this file.)
jdoe can do:
jdoe $ echo '&jdoe' > .qmail-john
to get the john mail delivered using his default delivery instruction. (jdoe
could also choose to get the john mail delivered to a specific mailbox, or
whatever.)
--
Joost
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 04:03:36PM -0600, Eric Walters wrote:
> Let me make sure I understand correctly. If I use the assign method, do I
> still need to create an .qmail-user file in jdoe's directory? Do I only
If you say, in assign,
=john:jdoe:uid:gid:/home/jdoe:::
then messages to john will be controlled by /home/jdoe/.qmail. If there
is no such file, mail will be delivered using the system's default
delivery to jdoe. (Just tested that :) See qmail-users(5). So you
don't need a .qmail or a .qmail-user file.
> have to do this if he wants it to forward to another local or remote
> address?
If you want to forward to a remote address, you can use .qmail-user files.
>
> With the assign method, how does it handle multiple John@domain accounts?
> In other words I have a John@domain1 and a John@domain2. I assume it can
> differentiate based on the fact that the virtualdomains file has the
> john@domain1:jdoe so it converts this to jdoe-john, treats the domain as
> local, and will deliver to jdoe's Maildir directory. If I have a
> John@domain2 :jjones it would deliver to the jjones Maildir. Right? :|
Yes.
> Is using the assign file the only way to accomplish my goal or is there
> another solution?
I think you can get what you want using a virtualdomains file only. However,
you should handle _every_ mailbox in the virtual domains using the virtual
domains file then. Domains you want to handle using the virtualdomains file
should not be in /var/qmail/control/locals. See qmail-send(8).
Hope this helps,
Bye,
--
Joost
I hardly read the list nowdays due to the noise. I agree - there's
a need for a fork.
--
Jörgen
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 07:37:13AM +0100, Magnus Bodin wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 02:08:14AM +0200, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> > PS: If anyone is interested in a mailing list about technical qmail
> > issues, please tell me. I am considering starting a qmail mailing list
> > where Outlook users can subscribe in the first place and were emails
> > from people who can't quote are rejected. Then we could stop wasting
> > time with whining lusers who couldn't even install qmail themselves if
> > their life depended on it and discuss some issues.
>
>
> There is definitively a need for a mailinglist fork to qmail-users and
> qmail-developers.
>
>
> /magnus
>
> --
> http://x42.com/
>
>
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 02:25:23PM +0100, Jörgen Persson wrote:
> I hardly read the list nowdays due to the noise. I agree - there's
> a need for a fork.
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 07:37:13AM +0100, Magnus Bodin wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 02:08:14AM +0200, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> > > PS: If anyone is interested in a mailing list about technical qmail
> > > issues, please tell me.
> > There is definitively a need for a mailinglist fork to qmail-users and
> > qmail-developers.
Oh yes, and I definitely second that idea
-Johan
PS: Vilken lundensisk grej detta blev...
--
Johan Almqvist
I have something of a large recurring problem. I've looked over the web and searched
all the resources that I know of to make this dern thing work correctly. Here is the
problem:
- A user, using an earthlink 56K dialup tries to send mail through my smtp server.
- 9 times out of 10, the mail fails because of a 'no transport provider' error.
Basically the SMTP server isnt talking.
Here's what I've done to the mail server thus far:
qmail 1.03 vanilla
big-todo patch
large concurrency
smtp_auth (plain & cram-md5)
The mailserver runs under supervise through tcpserver with ident and DNS lookup
turned off for speed, as well as -l 0
There are no log entries at my end to indicate why /only/ dialup users are having
problems with /only/ the SMTP server (they can recieve fine, qpopper is kicking
butt). There is no large volume of messages in the queue, no real load on the server
at all (Sun Ultra Enterprise 2, Solaris 8, 1.2G RAM, dual 200mhz processors), and
the problem disappears when people hit the mailserver from the LAN/WAN. In fact, the
general concensus within the office is that the mailserver is running significantly
faster than it did before I tweaked everything for speed.
I would appreciate any suggestions or ideas about why this might be occuring.
Rob
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First off, a little more description in the subject when you post to
the list helps us all prioritise a little more...I know it doesn't
change anything for you, but please try, and wrap your lines at <80
chars.
> - 9 times out of 10, the mail fails because of a 'no transport
> provider' error. Basically the SMTP server isnt talking.
This is a client-specific error...so, what client are they using?
Sounds like a very typical M$ error to me... This info helps. Your
problem could be based on IP addresses... What addresses do your staff
get when they dial up, can they ping your mail server, can they telnet
to port 25, can you manually send mail on port 25 when dialed up? If
not, what is the error? This is standard error tracing for mail
problems...
Remember to make sure your dial-up users have access in /etc/tcp.smtp
(if set up as in LWQ).
Brett.
--
"Is OS/2 only half an operating system ?"
Earthlink recently stopped allowing SMTP traffic out of their network except
from their mail servers.
I've had to change several of my dial up users settings to used Earthlink's
servers for out going
mail. On a positive note, they did stop requiring that the reply to field
point to one of their
domains.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Hines Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 7:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Mail server problems.
>
>
> I have something of a large recurring problem. I've looked over
> the web and searched
> all the resources that I know of to make this dern thing work
> correctly. Here is the
> problem:
>
> - A user, using an earthlink 56K dialup tries to send mail
> through my smtp server.
>
> - 9 times out of 10, the mail fails because of a 'no transport
> provider' error.
> Basically the SMTP server isnt talking.
>
> Here's what I've done to the mail server thus far:
>
> qmail 1.03 vanilla
> big-todo patch
> large concurrency
> smtp_auth (plain & cram-md5)
>
> The mailserver runs under supervise through tcpserver with ident
> and DNS lookup
> turned off for speed, as well as -l 0
>
> There are no log entries at my end to indicate why /only/ dialup
> users are having
> problems with /only/ the SMTP server (they can recieve fine,
> qpopper is kicking
> butt). There is no large volume of messages in the queue, no real
> load on the server
> at all (Sun Ultra Enterprise 2, Solaris 8, 1.2G RAM, dual 200mhz
> processors), and
> the problem disappears when people hit the mailserver from the
> LAN/WAN. In fact, the
> general concensus within the office is that the mailserver is
> running significantly
> faster than it did before I tweaked everything for speed.
>
> I would appreciate any suggestions or ideas about why this might
> be occuring.
>
> Rob
>
>
Sorry guys, need a bit of advice.
I have (at last) the basic system working properly, and now I need to add
POP3. If you don't mind I will ask about a few things I don't get before I
go off and screw it all up again.
I need...
POP3/SMTP access for virtual users, no local users at all
Web access to mail boxes
Web user administration would be nice
I have looked at the vpopmail package and its addons qmailadmin and
sqwebmail, which seem ideal - any comments here.
Bearing this in mind I am not sure how to set up qmail-pop3d. I have read
the section in the FAQ but I am not sure. It advises add the line
tcpserver 0 110 blah blah blah...
to my startup scripts. Wouldn't normally stop me, but I am using this
daemontools thing to start the rest of qmail. So what should I do here.
Will the default setup i.e. using /bin/checkpassword work with the vpopmail
package. I am really confused about user/password authorisation - there
seems to be very little info about it. Can you help me with the minimum
working config to get me started.
Thanks again
Howard
Sorry, forget the bit about password veriification, I got the right bit in
the INSTALL for vpopmail!! I really just need to know what the best thing
to do with the pop3 startup script is.
Ta....
At 13:49 02/11/00 -0800, you wrote:
>Sorry guys, need a bit of advice.
>
>I have (at last) the basic system working properly, and now I need to add
>POP3. If you don't mind I will ask about a few things I don't get before I
>go off and screw it all up again.
>
>I need...
>
> POP3/SMTP access for virtual users, no local users at all
> Web access to mail boxes
> Web user administration would be nice
>
>I have looked at the vpopmail package and its addons qmailadmin and
>sqwebmail, which seem ideal - any comments here.
>
>Bearing this in mind I am not sure how to set up qmail-pop3d. I have read
>the section in the FAQ but I am not sure. It advises add the line
>
> tcpserver 0 110 blah blah blah...
>
>to my startup scripts. Wouldn't normally stop me, but I am using this
>daemontools thing to start the rest of qmail. So what should I do here.
>
>Will the default setup i.e. using /bin/checkpassword work with the
>vpopmail package. I am really confused about user/password authorisation -
>there seems to be very little info about it. Can you help me with the
>minimum working config to get me started.
>
>Thanks again
>
>Howard
>
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I need...
>
> POP3/SMTP access for virtual users, no local users at all
> Web access to mail boxes
> Web user administration would be nice
>
> I have looked at the vpopmail package and its addons qmailadmin and
> sqwebmail, which seem ideal - any comments here.
vpopmail is the way to go. Download it, read the doco, install it,
experiment, and you will be happy.
--
"Windows isn't a virus, viruses do something."
Hi,
I'm about to set-up a mail distribution server, with 1 control host, and 3
distribution hosts. Can anybody point me in the direction of any documents
on how to do this?
