qmail Digest 12 Dec 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1211
Topics (messages 53840 through 53907):
Re: daemon mode VS tcpserver
53840 by: Piotr Kasztelowicz
53852 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
Re: all mail forwarding and catching all bounces
53841 by: Peter Green
Re: what is *.da.uu.net?
53842 by: Peter Green
Re: Does qmail really delay a bounce for this long?
53843 by: Peter van Dijk
Re: big-concurrency.patch
53844 by: Federico Edelman Anaya
53865 by: Martin Volesky
53867 by: Charles Cazabon
53895 by: Martin Volesky
Re: How to get Mail delivery in form cgi´s work
53845 by: Kris Kelley
53846 by: Chris Johnson
53847 by: Tim Hunter
qmail, linux and large scale environment
53848 by: Van Liedekerke Franky
53877 by: Greg Cope
53881 by: rdrake.telusplanet.net
Outlook Express bug
53849 by: dG
53851 by: Alex Pennace
53853 by: dG
53855 by: Alex Pennace
53857 by: dG
user alias file
53850 by: gmo.gmx.de
53854 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: [OT] Outlook Express bug
53856 by: Chris Johnson
Outlook Express Prank
53858 by: martin langhoff
53859 by: Alex Pennace
53860 by: Mike Jackson
53861 by: Nathan J. Mehl
53868 by: Felix von Leitner
53869 by: Hubbard, David
53870 by: martin langhoff
53871 by: Robin S. Socha
53872 by: martin langhoff
53873 by: martin langhoff
53874 by: Justin Bell
53875 by: Hubbard, David
53876 by: Bruno Wolff III
53878 by: Goran Blazic
53880 by: Chris Johnson
53883 by: Amitai Schlair
53884 by: James Stevens
53885 by: Alex Pennace
53886 by: Jason Brooke
Re: failure notice
53862 by: steves.connection.com
Moderated lists
53863 by: Goran Blazic
big mail spool
53864 by: Gustavo Vieira Goncalves Coelho Rios
53902 by: Gjermund Sorseth
53904 by: Mark Delany
queue-fix todo patch failuer
53866 by: steves.connection.com
can't unsubscribe
53879 by: Liberty
Qmail server set to forward to another host on the local ethernet.
53882 by: Rawlinsons Group \(Brisbane\)
53889 by: andrew.tic.ch
53890 by: Chris Johnson
FreeBSD, Qmail, and NFS
53887 by: Delanet Administration
Qmail source files - developer version
53888 by: Alex Kramarov
Limiting <rcpt to>
53891 by: Gan
53892 by: andrew.tic.ch
53893 by: Wong, Wing-Kin
Qmail and RFC1894 - Delivery Status Notifications
53894 by: James Morgenstein
53899 by: Sean Reifschneider
different mail relays?
53896 by: Thomas Haberland
53900 by: Mark Delany
alias account problem, pls help!
53897 by: mok swee loong
53907 by: Vincent Schonau
Email hosting solutions?
53898 by: Benjamin Lee
emergency: tell me, how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list files by text editor?
53901 by: bora.piano.ac
53903 by: Mark Delany
thanx so much, but ezmlm "fatal: address does not contain @"
53905 by: bora.piano.ac
53906 by: Vincent Schonau
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Linux wrote:
> I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail.
> It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ?????
> Can anyone give me and advice???
I use with tcpserver, because it seams be better.
Piotr
---
Piotr Kasztelowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:31:57AM +0100, Linux wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail.
> It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ?????
Search the archives, this question has been asked before.
But, anyway, qmail-smtpd is NOT daemonizable. It needs a tcp wrapper,
whichever it may be.
RC
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis Telecom - 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
* Alex Kramarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001210 16:53]:
> |grep -q MAILER-DAEMON || exit 99 - this works, but cause a loop in the
> system because every message forwarded to a user specified after this line
> (me of course) eventually goes again through qmail-queue and gets replicated
> to the log alias again.
Change the whole setup to:
|grep -q MAILER-DAEMON || exit 99
/var/qmail/alias/LOG/
To deliver *locally* to a Maildir/, rather than forwarding it off of the
machine. (You'll want to ``maildirmake'' the destination Maildir/ if you use
the above...)
/pg
--
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001210 21:27]:
> What kind of service is *.tnt.city.state.da.uu.net, or for example
> 1Cust147.tnt7.fort-lauderdale.fl.da.uu.net?
>
> SPAM from these addresses is not being blocked by DULS. traceroute
> suggests to me an above.net colo at uu.net? (my guess)
Note that there is an intermediate open relay between the da.uu.net address
and your mail server:
> Received: from co-location.ibtoday.iasiaworks.ne.kr (HELO ns.asiatrans.com)
>([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> by gray.maine.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2000 15:42:33 -0000
Here, your machine accepts the mail from 211.36.253.35 (aka
co-location.ibtoday.iasiaworks.ne.kr).
> Received: from mail1.joymail.com (1Cust147.tnt7.fort-lauderdale.fl.da.uu.net
>[63.25.243.147])
> by ns.asiatrans.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA15685
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 00:40:45 +0900
Here the co-location.ibtoday.iasiaworks.ne.kr machine accepts the spam from
the da.uu.net dial-up account and relays it. Lo and behold, this machine
(211.36.253.35) is on the RSS. :-)
> We're running the collected SPAMPATCH patches. Does it make
> sense to block *.da.uu.net in badmailpatterns or might there better
> way of doing it with tcpserver? Frankly, depending on what tnt
> is I'm tempted to block all da.uu.net. The addresses
> along the path change with each instance; only the source
> address seems consistent.
If your customers are not using UUnet dialups (or resold UUnet dialups), go
ahead and block 'em all, I say, whatever method you might use...
/pg
--
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You know, by the time you get some with all this, the "Swiss Army
Chainsaw" is going to be more like a Swiss Army Tactical Nuke.... :-)
--- Brandon Allbery
on perl in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 07:16:20PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote:
[snip]
> Plain qmail bounces back shortly after it encounters a permanent failure.
And to add to that, if for over a week (which is configurable) there are
only temporare failure, that is considered permanent too.
