Re: Life with qmail & smtp & daemontools
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 08:01:22PM +0200, Eric Persson wrote: > [root@mailzx daemontools-0.70]# /etc/init.d/qmail start > Starting qmail > svok: fatal: unable to chdir to /service/qmail-send: file does not exist > qmail-send service not running > svok: fatal: unable to chdir to /service/qmail-smtpd: file does not > exist > qmail-smtpd service not running > > I cant find any info on what those /service/qmail-send and > /service/qmail-smtpd should be, Look a little closer at Life With qmail. It's in there, promise. GW -- Greg White
Re: svc won't shutdown supervised pop3d...
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 02:04:51PM +0200, Gabriel Ambuehl wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hello, > I've added supervising of qmail-pop3d and POP3S support via stunnel > and qmail-pop3d to what is a pretty standard LWQ+vpopmail based > setup. > > I added the following files to the LWQ setup: > > /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run > #!/bin/sh > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -u `id -u vpopmail` -g `id -g vpopmail` -v > - -R 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \ > `hostname` /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 Why not take the example from the Life With qmail document? I'll give you a hint: the above lines are missing a call that starts all 'run' scripts. The child of 'supervise qmail-pop3d' is '/bin/sh' in your script, not tcpserver as it should be. > > /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-spop3d/run > #!/bin/sh > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -R -H -D -c 50 \\ > - -v -u `id -u vpopmail` -g `id -g vpopmail` 0 pop3s > /usr/local/sbin/stunnel -T -p /etc/stunnel.pem -l \ > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup -- qmail-popup `hostname` > /bin/checkpassword \ > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 This one is missing the same crucial call. -- Greg White
Re: qmail-pop3d
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 11:42:25AM -0400, qmail wrote: > After I test the qmail-smtpd and qmail-send is ok,it seems to me ok. > I try to install qmail-pop3d and start this service. > I add the run script in /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d > I use the method to test the checkpasswd program, the response is ok. > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R > -H -l 0 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup sbs01.helka.com.hk > /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 > > but I find a process: > root 8461 0.0 0.0 00 ?Z11:17 0:00 > [supervise > is it ok? > I can't check the pop3 with email client. > > anything that I should install after enable qmail-pop3d? I have two questions for you: 1. What is the output of 'svstat /service/*' ? 2. Is it just linewrap issues, or is 'run' really multilined without escape characters like that? -- Greg White
Re: Perl and Qmail
On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 03:10:29PM +, eric wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > [snip] > > > > > I'm not aware of any _reason_ you'd want to recieve mail in a Perl > > program -- that's what your MTA is there for. > > > > Using perl to create your own MUA, using perl to create an > autoresponder, blah, blah, blah..., using perl to grab the stuff > from your inbox and then process it. > Possibly my misunderstanding of what the OP meant by 'recieve' -- all that stuff happens at the filesystem level or MDA level, not at the level of receipt, at least to my mind. (I had visions of him trying to get a daemon to listen on 25 and accept connections. :) ) -- Greg White
Re: Perl and Qmail
On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 01:45:35PM -, Frederik Van Herterijck wrote: > I'm having some problems sending e-mail from within a perl program > using qmail. > > Can someone tell me how I can easily send and receive mails in perl > using qmail. I'm trying and trying but nothing works. > Qmail works perfectly. This isn't really a qmail question. Reply-to set appropriately. Perl has nearly any way you can imagine to send mail. 1. Net::SMTP -- this is the one I prefer 2. using a pipe to qmail-inject (mentioned elsewhere in this thread) 3. using a pipe to the sendmail wrapper are the best three, in order, IMHO. I'm not aware of any _reason_ you'd want to recieve mail in a Perl program -- that's what your MTA is there for. -- Greg White
Re: Again Local Deliveries not working - I'm LOST, really...