TIA,
Darren
--
+----------------------------+----------------------------+
| Darren Honeyball | DDI: +44(0)20 7863 1672 |
| Senior Systems Consultant | Office: +44(0)20 7863 1600 |
| & Technical Team Leader | Fax: +44(0)20 7863 1601 |
| TheStreet.com (UK) Ltd | Mobile: +44(0)7971 032292 |
+----------------------------+----------------------------+
*********************************************************************
* http://www.thestreet.co.uk *
* *
* This E-Mail is intended for the use of the addressee only and may *
* contain confidential information. If you are not the intended *
* recipient, you are hereby notified that any use or dissemination *
* of this communication is strictly prohibited. *
* If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us *
* immediately then delete this E-Mail. *
* *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
*********************************************************************
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm about to set-up a mail distribution server, with 1 control host,
> and 3 distribution hosts. Can anybody point me in the direction of
> any documents on how to do this?
Its not a HOWTO yet, but take a look at my reference docs at
http://xbox.ipsware.com/redes/ . We have done a similar thing, and I
can help out a fair bit in the setup if you need it, but there are the
basic ideas, concepts, and the implementation and design of our
system, which is designed to be extendable and easily managed. None of
the shell scripts we use or the config files are in there yet, but
take a look anyhow.
Brett.
--
"Windows 95 /n./ 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit
patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit
microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of
competition."
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> @400000003a0121b12c862ba4 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls
> @400000003a0121b233ef76ac alert: cannot start: unable to read controls
> @400000003a0121b33a6cb404 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls
> @400000003a0121b50467d0b4 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls
>
> How could I check that my email with "echo to: gast |
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject "
> was sent ?
It almost certainly hasn't been sent. qmail is complaining that it can't read
its control files, which reside in /var/qmail/control . Check the directory
and file permissions, as well as ownership of the files in there.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Christophe,
Thursday, November 02, 2000, 10:11:55 AM, you wrote:
> @400000003a0121b33a6cb404 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls
> @400000003a0121b50467d0b4 alert: cannot start: unable to read controls
do you got your domain name in the /var/qmail/control/me -File? Are
the dns settings right?
> How could I check that my email with "echo to: gast |
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject "
> was sent ?
check it in the queue directory ../todo ../intd
regards
Hans-Juergen
Viele Gruesse aus dem Allgaeu
Schwarz Hans-Juergen
--
HJS Internetdienste
Westerharter Weg 11
87700 Memmingen
Fon: 08331-901104
Fax: 08331-901105
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.hjs.de
Hello,
For a project, I'd need to find a way to log the mail traffic
on a qmail server, but not just sender and recipient: subject
is also needed.
For sender, recipient and size, the maillogs would be enough.
But I have to find a way to include the subject into the log.
Is anybody already doing that ? (patch?)
I would be glad to read your suggestions :)
Personally, I think I would first try to catch all the mails
using http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/admin.html#copies , and then
parse all the messages "by hand". But I guess there would
be a better solution ? :)
Regards,
Olivier
--
_________________________________________________________________
Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch
PGP signature
also sprach qmail:
> Personally, I think I would first try to catch all the mails
> using http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/admin.html#copies , and then
> parse all the messages "by hand". But I guess there would
> be a better solution ? :)
If you are using Bruce's RPMs (which I'm guessing you are, based on your
contributions to the vmailmgr list... :), check into the msglog@yourdomain
user (often controlled via ~alias/.qmail-msglog). There should already be a
placeholder file for this exact kind of thing.
Then, use the mess822 package to extract and save Subject: lines, or to do
whatever you want...
That's the way I'd do it.
/pg
--
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
"A journey of a thousand miles continues with the second step."
--- Larry Wall
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 10:31:06AM -0500, Peter Green wrote:
> > Personally, I think I would first try to catch all the mails
> > using http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/admin.html#copies , and then
> > parse all the messages "by hand". But I guess there would
> > be a better solution ? :)
>
> If you are using Bruce's RPMs (which I'm guessing you are, based on your
> contributions to the vmailmgr list... :), check into the msglog@yourdomain user
nope, I'm using self made stuff, and no rpms for critical server programs
(apache, mail, ftp, sql and dns) :)
> user (often controlled via ~alias/.qmail-msglog). There should already be a
> placeholder file for this exact kind of thing.
so this should come from a specific patch. I'll try to find which one.
> That's the way I'd do it.
thanks for your feedback!
Olivier
--
_________________________________________________________________
Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch
PGP signature
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 03:47:47PM +0100, Olivier M. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For a project, I'd need to find a way to log the mail traffic
> on a qmail server, but not just sender and recipient: subject
> is also needed.
Qmail-Scanner can certainly give you that - plus attachment data per message.
Output looks like:
31/10/2000 08:56:28:2757: p_s: msg info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My subject <msgid> <date> attachment1 attachment2
Admittedly that line is currently just one of the debug statements (Q-S is
primarily an Email virus scanner), but I'm heading down the track of
formally altering Qmail-Scanner to report such data into a seperate logfile.
BTW, it also has an archive feature which allows you to keep copies of all
Email that Qmail system parses. Once installed with the archive feature
enabled, you can turn it on and off at will when archiving/copying of Email
is required. I've found it very useful for debugging certain "issues" we've
had with Exchange servers... :-)
http://qmail-scanner.sourceforge.net/
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:59:31AM +0200, Stanislav Grozev wrote:
> Hi,
> i have the following problem with qmail-1.03 on redhat 6.2 system:
>
> when I mail a message (either through the sendmail wrapper or
> by using qmail-inject directly) it is written to the todo
> directory in the queue but qmail-send ignores it, as the todo
> is empty - i tried -ALRM-ing it, but to no avail. when I
> kill it and restart it by csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &' it delivers
> a message or two and starts sitting idle again, doing nothing
> leaving the other messages in the todo.
>
http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#trigger
Chris
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 09:53:39AM -0500, Chris Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:59:31AM +0200, Stanislav Grozev wrote:
>
> http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#trigger
thanks, that fixes it, it wasn't world writable.
>
> Chris
>
-tacho
--
[i don't follow] | [http://daemonz.org/ || [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler]
0x44FC3339 || [02B5 798B 4BD1 97FB F8DB 72E4 DCA4 BE03 44FC 3339]
PGP signature
I am testing my Qmail installation, according to test.deliver.
with echo to: me| /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject
But I get the following erro. Why ?r:
@400000003a0151032f698ce4 starting delivery 22: msg 3383 to local
me@servermail2
.nse-int.de
@400000003a0151032f6b270c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a015103305f85a4 delivery 22: deferral:
Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/
alias:_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/
@400000003a0151033061661c status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a01511b30022364 starting delivery 23: msg 3381 to local
me@servermail2
.nse-int.de
@400000003a01511b3003bd8c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a01511b30f83b64 delivery 23: deferral:
Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/
alias:_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/
@400000003a01511b30fa1bdc status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a0152bf37da8fa4 starting delivery 24: msg 3380 to local
me@servermail2
.nse-int.de
The rights of /var/qmail are:
drwxr-xr-x 2 alias qmail 4096 Nov 2 09:23 alias
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 bin
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 boot
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Nov 2 12:09 control
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Nov 2 12:52 doc
drwxr-xr-x 10 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 man
drwxr-x--- 11 qmailq qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 queue
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 108 Oct 30 10:11 rc
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 270 Oct 23 13:31 rc~
drwxr-xr-x 4 root qmail 4096 Oct 27 14:12 supervise
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 users
---------------------- Weitergeleitet von Christophe Andreoli/NSE/DE on
02.11.2000 16:10 ---------------------------
Christophe Andreoli
02.11.2000 15:57
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopie:
Thema: Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/
alias:_access_denied.
I am testing my Qmail installation, according to test.deliver.
with echo to: me| /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject
But I get the following erro. Why ?r:
@400000003a0151032f698ce4 starting delivery 22: msg 3383 to local
me@servermail2
.nse-int.de
@400000003a0151032f6b270c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a015103305f85a4 delivery 22: deferral:
Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/
alias:_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/
@400000003a0151033061661c status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a01511b30022364 starting delivery 23: msg 3381 to local
me@servermail2
.nse-int.de
@400000003a01511b3003bd8c status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a01511b30f83b64 delivery 23: deferral:
Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/
alias:_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/
@400000003a01511b30fa1bdc status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
@400000003a0152bf37da8fa4 starting delivery 24: msg 3380 to local
me@servermail2
.nse-int.de
The rights of /var/qmail are:
drwxr-xr-x 2 alias qmail 4096 Nov 2 09:23 alias
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 bin
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 boot
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Nov 2 12:09 control
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Nov 2 12:52 doc
drwxr-xr-x 10 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 man
drwxr-x--- 11 qmailq qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 queue
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 108 Oct 30 10:11 rc
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 270 Oct 23 13:31 rc~
drwxr-xr-x 4 root qmail 4096 Oct 27 14:12 supervise
drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 users
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 03:57:08PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Firstl, thank you, NOT!, for sending this message twice.
> The rights of /var/qmail are:
> drwxr-xr-x 2 alias qmail 4096 Nov 2 09:23 alias
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 bin
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 boot
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Nov 2 12:09 control
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Nov 2 12:52 doc
> drwxr-xr-x 10 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 man
> drwxr-x--- 11 qmailq qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 queue
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 108 Oct 30 10:11 rc
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 270 Oct 23 13:31 rc~
> drwxr-xr-x 4 root qmail 4096 Oct 27 14:12 supervise
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root qmail 4096 Oct 23 10:54 users
The permissions of /var/qmail would have been far more intresting than the
permissions of everything in it...
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
I may be posting this in the wrong place - sorry if so.
I am trying to install qmailadmin, I run the ./configure script and it
complains that it can't find my autoresponder binary. Err... what is it
going on about. What does an autoresponder binary look like, am I likely to
have one, and if not where do I get one.
