qmail Digest 9 Feb 2001 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1270
Topics (messages 56844 through 56910):
Re: high volume server configurations
56844 by: Michael Maier
Re: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock ?? HELP !!
56845 by: Henning Brauer
Re: multi-thread
56846 by: Felix von Leitner
56847 by: Jacques <Frip'> WERNERT
56849 by: Tim Goodwin
56865 by: Mark Delany
56867 by: Peter van Dijk
56874 by: Mark Delany
56884 by: Felix von Leitner
56901 by: Lincoln Yeoh
How do you start smtp with svscan please
56848 by: Roger Arnold
56850 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
Re: virtual pop e-mails
56851 by: Sean Swehla
56875 by: Kurth Bemis
Server won't start :-(
56852 by: Romeyn Prescott
56854 by: Romeyn Prescott
Re: Supervise without multilog.
56853 by: Russell Nelson
COmpiling qmail-1.03 under NCR sysr4 (mpras 4.2)
56855 by: Jocelyn Clement
56885 by: Felix von Leitner
Re: anybody know howto make 3 virtual domain in the one machineSNIP
56856 by: Tim Hunter
Problem receiving email - but mail can be sent
56857 by: Roger Arnold
56859 by: Matthew Patterson
Relay only server
56858 by: Dan Egli
56860 by: Matthew Patterson
56861 by: Uwe Ohse
56862 by: Charles Cazabon
56863 by: Chris Johnson
56864 by: Peter van Dijk
56868 by: Dan Egli
56869 by: Charles Cazabon
56870 by: Dan Egli
56873 by: Paulo Jan
56878 by: Charles Cazabon
56887 by: Dan Egli
Re: 451 qq Crashed
56866 by: Alex Pennace
Re: Slow response time
56871 by: Michael Owens
Re: Best option for sending a newsletter
56872 by: Dave Sill
Re: relaying restrictions
56876 by: Kurth Bemis
Re: Outbound sending..
56877 by: Kurth Bemis
Re: anybody know howto make 3 virtual domain in the one machine,and each virtualdomain
not use the fullname(mean username is [EMAIL PROTECTED])??
56879 by: Kurth Bemis
Re: The problem with serialmail/qmail and dialup lines
56880 by: Dave Sill
Re: Reliable fetching of email
56881 by: Dave Sill
Re: Newbie: Which Dist Linux, Best?
56882 by: Sean Reifschneider
LWQ - Was: anybody know howto make 3 virtual domain in the one machine,and each
virtualdomain not use the fullname(mean username is [EMAIL PROTECTED])??
56883 by: Peter Cavender
generating bounce list
56886 by: Brandon Yu
56888 by: Michael Lea
Administrative tool
56889 by: ari.doctordata.com.br
56890 by: Olivier M.
56894 by: Davi
Re: High MEM Usage??
56891 by: Kurth Bemis
mail delivery
56892 by: Miles Scruggs
56893 by: Peter van Dijk
WARNING: Worm (?) sending from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to *@anon.lcs.mit.ed
56895 by: Sean Reifschneider
56897 by: Aaron L. Meehan
56898 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
56899 by: Sean Reifschneider
56900 by: Roger Merchberger
Re: SMTP authentication
56896 by: ÀüÁö¿
Could someone just tell me the reason for this message
56902 by: Roger Arnold
56904 by: Greg White
56905 by: Roger Arnold
RBL and ORBS
56903 by: Andrew Wafula
56906 by: Piotr Kasztelowicz
56909 by: Scott Gifford
what first..install checkpasword with mysql, or checkpassword first..
56907 by: Miz
Re: ipme.c patch
56908 by: Scott Gifford
Detail logging of POP3D
56910 by: Tomas TPS Ulej
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > I also applied these patches:
> > qmail-1.03]# patch -p1 </usr/local/src/big-todo.103.patch
> >
> > qmail-1.03]# patch -p1 </usr/local/src/big-concurrency.patch
> > I got this error:
> > 1 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file spawn.c.rej
>
> Try -p0, perhaps.
>
> Greetz, Peter.
I have Errors, too with Solaris patch Tool but with GNU patch it's ok
--
Michael..
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:25:22PM +1100, dennis wrote:
> Hi all...
> My apologies for the repeated posting to the list regarding this problem.
> I did receive one reply but the suggestion was looked at and wasn't the
> problem.
> Is anyone aware why supervise would be giving me these errors ??
most of us but tired of these.
Follow the instructions by the Letter or just use qmail-conf (check
qmail.org for the url).
--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany
Thus spake Jacques <Frip'> WERNERT ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> ok, on my Solaris, the qmail distribution is "forking" almost 10 to 20
> processes per second.
Solaris is shunned for its incredibly bad fork performance.
Install Sparc-Linux or some BSD variant if that is a problem for you.
> So I'm trying to work on a threaded qmail-rspawn to avoid so many forks
Bad idea.
Very bad idea.
Felix
Hello,
I'll take care of your advice
Thanx
Frip'
----- Original Message -----
From: "Felix von Leitner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: multi-thread
> Thus spake Jacques <Frip'> WERNERT ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > ok, on my Solaris, the qmail distribution is "forking" almost 10 to 20
> > processes per second.
>
> Solaris is shunned for its incredibly bad fork performance.
> Install Sparc-Linux or some BSD variant if that is a problem for you.
>
> > So I'm trying to work on a threaded qmail-rspawn to avoid so many forks
>
> Bad idea.
> Very bad idea.
>
> Felix
>
> ok, on my Solaris, the qmail distribution is "forking" almost 10 to 20
> processes per second.
>
> This cost a lot in system ressources and system calls
Yes. Unfortunately, Solaris isn't Unix, and qmail was designed to run
on Unix systems. Unix is rather good at forking, especially images as
tiny as qmail; Solaris isn't. As Rob Pike once said, "perhaps if
people had understood fork() better we wouldn't have threads".
> So I'm trying to work on a threaded qmail-rspawn to avoid so many forks
Yikes.
I'm going to put my manager's hat on for a moment. How much time do
you intend to spend on developing and debugging this? How much does
that time cost? How much would it cost to buy a fast PC, run a real
Unix (I'd suggest OpenBSD, FreeBSD, or some version of Linux) on it,
and make that your mail server?
Tim.
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 12:06:05PM -0000, Tim Goodwin wrote:
> > ok, on my Solaris, the qmail distribution is "forking" almost 10 to 20
> > processes per second.
> >
> > This cost a lot in system ressources and system calls
>
> Yes. Unfortunately, Solaris isn't Unix, and qmail was designed to run
> on Unix systems. Unix is rather good at forking, especially images as
> tiny as qmail; Solaris isn't. As Rob Pike once said, "perhaps if
> people had understood fork() better we wouldn't have threads".