"This message has been in the queue too long. I give up. Sorry it didn't
work out." or something similar :)
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
'/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
'Het leven is een stuiterbal, maar de mijne plakt aan t plafond!' - me
Martin:
Ok! .. thanks!
Ummmm.. It's posible when I apply this change the performance of the machine turn
slowly?
Martin Volesky wrote:
> On 09/12/00 at 3:21 PM Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:
>
> >A few days ago .. I post on the list many question about
> >big-concurrency.patch ...
> >
> >I was reading other list about Qmail and I get this solution about the
> >problem with the FD ..
> >
> >The solution was:
> >
> >echo "65536" > /proc/sys/fs/inode-max
> >echo "16384" > /proc/sys/fs/file-max
> >
> >So.. you need to do this every system reboot, I don't know how to make
> >this persistent.. anybody have idea or know how to make this persistent?
>
> Under Liux 2.2.x, the way to make this persistent is to use the sysctl facility.
>
> add:
>
> fs.file-max = 16384
> fs.inode-max = 65536
>
> to the sysctl.conf file in /etc, and it will be loaded up evey time you boot the
>machine.
>
> Martin Volesky - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> CTO - Deijlabs Corporation
> 1221 Mackay, Suite 200
> Montreal, Quebec, Canada
> H3G 2H5
> Tel.: 514.399.9930 Fax.: 514.399.1117
On 11/12/00 at 12:30 PM Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:
>Martin:
> Ok! .. thanks!
>
>Ummmm.. It's posible when I apply this change the performance of the machine turn
>slowly?
>
Federico,
There is no reason why your system should run any slower because of the
sysctl.conf
modifications.
>
>Martin Volesky wrote:
>> Under Liux 2.2.x, the way to make this persistent is to use the sysctl facility.
>>
>> add:
>>
>> fs.file-max = 16384
>> fs.inode-max = 65536
>>
>> to the sysctl.conf file in /etc, and it will be loaded up evey time you boot the
>machine.
Martin Volesky - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO - Deijlabs Corporation
1221 Mackay, Suite 200
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H3G 2H5
Tel.: 514.399.9930 Fax.: 514.399.1117
Martin Volesky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/12/00 at 12:30 PM Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:
>
> >Ummmm.. It's posible when I apply this change the performance of the machine
> >turn slowly?
>
> There is no reason why your system should run any slower because of the
> sysctl.conf modifications.
At least as compared to having made the changes manually after boot.
However, his system could exhibit poorer interactive response compared to
before modifying the max-files and max-inodes due to the increased load
from qmail.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On 11/12/00 at 2:25 PM Charles Cazabon wrote:
>
>At least as compared to having made the changes manually after boot.
>However, his system could exhibit poorer interactive response compared to
>before modifying the max-files and max-inodes due to the increased load
>from qmail.
>
>Charles
Yes Charles, I agree with all your points.
Martin Volesky - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO - Deijlabs Corporation
1221 Mackay, Suite 200
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H3G 2H5
Tel.: 514.399.9930 Fax.: 514.399.1117
> If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your
signature:
>
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Doe"@example.com
>
> I don't know if that's a legal address, but its mere presence in an e-mail
> message will cause Outlook Express to freeze and eventually consume all of
your
> memory...
"Thanks for the warning," says the person who read this message with Outlook
Express. Incidentally, nothing happened, aside from the address being
incorrectly parsed by OE's mailto linker. I use version 5.
By the way, playing strictly by RFC 821's rules, that is a valid email
address.
---Kris kelley
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:27:08AM -0600, Kris Kelley wrote:
> > If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your
> > signature:
> >
> > "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Doe"@example.com
> >
> > I don't know if that's a legal address, but its mere presence in an e-mail
> > message will cause Outlook Express to freeze and eventually consume all of
> > your memory...
>
> "Thanks for the warning," says the person who read this message with Outlook
> Express. Incidentally, nothing happened, aside from the address being
> incorrectly parsed by OE's mailto linker. I use version 5.
It was version 5.5 that that address killed. Perhaps it's a new feature that
Microsoft decided to introduce.
Chris
Interesting Indeed, Kills my OE 5.5.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kris Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 11:27 AM
To: QMail Mailing List
Subject: Re: How to get Mail delivery in form cgi´s work
> If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your
signature:
>
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Doe"@example.com
>
> I don't know if that's a legal address, but its mere presence in an e-mail
> message will cause Outlook Express to freeze and eventually consume all of
your
> memory...
"Thanks for the warning," says the person who read this message with Outlook
Express. Incidentally, nothing happened, aside from the address being
incorrectly parsed by OE's mailto linker. I use version 5.
By the way, playing strictly by RFC 821's rules, that is a valid email
address.
---Kris kelley
Hi,
I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
processes,...)
Could those who use it please mail me their findings and settings?
Tx a lot for boosting linux!
Franky
Van Liedekerke Franky wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
> running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
> their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
> processes,...)
> Could those who use it please mail me their findings and settings?
>
> Tx a lot for boosting linux!
>
> Franky
Well
increase the file inodes and descriptors
Have lots of ram (use a ram disk)
read LWQ (Life With Qmail) - three times ...
Tweak reddrat - remove inetd, {a.n.other services}, adjust /etc/initab
to only start a few consoles
Get some fast disks ....
You could go further and change some underlying Linux things like tcp
window options, and swap/VM stuff - but this is a very specialist area
that comprimised my KISS principle.
Overall RedDrat is quite good overall (IMHO) once you remove all
necessary stuff (both RPMS and services).
Greg
Hi,
I am doing the same and would find some more discussion on this topic very
interesting. I think there are 2 levels to discuss here. One is the configuring the
Linux and kernel parameters and two is the layout and architecture. I am interested
in how others see a fully redundant arch using qmail.
My thoughts are to have a few front-end hosts running pop3d, smtpd, and qmqpd. Then I
would like to have mail stores on the back end that are dedicated to just storing
local mail. I guess they would run a queue, qmail-send, and qmail-lspawn. I don't
know how I would get qmail to route all of this mail though. I need to use ldap for
the authentication. Is there an LDAP attribute that I could use such that qmail would
check it for the location of the user's home mailstore? (say if I split the user base
on to 2 back end stores). Or do I have to do some tricks using smtproutes or
something to get mail to the backend? Or do most people just attach backend's via NFS
to the front ends? Are there performance concerns with NFS?