Thank you once again.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 03:10:44PM -0800, Howard Miller wrote:
> I may be posting this in the wrong place - sorry if so.
>
> I am trying to install qmailadmin, I run the ./configure script and it
> complains that it can't find my autoresponder binary. Err... what is it
> going on about. What does an autoresponder binary look like, am I likely to
> have one, and if not where do I get one.
>
you can get the autoresponder from the same place you got qmailadmin
(http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/) or if you want you can disable
it with a configure option - see ./configure --help
btw. this is a question for the qmailadmin list
> Thank you once again.
>
>
-tacho
--
[i don't follow] | [http://daemonz.org/ || [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler]
0x44FC3339 || [02B5 798B 4BD1 97FB F8DB 72E4 DCA4 BE03 44FC 3339]
PGP signature
Check the qmailadmin website: http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin
And yes this is not exactly the right place, there is a mailing list for
each of inter7's products.
-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 6:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Me yet again - qmailadmin this time
I may be posting this in the wrong place - sorry if so.
I am trying to install qmailadmin, I run the ./configure script and it
complains that it can't find my autoresponder binary. Err... what is it
going on about. What does an autoresponder binary look like, am I likely to
have one, and if not where do I get one.
Thank you once again.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 06:03:01PM +0200, Stanislav Grozev wrote:
>you can get the autoresponder from the same place you got qmailadmin
>(http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/) or if you want you can disable
>it with a configure option - see ./configure --help
I was under the impression that you could not. The install documentation
for the current release version says something to the effect of "If you
don't have ezmlm and autoresponder, stop and go get them." I have found
that you can get around it by specifying the path of both as
/usr/local/bin with the configure options though.
Sean
--
America has the best government money can buy!
VOTE! November 7, 2000
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:34:50AM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 06:03:01PM +0200, Stanislav Grozev wrote:
> >you can get the autoresponder from the same place you got qmailadmin
> >(http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/) or if you want you can disable
> >it with a configure option - see ./configure --help
>
> I was under the impression that you could not. The install documentation
> for the current release version says something to the effect of "If you
> don't have ezmlm and autoresponder, stop and go get them." I have found
> that you can get around it by specifying the path of both as
> /usr/local/bin with the configure options though.
i compile without ezmlm by specifying --without-ezmlm-dir
i guess that the same will work by --without-autoresponder-bin
but I haven't tried it.
>
> Sean
-tacho
--
[i don't follow] | [http://daemonz.org/ || [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler]
0x44FC3339 || [02B5 798B 4BD1 97FB F8DB 72E4 DCA4 BE03 44FC 3339]
PGP signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Dear Enrique,
>
Thanks for your reply.
> The return receipt requested feature (when activated on an outgoing email) allows
>you to ask that the recipient notify you that the message has been displayed on
>his/her screen (and hopefully read). This notification will arrive as a separate
>email in your Inbox.
> The return receipt requested feature must be supported by a recipient's email client
>(i.e. Outlook Express) or the site at which he/she receives mail (i.e. Mail.com) for
>you to receive notification. However, even then, the recipient can also choose not to
>notify you.
I know it. But my question it's another. I'm going try explain better.
I have try these.
I have send a email with netscape comunnicator 4.61 and i have put
"Request return receipt" to on. I have send these email over a SMTP
SENDMAIL server, and when i received this email, i have been questioned
if i want replay confirmation. Ok.
But, if i do the same over a SMTP QMAIL server, when i receive the email
i don't receive these question. The SMTP QMAIL server don't support
these characteristic?.
Do you understan me?
By another way, I have probed the last above example with the SMTP
server of QMAIL list and I have been questioned about confirm the reply.
Then, how can i do on my smtp server QMAIL for support a email whith
"Request retun receipt" to on.
I have see the email's header when it arrive whith question about
confirmation and I see this:
Disposition-Notification-To
Qmail Server can't support these parameter?.
Thanks.
> Best Regards,
>
> Phil Castellano
> Member Services Representative
>
> -----Original Message-----
> "OK 2 NET - André Paulsberg" wrote:
> >
> > > Qmail doesn't support "return receipt". Any solution for this?.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure you are confusing "Reply-To:" with "Return-Path:",
> > "Return-Path:" also known as envelope sender is used as the
> > return address/receipt on "all" mailservers including QMAIL.
> >
> > "Reply-To:" is used by E-Mail clients when the user presses his REPLY button,
> > and should under NO circumstances be supported by the mailserver.
> >
> > MVH André Paulsberg
>
> Thanks for you answer, maybe i have expresed bad.
>
> I want use the features on my mail client (Netscape Communicator 4.61)
> "Request return receipt" when i send a email, on my mail server (QMAIL).
> But when i send a email whith these features to on, i don't receive
> confirmation after i read these email.
>
> QMAIL dosen't support send's confirmation, how can resolve these?. Exist
> any patch?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> --
> Enrique Rodríguez
>
> Mail.com, Inc.
> The Internet Messaging Company
>
> For a quick answer to any questions you may have or problems you may be
> experiencing with your Mail.com email account, please use our online
> member services support site at
> http://www.mail.com/cgi-bin/mailcom/frames/support
>
> Either use the drop-down box for Frequently Asked Questions or the Keyword
> search to target your specific question.
Thanks for you answer.
--
Enrique Rodríguez Lázaro
Dpo. Técnico Xpress
Avd. Pérez Galdós, 13 9º
Valencia - 46007
Works for me using outlook and outlook express, I have never tried Netscape.
Looks like this: Disposition-Notification-To: "Tim Hunter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This is sent from a qmail server and received by a qmail server.
Perhaps you have something stripping it out along the way?
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Enrique
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 12:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: QMAIL
Subject: Re: Return receipt [T2000103100V0]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Dear Enrique,
>
Thanks for your reply.
> The return receipt requested feature (when activated on an outgoing email)
allows you to ask that the recipient notify you that the message has been
displayed on his/her screen (and hopefully read). This notification will
arrive as a separate email in your Inbox.
> The return receipt requested feature must be supported by a recipient's
email client (i.e. Outlook Express) or the site at which he/she receives
mail (i.e. Mail.com) for you to receive notification. However, even then,
the recipient can also choose not to notify you.
I know it. But my question it's another. I'm going try explain better.
I have try these.
I have send a email with netscape comunnicator 4.61 and i have put
"Request return receipt" to on. I have send these email over a SMTP
SENDMAIL server, and when i received this email, i have been questioned
if i want replay confirmation. Ok.
But, if i do the same over a SMTP QMAIL server, when i receive the email
i don't receive these question. The SMTP QMAIL server don't support
these characteristic?.
Do you understan me?
By another way, I have probed the last above example with the SMTP
server of QMAIL list and I have been questioned about confirm the reply.
Then, how can i do on my smtp server QMAIL for support a email whith
"Request retun receipt" to on.
I have see the email's header when it arrive whith question about
confirmation and I see this:
Disposition-Notification-To
Qmail Server can't support these parameter?.
Thanks.
> Best Regards,
>
> Phil Castellano
> Member Services Representative
>
> -----Original Message-----
> "OK 2 NET - André Paulsberg" wrote:
> >
> > > Qmail doesn't support "return receipt". Any solution for this?.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure you are confusing "Reply-To:" with "Return-Path:",
> > "Return-Path:" also known as envelope sender is used as the
> > return address/receipt on "all" mailservers including QMAIL.
> >
> > "Reply-To:" is used by E-Mail clients when the user presses his REPLY
button,
> > and should under NO circumstances be supported by the mailserver.
> >
> > MVH André Paulsberg
>
> Thanks for you answer, maybe i have expresed bad.
>
> I want use the features on my mail client (Netscape Communicator 4.61)
> "Request return receipt" when i send a email, on my mail server (QMAIL).
> But when i send a email whith these features to on, i don't receive
> confirmation after i read these email.
>
> QMAIL dosen't support send's confirmation, how can resolve these?. Exist
> any patch?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> --
> Enrique Rodríguez
>
> Mail.com, Inc.
> The Internet Messaging Company
>
> For a quick answer to any questions you may have or problems you may be
> experiencing with your Mail.com email account, please use our online
> member services support site at
> http://www.mail.com/cgi-bin/mailcom/frames/support
>
> Either use the drop-down box for Frequently Asked Questions or the Keyword
> search to target your specific question.
Thanks for you answer.
--
Enrique Rodríguez Lázaro
Dpo. Técnico Xpress
Avd. Pérez Galdós, 13 9º
Valencia - 46007
> I know it. But my question it's another. I'm going try explain better.
>
> I have try these.
>
> I have send a email with netscape comunnicator 4.61 and i have put
> "Request return receipt" to on. I have send these email over a SMTP
> SENDMAIL server, and when i received this email, i have been questioned
> if i want replay confirmation. Ok.
>
> But, if i do the same over a SMTP QMAIL server,
> when i receive the email i don't receive these question.
> The SMTP QMAIL server don't support these characteristic?.
>
> Do you understan me?
>
> By another way, I have probed the last above example with the SMTP
> server of QMAIL list and I have been questioned about confirm the reply.
>
> Then, how can i do on my smtp server QMAIL for support a email whith "Request retun
>receipt" to on.
>
> I have see the email's header when it arrive whith question about confirmation and I
>see this:
>
> Disposition-Notification-To
>
> Qmail Server can't support these parameter?.
If you can see the HEADER in the client you are using it is somehow
not detecting this information, as you described before your client
"i have been questioned if i want replay confirmation." which confirmes
this IS an client action and not done på the server (more or less).