>
> > So I'm trying to work on a threaded qmail-rspawn to avoid so many forks
>
> Yikes.
If all he's trying to achive is reduce forking on his Solaris box, I
concur. However if we generalize the question, I don't know that I'd
draw the same conclusion.
If any area of qmail would benefit for threading, it might be the
remote delivery mechanism - currently handled by Batman and Robin, er,
sorry, qmail-rspawn and qmail-remote.
First off, there is an amount of data they can share and cache, such
as tcpok and recent DNS lookups.
Second, remote delivery can have very high latency so any footprint
saving is a big saving.
Third, the state requirements are truly tiny. A socket and an fd is
just about all that the thread needs.
Fourth, there are few security issues. Neither qmail-rspawn nor
qmail-remote need any special file system access. This is often a
nasty complication for threaded implementations. Not so here.
Fifth, the interface is simple and clean, plug in the threaded
qmail-rspawn and no one is any the wiser.
Sixth, the problem domain isn't that large:
$ wc -l qmail-rspawn.c qmail-remote.c
103 qmail-rspawn.c
427 qmail-remote.c
530 total
Having said that, in the scheme of things, qmail-remote borders on
ridiculously tiny as it is. I recently wrote a queueless wrapper
program that uses qmail-remote as the smtp engine (opt-in spam I call
it). I rediscovered that a concurrency of 1,000 qmail-remotes consumes
very little system resource on FreeBSD.
> I'm going to put my manager's hat on for a moment. How much time do
> you intend to spend on developing and debugging this? How much does
> that time cost? How much would it cost to buy a fast PC, run a real
> Unix (I'd suggest OpenBSD, FreeBSD, or some version of Linux) on it,
> and make that your mail server?
As a solitary exercise solely designed to speed up one system, of
course replacing the box may be a better solution.
Regards.
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:51:39PM +0000, Mark Delany wrote:
[snip]
> First off, there is an amount of data they can share and cache, such
> as tcpok and recent DNS lookups.
That's what the dnscache running on your 127.0.0.1 is for. That's
close enough.
[snip]
> Fifth, the interface is simple and clean, plug in the threaded
> qmail-rspawn and no one is any the wiser.
With nonblocking sockets and select(), one could write a
single-threaded qmail-rspawn/remote. Only need to find a way to do the
dns lookups in parallel.
Greetz, Peter.
> > Fifth, the interface is simple and clean, plug in the threaded
> > qmail-rspawn and no one is any the wiser.
>
> With nonblocking sockets and select(), one could write a
> single-threaded qmail-rspawn/remote. Only need to find a way to do the
> dns lookups in parallel.
Yes Virginia. There are at least three ways to skin a cat in Unix. And
even the design of a good threaded implementation may not be the
obvious one of one thread per socket. It might be, eg, a thread per
function, or a thread per lockable area or a thread per external
interface or...
And yes Virginia. This is off topic now.
Regards.
Thus spake Mark Delany ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> If all he's trying to achive is reduce forking on his Solaris box, I
> concur. However if we generalize the question, I don't know that I'd
> draw the same conclusion.
> If any area of qmail would benefit for threading, it might be the
> remote delivery mechanism - currently handled by Batman and Robin, er,
> sorry, qmail-rspawn and qmail-remote.
Nothing benefits from multithreading.
It makes the code hard to understand, creates new problems (one thread
dies, the whole app dies), kills resource limits, and is not even
faster.
There is no reason to use multithreading except if you are a marketing
guy at Sun or Microsoft and your analysis says that it is cheaper to ram
multithreading down people's throats than to fix the insanely huge
process creation latency of your broken poor excuse of an operating
system.
Felix
At 04:51 PM 08-02-2001 +0000, Mark Delany wrote:
>it). I rediscovered that a concurrency of 1,000 qmail-remotes consumes
>very little system resource on FreeBSD.
What do we gain by multithreading?
The design of qmail will theoretically result in more latency e.g. process
1 forking and exec'ing process 2 which execs process 3 and so on.
Also there's less shareable memory that way. However the gain in
simplicity, security and robustness is worth it, especially since the
processes are very small making these nonissues in most cases and
especially for email. Also most other email servers aren't even close to
performing at that level in the first place :).
I can see how it will be an issue for web servers though.
Still if we start putting fat processes (a perl checkmail for instance) in
the typical qmail process pipeline it could get ugly. Or do anything which
needs a long startup time (make db connections).
Cheerio,
Link.
Roger Arnold wrote:
I am a newbie so sorry if I am on the wrong list.
What I need to know is how to enable smtp with svscan so that it is
enabled after every reboot please
Thanks in advance
Roger
> What I need to know is how to enable smtp with svscan so that it is
> enabled after every reboot please
Install the daemontools package (http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html) and
read the FAQ entry "How do I run qmail-smtpd under tcpserver?"
Regards, Frank
http://www.qmail.org/man/misc/FAQ.txt
See section 3.2. Documentation is a wonderful thing... (-:
Alex wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone can tell me, how can I make virtual POP e-mails? I didn't find
> any information about this. I have server, running Slackware 7.1 Linux and
> qmail 1.03 as smtp server. My friend asked me to host his website on my
> server, so I made him name based hosting in Apache, but now he wants also to
> have e-mail @hisdomain.com. I added his domain name to
> /var/qmail/control/rcptdomains, and his e-mail is now
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] But it's not enough for him: he want to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] , etc.. I don't want to create so many accounts on my
> system.. (he need up to 40 or 50 e-mail addresses)..
>
> thanks.
>
> Aleks
--
____ __________________ _________________________________
\ \ / \______ \ \|\________________________________\
\ Y /| __/ | \ | Sean Swehla |
\ / | | / | \| Senior Systems Design Engineer |
\___/ |____| \____|__ /| VPN Solutions, LLC |
= S O L U T I O N S =\/ +--------------------------------+
At 06:41 PM 2/7/2001, Alex wrote:
ARG!!!!!!!
READ LIFE WITH QMAIL...its THE how-to for qmail. everything you need is in
there. you must of read it once as you have qmail running. I know that
you can read as to write you must have basic reading skills.
check it out at http://www.lifewithqmail.org
~kurth
>Hi,
>
> Does anyone can tell me, how can I make virtual POP e-mails? I didn't find
>any information about this. I have server, running Slackware 7.1 Linux and
>qmail 1.03 as smtp server. My friend asked me to host his website on my
>server, so I made him name based hosting in Apache, but now he wants also to
>have e-mail @hisdomain.com. I added his domain name to
>/var/qmail/control/rcptdomains, and his e-mail is now
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] But it's not enough for him: he want to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] , etc.. I don't want to create so many accounts on my
>system.. (he need up to 40 or 50 e-mail addresses)..