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 03:26:16PM -0230, Martin Marconcini wrote: > > If you don't put From and To headers in your message, there won't be > any > > From > > and To headers in your message. What appears in these headers has > nothing > > to do > > with the SMTP MAIL FROM and RCPT TO commands. > > Now a question... > Why I usually do a telnet xxx 25 and send a mail like I did and I works? > > Is there any configuration? > > I mean I did mail to: email, rcpt to: email my whole life! > I swear! If you mean, "How come other MTAs let me get away with that?", it's simple. qmail speaks SMTP properly, and is not very forgiving about those that don't. The ability to handle arbitrary variations in the SMTP protocol would require a parser in qmail-smtpd, which would complicate the code unnecessarily. I have yet to see another MTA which sends mail in the format you describe, so a parser is unecessary. Another former poor SMTP speaker, GW
Re: Dan, how do we solve this problem?
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 10:35:50PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote: > A user on this mailing list has a problem. He has a fast non-static > IP ADSL connection, which is listed on the DUL. The non-default route > was a slow second internet connection with a static IP and which was > not listed on the DUL. He has several choices that I can see: > > 1) Try to get his fast connection removed from the DUL. That's not > acceptable since he doesn't have a fixed IP address. > > 2) Let his SMTP client connections go out from the IP address on the > DUL. This isn't acceptable because anybody subscribing to the DUL > will reject his email. > > 3) Use a wildcard smtproutes entry to redirect his email to his ISP's > email relay. This isn't acceptable because he doesn't want to have to > trust his ISP. He wants to be able to look in his log files and know > that the email has been accepted by the recipient's SMTP server. > > 4) He could change the default route to point to the slow connection. > Obviously unacceptable. > > 5) He simply MUST convince qmail-remote to bind to the IP address of > the slow non-DUL interface. Unfortunately, there is no way to do that > short of patching qmail. Why should he have to patch qmail in order > to add a feature he needs? As you've said yourself, the problem with > people offering patches is that you don't get an indication of how > many people are using the patch. > > 6) His only acceptable alternative to patching qmail is to try to > convince you to add this as a feature to qmail. Other people have > tried to get this feature added, and you've called their desire > "frivolous". He doesn't hold out much hope for success. And, of course, 7) Use operating system features to ensure that all outbound traffic to port 25 goes out the slower interface. This should be trivial with ipfilter/ipnat, ipfw/natd or the Linux-packet-filter-and-nat of the week, no? This does not strike me as too large a hoop to jump through for such a specialized need, and should work flawlessly once configured. Not trying to make your point invalid, as I do think that this code, if reviewed, should be simple enough to integrate in the source. Just trying to point out another option. P.S. If inegration is going to happen, I wouldn't mind seeing the ipme.c/0.0.0.0 patch in place, either. I _know_ the OS is supposed to DTRT with it, but this wouldn't be the first time Dan has had to work around a braindead decision by authors of other OSs. :) -- Greg White
Re: unable to find user alias
On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 06:27:08PM -0400, David Loszewski wrote: > When I try to install qmail this is what I get. > > fatal: unable to find user alias > make: *** [auto_uids.c] Error 111 > > How do I fix that?? You RTFM -- read INSTALL and INSTALL.ids in the source tree. While you're at that, visit: http://www.lifewithhqmail.org/ Read it. Understand it. Become one with it. :) -- Greg White
Re: Problem with routing (Again)
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 06:15:07PM -0600, Cordell Bourne wrote: > Here is my situation. I have a test lab with many mail servers from various > venders. Each of the mail servers has the same set of test users loaded on each > machine. With this problem I am not able to setup a MX record so I use the > "artificial routing" scheme of qmail to get some things accomplished that I need > done. > > Here is what I am trying to achieve now. > > I have qmail on a server with the U of W IMAP server. With our client which we > are testing I am able to send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the message is > accepted by qmail with no problem. > > However, if I send to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] the message never arrives. I get a bounced message from > qmail stating the following > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at hostname.psomedomain.com. > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following > addresses. > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, I couldn't find any host named pain.teamp.com. (#5.1.2) I don't