MVH André Paulsberg
Hi,
I have the problem that I have a mailserver in the DMZ with 2 testaccounts.
The mails for these
mailaccounts will be forwarded from another mailserver. The result is that
the mails won''t arive
in the mailbox.
Here the part of the logfile
Nov 2 23:53:44 mail qmail: 973205624.108283 starting delivery 7: msg
850637 to
remote
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 2 23:53:44 mail qmail: 973205624.108501 status: local 0/10 remote
1/20
Nov 2 23:53:47 mail qmail: 973205627.559026 delivery 7: success:
212.185.23.250
_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_OK./
Nov 2 23:53:47 mail qmail: 973205627.559383 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Nov 3 00:23:10 mail qmail: 973207390.670186 status:
exiting
Nov 3 00:23:17 mail qmail: 973207397.602515 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
What is getting wrong and how can I fix it.
Regards,
Ruprecht
-----------------------------------------------------------
INTERNOLIX Standards for Ebusiness
------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNOLIX AG
Ruprecht Helms
System-Engineer
http://www.internolix.com
mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Weiherstr. 20 Tel: +49-[0]7533-9945-71
78465 Konstanz Fax: +49-[0]7533-9945-79
Hi,
I have the problem that I have a mailserver in the DMZ with 2 testaccounts.
The mails for these
mailaccounts will be forwarded from another mailserver. The result is that
the mails won''t arive
in the mailbox.
Here the part of the logfile
Nov 2 23:53:44 mail qmail: 973205624.108283 starting delivery 7: msg
850637 to
remote
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 2 23:53:44 mail qmail: 973205624.108501 status: local 0/10 remote
1/20
Nov 2 23:53:47 mail qmail: 973205627.559026 delivery 7: success:
212.185.23.250
_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_OK./
Nov 2 23:53:47 mail qmail: 973205627.559383 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Nov 3 00:23:10 mail qmail: 973207390.670186 status:
exiting
Nov 3 00:23:17 mail qmail: 973207397.602515 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
What is getting wrong and how can I fix it.
Regards,
Ruprecht
-----------------------------------------------------------
INTERNOLIX Standards for Ebusiness
------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNOLIX AG
Ruprecht Helms
System-Engineer
http://www.internolix.com
mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Weiherstr. 20 Tel: +49-[0]7533-9945-71
78465 Konstanz Fax: +49-[0]7533-9945-79
> Here the part of the logfile
Which machine is this logfile from? The forwarding host, or the
final destination? And which machine is 212.185.23.250?
> Nov 2 23:53:47 mail qmail: 973205627.559026 delivery 7: success:
> 212.185.23.250_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_OK./
If 212.185.23.250 is the final destination, what do the logs on that
machine say? It accepted the message, so the responsibility for the message
is no longer that of the machine whose logs you posted.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I sent an email about problems with my users reaching my SMTP server via
Earthlink dialup. Several responded and from that I found that Earthlink
was blocking SMTP except to their mail server.
My immediate idea for a solution was to run a second qmail-smtpd on
another port that Earthlink is not blocking. My question is, can I run
multiple instances of qmail-smtpd concurrently on different ports
through supervise and tcpserver, or do I need to do something wierd to
make this work?
Rob
Rob Hines Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 2 November 2000 at 12:04:02 -0500
> I sent an email about problems with my users reaching my SMTP server via
> Earthlink dialup. Several responded and from that I found that Earthlink
> was blocking SMTP except to their mail server.
>
> My immediate idea for a solution was to run a second qmail-smtpd on
> another port that Earthlink is not blocking. My question is, can I run
> multiple instances of qmail-smtpd concurrently on different ports
> through supervise and tcpserver, or do I need to do something wierd to
> make this work?
You can run multiple instances on different ports without any trouble;
you give tcpserver the port to run on as a command-line argument.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
Rob Hines Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I sent an email about problems with my users reaching my SMTP server via
> Earthlink dialup. Several responded and from that I found that Earthlink
> was blocking SMTP except to their mail server.
>
> My immediate idea for a solution was to run a second qmail-smtpd on
> another port that Earthlink is not blocking. My question is, can I run
> multiple instances of qmail-smtpd concurrently on different ports
> through supervise and tcpserver, or do I need to do something wierd to
> make this work?
Running multiple qmail-smtpds on different ports works fine. Getting your
users to configure their clients to use a non-standard port for SMTP could
be much harder, depending on how technical they are.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Rob Hines Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I sent an email about problems with my users reaching my SMTP server via
> Earthlink dialup. Several responded and from that I found that Earthlink
> was blocking SMTP except to their mail server.
>
> My immediate idea for a solution was to run a second qmail-smtpd on
> another port that Earthlink is not blocking. My question is, can I run
> multiple instances of qmail-smtpd concurrently on different ports
> through supervise and tcpserver, or do I need to do something wierd to
> make this work?
My first question is why? Is there any GOOD reason why your users
can't just use Earthlink's own SMTP server? That's the way it's meant
to work. The only good reason I know of to not use the server your
ISP intends you to use is if they stop you using non-provider From:
headers. Earthlink doesn't do that.
Well, OK, two other reasons (good or otherwise) that I hear are,
firstly, so that all dialup users' configurations can be set up the
same, and secondly, to make support easier (so you don't get blamed
for the ISP's problems).
If you HAVE to do it, then there should be no reason why you can't run
tcpserver/qmail-smtpd from several different ports. After all, a new
qmail-smtpd is invoked for each connection, so it already handles
concurrency.
I hope for your sake that you are using a GOOD method of ensuring your
email servers are not open relays.
-Matt
--
| Matthew J. Brown - Senior Network Administrator - NBCi Shopping |
| 1983 W. 190th St, Suite 100, Torrance CA 90504 |
| Phone: (310) 538-7122 | Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| Cell: (714) 457-1854 | Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> My immediate idea for a solution was to run a second qmail-smtpd on
> another port that Earthlink is not blocking. My question is, can I run
> multiple instances of qmail-smtpd concurrently on different ports
> through supervise and tcpserver,
Yes. Merely invoke tcpserver twice, with different port arguments.
> or do I need to do something wierd to
> make this work?
Nope.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hi,
I'm starting to be fond of the easy path qmail gives me to turn email
addresses into commands. Now, besides my nicey development box, some of
these commands could be useful for my users, but I'd like to implement a
'confim source of command' feature like ezmlm has.
Just before commmiting myself to writing such a mechanism, I'd like to
know if someone's already has written one.
The commands I'm thinking about are not sensitive (it wouldn't be
*that* bad if someone fools the mechanism). I understand that the
security this mechanism provides is feeble against a knowledgeable and
determined hacker. Most users, though, will be deterred. That's my aim.
I'm developing with Perl mostly, so if it's done in Perl, the better.
Well, if I knew something of C, I'd rip it off EZMLM -- mmhh. Could I do
that? Should read the licence ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
martin langhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm starting to be fond of the easy path qmail gives me to turn email
> addresses into commands. Now, besides my nicey development box, some of
> these commands could be useful for my users, but I'd like to implement a
> 'confim source of command' feature like ezmlm has.
[...]
> The commands I'm thinking about are not sensitive (it wouldn't be
> *that* bad if someone fools the mechanism). I understand that the
> security this mechanism provides is feeble against a knowledgeable and
> determined hacker. Most users, though, will be deterred. That's my aim.
If by "confirm source of command" you mean just check the apparent envelope
sender of the message, then the manpage for qmail-command will tell you
which environment variables qmail sets for you before calling your scripts.
You could also use ezmlm's (un)subscription confirmation mechanism, where
a confirmation code is sent to (approved) sender addresses and required in
a reply before the command is invoked.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
I am running Qmail 1.03 on FreeBSD, and am using the MailDir format.
fqdn of this machine is twqmail1.ltfinc.net.
currently, i have the following .qmail file for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
./MailDir/
&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whenever I send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], the message does
go into the Maildir and does forward the message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
My company would like me to do a store/forward, where all incoming mail will
go into
a MailDir, and then be forwarded to our Microsoft Exchange Server. The
problem
that arises is when I am using Outlook to get mail from Exchange that I will
select a 'Reply All' , which
puts in [EMAIL PROTECTED] as a receipient in addition to the
other users.
Is there anyway that this can be disabled short of changing functionality of
qmail?
Dave
I took rblcheck and added some extra code to read a message from stdin,
find the IP of the last relay. It then compares a rating, based on
running lookups against various RBL-style lists, against the value
supplied on the command line. These mods make it suitable to be used in
a .qmail file.
In other words, it looks for the first instance of this type of line:
Received: from mail.domain.com (HELO domain.com) (12.34.56.78)
It will grab the IP in ()'s and feed it into the rblcheck routine
written by Edward Marshall. The rblcheck routine(s) has been modified to
return a value based on which list(s) matched. Namely:
rbl.maps.vix.com = 16
dul.maps.vix.com = 8
relays.mail-abuse.org = 4
outputs.orbs.org = 2
relays.orbs.org = 1
Add all values of lists that matched together, and compare it to the
value supplied on the command line. If the returned value is less than
or equal to the command line value, qrblcheck returns code 0, which
tells qmail to continue delivery. If the value is greater than that
supplied on the command line, qrblcheck returns 100 which tells qmail to
stop all deliveries and return the message.
If, for whatever reason, no IP was found, qrblcheck returns 0 (mail is
accepted).