>
>thanks.
>
>
>Aleks
Please Help.
Some time ago (several months) I successfully set up qmail on my
Linux box at work. (I use it as a "junk" mail server.)
I used "Life With qmail" as my guide and things went well. It worked
and HAS worked flawlessly for me lo these many months.
Yesterday, for the first time since that time of installation I had
occasion to reboot my box. I guess I must never have properly
configured qmail to start automatically, 'cause it didn't!
Re-reading through LWQM I attempted to "manually" start qmail by
executing /usr/local/sbin/qmail (script follows). Upon doing that,
my console starts scrolling with the following messages:
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-send/supervise/lock:
temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock:
temporary failure
Unfortunately, the failure seems anything BUT temporary!
I'm writing as a leech who really wants his qmail server operational
again and knows that y'all aren't sitting around with nothing to do,
but hopes that someone can off the top of their head offer me a
suggestion/solution and save me a lot of re-reading.
<timid> please don't hurt me </timid>
My /usr/local/sbin/qmail (if it helps):
#!/bin/sh
PATH=/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin
export PATH
case "$1" in
start)
echo -n "Starting qmail: svscan"
cd /var/qmail/supervise
env - PATH="$PATH" svscan &
echo $! > /var/run/svscan.pid
echo "."
;;
stop)
echo -n "Stopping qmail: svscan"
kill `cat /var/run/svscan.pid`
echo -n " qmail"
svc -dx /var/qmail/supervise/*
echo -n " logging"
svc -dx /var/qmail/supervise/*/log
echo "."
;;
stat)
cd /var/qmail/supervise
svstat * */log
;;
doqueue|alrm)
echo "Sending ALRM signal to qmail-send."
svc -a /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
;;
queue)
qmail-qstat
qmail-qread
;;
reload|hup)
echo "Sending HUP signal to qmail-send."
svc -h /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
;;
pause)
echo "Pausing qmail-send"
svc -p /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
echo "Pausing qmail-smtpd"
svc -p /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd
;;
cont)
echo "Continuing qmail-send"
svc -c /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
echo "Continuing qmail-smtpd"
svc -c /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd
;;
restart)
echo "Restarting qmail:"
echo "* Stopping qmail-smtpd."
svc -d /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd
echo "* Sending qmail-send SIGTERM and restarting."
svc -t /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
echo "* Restarting qmail-smtpd."
svc -u /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd
;;
cdb)
tcprules /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb /etc/tcp.smtp.tmp < /etc/tcp.smtp
chmod 644 /etc/tcp.smtp*
echo "Reloaded /etc/tcp.smtp."
;;
help)
cat <<HELP
stop -- stops mail service (smtp connections refused, nothing goes out)
start -- starts mail service (smtp connection accepted, mail can go out)
pause -- temporarily stops mail service (connections accepted,
nothing leaves)
cont -- continues paused mail service
stat -- displays status of mail service
cdb -- rebuild the tcpserver cdb file for smtp
restart -- stops and restarts smtp, sends qmail-send a TERM & restarts it
doqueue -- sends qmail-send ALRM, scheduling queued messages for delivery
reload -- sends qmail-send HUP, rereading locals and virtualdomains
queue -- shows status of queue
alrm -- same as doqueue
hup -- same as reload
HELP
;;
*)
echo "Usage: $0
{start|stop|restart|doqueue|reload|stat|pause|cont|cdb|queue
|help}"
exit 1
;;
esac
exit 0
--
signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to
compile under RedHat 7... *sigh* :-(
Somewhen around 9:03 AM -0500 2/8/01, a person believing themself to
be Romeyn Prescott scribbled:
>Please Help.
Disregard. I think. It wasn't qmail that wasn't working, it was
popd. I got that going and can once again check for mail.
Mea culpa. And sorry too for not being more specific in my original message.
...ROMeyn
--
signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to
compile under RedHat 7... *sigh* :-(
Uwe Ohse writes:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 11:57:34AM -0500, Peter Brezny wrote:
>
> > I'd like to run supervise, but i would prefer the logging still take place
> > in /var/log/maillog.
>
> you are mistaken.
Nonsense. Of course he prefers that the logging still take place in
/var/log/maillog. You can be sure he prefers this because he said so.
That's a bad idea. However, he can get a similar effect by creating a
symlink like this:
ln -s /service/qmail/log/main/current /var/log/maillog
> or put this in your supervised-service/log/run file:
> #! /bin/sh
> /var/qmail/bin/splogger qmail
That's like putting the cart before the automobile, to turn a phrase.
syslog is a piece of crap. You *can* use it, but it's a waste of
resources that could be better spent delivering email.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "This is Unix...
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Stop acting so helpless."
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | --Daniel J. Bernstein
Anybody has any luck or experience with this OS.
Josh
Thus spake Jocelyn Clement ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Anybody has any luck or experience with this OS.
What kind of question is this?
Why don't you just try and see if it works?
ARGH!
Felix
You obviously have not read the full docs, since with vpopmail you can only
use the username to login for different domains as long as you have proper
dns records, with reverselookup working properly.
You probably want to move this discussion to the vpopmail list as this is
out of the scope with stock qmail.
-----Original Message-----
From: dick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 1:46 AM
To: Greg White; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: anybody know howto make 3 virtual domain in the one
machineSNIP
thanks your answer,but i mean the username is dick not [EMAIL PROTECTED]
maybe there no such solution?
maybe all the virtualmail user must use the fullmailname.
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: anybody know howto make 3 virtual domain in the one machineSNIP
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 11:15:05AM +0800, dick wrote:
> > any suggestion is welcome.
>
> Suggestion -- putting your question in the subject line, unless your
> question is ten words or less, is a very bad idea at all times, and is
> not really a good idea at any time.
>
> Suggestion -- Read all the documentation available at:
>
> http://www.inter7.com/qmail/index.html
>
> for vpopmail -- I am positive your question is answered there.
>
> I replied off list intentionally, as it's generally considered to be
> incredibly bad form to post with a subject line as long as yours, and
> considered that you deserved a private warning before the on-list
> flame-fest begins.
>
> --
> Greg White
> Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent
> revolution inevitable.
> -- John F. Kennedy
>
Roger Arnold wrote:
I wonder if someone can help a newbie that hasn't a clue.
I have finally got Qmail, Vpopmail, Qmailadmin, and Sqwebmail sort of
working.