know where pain.teamp.com comes in, but your nameservers are broken -- that makes it difficult to recieve mail. gregw@frodo:~$ dnsq mx somedomain.com a.gtld-servers.net 15 somedomain.com: 108 bytes, 1+0+2+2 records, response, noerror query: 15 somedomain.com authority: somedomain.com 172800 NS ns1.betstop.com authority: somedomain.com 172800 NS ns2.betstop.com additional: ns1.betstop.com 172800 A 12.8.12.75 additional: ns2.betstop.com 172800 A 12.8.12.76 So, I asked ns1.betstop.com about somedomain.com, and it said: gregw@frodo:~$ dnsq soa somedomain.com ns1.betstop.com 6 somedomain.com: timed out ns2.betstop.com revealed the same result. Fix your nameservers, then maybe things will work. If not, fix them and post the results. The results you posted look like a _real_ misconfiguration, based on whatever your _real_ DNS is. Perhaps posting an unmunged bounce message, and unmunged output of 'qmail-showctl' would be helpful for the list in determining what the problem really is. Note that, in posting what appears to be mangled data, much of the list has ignored your post. :) -- Greg White
Re: Anti-Virus options
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 03:21:26PM -0400, Ed Weinberg wrote: > I have seen the anti-virus options listed on the qmail.org site and looked at > the documentation on vendors sites. I was wondering what the advantage was of > installing the anti-virus add-ons to Qmail (like Qmail-Scanner) when you can just >run most of > the mail scrubbers as a daemon which listens to port 25 and sends good eamail > to some non-standard p;ort where qmail-smtpd (via tcpserver) can be listening? > > -- Ed First thought that occurs to me: why would I trust the AV author to entirely DTRT WRT SMTP? I use qmail because Dan's code is small, lean, and appears from all accounts to be immune to remote exploit. I have no such faith in any AV authors yet -- after all, they're incapable of filtering simple double-extension Outlook viruses by their nature, why trust them with network code? *grin* -- Greg White
Re: can qmail control a mail size before sending it ??
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 05:26:55PM +0200, Lukas Beeler wrote: > At 08:14 03.08.2001 -0700, you wrote: > > >Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't databytes exactly > >what the OP does _not_ want? databytes is checked after the mail is > >spooled, no? > i don't use this function. > i thought it would decline the message on smtp level. with a 553 error > after "data". But, i don't know it, because i never used this function. > and, the question is how: > >I'd like to controle the mail size before sending it. > should be interpretet.. the message won't be sent to the to the other end, > with databytes. in any case. > -- > --/-/-- Lukas Beeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---\-\-- >\ \ My HomePage: http://www.projectdream.org> / / > Man, I'm not having a good month. Never did get around to implementing databytes, as it was my understanding that its utility was limited -- the manpage never explicitly states whether the mail is actually queued or not, and I (apparently) misread it. qmail-send never sees the mail, and it is rejected at the SMTP level, not bounced. This appears to work regardless of destination -- all SMTP injected mail must fit inside databytes. To the OP, it looks like databytes will do what you want, if the sender is injecting via SMTP, rather than locally. -- Greg White
Re: dns.o compilation errors
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 03:43:20PM -0700, Greg White wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 04:14:16PM -0500, Proc Meminfo wrote: > > Hey, I am receiving the following errors while doing 'make setup check': > > > > dns.o: In function 'resolve': > > dns.o(.text+0xf8): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > > dns.o: In function 'findname': > > dns.o(.text+0x1bc): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > > dns.o(.text+0x24c): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > > dns.o: In function 'findip': > > dns.o(.text+0x2ae): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > > dns.o: In function 'findmx': > > dns.o(.text+0x3ac): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > > dns.o(.text+0x45a): more undefined references to '__dn_expand' follow > > dns.o: In function 'dns_init': > > dns.o(.text+0x4a3): undefined reference to '__res_search' > > dns.o(.data+0xc): undefined reference to '__res_query' > > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > > make: *** [qmail-remote] Error 1 > > qmail appears to be attempting to link again your local resolver library > and not being able to find it. Do you have /usr/include/resolv.h? > This isn't really a qmail issue -- just install the resolver library and > all should be well. > > GW I noted your other reply -- all those references are contained in my resolv.h, both on my FreeBSD and Linux boxen. Please verify for me that resolv.h contains references to those functions -- they're right at the top of the file. If so, what are the contents of dns.lib in the qmail source tree? (Should be '-lresolv'). -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: dns.o compilation errors