EXAMPLE:
Putting "|qrblcheck 15" on the first line of your .qmail file will block
any mail that matches rbl.maps.vix.com. Instead, using "|qrblcheck 1"
will reject mail that matches all the lists except for relays.orbs.org.
Download the source at
http://jon.rusts.net/qrblcheck.c
I'm not an experienced C programmer, so feedback is welcome and
encouraged. The biggest problem I see right now is that it will match
bogus IP's... like 999.999.999.999, but I don't see how that would work
it's way into headers written by qmail. Regardless, I do plan on
implementing some sort of trap for this.
It successfully compiles on FreeBSD 4.x, but can't be sure it will on
any other system.
Hopefully this will be useful to someone.
jon
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> i know that the problem is at my machine, and not on the remote email server. (
> i xxx'd out the relevant things as i'm a contractor, and the company has very
> specific policies of my using their name... i like to work, if you know what i
> mean <s>)
>
> anyway, i know it is at my machine as when to problem showed up under sendmail,
> i checked internally, and was given the fix in the form of a sendmail.cf file
> for my machine, not the remote server. so, naturally, i suspect the fix is
> local for qmail as well.
Important point: qmail is not sendmail, not by a long shot.
The point I tried to make in my response was that qmail did everything
exactly as its supposed to, however the _remote mail server_, running
sendmail, rejected your message. So, it begs the question, "what does
this have to do with qmail?" The answer is: nothing. qmail-remote
connected to the remote mail server, it tried to deliver a message,
the remote mail server rejected it. Simple as that.
You stated in your last mail that the company you work for has a
policy of "no wildcard MXs." I'm having trouble understanding exactly
why on Earth anyone would care. Do you know exactly what a wildcard
MX is?
This is the part that is confusing: you are sending mail to
atoka-software.com. It's MX record looks like:
atoka-software.com MX 10 mail1.best.com
atoka-software.com MX 10 mail2.best.com
atoka-software.com MX 20 mail3.best.com
atoka-software.com MX 20 mail4.best.com
further, mail[1234].best.com each has multiple IP addresses, which is
returned round-robin by the name server. They do this for the sake of
redundancy. That is not wildcard MX'ing. Unless you are using a
smarthost, a la smtproutes, then qmail will check the DNS for the MX
for atoka-software.com, then connect to the IP address returned by the
name server. If you are using a smarthost, and it rejects relaying
your mail to one of best.com's mail servers, then the smarthost is not
configured properly. The bounce qmail sent you points this out
clearly.
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 1.2.3.4 does not like recipient.
> Remote host said: 554 <myclient.server.domain.com[1.2.3.4]>: Client host rejected:
>Will not relay via wildcard MX records - reference
>http://www.server.domain.com/DNS/wildmx.html
> Giving up on 1.2.3.4.
I'd sure like to know what that web page says. So, like I said
previously, more information is needed, unfortunately your employer's
dubious "security through obscurity" mentality, and your acceptance of
it, makes it much more difficult to decipher the exact nature of this
problem.
Aaron
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > 1.2.3.4 does not like recipient.
> > > Remote host said: 554 <myclient.server.domain.com[1.2.3.4]>: Client host
>rejected: Will not relay via wildcard MX records - reference
>http://www.server.domain.com/DNS/wildmx.html
> > > Giving up on 1.2.3.4.
> >
> > atoka-software.com does not have any wildcard MXs. I'm pretty confused
> > as to what that mail server is thinking. I think some more info is
> > needed.
> so far as i can determine, it is not that the receiving domain has
> wildcard mx's; it is the dependence of the mail server on the local
> machine that is somehow depending on a wildcard mx. (pardon me, i am
> ignorant here! <s>) anyway, it does not matter where the destination
> mailbox is (other than *.domain.com).
Hmm, no that doesn't make any sense at all. As an addendum to my
latest message, I see that best.com has indeed set up wildcard MX
for your domain:
$ host -t mx blah.atoka-software.com
blah.atoka-software.com MX 10 mail1.best.com
blah.atoka-software.com MX 10 mail2.best.com
blah.atoka-software.com MX 20 mail3.best.com
blah.atoka-software.com MX 20 mail4.best.com
Even so, the wildcard only means anything when sending to
*.atoka-software.com. There isn't anything you can do on the qmail
machine to work-around your employer's mail server's rejecting of your
mail. I can't see what you could do on a sendmail machine, either,
other than bypass the smarthost.
Personally, I simply would not use their mail server as a smarthost.
I can't see any advantage to rejecting mail simply because there
are wildcard MX records associated with it. Maybe someone else
can enlighten me.
Aaron
Hi there,
I have no problems retrieving mail using pop authentication with vchkpw and
/etc/passwd. However, when I authenticate using APOP I get an authorization
error. Does vchkpw APOP authentication not support /etc/passwd (shadow)?
Thanks in advance,
--jtb
"Olivier M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Unfortunately avp is not free, the license-fee for a (linux)
> > mail-server is about 100$/year.
>
> this would be acceptable. Are the updates automatic, or do they
> have to be done manualy ? (wget something, for example).
How should the updates be done automatic? I use a cron-job starting wget
each night and restart AvpDaemon after successful download. I would not
use win-like programs where I don't have the source and which would do
something automatic...
Or do you mean the license-file itself? Don't have experience with that
cause the license-files of the servers I administrate run until Sep
2001. And then I will contact AVP and buy some new licenses.
HTH, Martin
I had been getting complaints lately that mail was being delivered slower
then usual through one of my servers. This server houses several semi-high
traffic domains and a fairly large traffic mailing list. I logged into the
server and the queue wasn't that bad. 150 messages or so. But when I looked
at the qmail processes qmail-rspawn was taking up 30+MB of RAM. I quickly
restarted qmail and things returned to normal and the load average dropped.
I was wondering what could have caused this errata and how I can prevent it
in the future.
--
Erich Zigler
A nuclear war can ruin your whole day.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 02:10:33PM -0600, Erich Zigler wrote:
> I had been getting complaints lately that mail was being delivered slower
> then usual through one of my servers. This server houses several semi-high
> traffic domains and a fairly large traffic mailing list. I logged into the
> server and the queue wasn't that bad. 150 messages or so. But when I looked
> at the qmail processes qmail-rspawn was taking up 30+MB of RAM. I quickly
> restarted qmail and things returned to normal and the load average dropped.
> I was wondering what could have caused this errata and how I can prevent it
> in the future.
Which OS Erich? I've seen this once before - but it'll take my braincells a
little while to recall which OS. The server I saw it on wasn't doing anything
particularly different.
Regards.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 01:47:27PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Which OS Erich? I've seen this once before - but it'll take my braincells a
> little while to recall which OS. The server I saw it on wasn't doing anything
> particularly different.
FreeBSD 3.3. I'm really confused. Everything "appears" to be fine, but it is
taking a long time to process messages.
--
Erich Zigler
Sometimes I think I'd be better of dead. No, wait. Not me, you. -- Jack Handey
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 04:37:41PM -0600, Erich Zigler wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 01:47:27PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Which OS Erich? I've seen this once before - but it'll take my braincells a
> > little while to recall which OS. The server I saw it on wasn't doing anything
> > particularly different.
>
> FreeBSD 3.3. I'm really confused. Everything "appears" to be fine, but it is
> taking a long time to process messages.
Are you saying that qmail-rspawn regrows to 30M (or thereabouts) fairly immediately?
Or are you making a general observation that "things seem slow"? In the latter case
you'll want to resort to the usual strategies of looking at the delivery rate, looking
at your system resources, etc.
Regards.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 09:11:49PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Are you saying that qmail-rspawn regrows to 30M (or thereabouts) fairly immediately?
> Or are you making a general observation that "things seem slow"? In the latter case
> you'll want to resort to the usual strategies of looking at the delivery rate,
>looking
> at your system resources, etc.
No, it had grown to 30MB over an extended period of time. But just in the
last 10 hours it has grown to using up 2MB of RAM. I was wondering what
causes this. But yes things do seem slow, it can take up to half an hour to
2 hours to get a message sent to the mailing list returned. It is odd. I
will look into what you suggesed though. qmailanalog is my friend.
--
Erich Zigler
I brake for animals... if they're big enough to dent my car. -- Duckman
I'm having a problem with RCPTHOSTS and relaying. Without RCPTHOSTS (or
MORERCPTHOSTS) my mail server is an open relay, and yet I'm having
difficulty setting it up so that my Listserv (Listar), which runs on the
same box as QMail, can send out email to list subscribers?
I have the following in rcpthosts:
listserv.genexchange.com
listserv.genexchange.org
listserv.genexchange.net
and I have the following in defaulthost
listserv.genexchange.com
I've read through the relaying tutorials linked to from the QMail website,
but didn't find anything addresses this point. I need to relay selectively
for mailing lists traffic, for not for anyone else...
Any ideas?
Thanks
Anthony
Anthony Abby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 2 November 2000 at 16:37:43 -0500
> I'm having a problem with RCPTHOSTS and relaying. Without RCPTHOSTS (or
> MORERCPTHOSTS) my mail server is an open relay, and yet I'm having
> difficulty setting it up so that my Listserv (Listar), which runs on the
> same box as QMail, can send out email to list subscribers?
>
> I have the following in rcpthosts:
>
> listserv.genexchange.com
> listserv.genexchange.org
> listserv.genexchange.net
>
> and I have the following in defaulthost
>
> listserv.genexchange.com
>
> I've read through the relaying tutorials linked to from the QMail website,
> but didn't find anything addresses this point. I need to relay selectively
> for mailing lists traffic, for not for anyone else...