If I log-on as a user in Sqwebmail I can compose and send an email, but
if I log-on as a local user on another server and reply or just send a
new email to the user that I was previously logged on with Sqwebmail, I
can neither send to that user or reply to an email sent from that user.
Also if someone using a completely separate ISP sends an email to the
Sqwebmail user, it is not received, and the server replies that the user
doesn't exist, even though the user is in the domain.
Sorry for the round about way of putting this request, but I am not sure
what's going on myself.
Is there something that I have not configured in Qmail ?
Or is it something to do with relaying ?
Qmail, pop3d and smtpd have all been started and show up as services
Any help would be much appreciated, even if someone can point me to
somewhere in all the docs.
Thanks in advance
Roger
On Thu, 08 Feb 2001, Roger Arnold wrote:
>Roger Arnold wrote:
>
>I wonder if someone can help a newbie that hasn't a clue.
>
>I have finally got Qmail, Vpopmail, Qmailadmin, and Sqwebmail sort of
>working.
>If I log-on as a user in Sqwebmail I can compose and send an email, but
>if I log-on as a local user on another server and reply or just send a
>new email to the user that I was previously logged on with Sqwebmail, I
>can neither send to that user or reply to an email sent from that user.
>Also if someone using a completely separate ISP sends an email to the
>Sqwebmail user, it is not received, and the server replies that the user
>doesn't exist, even though the user is in the domain.
>
>Sorry for the round about way of putting this request, but I am not sure
>what's going on myself.
>Is there something that I have not configured in Qmail ?
>Or is it something to do with relaying ?
>
>Qmail, pop3d and smtpd have all been started and show up as services
>
>Any help would be much appreciated, even if someone can point me to
>somewhere in all the docs.
>
>Thanks in advance
>Roger
Once again, not enough info. Send us the contents of ~qmaild/users/assign, the output
of `ls -l ~vpopmail/domains` and the output of ~qmaild/bin/qmail-showctl.
Maybe with that we can help you.
--
***********************************
Matthew H Patterson
Unix Systems Administrator
National Support Center, LLC
Naperville, Illinois, USA
***********************************
How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and then
simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server? i.e.
server MX1 == Primary server.
server MX2 == Alternate server
MX1 is down, so MX2 recieves a mail message. The users on MX1 do not exist
on MX2, but I want MX2 to accept the message, then relay it to MX1 when MX1
is back up.
How is this accomplished?
Thanks!
-- Dan
On Thu, 08 Feb 2001, Dan Egli wrote:
>How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and then
>simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server? i.e.
>
>server MX1 == Primary server.
>server MX2 == Alternate server
>
>MX1 is down, so MX2 recieves a mail message. The users on MX1 do not exist
>on MX2, but I want MX2 to accept the message, then relay it to MX1 when MX1
>is back up.
>
>How is this accomplished?
>
>Thanks!
>-- Dan
See the man page for qmail-qmqp(8).
--
***********************************
Matthew H Patterson
Unix Systems Administrator
National Support Center, LLC
Naperville, Illinois, USA
***********************************
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 08:57:08AM -0700, Dan Egli wrote:
> MX1 is down, so MX2 recieves a mail message. The users on MX1 do not exist
> on MX2, but I want MX2 to accept the message, then relay it to MX1 when MX1
> is back up.
> How is this accomplished?
Enter the domain name on MX2 in /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
Then set the MX records on your DNS server.
Regards, Uwe
Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and then
> simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server? i.e.
Put the domain in "rcpthosts" or "morercphosts" only.
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 Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 08:57:08AM -0700, Dan Egli wrote:
> How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and then
> simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server? i.e.
>
> server MX1 == Primary server.
> server MX2 == Alternate server
>
> MX1 is down, so MX2 recieves a mail message. The users on MX1 do not exist
> on MX2, but I want MX2 to accept the message, then relay it to MX1 when MX1
> is back up.
Put the domain in /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts (and nowhere else) on MX2.
Chris
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 10:14:02AM -0600, Matthew Patterson wrote:
[snip]
> See the man page for qmail-qmqp(8).
That makes no sense.
Greetz, Peter.
I have the domain in rcpthosts, but the problem is that when Qmail recieves
a message for UserA and UserA does not exist on MX2, it bounces it back as
550 user unknown. I do not want to create all the users again on the MX2
machine.
-- Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: Relay only server
> Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and
then
> > simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server?
i.e.
>
> Put the domain in "rcpthosts" or "morercphosts" only.
>
> 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.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have the domain in rcpthosts, but the problem is that when Qmail recieves
> a message for UserA and UserA does not exist on MX2, it bounces it back as
> 550 user unknown. I do not want to create all the users again on the MX2
> machine.
"it" bounces it back. MX2? If so, you have it misconfigured. The domain
should be in "rcpthosts" and ("virtualdomains" OR "locals") on MX1 (primary),
and in "rcpthosts" ONLY on MX2.
Post the output of `qmail-showctl` on both MX1 and MX2, and DON'T obscure/
mask the host/domain names in question. We need that information to check
if the DNS is correct.
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
never mind. I got it working. Thanks
-- Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Egli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: Relay only server
> I have the domain in rcpthosts, but the problem is that when Qmail
recieves
> a message for UserA and UserA does not exist on MX2, it bounces it back as
> 550 user unknown. I do not want to create all the users again on the MX2
> machine.
>
>
> -- Dan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Relay only server
>
>
> > Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and
> then
> > > simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server?
> i.e.
> >
> > Put the domain in "rcpthosts" or "morercphosts" only.
> >
> > 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.
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
Dan Egli wrote:
>
> I have the domain in rcpthosts, but the problem is that when Qmail recieves
> a message for UserA and UserA does not exist on MX2, it bounces it back as
> 550 user unknown. I do not want to create all the users again on the MX2
> machine.
>
> -- Dan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Relay only server
>
> > Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How does one setup Qmail to accept mail for a particular domain, and
> then
> > > simply hold it and que it till it can be delivered to another server?
> i.e.
> >
> > Put the domain in "rcpthosts" or "morercphosts" only.
> >
You should add the domain in "smtproutes" too; something like:
domain.com:1.2.3.4
Where 1.2.3.4=IP of the primary MX.
Paulo Jan.
DDnet.
Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> never mind. I got it working. Thanks
Mailing list netiquette: if you post a problem to the list, and then later
figure out the problem, please post a summary message to the list saying
what the problem turned out to be, how you figured it out, and how you
fixed it.
This way, when other people have similar problems and search the list
archives, they actually find solutions to their problem, not just many
copies of "I've got problem X" and "Never mind, I fixed it".
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem was that I had the name mx2.cfourusa.com in the locals file (I
forgot I added it there). When I removed it, I was able to send messages to
the server and have them relayed to the primary server properly. I thank
everyone for their help!
-- Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: Relay only server
> Dan Egli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > never mind. I got it working. Thanks
>
> Mailing list netiquette: if you post a problem to the list, and then
later
> figure out the problem, please post a summary message to the list saying
> what the problem turned out to be, how you figured it out, and how you
> fixed it.
>
> This way, when other people have similar problems and search the list
> archives, they actually find solutions to their problem, not just many
> copies of "I've got problem X" and "Never mind, I fixed it".
>
> 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 Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:55:02PM +0800, Mark Lo wrote:
> I got an "451 qq Crashed " #4.3.0 error message when sending a
> messages with the size over 5MB. I am using qmail + vmailmgr +
> omail-admin pre10. I have configured the soft-quota and hard-quota
> limit to 20480KB (20MB) and the messages size to 10240KB (10MB). But,
> when I try to send out a messages with attachement which over 5MB. I
> got the error messges stating that "451 qq crashed". Please help me
> and explain how to overcome this problem !!
Sounds like you are invoking qmail-smtpd with a low file size limit as
set through softlimit or ulimit. Check your scripts.
I noticed that I had the paranoid switch on as well (-p), which also may have
been part of the problem. So I added -R and removed -p, and everything seems
to working great.
Thanks again to everyone for the help.
> try starting tcpserver with the -R option.
>
> Regards, Uwe
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Paco Gracia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I have to send a daily newsletter to 60.000 e-mail addresses that are stored
>> in a MySQL database. The newsletter is the same for everybody and the process
>> of composing and sending it will be started from a PHP web app.
>
>Sounds good so far.
>
>> 1- Should I use mail() function from PHP, invoke qmail directly or create a
>> mailing list with ezmlm?
>
>ezmlm is a particularly nice way to go, because of its completely automatic
>bounce handling.
But since the list is dynamically extracted from a database, he'd need
to do something to propagate the bounce-generated unsubs back into the
database.
>> 3- What side effects have to set concurrencyremote to high values like 300?
If you have a lot of recipients on a single poorly managed server, you
could flood that server by opening more connections to it than it can
handle. I've never seen that happen on my list server (with
concurrencyremote=500), but the possibility exists.
>> 5- Could I set up a second qmail instalation for just sending the newsletter
>> so it doesn't slow the "normal users" mail?
>
>Yes, you could. It will still have some effect, though, because they will
>be sharing I/O bandwidth on the queue and log disks, and on the network.
The advantage to a separate installation for the bulk mail is that
it'll allow normal mail to flow fairly normally while sending the bulk
mail. With a single installation, no normal mail will flow until the
first pass at the bulk delivery finishes because the queue is strictly
FIFO.
-Dave
At 10:22 AM 2/7/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
please read life with qmail by dave sill @ http://www.lifewithqmail.org
your looking for something called tcp.smtp
~kurth
>Hi
>
>If anyone could point me in the right direction I would appreciate it. I
>would like qmail to relay for a user if he/she comes from an allowable IP
>address and/or from an allowable domain. Right now the server is only
>allowing relaying for people within allowable IP ranges and from one
>specific domain. Would I need the whole list of domains we host along with
>their users corresponding ip address ranges in the tcp.smtp and
>relaymailfrom files?
>
>i would like to set relaying up based almost exclusively on ip address
>ranges, with the exception of allowing relaying from one particular domain.
>
>ideas?
>
>thanks
>
>brendan
At 10:58 AM 2/4/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you need something called tcp.smtp. it defines who can relay and who can't.
check out LWQ @ http://www.lifewithqmail.org it goes over this in depth :-)
~kurth
>All of my users when trying to send to aol or other off system sites are
>getting this error.
>
>sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts(#5.7.1)
>
>Well why should aol.com or msn.com or anything off site be in rcpthosts?
>
>What am I missing on my qmail server to do this..
>
>Any help would greatly be apreciated..
>It has to be simple I am sure :)
>--Matt
At 10:15 PM 2/7/2001, dick wrote:
sigh.....i think we all know the awnser....
read LWQ at http://www.lifewithqmail.org
dave - you should charge $1.00 for every person that reads LWQ, you'd be a
very wealthy man. :-)
~kurth
>any suggestion is welcome.
Paulo Jan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been in this list, on and off, for about two years,
>and I have seen the issue discussed several times, but have never seen a
>solution for this particular case (customer on a dialup line, sending
>large mails to several people). Has anyone come up with a way to deal
>with this situation?
The best workaround I'm aware of is to set up a list containing the
recipients on the server. That won't help much if the list is
dynamic.
>Or is this one of the cases where other MTAs could
>actually have done a better job?
Yes, other MTA's could handle this more efficiently.
-Dave
"John P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>1 - Forward all user mails to *@office.domain.com and have Qmail deliver
>them to each user - but, our ADSL connection is a bit unreliable, and
>sometimes the server will be 'off the internet' for an hour or so - could
>this be a problem with the lack of a secondary etc.? Or could our webserver
>be the secondary?
No problem. No secondary is necessary or even desirable. If your
system isn't connected at the time a remote system tries to send it
mail, it'll try again later.
>or 2- Have the Qmail server manually fetch the e-mails via POP3 at set
>intervals.
>
>How would I do option 2 with Qmail?
With fetchmail or getmail.
-Dave
On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 11:09:17PM -0500, Phil Barnett wrote:
>First off, trying to use a .0 release of any Redhat release is,at the
>very least, foolish.
Are you saying that RedHat 7.0 is worse than RedHat 6.1? If so, you
either haven't used RedHat 7.0, or haven't used RedHat 6.1... We have
a RedHat-based release (KRUD -- http://www.tummy.com/krud/) and it was
on the order of 6 months before 6.1+errata was up to a quality where
we started basing our distro on it. With 7.0, it was the month after
it was released. No matter what the press is saying about it...
I find that most people who are bad-mouthing 7.0 have never even used
it...
What distribution is the best for a newbie? I certainly wouldn't wave
you off RedHat 7.0. My recommendation is that you use the distribution
that most of your friends or most of the experienced people in your local
LUG use. You *WILL* need help, better to not have any reason for your
friends not to help you.
Sean
--
We have just gotten a wake-up call from the Nintendo Generation.
-- _Hackers_
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
>At 10:15 PM 2/7/2001, dick wrote:
>
>sigh.....i think we all know the awnser....
>
>read LWQ at http://www.lifewithqmail.org
>
>dave - you should charge $1.00 for every person that reads LWQ,
>you'd be a very wealthy man. :-)
If he charged $1 for everyone who _didn't_ read it before posting,
he'd be even richer :-)
>
>~kurth
>
>>any suggestion is welcome.