Does qmail support such an architecture? I am even thinking of breaking the queuing
onto a seperate server?
Any thoughts?
thanks.
>
>From: Greg Cope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 21:40:59 +0000
>To: Van Liedekerke Franky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: 'qmail list' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: qmail, linux and large scale environment
>
>Van Liedekerke Franky wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
>> running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
>> their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
>> processes,...)
>> Could those who use it please mail me their findings and settings?
>>
>> Tx a lot for boosting linux!
>>
>> Franky
>
>Well
>
>increase the file inodes and descriptors
>Have lots of ram (use a ram disk)
>read LWQ (Life With Qmail) - three times ...
>
>Tweak reddrat - remove inetd, {a.n.other services}, adjust /etc/initab
>to only start a few consoles
>
>Get some fast disks ....
>
>You could go further and change some underlying Linux things like tcp
>window options, and swap/VM stuff - but this is a very specialist area
>that comprimised my KISS principle.
>
>Overall RedDrat is quite good overall (IMHO) once you remove all
>necessary stuff (both RPMS and services).
>
>Greg
>
Great! The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work today
was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck with
everyone using IE. Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the same
post. Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how I can
get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete them
they lock up.
I would have expected better of this list. It has been a big help but I
don't have time to deal with childish pranksters. I will be checking the
qmail webpage to see if a more professional list gets off the ground. Until
then I am signing off.
David
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:03:49PM -0600, dG wrote:
> Great! The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work today
> was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck with
> everyone using IE. Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the same
> post. Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how I can
> get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete them
> they lock up.
>
> I would have expected better of this list. It has been a big help but I
> don't have time to deal with childish pranksters. I will be checking the
The childish pranksters are at Microsoft. Why should we be censored
because your mail client is broken?
> I will be checking the
> qmail webpage to see if a more professional list gets off the ground. Until
> then I am signing off.
You should also sign off from every list if your client barfs on legal
mail text.
PGP signature
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. For me it was a
huge annoyance which pissed me off but there are hundreds and thousands of
people out there who are not technical in any way for whom this would be a
major crisis. Are you going to fuck up their computers just because you
have the ability? Are you going to punish them because of Microsoft? If
you say yes, then in my book you are a pathetic human being. Making
ignorant people suffer for their ignorance is not funny.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Pennace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "dG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: Outlook Express bug
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:29:39PM -0600, dG wrote:
> Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. For me it was a
> huge annoyance which pissed me off but there are hundreds and thousands of
> people out there who are not technical in any way for whom this would be a
> major crisis. Are you going to fuck up their computers just because you
> have the ability? Are you going to punish them because of Microsoft? If
> you say yes, then in my book you are a pathetic human being. Making
> ignorant people suffer for their ignorance is not funny.
So all of a sudden uttering certain kinds of addresses becomes taboo
just because some mail clients barf on it? Will Congress pass a law
against using the word "Hello" in electronic mail because Outlook 2004
crashes on it?
You are responsible for facilitating your mail. If some arbitrary text
breaks your mail system, fix it. It's quite rude to call us "pathetic
human beings" because your mailer died. I'm not responsible for your
choice of MUA. I'm not responsible for the design of your MUA. And I
refuse to kowtow to being Outlook-correct in my messages, I'm
following published standards.
PGP signature
Yeah, your right. I had preview turned off in Outlook but not in IE. My
bad.
David
P.S. My apolgies for my original rude post, and cursing.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "dG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 12:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [OT] Outlook Express bug
>
>
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:04:11PM -0600, dG wrote:
> > > Great! The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work
> today
> > > was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck
with
> > > everyone using IE. Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the
> same
> > > post. Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how
I
> can
> > > get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete
> them
> > > they lock up.
> >
> > Don't open them. If you don't open them, they won't hurt you. If you've
> opened
> > one and Outlook Express locks up, kill Outlook Express, start it back
up,
> and
> > don't read the message again. (I discovered this bug because I received
> with
> > Outlook Express a double bounce message with an address like the one I
> posted
> > in it. In the course of trying to nail down exactly what triggered the
bug
> I
> > sent myself half a dozen messages which locked me up. At no time was my
> client
> > "pretty much fucked." I just killed it, started it back up, and deleted
> the
> > message.)
> >
> > If you're using Windows, you should be used to it locking up for no
> apparent
> > reason and you should know how to deal with it. It comes with the
> territory.
> >
> > Chris
>
Hi, i’ve a problem with the user alias file. I’ve got the qmail-pw2u
command and i got the follows assign file:
/var/qmail/users/assign
=gustav:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:::
+gustav-:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:-::
Then i used the qmail-newu command and when i send an email to gustav it
works ok.
But, i want use an "external" name [EMAIL PROTECTED], but it isn’t
work.
example:
mail GUSTAV.MARTIN.OLSEN
Subject: HEAD
FOO,FOO
^D
Whats my problem ?
Thank for the help
Best regard,
Gustav
error message:
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mailsvr.my.de.
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]>:
This message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line. (#5.4.6)
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 612 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2000 16:50:08 -0000
Delivered-To: ~[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 598 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2000 16:50:08 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 584 invoked by uid 0); 11 Dec 2000 16:50:07 -0000
Date: 11 Dec 2000 16:50:07 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: HEAD
FOO,FOO
--
Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, i’ve a problem with the user alias file. I’ve got the qmail-pw2u
> command and i got the follows assign file:
>
> /var/qmail/users/assign
> =gustav:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:::
> +gustav-:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:-::
>
> Then i used the qmail-newu command and when i send an email to gustav it
> works ok. But, i want use an "external" name [EMAIL PROTECTED], but
> it isn’t work.
You do not appear to be handling mail for local "gustav.martin.olsen', at least
according to your 'assign' file above. read `man qmail-users` perhaps for
more details. You're only handling mail for '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' and
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with those entries.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:04:11PM -0600, dG wrote:
> Great! The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work today
> was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck with
> everyone using IE. Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the same
> post. Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how I can
> get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete them
> they lock up.