>
> Any ideas?
How does the mailing list submit messages to qmail? Since you say
this doesn't work, what symptom or error message do you see? And
finally, What Do The Logs Say (TM)?
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
> How does the mailing list submit messages to qmail? Since you say
> this doesn't work, what symptom or error message do you see? And
> finally, What Do The Logs Say (TM)?
David:
Listar hands off list traffic directly back to Qmail via SMTP. The logs
indicate QMail won't "relay" the mail because the addresses the mail is
bound for are not local. Someone else wrote me and suggested I read
http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html, which I did not read
before but which appears to answer my question. This is something else that
the Richard Blum "Running Qmail" doesn't cover. A couple people suggested I
return the book after I bought it, but I didn't. Should have listened to
them when they offered the advice!!! So when does the O'Reilly book get
published already??
Sorry for bothering everyone!
Anthony
Hi,
Since I never got a response from my previous post, I assume my question was
lame or lacked detail. I'll try again...
Is there anyway I can configure vchkpw to handle APOP for /etc/passwd users?
I know there are other means for handling this (patches to checkpassword,
checkpw, etc.) but I like the logging features of vchkpw and the fact if
configured, will maintain the relay cdb. I do NOT (at least at this time)
wish to use vpopmail other than to maintain the relay cdb and for
authentication. From investigation it appears virtual apop users' passwords
are stored in clear text in order to match md5 hashed copies sent across the
wire. Qualcomm's qpopper supports the use of APOP with /etc/shadow-- can
vchkpw offer the same? Just curious, anyone know how qpopper utilizes
/etc/shadow with APOP? I ask only because from searching the qmail archives
it appears passwords need be stored in clear text on the server.
The qmail site offers numerous alternatives, but if vchkpw can use
/etc/shadow with APOP authentications, then I won't have to change the auth
mechanism.
A response of any sort would be appreciated.
many thanks,
--James
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 12:53:27PM +0000, Greg Cope wrote:
>Out of interest does the Netfilter have a large / battery backed cache
>to decrease the I/O / disk bottle neck ?
Yes. They have a chunk of NVRAM which ACKs the write request as soon as it's
committed there. This gives it the ability to ack write messages very quickly
while still ensuring that the data is resiliant to crashes.
>Also does your system only send one message - the ones I deal with are
>all individual (both in content and message headers).
That's the problem. It's relatively slow throwing a bunch of messages
into QMail. It doesn't take a very powerful machine to completely swamp
a fairly hefty QMail server, I've found. And since the smtp daemons
are fat, dumb, and happy individual processes, they don't really have the
smarts to do any sort of throttling on incoming connections.
We ended up having to implement that sort of thing externally so that the
originating program wouldn't swamp the box.
>> Short of a threaded qmail-remote (or qmail-send/qmail-remote hybrid), a
>> pre-forked pool of qmail-remotes waiting on a common socket would probably be
>> a significant improvement. In short, Apache-style process management.
Well, remember that Apache is pre-forking the *LISTENERS*, not originators.
So the exact setup wouldn't exactly be relavent. What you really want to
be able to do is keep an existing session open to a mail server and shove
additional messages down it.
I realize that DJB has numbers which say it's faster to open 10 independant
connections than to stream 10 messages over 1 connection. If you're
already at concurrencyremote I suspect it's just a waste of time to
shut down a connection when you're just going to open it again.
Also, pre-forking is only really relavent when you have *ANTICIPATED*
load. If you actually have more messages to deliver, it's not called
pre-forking. ;-)
Sean
--
Laws are the source code to our government. Submit a patch November 7.
VOTE! November 7, 2000
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
>>> Short of a threaded qmail-remote (or qmail-send/qmail-remote hybrid), a
>>> pre-forked pool of qmail-remotes waiting on a common socket would probably
be
>>> a significant improvement. In short, Apache-style process management.
>
>Well, remember that Apache is pre-forking the *LISTENERS*, not originators.
>So the exact setup wouldn't exactly be relavent. What you really want to
>be able to do is keep an existing session open to a mail server and shove
>additional messages down it.
The model is exactly the same. In both cases you have a bunch of equivalent
independent processes waiting for work from a single queue; and in fact
qmail-send is *listening* for work from qmail-send (this makes more sense when
you consider pre-forked workers). As far as pipelining is concerned, that's
HTTP/1.1.
But Apache is not really the issue here...
>I realize that DJB has numbers which say it's faster to open 10 independant
>connections than to stream 10 messages over 1 connection. If you're
>already at concurrencyremote I suspect it's just a waste of time to
>shut down a connection when you're just going to open it again.
>
>Also, pre-forking is only really relavent when you have *ANTICIPATED*
>load. If you actually have more messages to deliver, it's not called
>pre-forking. ;-)
The pool doesn't have to be a static size. You define minimum, maximum, and
maximum spare (workers not in active use). If the rate of work increases and
you start consuming your pool of idle workers, you spawn more in response to
the increasing workload. And when you have too many idle workers, you kill
them off.
But certainly a component of this design would be to make the worker procesess
persistent, i.e., they handle more than one connection before exit().
The reason I'm in favor of this model is because (a) it's proven effective for
very similar applications, hence the Apache reference; and (b) I believe it's
possible to modify the qmail-send:qmail-remote interface to support this kind
of model without completely ripping out the guts of qmail.
I really *don't* want to write a completely new MTA, particularly when qmail
already does certain things very well. But there are definitely areas where
performance can be improved.
-Jeff
>Out of interest does the Netfilter have a large / battery backed cache
>to decrease the I/O / disk bottle neck ?
Yes. 32MB of write cache and 512MB of read. We've found NetApp boxes to work
very well for applications like this.
>Also does your system only send one message - the ones I deal with are
>all individual (both in content and message headers).
Yes. We're doing only one large message at a time (250-750k recipients,
typically), and we shut down qmail-smptd during the run. With more jobs in the
queue and local deliveries being added to the, performance hits the floor.
-Jeff
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 02:31:53PM -0800, Jeff Mayzurk wrote:
>The model is exactly the same. In both cases you have a bunch of equivalent
>independent processes waiting for work from a single queue; and in fact
Not exactly the same... qmail-remote exits after every run. Do you have
any profile information that suggests that the fork latency is even worth
considering as far as making a performance impact? During heavy activity,
I'm not sure that the added complexity of the pre-fork code would cause
anything but a negative impact on the fork latency. Checking to see if you
have any spare workers and then forking is more expensive than forking
alone...
The first thing to do about this if you want to implement it is to
find out exactly WHY apache chose to do it that way. What were they
hoping to resolve with that, and did it actually achieve the desired
results?
The thing to keep in mind is that this scheme resulted in some fairly
poor benchmark results in one of the comparisons, because of the time
they took to ramp up to handling the full load.
>But certainly a component of this design would be to make the worker procesess
>persistent, i.e., they handle more than one connection before exit().
Actually, I suspect that ability to optimize the deliveries so that an
existing worker could be assigned multiple messages to a single host
would be the single biggest win -- especially in this day of a majority
of mail going to a handful of domains.
>The reason I'm in favor of this model is because (a) it's proven effective for
>very similar applications, hence the Apache reference; and (b) I believe it's
>possible to modify the qmail-send:qmail-remote interface to support this kind
>of model without completely ripping out the guts of qmail.
And what sorts of performance improvements do you expect to see? 1%?
3%?
>I really *don't* want to write a completely new MTA, particularly when qmail
>already does certain things very well. But there are definitely areas where
>performance can be improved.
It also does certain things particularly poorly. Injecting many messages
into the queue being the biggest issue. I don't have any complaints about
it the outbound delivery performance.
Sean
--
All bugs are shallow when there are many eyes looking for them.
VOTE! November 7, 2000
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 02:54:10PM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> That's the problem. It's relatively slow throwing a bunch of messages
> into QMail. It doesn't take a very powerful machine to completely swamp
> a fairly hefty QMail server, I've found.
I think the main problem is within qmail-send.
qmail doesn't use concurrencies to their max as long as there are still
unprocessed messages in the queue or the deliveries generate a lot of
bounces.
We have a customers that injects about 15000 single messages in bunches
of 100 messages to a dedicated qmail server. Sadly the "list" isn't too
well administrated and even after the queue has reached a status where
you have no unprocessed messages at one point the bounces slow down
qmail quite a lot.
I have generated a graph from the
qmail: 973205710.228381 status: local 0/120 remote 1/120
lines which show this "waving" behaviour. I'd posted that info to the
list some time ago, but anyway, here's the URL for that graph (10 KB) again:
http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/software/qmail/deliver-stats.gif
The lot of local deliveries are due to the QUEUE_EXTRA delivery we have
for accounting reasons.
I have made a second graph. This is also a dedicated qmail server
running a mailinglist (newsletter) with approx 91000 subscribers.
The graph is one "shot". As the mailing-list is run by ezmlm there are
very few bounces and only some occasional (un-)subscribe messages.
This time qmail keeps the concurrency at max. The second and third
shorter peaks are due to deferred messages tried again after backoff.
The image (40 KB) is at
http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/software/qmail/deliver-stats2.gif
I know it would be better to also have some figures about messages
in queue, unprocessed messages in queue, successful/deferred deliveries
included, but those are hard to extract from the logfile :/
I think a big gain in performance would be to split up the scheduler
in qmail-send into at least one for remote, one for locals and one
for sorting in new messages into the remote or local queue.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 04:52:50PM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
[snip]
> The first thing to do about this if you want to implement it is to
> find out exactly WHY apache chose to do it that way. What were they
> hoping to resolve with that, and did it actually achieve the desired
> results?