I am sending out a bunch of emails and would like to generate a list
usernames whose mail bounces. Does Qmail have any feature to accomplish
this? Or is there another way to accomplish this?
Thanks,
Brandon
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 02:41:44PM -0800, Brandon Yu wrote:
> I am sending out a bunch of emails and would like to generate a list
> usernames whose mail bounces. Does Qmail have any feature to accomplish
> this? Or is there another way to accomplish this?
Try the qmailanalog package. From http://cr.yp.to/qmailanalog.html:
qmailanalog is a collection of tools to help you analyze qmail's
activity record. It supplies statistics to answer a wide variety of
questions:
- overall: how many messages? recipients? attempts? etc.
- ddist: how soon were 50% of the messages delivered? 90%?
95%? 99%?
- rxdelay: what's the best order of recipients for mailing lists?
- recipients, rhosts: who's getting mail? bytes? messages?
attempts?
- successes, failures, deferrals: why? how often? how much delay?
- senders, suids: messages? bytes? load? recipients? attempts?
delay?
qmailanalog also includes several tools to focus attention on
particular senders, recipients, or messages.
- Mike
PGP signature
Hi All.
Is there an administrative tool to create, delete or modify users without
vpopmail?
I have an installation with users in /etc/passwd, without vpopmail.
I saw qmailadmin and oMail-admin, but both users vpopmail.
Thanks,
Ari
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 09:15:26PM -0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi All.
> Is there an administrative tool to create, delete or modify users without
> vpopmail?
> I have an installation with users in /etc/passwd, without vpopmail.
not that I'm aware off. This tool would have to run as root, so
it's maybe not really a good idea ?
> I saw qmailadmin and oMail-admin, but both users vpopmail.
nope, omail-admin is working with vmailmgr, and not vpopmail.
Cheers,
Olivier
--
_________________________________________________________________
Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
qmail projects: http://omail.omnis.ch - http://webmail.omnis.ch
PGP signature
I've wrote a simple one, but I don't have it now.
I'll send you tomorrow.
[]s
Davi
On Thursday 08 February 2001 21:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> Is there an administrative tool to create, delete or modify users without
> vpopmail?
>
> I have an installation with users in /etc/passwd, without vpopmail.
>
> I saw qmailadmin and oMail-admin, but both users vpopmail.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ari
At 09:34 AM 2/4/2001, Sumith Ail wrote:
try free -m -t...
don't freak out about buffers.....its just buffers that can be overwritten..
~kurth
>Hello,
>
>We have just received our server which is a Dual PIII with 512 MB RAM , RH
>Linux 6.2 Box. I have installed qmail on this with tcpserver, Now the
>meminfo shows
>cat /proc/meminfo
>
> total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
>Mem: 529530880 364380160 165150720 72847360 300982272 24657920
>Swap: 1048551424 0 1048551424
>MemTotal: 517120 kB
>MemFree: 161280 kB
>MemShared: 71140 kB
>Buffers: 293928 kB
>Cached: 24080 kB
>BigTotal: 0 kB
>BigFree: 0 kB
>SwapTotal: 1023976 kB
>SwapFree: 1023976 kB
>
>There is hardly anybody using this server...please let me know how can I
>find out which process is using so much of memory.
>
>Kind Regards
>Sumith
I just had the DNS transferred over from a third party that was handling the
mail. All that goes to our addresses doesn't get rejected but when we login
there is no messages either. This is for both mail that is relayed remotely
and locally. When I do qmail-qstat I get this:
messages in queue: 110
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
I'm at a loss as to where the mail is going and how to get it to the right
users. I'm using vpopmail to handle the virtual domain. I did a test with
a unused test subdomain before the switch and everything was working fine.
Now I have the black hole for email
Miles
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 05:52:03PM -0600, Miles Scruggs wrote:
> I just had the DNS transferred over from a third party that was handling the
> mail. All that goes to our addresses doesn't get rejected but when we login
> there is no messages either. This is for both mail that is relayed remotely
> and locally. When I do qmail-qstat I get this:
>
> messages in queue: 110
> messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
>
> I'm at a loss as to where the mail is going and how to get it to the right
> users. I'm using vpopmail to handle the virtual domain. I did a test with
> a unused test subdomain before the switch and everything was working fine.
> Now I have the black hole for email
What do the logs say?
Greetz, Peter.
Anyone else seeing thousands of messages filling up your queue, apparently
from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to addresses such as:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Looks like this has started within the hour. Looks like one of our
clients got hit with about 6000 of them, and they're still coming
in.
We're currently just trapping them by setting up anon.lcs.mit.edu in
virtualdomains and directing that to a maildir:
echo anon.lcs.mit.edu:virustrap >>/var/qmail/control/virtualdomains
echo '/path/to/maildir/' >~alias/.qmail-virustrap
maildirmake /path/to/maildir
killall -HUP qmail-send
It seems like putting "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" in badmailfrom may prevent it
from hitting your boxes resources, but we have tons of resources and
would like to check it out a bit.
The message is around 80 lines of 70 column upper-case text, something like:
Subject: i_rz [NZM zmPaLazCnSTOnermbGneLqrmDGbenCfWrCrSXSTiI
GYEPBZDWDNIOFPKVGXPSHSGSFRBVIUNTEBFSDRKTEVLNGCCUKCKCOTCXZNPBFWGBOZ
EZGZMMLYBQGVNQGBGPOXFNONKMDTBMZQHNPVCTLCBTHXGWDSESBWDMZWHOMRNPKUEC
FSOVFVZSDRFNOWHYMZFUDZBUJYJVIMNSDVJYGWFSCMGNDUEBPBDCFUZMMZPVCQMOEM
[...]
Sean
--
Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open
sewer and die. -- Mel Brooks
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
Quoting Sean Reifschneider ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Anyone else seeing thousands of messages filling up your queue, apparently
> from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to addresses such as:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm pretty sure this is the work of the W95.Hybrid email worm (the
sexyfun.net one), sending copies of itself to the mail2news gateway
for distribution to news servers worldwide, so that other infected
computers can download new plugins. That sure is a nasty bugger.
One or more of your users is undoubtedly infected with the
worm--plenty of ours are, I'm sorry to say.
It would seem that when it was discovered that worm authors intended
to use them for worm distribution, the administrators of that gateway
shut it down. One point to the miscreants.
Aaron
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 05:51:40PM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> Anyone else seeing thousands of messages filling up your queue, apparently
> from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to addresses such as:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeap, I've seen that one, but didn't pay much attention to it...
I thought it was some wise-ass customer fooling around. Appearently... it
isn't.