Don't open them. If you don't open them, they won't hurt you. If you've opened
one and Outlook Express locks up, kill Outlook Express, start it back up, and
don't read the message again. (I discovered this bug because I received with
Outlook Express a double bounce message with an address like the one I posted
in it. In the course of trying to nail down exactly what triggered the bug I
sent myself half a dozen messages which locked me up. At no time was my client
"pretty much fucked." I just killed it, started it back up, and deleted the
message.)
If you're using Windows, you should be used to it locking up for no apparent
reason and you should know how to deal with it. It comes with the territory.
Chris
boys and girls,
this is not reasonable.
Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list.
Please do you some responsibility towards this tiny community. Thanks.
martin
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
> Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
> wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
> unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
> expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list.
No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
for their MUA.
PGP signature
Hi,
Could somebody resend me the original post concerning this? It seems I
deleted it on accident and it may have been removed from the list
archives...
Thanks,
Mike
In the immortal words of Alex Pennace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
> for their MUA.
At what point, exactly, did asking someone to act like (a) a
professional and (b) a decent human being become censorship?
Oh, right, the same point at which this list became about adolescent
chest-thumping and OS/MUA advocacy instead of qmail. Silly me.
I think we'll just add me to the list of disgusted unsubscribers.
Someone please drop me a line if the kids here ever grow up, eh?
-n, unix user since before you figured out how to cop an attitude, thanks.
------------------------------------------------------<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've got more than one membership / to more than one club
and I owe my life / to the people that I love. (--Ani DiFranco)
<http://www.blank.org/memory/>------------------------------------------
Thus spake martin langhoff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> this is not reasonable.
> Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
> wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
> unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
> expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list.
> Please do you some responsibility towards this tiny community. Thanks.
What in the seven hells are you talking about?
Who did what prank that caused Outlook to barf and die?
And if that happened as you insinuate above, why would you blame him and
not Outlook? Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
mailing list about an Unix MTA?
Probably not. Windoze people usually don't blame themselves.
Sheesh.
Felix
What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?
-----Original Message-----
From: Felix von Leitner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 3:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank
Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
mailing list about an Unix MTA?
Probably not. Windoze people usually don't blame themselves.
Sheesh.
Felix
Alex,
this is not a call for censorchip, please! We are on a public list!
I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
to destroy.
Pranksters usually enjoy the power of destruction they gain with a
little knowledge.
Of course you can be a prankster. Just not here, please. There are
people working, who that rely on this list for discussion and for help
when their mail servers act up. They don't enjoy being the victims of a
prank, whoever clever it might be.
I'm asking people not to attack other people's programs just because we
know how to. We should not be script kiddies, y'know.
martin
Alex Pennace wrote:
> No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
> for their MUA.
* Hubbard, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?
Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
and I won't show you the difference.
Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
<http://learn.to/attribute/>
<http://learn.to/sign/>
<http://learn.to/edit_messages/>
--
Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/LB/>
Felix von Leitner wrote:
> Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
> mailing list about an Unix MTA?
We are on the *internet*. Welcome.
Many people, many machines, lots of strange company policies, personal
choices and other constraints. Please refrain from making assumptions on
how somebody else's machine/software should be run, because we are not
here to judge. We're here to share.
And, of course, you can criticize my MTA and its setup. And even my
MUA. But please, people, it's not funny to kill it!
The way *anyone* runs his/her boxes is not the *right* way. Is just
his/her way. We're discussing qmail, and I'm asking people not to post
things that will make some software blow up.
I don't know who's to blame, but please, lets be good netizens.
martin
Felix von Leitner wrote:
> What in the seven hells are you talking about?
> Who did what prank that caused Outlook to barf and die?
>
> And if that happened as you insinuate above, why would you blame him and
> not Outlook?
Felix,
please, inform yourself and you'll save time. A few hours ago some
jokester ( Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ) sent a msg that read
> If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your signature:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[replace QUOTE with " ... I didn't know if were using a susceptible MUA]
which is a valid address as per RFC822 -- and a recipe for OE lockup. A
few OE users on this list were hit. Chis knew what he was doing, and I'd
bet he did it for fun.
Now, however crappy OE may be, locking people's machines for fun is not
a behaviour to be encouraged.
martin
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:03:20PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote:
# On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
# > Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
# > wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
# > unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
# > expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list.
#
# No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
# for their MUA.
Also, how would we know what the string is had no one posted it?
--
Justin Bell
I'm a competent sysadmin on Solaris & linux and
I use Outlook 2k. So it has less features and
virtually no standards adherence compared to
other MUAs mentioned on this list, big deal, it
is the corporate standard at my company, I have
no alternatives for connecting to the corporate
Exchange server, and it lets me read this list
which helps me keep quite a few qmail boxes running
very happily. Either way, my raggedy MUA has
nothing to do with a great MTA.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 4:19 PM
To: Qmail-List
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank
Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
and I won't show you the difference.
Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
<http://learn.to/attribute/>
<http://learn.to/sign/>
<http://learn.to/edit_messages/>
--
Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/LB/>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:19:27PM +0100,
"Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
> <http://learn.to/attribute/>
I took a look at the attribute page because I had had a recent discussion
with someone over whether or not date and/or time belong in attributions
in usenet posts.
While there is some useful information there, the presentation is poor.
There seems to be a lot of javascript on the web page. There seems
to be a needless break into more than one page for this information.
The first page had less than a paragraph about attribution. The rest of
the first page seemed to be pretty much advertising related.
If there are other sites with similar information, but with better presentation,
those might make a better reference to give to people. I find it hard to
take their recommendations about attribution lines seriously, when the
web page design is so bad.
Exactly my point...
I wouldn't say for myself, that I am a competent sysadmin... After all I
take care of only five servers running qmail on Linux...
The company I work for uses Exchange, so I am forced to use Outlook (2k). I
would use anything else, but the smtp port is closed to the outside... so I
have a problem, right? :)
Goran
> I'm a competent sysadmin on Solaris & linux and
> I use Outlook 2k. So it has less features and
> virtually no standards adherence compared to
> other MUAs mentioned on this list, big deal, it
> is the corporate standard at my company, I have
> no alternatives for connecting to the corporate
> Exchange server, and it lets me read this list
> which helps me keep quite a few qmail boxes running
> very happily. Either way, my raggedy MUA has
> nothing to do with a great MTA.