In Apache, pre-forking is useful because it is one big fat whale.
If you take a look at WN, for example (http://www.wnserver.org/), that
doesn't pre-fork, you'll see that it shows similar or better
performance.
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
'/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
'Het leven is een stuiterbal, maar de mijne plakt aan t plafond!' - me
I just instaled QMail, but it is not starting, I can not to telnet to my
machine by 25 or 110 ports (I can to do a normal telnet), where can to check
??, I'm using RedHat....
Thanks...
Ing. J@vier Morquecho Morquecho
Cedetel
Desarrollo de proyectos comerciales
Tel : 177-10-87
Cel : 177-00-87
e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e-movil : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Cedetel : http://www.cedetel.com.mx
"#define QUESTION ((bb) || !(bb)) // Shakespeare"
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Javier Morquecho Morquecho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Enviado el: Miércoles 1 de Noviembre de 2000 5:53 PM
Para: 'qmail mailinglist'
Asunto: Help!!!, Several newbie QMail questions....
Hi you all !!...
Hello friends !!....I'm new in this list, I hope we can share a lot of
knowlodge....
I'm very, very pressing, i need a propouse an mail solution to my
company.... I have some newbie QMail questions..
1) Can I to have 2 mail servers at the same machine??, Right now I have
Sendmail, but I would like to use QMail too (sorry if this is an estupid
question, but I prefer to be stupid once)
2) If I planning to have 100,000-200,000 user and to use Red Hat, Apache,
QMail, what features would be to have the equipment ??, I mean what machine
do you recomended me (proccesor, HD, RAM) ??....
3) I'm going to use TWIG as mail client, and I going to develop with PHP a
module with a way to allow users to signup for
email accounts. So, what about the PHP functions to QMail :
vm_adduser — Add a new virtual user with a password
vm_addalias — Add an alias to a virtual user
vm_passwd — Changes a virtual users password
vm_delalias — Removes an alias
vm_deluser — Removes a virtual user
are they working ??...
Thanks in advance...
Ing. J@vier Morquecho Morquecho
Cedetel
Desarrollo de proyectos comerciales
Tel : 177-10-87
Cel : 177-00-87
e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e-movil : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Cedetel : http://www.cedetel.com.mx
"#define QUESTION ((bb) || !(bb)) // Shakespeare"
I am getting a recurring, off-and-on odd behavior when one of my
users attempts to send email to sherwin.com (sherwin-williams the
paint people), for all addresses within that domain.
My other mailservers (exim and a proprietary piece of work, old BBS
software from eSoft) *will* send mail to that domain, no problem,
even on days when qmail will not.
Here is what I have so far...
The error message from the logs...(no, it isn't really a win95 box)
Nov 2 14:05:30 win95 qmail: 973191930.503701 delivery
628273: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an
_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/
My mail server is able to get a valid DNS entry for the sherwin.com
mail server. It's not a dns or MX record problem.
As well, port 25 on mail01.sherwin.com (the best MX record) is alive
and well, for when I telnet to the box on port 25, I get the
following message (all one line, no spaces in the ***'s part until
after 2000).
220
********************************************************0*********
*********2*****2000 ****2*****0*00
It says 220 (space) 75 continual characters (space) some more
asterisks, and whatnot. The first space is after 220. The second
space is after 2000. It is all ONE LINE of stuff on my ssh screen.
If I type in things (HELO and like that) it talks back to me with
appropriate looking replies. I'm not an expert, but it does what the
821 rfc sample "conversations" say it is supposed to do.
Their DNS isn't bad. Their MX record isn't hosed. The box and the
port are alive and well. I can reach them without network problems,
from the exact box that is giving me the 4.4.1 message. It is none
of those things.
Okay. I would say that this is likely a qmail oddity, due to the
fact that my other mail servers are perfectly able to send mail to
the domain.
However, since I DO NOT get this error with any other domain besides
this one, I am curious to know why it is happening. Also, folks
at sherwin.com claim I'm an idiot and blame me. *sigh*
My current theory is that the server at mail01.sherwin.com is
sending a 'greeting' that is too long. This is because it works
sometimes and not other times.
I think qmail is barfing on this 70+ character string and causing
my user to tell me that my server is broken, which I don't believe it
is. The other several thousand messages a day it handles go through
just fine, only the ones to sherwin.com die.
Apparently, the mail server's response is not ALWAYS
too long because SOMETIMES my server will send mail to
sherwin.com without a hassle. Looks like part of the 75 chars is a
date. The 2 and 2000 are probably the day and the year. Maybe it
also contains something like a system message of the day, I don't
know.
A bounced mail header gives the following informative lines:
Received: from mail01.sherwin.com (HELO ehub1.sherwin.com)
(148.141.15.156)
Received: from cbdserv4.sherwin.com ([148.141.17.249])
by ehub1.sherwin.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.3)
So then. This mail server which is providing excessive
amounts of asterisks in its 220 greeting for connection
establishment is a Lotus Domino 5.0.3, known internally as
ehub1.sherwin.com and externally as mail01.sherwin.com ...
ehub1.sherwin.com does not resolve for me in DNS, so I'd say it
was an internal network name, not a public one.
I'm not sure Lotus would make their server spit out a
bucket of asterisks in its smtp conversations, at least not in the
'out of the box' configuration. I think that's a user-defined
variable...I know it is in some of my mail servers.
I have temporarily remedied the problem on my end by providing the
user with a substantially less-fussy (and less STABLE...) mail
server, but this does not solve the problem permanently.
Any thoughts ya'll have on the subject would be appreciated.
Am I right, am I wrong, am I out of my mind? Is it something else
entirely?
The fine folks at sherwin.com claim I am the ONLY ISP on
the planet who has trouble with this, that it simply MUST be on my
end. And really, with the two other mail servers that I run, I don't
have trouble sending email to sherwin.com...so their argument has
some validity.
I'd like some more thoughts on what is going wrong, because I
feel like an idiot, here.
Jessica U. Gothie -- admin., bedford.net
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 07:36:47PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
> Nov 2 14:05:30 win95 qmail: 973191930.503701 delivery
> 628273: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an
> _SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/
[snip]
> As well, port 25 on mail01.sherwin.com (the best MX record) is alive
> and well, for when I telnet to the box on port 25, I get the
> following message (all one line, no spaces in the ***'s part until
> after 2000).
>
> 220
> ********************************************************0*********
> *********2*****2000 ****2*****0*00
But:
alex@buick:~$ telnet mail01.sherwin.com smtp
Trying 148.141.15.156...
Connected to mail01.sherwin.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220
********************************************************0******************2*****2000
******02**0*00
EHLO buick.978.org
500 Syntax error, command "XXXX buick.978.org" unrecognized
QUIT
221 ehub1.sherwin.com SMTP Service closing transmission channel
This proves my theory that there is a very broken firewall product out
there that corrupts the banner and ESMTP stuff on SMTP connections. We
at UML are fortunate enough to be "protected" by this product as well
(check out SMTP @ buick.978.org, and no those asterisks are NOT what
gets sent). Of course, it breaks ESMTP, but who cares? We have to
protect broken mailers.
Other qmail servers never had any problem with the SMTP service on
buick.978.org in spite of this insane TCP corruption, but maybe this
particular firewall/mailer combination at sherwin.com is causing non
standards compliant behavior which rubs qmail the wrong way. But their
end is broken.
> However, since I DO NOT get this error with any other domain besides
> this one, I am curious to know why it is happening. Also, folks
> at sherwin.com claim I'm an idiot and blame me. *sigh*
Ask them what happened to ESMTP.
> The fine folks at sherwin.com claim I am the ONLY ISP on
> the planet who has trouble with this, that it simply MUST be on my
> end. And really, with the two other mail servers that I run, I don't
> have trouble sending email to sherwin.com...so their argument has
> some validity.
You running any qmail patches?
PGP signature
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 07:37:09PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Received: from mail01.sherwin.com (HELO ehub1.sherwin.com)
> (148.141.15.156)
> Received: from cbdserv4.sherwin.com ([148.141.17.249])
> by ehub1.sherwin.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.3)
>
What is cbdserv4? Does that mean your mail got through
the first hub before bouncing or is it same machine too?
>
> The fine folks at sherwin.com claim I am the ONLY ISP on
> the planet who has trouble with this, that it simply MUST be on my
> end. And really, with the two other mail servers that I run, I don't
> have trouble sending email to sherwin.com...so their argument has
> some validity.
When I started as ISP 7 years ago a local BBS operator shared
with me his favorite like "It only happens on your system|modem|
server so it MUST be your problem." YMMV :-)
cfm
--
Christopher F. Miller, Publisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039
1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/
Database publishing, e-commerce, office/internet integration, Debian linux.
Hi folks
I have relaying enabled for a host by IP address as follow:
in /etc/tcp.smtp
172.xxx.xxx.xxx:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
.
.
.
:allow
and did tcprules /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb /etc/tcp.smtp.temp < /etc/tcp.smtp
also kill -HUP qmail-send
but relaying still fails
What could be missing here?
Thanks
Dan
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> and did tcprules /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb /etc/tcp.smtp.temp <
> /etc/tcp.smtp also kill -HUP qmail-send but relaying still fails
> What could be missing here?