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
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 05:02:06PM -0800, Aaron L. Meehan wrote:
>I'm pretty sure this is the work of the W95.Hybrid email worm (the
>sexyfun.net one), sending copies of itself to the mail2news gateway
What triggered the sudden hit then? sexyfun has been around for
quite a while and the mail servers have kept up pretty well. This
one is really pounding it though.
Sean
--
Blaming the software quality on the tool is like saying "I can't pick up
chicks because my car isn't cool enough." -- Sean Reifschneider, 1998
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
On or about 06:18 PM 2/8/01 -0700, Sean Reifschneider was caught in a dark
alley speaking these words:
>On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 05:02:06PM -0800, Aaron L. Meehan wrote:
>>I'm pretty sure this is the work of the W95.Hybrid email worm (the
>>sexyfun.net one), sending copies of itself to the mail2news gateway
>
>What triggered the sudden hit then? sexyfun has been around for
>quite a while and the mail servers have kept up pretty well. This
>one is really pounding it though.
I think part of it's ability to download updates makes changes to the worm,
to the point where you may be seeing a new variant of it. I've seen *2*
variants of this so far - one from "sexyfun" and the badly misspelled
story, and one with no story or faked sender - only an empty sender, but
otherwise the same virus.
This critter hasn't taken down our qmail server (mark 1 for the good guys)
despite it's being an antique (relatively speaking) - Cyrix P166(ish) / 4G
IDE / 128M RAM, altho I was receiving nearly 1000 double-bounces per day
from the damnable thing. Tracking who has it isn't exactly easy, either...
however if there are any dial-up sysadmins out there who could use a tip,
this has helped me out considerably:
In Win9x, under the network control panel, setting the "Host:" setting
under DNS to the username of the person, will make that username show up in
the (HELO xxxxx) string in qmail's main Received: header. We had our
customers set this since day 1, and this has helped me immensely in
tracking the infected person.
That and if you have separate qmail & authentication servers, make sure
they're both updated at least once per day to an atomic time clock. Servers
that are 5 min. off are a real bugger to figure out who was online when...
Anywho, I hope this helps someone out there -- it's the least I can do to
try to repay the help I've received on this list over the last 6 years... :-)
Thanks,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
=====
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SysAdmin - Iceberg Computers
===== Merch's Wild Wisdom of the Moment: =====
Sometimes you know, you just don't know sometimes, you know?
[arith@foo arith]$ telnet foo.com 25
Trying 192.0.0.1...
Connected to foo.com
Escape character is '^]'.
220 foo.com ESMTP
ehlo foo.com
250-foo.com
250-PIPELINING
250 8BITMIME
qmail don't support RFC2554
-----Original Message-----
From: Michail A.Baikov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 4:31 PM
To: Matt Simonsen; Enrique Vadillo
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SMTP authentication
Qmail support SMTP Authorization (RFC2554) ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Enrique Vadillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Matt Simonsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:40 PM
Subject: Re: SMTP authentication
> I got exactly the same problem, the only thing i could do for now is
> to give them a webmail frontend but most people are very used to sending
> mail using their favorite mail programs.
>
> anyone here know any way this can be done? i use qmail on solaris,
> i'm open to any ideas.
>
> iPass has no information on this even though it's very related to their
> business.
>
> Enrique-
>
> |o| ---- Matt Simonsen escribió ----
> |o| Is it possible/adviseable to run a Qmail server to authenticate all
relay
> |o| SMTP traffic so that we can leave the relay open but not allow
spammers
> |o| access? I have Qmail running with Courier IMAP server, my problem is
that we
> |o| have some users with laptops who travel and use different ISPs out of
the
> |o| office and would not be able to get email through out SMTP server. To
ask
> |o| them to change settings may be too much. I have thought of setting up
2
> |o| Outlook profiles for them with different outgoing mail servers, but I
am
> |o| hoping there is a way to allow their traffic through via a username
and
> |o| password combo.
> |o|
> |o| Thanks
> |o| Matt
Roger Arnold wrote:
Could someone just tell me the reason for this message so I can start
over, sorting it out please?
I think I am brain dead because I am just going around in circles.
Email client message:
An error occurred while sending mail.
The mail server responded:
5.1.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User unknown
Please check the message recipients and try again.
What I need to know is:
Is this error caused by a problem in RELAYCLIENT or
An error in Qmails control files or
Something else
I have been reading and reading until I don't know arthur from martha,
and am now totaly confused.
Yes I am a newbie
One last thing, can you have 2 startup lines for tcpserver (one for pop3
and one for smtp)
Eg.
/usr/bin/tcpserver -u vpopmail -g vchkpw -H -R 0 pop-3
/usr/bin/qmail-popup jupiter.webways-hosting.net
/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
/usr/bin/tcpserver -x/home/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u101 -g16 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
Many thanks in advance for any and all help
Regards
Roger
On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 03:24:54PM +1100, Roger Arnold wrote:
> Roger Arnold wrote:
>
> Could someone just tell me the reason for this message so I can start
> over, sorting it out please?
> I think I am brain dead because I am just going around in circles.
> Email client message:
>
> An error occurred while sending mail.
> The mail server responded:
> 5.1.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User unknown
> Please check the message recipients and try again.
>
> What I need to know is:
> Is this error caused by a problem in RELAYCLIENT or
> An error in Qmails control files or
> Something else
Well, now you've got me confused, because your server at domain.com
appears to like [EMAIL PROTECTED] just fine...
( mail.domain.com appears to be the only MX for domain.com )
gregw@localhost:~$ telnet mail.domain.com 25
Trying 209.92.33.180...
Connected to mail.domain.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
HELO greg.cex.ca
220-domain.com VOPmail ESMTP Receiver Version 4.5.186.0 Ready
220 Warning: no name found in DNS for your host address
250 OK
MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK
RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK
QUIT
221 domain.com closing
Connection closed by foreign host.
So, I don't understand the problem. Your server also does not appear to
be running a stock qmail -- its responses lead me to believe that it is
something else entirely....
>
>
> One last thing, can you have 2 startup lines for tcpserver (one for pop3
> and one for smtp)
> Eg.
> /usr/bin/tcpserver -u vpopmail -g vchkpw -H -R 0 pop-3
> /usr/bin/qmail-popup jupiter.webways-hosting.net
> /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
>
> /usr/bin/tcpserver -x/home/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u101 -g16 0 smtp
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
Yes, you _could_ put that all in one 'run' script for supervise, but I
personally would not. Once supervise, one run script (or one more for
multilog), and one service. They're easier to deal with that way.