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
> I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
> joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
> Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
> to destroy.
>
Everyone needs to take a deep breath and just relax. The message I posted was
in the context of a discussion of certain types of legal addresses that mutt
didn't handle correctly. As an aside, I posted a message with an address in it
that caused Outlook Express to lock up. It didn't "destroy" anything. It wasn't
a virus. It didn't erase files. It simply made it necessary to kill Outlook
Express and restart it.
If you use Windows (and I do), it's a fact of life that programs lock up
frequently and unexpectedly. You kill them, or sometimes you have to reboot
(which in this case you didn't), and life goes on.
So please spare me all this talk of "attacks" and "vicitms" and so forth. If
you want to get angry at someone, get angry at the Microsoft software engineers
who put out an MUA that can be locked up by messages containing certain
sequences of ASCII characters.
Chris
martin langhoff wrote:
> We are on the *internet*. Welcome.
Precisely. If you must use software that cannot handle the full spectrum
of demands the Internet presents, don't blame the Internet.
- Amitai
Well let's see.. Been Managing Unix systems for about 5 years now .. Did
start on Mac's then Windows then Unix so yeah I kinda went the long way
but I have been using Outlook Express almost since the beging.. It has
just been recently that I have started using other MUA's ... However I
don't run your stock Outlook Express either. I know of just about every
trick that can be played on Outlook and Outlook express.. Although if
anyones using Outlook then there much braver than I am. Hell I can tell
you which bugs/tricks work on which versions.
Without going into a 20 page technical look at every bug here's some
simple tips even biggeners should know.
1. Don't use the 'Preview' plane.
2. Don't let or set Outlook to open messages automatically.
3. Don't open any executable or any other microsoft attachement unless
it's from someone you know and trust. VBS bugs are kewl but are a 'PAIN
IN THE ASS'.
4. Know your damm system.. Spacifically know where the mail is stored on
your computer.. It's simple to go delete the damm inbox.mbx file when one
pesky message is bugging you. If your good you can even get rid of the
one message without loosing the rest of your inbox.
5. Goto windowsupdate.microsoft.com and make sure you have all the
security patches for your current version. Microsoft is famous for
releasing about a dozzen security patches a month for OutLook and OutLook
Express amoung other things.
And Number 6... Use common sense and quit belly aching when someone
screws up.
If someone purposely screwed you up then fix your computer then go and
send them a nice email thanking them for the 'grand experienece' .. If
they wana be pricks then leave them be, there not worth getting heart
burn or teary eye'd over.. If you wana put yourself down to there level
for pay back then hey, more power to ya.
As you can tell I'm not a Microsoft Lover but I'm not a hatter either.
Microsoft has it's up's and down's (Okay, more downs than up's) just like
any of the other Major OS's around the world but if your gona use it then
you'd better dam well learn it and most of all learn how to deal with it.
I think just about every admin on this list would agree with that last
statement, however I expect varying flames regarding the rest (grin)
--JT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 12/11/00, 1:19:27 PM, Robin "S." Socha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding
Re: Outlook Express Prank:
> * Hubbard, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?
> Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
> and I won't show you the difference.
> Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
> <http://learn.to/attribute/>
> <http://learn.to/sign/>
> <http://learn.to/edit_messages/>
> --
> Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/LB/>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:45:40PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
> I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
> joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
> Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
> to destroy.
>
> Pranksters usually enjoy the power of destruction they gain with a
> little knowledge.
While I'm not a prankster, I find it unnecessary to refrain from
posting any text that may cause Outlook Express to crash. I am
operating within standards, and I forced no one to use a broken
MUA. Its rather unprofessional to come onto the Internet and complain
when something of yours blows up.
Outlook is broken. Fix it instead of jury rigging the Internet to work
around it.
PGP signature
Just when you thought he couldn't possibly more clearly define the word
moronic through his typed dialogue...
jason
This email brought to you by Outlook Express - accept it
> Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
> and I won't show you the difference.
>
> Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
> <http://learn.to/attribute/>
> <http://learn.to/sign/>
> <http://learn.to/edit_messages/>
> --
> Robin S. Socha <http://socha.net/LB/>
Howdy!
I just downloaded the queue-fix program. Since
I have installed the big-todo patch for qmail-103, I need
the queue-fix-todo-patch for queue-fix. I got all parts
from the addons link on the main qmail.org site. The
patch fails. No problems with any other patches..
FreeBSD 4.2
Ideas?
$ patch <queue-fix-todo-patch
Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|--- queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c-ori Tue Aug 17 09:43:58 1999
|+++ queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c Tue Aug 17 09:52:16 1999
--------------------------
Patching file queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 445.
Hunk #2 failed at 513.
Hunk #3 failed at 553.
Hunk #4 failed at 684.
4 out of 4 hunks failed--saving rejects to queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c.rej
Hmm... Ignoring the trailing garbage.
done
-steve
Hi to all...
I have been reading mail from this list for quite some time now, and must
say, I have learned a lot.
Most things I knew how to answer (more or less frequently asked questions) I
answered off-list, because I didnt want to trash up the list, as I am using
MS Outlook... I'm not proud of it, but hey, I get paid to use it.
Lately the list is becomming ... how shall I put it... kind of childish...
Ok... I am not against newbies and their "stupid" questions. You all heard
this one: There are no stupid questions, but stupid answers... Now thats
another thing.
My opinion is, that it would be a great waste if the list stopped
functioning. That is why I would suggest a transition to a moderated list.
Would that be possible?
Goran
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
Dear gentleman,
I am managing my email users using mysql, all email addresses are mapped
to a unique id. This id is used to let the id owner to fetch their
messages.
My mail spool is hashed into a directory using a function of my own.
This function takes the id as parameter and returns the user spool from
a given location, for instance:
My spool root is: /var/qmail/mail and every user dir is lied into this
directory.
The user directory is given by a function hash, this function gets the
id and return a path to it, for instance:
id Relative path to /var/qmail/mail
0 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
1 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/1
. ....
. ....
15 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/f
16 0/0/0/0/0/0/1/0
17 0/0/0/0/0/0/1/1
Got the ideia ?