Are you calling tcpserver with -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb ? (From
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run if you are installing as per
LWQ). You might also want to try killall -HUP tcpserver or simply
/etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail restart (if using LWQ and the SysVInit
approach)
Brett.
--
"Hey, I know this! This is Unix!"
- Jurassic Park
How did this happen?
I'm not using a crap MUA and it wasn't spam...
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: 3 Nov 2000 02:18:38 -0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at ipsware.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]>:
You're either using a crap MUA or you're spamming me. Go away.
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 19369 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2000 02:18:36
-0000 Received: from unknown (HELO taz2.fiberhosting.com)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by co3003608-a.blktn1.nsw.optushome.com.au with SMTP; 3 Nov
2000
02:18:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 6436 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2000 02:16:18 -
0000
Received: from max1-105.mtld.fl.iag.net (HELO odo)
(207.30.74.105)
by taz.fiberhosting.com with SMTP; 3 Nov 2000 02:16:18 -0000
From: "Phil Barnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Brett Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 21:16:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Yahoo delivery failure - short test and proposal
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <3A01D9A1.14748.4B14353@localhost>
Priority: normal
References: Rich Feather's message of "Thu, 02 Nov 2000 05:21:21
-0700" In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-
mailer:
Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
On 2 Nov 2000, at 23:28, Brett Randall wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Count me in. I'm seeing the same problem.
>
> Well, I'm not really after an army of followers, but I would more
> like to see people taking some degree of initiative, giving the list
> information on what the problem would be, e-mail addresses of people
> we can talk to at Yahoo, whether or not this is a good idea, and
> other information which I haven't thought of yet :) A petition isn't
> going to be anything...we actually need to talk to Yahoo, but I
> haven't the foggiest about how to get in contact with the right
> department there...
Actually, intense media coverage would get quicker response. If
this becomes a media football, they will scramble to fix it.
Maybe we can interest a pundit in one of the trade rags...
--
Phil Barnett mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW http://www.the-oasis.net/
FTP Site ftp://ftp.the-oasis.net
------- End of forwarded message -------
--
Phil Barnett mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW http://www.the-oasis.net/
FTP Site ftp://ftp.the-oasis.net
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How did this happen?
>
> I'm not using a crap MUA and it wasn't spam...
Um, this is my spam protection system and...ummm...it has s slight bug
:P I didn't know that some MUAs sent mail with In-reply-to instead of
In-Reply-To (note caps)...I will make it case insensitive for future
cases. Apologies to Phil and anyone else who has received this
error...
Brett.
--
"I wonder what Jesus would do if HE had to reload Windows 95 for the
eighth time today ?"
- Mirabour Gilbride
Thus said Brett Randall on 03 Nov 2000 13:44:59 +1100:
> In-Reply-To (note caps)...I will make it case insensitive for future
> cases. Apologies to Phil and anyone else who has received this
> error...
I believe all headers should be treated case insensitive... :-) Kind
of nice that it's working to some extent though isn't it? I need to
start implementing something like this. I get over 90 SPAM a month on
this email account. Granted, I have a heavy set of procmail filters
setup and I only see 1% of them, but it also catches some valid
emails...
Andy
--
[-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------]
9:54pm up 1 day, 13 min, 4 users, load average: 1.31, 1.31, 1.27
Dear Gentleman/Madam,
I am new to qmail and have my system just up and running, but i would
like to have a better control over qmail configuration
files(/var/qmail/control). Since i respectfully request your help in
order to point to a source of information about each qmail configuration
file and detailed description of its format.
Thanks you for your time and cooperation.
Best regards,
Gustavo Rios
On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 01:25:25AM +0000, Gustavo Vieira Goncalves Coelho Rios wrote:
> I am new to qmail and have my system just up and running, but i would
> like to have a better control over qmail configuration
> files(/var/qmail/control). Since i respectfully request your help in
> order to point to a source of information about each qmail configuration
> file and detailed description of its format.
All you want to know is described in the man page named "qmail-control"
There is a table
control default used by
badmailfrom (none) qmail-smtpd
[ ... ]
which means that you can find detailed information about the
"badmailfrom" control file in the man page to "qmail-smtpd".
If
$ man qmail-control
gives you a "No manual entry for qmail-control" you may try a
$ MANPATH=/var/qmail/man man qmail-control
Additionally you may want to take a look at
Life with qmail <URL:http://Web.InfoAve.net/~dsill/qmail.html>
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Markus Stumpf wrote:
> All you want to know is described in the man page named "qmail-control"
> There is a table
> control default used by
> badmailfrom (none) qmail-smtpd
> [ ... ]
> which means that you can find detailed information about the
> "badmailfrom" control file in the man page to "qmail-smtpd".
>
> If
> $ man qmail-control
> gives you a "No manual entry for qmail-control" you may try a
> $ MANPATH=/var/qmail/man man qmail-control
>
> Additionally you may want to take a look at
> Life with qmail <URL:http://Web.InfoAve.net/~dsill/qmail.html>
Thanks for your answer! That URL (above) is a hell of help for qmail
beginner.
Again, thanks!
Say sorry to everyone: I send this mail just test that dose
my
mail can send out. If I can read this mail from qmail
list.
It mean my act is right!
Say SORRY again.
ljwsy
|
Methinks I spoke just a tad bit too soon earlier this evening. My problem
with not be able to relay mail from my mailing lists should be solved by
using TCPSERVER (http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html) to set
the RELAYCLIENT environment variable, but I had some problems and have one
small problem left.
After I untarred ucspi-tcp I created the /etc/smtp.tcp as it instructed as
such
192.168.1.2:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
:allow
then I ran "tcprules tcp.smtp.cdb tcp.smtp.temp < tcp.smtp" without any
problem... then ran "tcpserver -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u501 -g501 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &" and ran into my first problem. Like others, I
got "tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used". Was a little
stumped by what exactly that meant, so I visited the archives of this list
and started reading all the responses. Unlike most of the people who are
documented in the archives I'm not running inetd, but rather running xinetd
so I couldn't really comment out any line. Instead I had to remove the smtp
file from /etc/xinet.d/ and make sure QMail was off. Ran a quick check of
the system with ps ax and sure enough, nothing else was using port 25.
I then rebooted the system (just to be safe and sure) and shut down QMail
again, then reran the tcpserver command and this time received no errors.
Big smile on my face, but it was short lived because as soon as I restarted
QMail I tried to telnet to port 25 but could not connect.... hmmmm... so I
figured, instead of removing the SMTP file from /etc/xinet.d/ I guess I
should have just amended it somehow??
Now this is what I had running in xinetd... should I change this somehow and
replace it in /etc/xinetd/ or am I running down the wrong path??
service smtp
{
socket_type = stream
protocol = tcp
wait = no
user = qmaild
id = smtp
server = /var/qmail/bin/tcp-env
server_args = /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
log_on_success -= DURATION USERID PID HOST EXIT
log_on_failure -= USERID HOST ATTEMPT RECORD
}
Thanks
Anthony
Hallo Anthony,
Friday, November 03, 2000, 6:24:07 AM, you wrote:
> then I ran "tcprules tcp.smtp.cdb tcp.smtp.temp < tcp.smtp" without any
> problem... then ran "tcpserver -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u501 -g501 0 smtp
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &" and ran into my first problem. Like others, I
> got "tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used". Was a little
I don´t really know why this error occurs but I changed the options
on tcpserver to "tcpserver -H -R -x /path/to/tcp.smtp.cdb" and it
worked. The tcpserver manual says you should use this options on
servers running on TCP Ports 53 and 113
regards
Schwarz Hans-Juergen
|
Hello to everyone,
My company has the mail server running on Exchange
5.0 (needles to say it works like hell) and I would like to move all the
accounts on Linux QMail:
PROBLEM: Is it possible to authentificate the QMail
users against the an NT station?
-->(at this time when the user logs on to check
his mail on Exchnage he uses the same user/pass that he uses to log on to the
local domain) <--
I mean ... Is there any way that I can use the same
NT Domain Logon based system (the file) to auth my further QMail users when
checking their mail.
If so PLEASE tell me how or give me some
links...
Thank you
Regards,
Victor
|
Hello,
I have to change our qmail-based e-mail environment integrating a MS
Exchange server :-(.
My plans are:
o all incoming mail is handeled by qmail in the following manner:
- if the mail could be delivered to a local mailbox this should be done
by qmail
- if there is no local mailbox for this recipient the mail should be
forwarded to
the exchange server
o all outgoing mail (injected by Exchange or directly to qmail) should be
handeled by qmail.
I think the handling of outgoing mail is no problem.
But how I have to configure qmail to handle the incoming mail? By
~alias/.qmail-default ?
Thanks in advance.
Stefan Witzel
(Sorry if the solution is in the faqs, ... . The e-mail service is
essential for us and there
is no Exchange server available for testing.)
Stefan Witzel -----------------------------------
Universitaet Goettingen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stabsstelle DV -----------------------------------
Gosslerstrasse 5-7 fon: +49 551 394160
37073 Goettingen fax: +49 551 399612
Germany -----------------------------------
Hi there,
I've just installed qmail, spent some time to configure it and finally
tested it. It worked fine until I noticed
something that's driving me crazy:
I've built a /etc/qmail/users/assign file where I put all the popusers
of the system, executed qmail-newu and restarted qmail.
It worked. After some time, I went back to that file and noticed that it
had been replaced by another one that seems to have been built using the
/etc/passwd file.
Could someone tell me why? That happened automatically and every time I
modify the assign file, it's replaced by another one after some time.
Any help is welcome
Thanks
David