>
> Many thanks in advance for any and all help
> Regards
> Roger
>
You're welcome. ;)
--
Greg White
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent
revolution inevitable.
-- John F. Kennedy
Roger Arnold wrote:
Sorry Greg, I only put "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as an example, it's not the real user
and domain.
The real user/domain is "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
The line should read:
5.1.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User unknown
Also, with the second question, are you saying that there should be more than
one supervise running,
I am sorry but I don't understand what you mean.
If you mean they should both be combined into one script, could you supply an
example as I am
not a programmer,
Thanks
Roger
Greg White wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 03:24:54PM +1100, Roger Arnold wrote:
> > Roger Arnold wrote:
> >
> > Could someone just tell me the reason for this message so I can start
> > over, sorting it out please?
> > I think I am brain dead because I am just going around in circles.
> > Email client message:
> >
> > An error occurred while sending mail.
> > The mail server responded:
> > 5.1.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User unknown
> > Please check the message recipients and try again.
> >
> > What I need to know is:
> > Is this error caused by a problem in RELAYCLIENT or
> > An error in Qmails control files or
> > Something else
>
> Well, now you've got me confused, because your server at domain.com
> appears to like [EMAIL PROTECTED] just fine...
> ( mail.domain.com appears to be the only MX for domain.com )
>
> gregw@localhost:~$ telnet mail.domain.com 25
> Trying 209.92.33.180...
> Connected to mail.domain.com.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> HELO greg.cex.ca
> 220-domain.com VOPmail ESMTP Receiver Version 4.5.186.0 Ready
> 220 Warning: no name found in DNS for your host address
> 250 OK
> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK
> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK
> QUIT
> 221 domain.com closing
> Connection closed by foreign host.
>
> So, I don't understand the problem. Your server also does not appear to
> be running a stock qmail -- its responses lead me to believe that it is
> something else entirely....
>
> >
> >
> > One last thing, can you have 2 startup lines for tcpserver (one for pop3
> > and one for smtp)
> > Eg.
> > /usr/bin/tcpserver -u vpopmail -g vchkpw -H -R 0 pop-3
> > /usr/bin/qmail-popup jupiter.webways-hosting.net
> > /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
> >
> > /usr/bin/tcpserver -x/home/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u101 -g16 0 smtp
> > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
>
> Yes, you _could_ put that all in one 'run' script for supervise, but I
> personally would not. Once supervise, one run script (or one more for
> multilog), and one service. They're easier to deal with that way.
>
> >
> > Many thanks in advance for any and all help
> > Regards
> > Roger
> >
> You're welcome. ;)
>
> --
> Greg White
> Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent
> revolution inevitable.
> -- John F. Kennedy
Hello,
I was at the ORBS site the other day and I saw that as from 1st Feb 2001
relays.orbs.org would be deleted.
This may seem dumb but here goes :).
Now, does it mean that we can no longer use it to check for open relays and
if so what replacement do we have?
Andrew
Hello
> This may seem dumb but here goes :).
> Now, does it mean that we can no longer use it to check for open relays and
> if so what replacement do we have?
I had said about the mor free time!!!
But is this really true, that ORBS has been closed permanently?
Piotr
---
Piotr Kasztelowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]
"Andrew Wafula" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello,
>
> I was at the ORBS site the other day and I saw that as from 1st Feb 2001
> relays.orbs.org would be deleted.
>
> This may seem dumb but here goes :).
> Now, does it mean that we can no longer use it to check for open
> relays
No, they just split it up, to make it easier to pick and choose the
parts of ORBS that you want to use.
From the same part of the page that says that relays.orbs.org is
going away (http://www.orbs.org/usingindex.html):
* relays.orbs.org is going away and will be deleted by 1 February 2001.
* Manual entries and netblock entries have already been removed
from relays.orbs.org.
* Use inputs.orbs.org for single stage relay filtering
* Use outputs.orbs.org for immediate filtering of multihop relays.
* Use delayed-outputs.orbs.org for multihop relay filtering using
a 3-5 day grace period.
and also the experimental zones:
* manual.orbs.org - open relays tested manually and believed to be
blocking the tester. Return code is 127.0.0.5. Updated: hourly
* spamsources.orbs.org - direct spam sources. Returns
127.0.0.6. Updated: hourly
* untestable-netblocks.orbs.org - netblocks known to contain open
relays and which have been proven to be blocking the ORBS tester
or who have demanded that ORBS not test. Returns
127.0.0.7. Updated: hourly
* spamsource-netblocks.orbs.org - spam source and support
netblocks. - Returns 127.0.0.8. Updated: hourly
What this means is that you can configure your rblsmtpd to use:
-routputs.orbs.org
to get only use the actual, verified SPAM relays that ORBS does a good
job of finding, and avoid all of their political bullshit.
And you can use
-rinputs.orbs.org
on your customers to make sure you don't allow them to send spam
through you as a third-party relay.
On the whole, it should be a good thing, even if you hate ORBS. Makes
it easier to pick and choose which parts of ORBS you agree with, and
just filter based on them. And it makes it harder for people to drop
mail that is blocked by the somewhat more biased parts of ORBS (like
spamsource and untestable-netblocks) without realizing that's what
they're doing.
> and if so what replacement do we have?
Although ORBS isn't going anywhere, the RBL (www.mail-abuse.org) does
similar things.
------ScottG.
then after success, install again checkpassword but now with mysql.
"James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There was recently some talk on this list about about patching ipme.c
> to add 0.0.0.0 to qmail's list of known local addresses.. and the
> original poster supplied a patch. However, the patch was only _part_
> of a bigger patch.. leaving those of us that aren't familiar with
> qmail's code in the dark.
>
> So.. my question is, could someone please post a complete patch to
> work around this issue? Or at least a URL to their patch? Thanks.
I have put a copy of the 0.0.0.0 patch (the same one I posted to this
mailing list a week or three ago) in:
http://www.tir.com/~sgifford/qmail/
at
http://www.tir.com/~sgifford/qmail/qmail-0.0.0.0.patch
That will be its permanent home, so feel free to link to it.
------ScottG.
With sendmail/postfix + ipop3d I can log pop3d activities like (via
syslogd):
Feb 9 11:50:48 gh0st ipop3d[49838]: port 7110 service init from 195.168.1.77
Feb 9 11:50:52 gh0st ipop3d[49838]: Login user=tps host=gh0st.tps.sk [195.168.1.77]
nmsgs=0/0
Feb 9 11:50:55 gh0st ipop3d[49838]: Logout user=tps host=gh0st.tps.sk [195.168.1.77]
nmsgs=0 ndele=0
Can be same output reported with qmail' pop3d?
--
TPS
more? http://tps.sk