I would like to hear from you if my approach is good (performance in
mind). To get into the user maildir, i get at most 16*8 lookup_dir
routines, so at least it's better than having all user dir into a single
directory. My approach is only better if you have morer than 16*8 pop
accounts.
What you wizards have to say about that ? I plan to have about 2*2^16
users into a single box running qmail+freebsd!
> My spool root is: /var/qmail/mail and every user dir is lied into this
> directory.
> The user directory is given by a function hash, this function gets the
> id and return a path to it, for instance:
>
> id Relative path to /var/qmail/mail
> 0 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
> 1 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/1
> . ....
> . ....
> 15 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/f
> 16 0/0/0/0/0/0/1/0
> 17 0/0/0/0/0/0/1/1
>
> Got the ideia ?
>
> I would like to hear from you if my approach is good (performance in
> mind). To get into the user maildir, i get at most 16*8 lookup_dir
> routines, so at least it's better than having all user dir into a single
> directory. My approach is only better if you have morer than 16*8 pop
> accounts.
The basic idea is good, but I think your directory tree is
much deeper than neccesary. If you use NFS, I think it will have
a performance impact.
On my system I also map each account to a number which is used to
construct the path to the mailbox, but I only use three levels,
something like this:
/var/mail/26/83/username
These mailboxes are distrubuted across 100 x 100 = 10000 directories,
which is probably sufficient for up to 10 million users.
--
Gjermund Sorseth
> >
> > id Relative path to /var/qmail/mail
> > 0 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
> > 1 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/1
> > . ....
> > . ....
> > 15 0/0/0/0/0/0/0/f
> > 16 0/0/0/0/0/0/1/0
> > 17 0/0/0/0/0/0/1/1
> >
> > Got the ideia ?
> The basic idea is good, but I think your directory tree is
> much deeper than neccesary. If you use NFS, I think it will have
> a performance impact.
I'm with Gjermund. Anything more than three levels deep is probably
excessive. I tend to use the letters of the user as sub-dirs, so
"john" ends up in /var/mail/j/o/john, or perhaps /var/mail/j/o/h/john,
which gives 26^3 directories. Assuming an even distribution (which
it's not), a server supporting 64K users would end up with just 3
entries per sub-dir!
In any event, any reasonable distribution alg will work and anything
more that 3 directory levels is probably excessive for all but the
most pathological of situations.
Regards.
Ooops sorry, bad subject...
Howdy!
I just downloaded the queue-fix program. Since
I have installed the big-todo patch for qmail-103, I need
the queue-fix-todo-patch for queue-fix. I got all parts
from the addons link on the main qmail.org site. The
patch fails. No problems with any other patches..
FreeBSD 4.2
Ideas?
$ patch <queue-fix-todo-patch
Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|--- queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c-ori Tue Aug 17 09:43:58 1999
|+++ queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c Tue Aug 17 09:52:16 1999
--------------------------
Patching file queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 445.
Hunk #2 failed at 513.
Hunk #3 failed at 553.
Hunk #4 failed at 684.
4 out of 4 hunks failed--saving rejects to queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c.rej
Hmm... Ignoring the trailing garbage.
done
-steve
Does anyone know the proper address to send an
unsubscribe request for this list?
Thanks,
Gene
=====
Gene Whitehead
Founder
American Sons of Liberty
American Sons of Liberty Online:
http://www.americansonsofliberty.com
I haven't done this yet so I can't provide real internet names.
I will have the following:
Computer A (On ISP Primary)
| - Linked via 100Mbps ethernet
Computer B (On ISP Secondary)
I'd like to setup A as the first MX record for host blah.com and B as the
secondary MX record for blah.com both on different ISPs and connected via
100Mbps ethernet.
If A is down and B starts receiving email for A, how do I forward all the
emails B receives to A over the ethernet and not keep copies of those emails
on server B?
Thankyou very much.
> I will have the following:
>
> Computer A (On ISP Primary)
> | - Linked via 100Mbps ethernet
> Computer B (On ISP Secondary)
>
> I'd like to setup A as the first MX record for host blah.com and B as the
> secondary MX record for blah.com both on different ISPs and connected via
> 100Mbps ethernet.
>
> If A is down and B starts receiving email for A, how do I forward all the
> emails B receives to A over the ethernet and not keep copies of those emails
> on server B?
Hi,
This is straightforward, using control/locals, control/rcpthosts and optionally
control/smtproutes:
Your primary MX, "A" is where the mail is delivered, so put your domain in
control/locals
and control/rcpthosts. Your secondary MX, "B", where mail is not delivered, merely held
while "A" is unreachable, has your domain in control/rcpthosts but not control/locals
- so
that any mail accepted by this machine is not regarded as local and will be queued for
later remote delivery. Remote delivery will be attempted periodically by qmail (see the
man pages for details of this). You didn't mention if the 100MBps link was a public or
private link. If the latter, you need to add the private address of "A" to
control/smtproutes for your domain - this overrides the DNS entry for "A".
More details on all the above in the standard sources of documentation - start at
www.qmail.org, esp. see the man pages, Dan's site (cr.yp.to), Dave Sill's Life with
qmail
and the qmail howto.
cheers,
Andrew.
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 08:21:09AM +1000, Rawlinsons Group (Brisbane) wrote:
> Computer A (On ISP Primary)
> | - Linked via 100Mbps ethernet
> Computer B (On ISP Secondary)
>
> I'd like to setup A as the first MX record for host blah.com and B as the
> secondary MX record for blah.com both on different ISPs and connected via
> 100Mbps ethernet.
>
> If A is down and B starts receiving email for A, how do I forward all the
> emails B receives to A over the ethernet and not keep copies of those emails
> on server B?
On B, put blah.com in control/rcpthosts *only*. That's all you have to do.
Chris
I have a project I am about to undertake and would like some opinions
before I begin.
We currently have a single server running Qmail on FreeBSD 3.2, with
customer Maildirs on a NFS attached external raid connected from another
server. This for the most part works fine. We occasionally have problems
where the mail server is unable to read the contents of user directories
(the NFS server can see them fine). At these times the only fix has been
to move the contents of the directory into a temporary location and
delete the directory, add it back and move the files back. This happens
once every 2 or 3 months.
We are now planning to expand our mail system. We would like to keep
Qmail and FreeBSD both. We were wishing to have 3 or 4 load balanced
front end servers to split the load of the mail servers, with a common
fibre channel raid back end.
This brings up some obvious issues. First, we wanted to have all 4 hosts
processing and able to access the raid simultaneously with ability for
live failover and the ability to remove/upgrade individual parts of the
cluster at any time. NFS under FreeBSD (as of the posts I saw from Nov
2000) has no support for per client file locking. GFS was my other
choice, however Sistina Software said there will not be a copy ported to
FreeBSD until Q2/Q3 2001. I do not know of any other file systems that
are capable of per client file locking for FreeBSD that will offer
reliability and the performance we wish it achieve (If anyone else does,
I'd really like to know).
This leads to the next question, is file locking necessary under Qmail
when using the Maildir style directory structure for the mail store?
SMTP will never be accessing any files after it writes them to the
Maildir. Pop3 should not interfere either. Perhaps if a user tries to
access via pop3 multiple times simultaneously, but otherwise I see no
reason for file locking in this environment. If this is the case, what
do people think of this cluster configuration with a fibre channel back
end raid? Or should we use NFS instead? And if we do use NFS, has the
problem we experienced (noted above) been resolved in the more recent
releases of FreeBSD or is this a configuration issue on our end?
Also, If anyone else has clustered FreeBSD with Qmail already, we would
like also to know how you achieved it and any tips you may have as to
configuration of such a setup.
Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Comoletti - Network Engineer / Systems Administrator
Delanet Inc. http://www.delanet.com
Frontline Communications Corp. http://www.fcc.net
phone: (302) 326-5800 fax: (302) 326-5802 x312
262 Quigley Blvd, New Castle, DE 19720, USA
------------------------------------------------------------
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
|
Maybe I am asking on the wrong forum, but boes anybody know, if there
is a "developer" version of qmail sources with at lease some remarks and
functionality description in the code so it would be more readable ? Or if
there is a site that has some description on the way qmail is written. I
want to write an addon to qmail, so it could forward mail to another
server before it hits the queve, splitted to several copies, one for each
recipient domain. I think many could benefit from this feature, in terms
of bandwidth conservation.
Alex
Incredimail Admin
|
__________________________________________
Created and best viewed
with IncrediMail!
Get your free copy at: www.incredimail.com
|
Hi, I am Using Qmail for 1/2 year and very happy with it,
Here is my question :
is there any way to limit <rcpto to> s in qmail smtp session?
like:
rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
....etc...
rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------
No more than N time
idea is that after count of <rcpt to> reaches N qmail expects <rset> or
kills the connection
Gan,
> is there any way to limit <rcpto to> s in qmail smtp session?
This sounds very similar to the tarpit patch - find this from www.qmail.org - you
should
be able to modify this to give you the behaviour you desire.
cheers,
Andrew.
There is a patch 'qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch' that is to limit the max. no. of
<rcpt to>s.
http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1999/11/msg00245.html
regards,
Kent
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 10:22 AM
> To: Gan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Limiting <rcpt to>
>
> Gan,
>
> > is there any way to limit <rcpto to> s in qmail smtp session?
>
> This sounds very similar to the tarpit patch - find this from
> www.qmail.org - you should
> be able to modify this to give you the behaviour you desire.
>
> cheers,
>
> Andrew.
>
All-
I have a need to process mail server bounces in an automated fashion and
planned to make use of RFC1894 - An Extensible Message Format for Delivery
Status Notifications.
This appears to be used by most of the public mail servers that I have
tested against, but when a mail bounces out of one of my local qmail
machines (e.g., cannot connect after the maximum queue time), the message
that I am receiving back from qmail does not appear to follow the RFC
specification for reporting this error.
Do I have something mis-configured? Is there a patch to bounce using
RFC1894 standards?
Thanks for the help.
James
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:04:14PM -0500, James Morgenstein wrote:
>This appears to be used by most of the public mail servers that I have
>tested against, but when a mail bounces out of one of my local qmail
The problem with DSN is that *EVERY* machine that the message passes through
must support DSN, or it fails. QMail doesn't support DSN (unless there's
a patch, you have looked at www.qmail.org, right?). Check out
VERPs -- Variable Envelope Return Paths. Searching google
should provide some good hits.
Sean
--
I never thought I would live in a country which had a
self-declared president.
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
Hi,
searching through the available qmail docs and FAQ I can't find an answer, if
and how solutions for the below described problems are possible.
Situation:
My qmail server is located into a bigger company Intranet network. Each
location has their own mail server, their own mail domain (sub's of an
Intranet top level domain - that is no problem) and own DNS. Relaying mail
works fine, no problems.
Now one location offers a mail gateway to the public Internet.
The two questions are:
- Intranet mail relaying should keep working, but how do I seperate relaying
of Intranet mails to [location].myintranet.dom and outside to the Internet
for all other mails?
The Internet mail gateway has a different IP address.
- is it possible to grant access to use the Internet mail gateway (relay) for
specific users or user groups? How?
Note: I am using qmail only for relaying outside mails. My primary local mail
server is Hawkeye (on top of a MySQL database).
Thanks,
Thomas
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 02:08:29AM +0100, Thomas Haberland wrote:
> The two questions are:
>
> - Intranet mail relaying should keep working, but how do I seperate relaying
> of Intranet mails to [location].myintranet.dom and outside to the Internet
> for all other mails?
That depends on a number of factors.
1. Can these internal mail systems connect to the internet directly
(perhaps via a NAT)?
2. Is your internal DNS setup such that queries about non local
domains are answered correctly?
If the answer is "yes" to both questions, then qmail will work without
any special configuration.
If the answer is "no" to either question, then you need to add a
special smtproutes entry such that mail to your domain use the DNS
while all other mails are forwarded to your "Internet Mail
Gateway". The man page for qmail-remote discusses this very
requirement, but using your sample domain, the smtproutes file would
have:
.myintranet.dom:
:Internet-gateway.myintranet.dom
What this means is that all mail address to .myintranet.dom will use
the name server to resolve the MX and anything else will be
unconditionally forwarded to Internet-gateway.myintranet.dom which is
meant to be the name of your Internet Mail Gateway, which I assume is
in your internal DNS.
> The Internet mail gateway has a different IP address.
I'm not sure what the significant of that statement is. A different IP
address from what exactly? As long as it's in your internal DNS and as
long as it's reachable by your internal qmail servers, then it's not a
problem.
> - is it possible to grant access to use the Internet mail gateway (relay) for
> specific users or user groups? How?
No. You'd have to write code to do this. It's sort of possible if you
can identify users by IP address and thus redirect them to different
instances of qmail, but there is no general nor easy mechanism.
Regards.
hi all,
- i'm using vpopmail + qmail.
- i have a virtual domain setup mydomainname.com.
under my /home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com, i have always use a
.qmail-aliasname file to create alias account that deliver mail to multiple
users, the format of the file is:
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user1/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user2/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user3/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user4/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user5/Maildir/
and i have no problem with all the alias accounts all this while. BUT one
particular alias account does give me this weird problem!
when someone send mail to this alias account - some of the users in this
list will receive MULTIPLE copies of the same mail, and some dun receive any
copy at all!!
and in the log i found something suspicious:
starting delivery 74: msg 32174 to local
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
delivery 74: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/
status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
- obviously an alias account doesnt have any real maildir, any idea what
could cause this error?
- and this particular alias acount contains 65 entries, is the biggest alias
in my setup, could this be a problem?
i try to read eveything that i can find, but don't seems to come across
anything like this, pls help!
thanks in advance!!
best regards,
mok swee loong.
mok swee loong writes:
[...]
> and i have no problem with all the alias accounts all this while. BUT one
> particular alias account does give me this weird problem!
> when someone send mail to this alias account - some of the users in this
> list will receive MULTIPLE copies of the same mail, and some dun receive any
> copy at all!!
> and in the log i found something suspicious:
> starting delivery 74: msg 32174 to local
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
> delivery 74: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/
> status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
> - obviously an alias account doesnt have any real maildir, any idea what
> could cause this error?
What's in /home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/.qmail-aliasname? Are
there no duplicates, and do all Maildirs exist and have correct
permissions?
> - and this particular alias acount contains 65 entries, is the biggest alias
> in my setup, could this be a problem?
Only to manage them. If you have that many subscribers you might want to
look into using ezmlm-idx with vpopmail.
Vince.
Hi all,
Was looking for some comments on two things...
Number one, I was wondering if anyone has put together (or knows of)
'plug-n-play' email hosting solutions?
I'm thinking of something quite complete like:
qmail/postfix/sendmail + [ procmail ] + courier / cyrus / uw / other?
plus...
virtual domains + web admin (qmailadmin?) + web email (IMP?)
Number two, correct me if I'm wrong but, there are two ways to do 'virtual
domain' hosting (retrieval) of email. (I'm not talking about the delivery
-- MTA -- part. Yup, I should send this part to another more appropriate
list. ;-P )
1. IP based
Mail server gets multiple IP addresses, IMAP or POP looks up different
accounts depending on IP address... blah blah.
2. Name mapping based
User email addresses are mapped to different accounts, therefore, IMAP
or POP don't do anything special.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> jdoe-first
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> jdoe-second
Cheers,
Ben.
--
B. http://makelinux.org/ "Always real." http://realthought.net/
__________________________________________________________________________
Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way. When it isn't,
don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery, or simple bad luck.
-- Joseph Heller, "God Knows"
|
who knows how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list by text
editor?
I'm using qmail with ezmlm-0.53.
as a root or owner of mailinglist
(of course , except auto-subscribing)
how can I add so many mail address by text
editor?
please help me!
===========================================================
Regards
Sangbin Lim
|
On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 04:59:19PM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> who knows how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list by text editor?
>
> I'm using qmail with ezmlm-0.53.
>
> as a root or owner of mailinglist
> (of course , except auto-subscribing)
>
> how can I add so many mail address by text editor?
Yes, trivially easily.
1. Create a file with your text editor where each line is a new
subscriber email address. Lets call that file "new".
2. Exit the editor once you're done and feed that file into the
ezmlm-sub command, precisely as defined in the manpage. I suggest the
use of the xargs command if the list is very large. That standard Unix
command is likewise described in a manpage. If you read those manpages
you'll end up with a command pipeline like:
xargs <new ezmlm-sub Dir
3. You're done.
Of course these are email addresses that want to be on the list,
right?
Regards.
thanx so much, but ^^
in command line I did it
#
ezmlm-sub /home/accounts/list/subscribers
biz
<--biz is my address file name
result -->
"fatal: address does not contain @"
of course my "biz" file contains [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] and so on.
if you say exact
command and arguments it 'll help me.
(I read " man ezmlm-sub", I cant
understand, novice for linux yet)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Delany" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday,
December 12, 2000 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: emergency: tell me, how can I edit
ezmlm mailing-list files by text editor?
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at
04:59:19PM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > who knows how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list by text
editor?
> >
> > I'm using qmail with ezmlm-0.53.
> >
> > as a root or owner of mailinglist
> > (of course , except
auto-subscribing)
> >
> > how can I add so many mail address
by text editor?
>
> Yes, trivially easily.
>
> 1.
Create a file with your text editor where each line is a new
> subscriber
email address. Lets call that file "new".
>
> 2. Exit the editor
once you're done and feed that file into the
> ezmlm-sub command,
precisely as defined in the manpage. I suggest the
> use of the xargs
command if the list is very large. That standard Unix
> command is
likewise described in a manpage. If you read those manpages
> you'll end
up with a command pipeline like:
>
> xargs <new ezmlm-sub
Dir
>
>
> 3. You're done.
>
>
> Of
course these are email addresses that want to be on the list,
>
right?
>
>
> Regards.
===========================================================
Regards
Sangbin Lim
|
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> thanx so much, but ^^
> in command line I did it
> # ezmlm-sub /home/accounts/list/subscribers biz
> <--biz is my address file name
> result --> "fatal: address does not contain @"
Ezmlm-sub thinks 'biz' is the address you want to add.
> of course my "biz" file contains [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] and so on.
> if you say exact command and arguments it 'll help me.
The exact command was in the response, you just didn't follow it.
Vince.