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 04:14:16PM -0500, Proc Meminfo wrote: > Hey, I am receiving the following errors while doing 'make setup check': > > dns.o: In function 'resolve': > dns.o(.text+0xf8): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > dns.o: In function 'findname': > dns.o(.text+0x1bc): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > dns.o(.text+0x24c): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > dns.o: In function 'findip': > dns.o(.text+0x2ae): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > dns.o: In function 'findmx': > dns.o(.text+0x3ac): undefined reference to '__dn_expand' > dns.o(.text+0x45a): more undefined references to '__dn_expand' follow > dns.o: In function 'dns_init': > dns.o(.text+0x4a3): undefined reference to '__res_search' > dns.o(.data+0xc): undefined reference to '__res_query' > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > make: *** [qmail-remote] Error 1 qmail appears to be attempting to link again your local resolver library and not being able to find it. Do you have /usr/include/resolv.h? This isn't really a qmail issue -- just install the resolver library and all should be well. GW
Re: qmail on AFS
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 05:17:46PM -0400, Rudy Zung wrote: > [Don't remember if I've already posted this; sorry if it's a repeat.] > > Trying to run qmail with Maildir on a Slackware with AFS. The AFS is > installed and runs properly. Users' home volumes and Maildir are on AFS. > Qmail is generating temporary delivery errors; the mail never gets delivered. Seeing the temporary delivery errors would likely be helpful here. "What Do the Logs Say?" GW
Re: RES: Message without Subject and From!!!
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 04:15:55PM -0300, Daniel Abad wrote: > Ok, I telnet at 25 and compose a message, with mail from: , rcpt to: anda > data (.) . > > When I received this from my Outlook or Webmail, the message is empty! Only > the time appears! > > Tks. > > Daniel Please learn to speak SMTP -- you're not sending any To or From headers, just envelope-from and envelope-to. A proper conversation reads a little like this, for your side of it: HELO example.com MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DATA From: Joe Blow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jim Blow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Testing my SMTP This is a test. . That will do what you're expecting. GW
Re: Selective Relaying and tcprulescheck
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 11:14:43AM -0500, Scott Zielsdorf wrote: > Thanks Philipp and Charles for the help on this. > > Once I set the TCPREMOTEIP variable I did see the rule which now leads me to > the discovery that my Windows workstations - which are DHCP clients - do not > have entries in my DNS. So when qmail does the reverse look up, it can't > resolve the IP. > Short of going off DHCP and putting all my workstations in my DNS, is there > any way to "fix this"? > > Thanks. What, precisely, needs 'fixing'? Reverse lookup is not a requirement. Reverse lookup does not 'resolve IPs' -- it gives a PTR to an A record for the host. TCPREMOTEIP is set based on the connection -- the address is known, not looked up. What problem are you trying to solve? GW
Re: mystery failure notice
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 10:34:27AM -0500, Virginia Chism wrote: > I received a failure notice concerning an email I did not send. I am > attempting to track down how this happened and have hit a wall. When I do > 'tail -f /var/log/maillog' I get current activity. If I do 'more > /var/log/maillog' it goes all the way back to day one and I don't have time > to slog through FOUR YEARS of maillog when what I need was a couple of days > ago. Is there any way to select a certain number of items to view in this > log? > This has nothing whatsoever to do with qmail. This is a basic sysadmin question. Hint -- grep is your friend. Look into the -A option if it exists on your system. man grep -- Greg White
Re: Supervise lock error?
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 03:22:42PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi!!! > > I've been running my Qmail server for 7 months now, without any problems what so >ever!! > Glad to hear it. > But yesterday it stopped sending any outgouing mail. Incoming still works fine > > I tried a restart which did not help at all. > > When qmail starts i get the following error message: > > supervise: fatal: unable to acquire > qmail-send/supervise/lock: temporary failure > supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock: > temporary failure > > What has happened??? Looks to me like you're trying to 'supervise' qmail-smtpd twice, or a previous supervise process did not exit cleanly, and left lockfiles hanging around. Try: svc -d /service/qmail-send rm /service/qmail-send/supervise/* svc -u /service/qmail-send Then try to find out what's starting the supervise process twice -- possibly you have a SYSV-type script that starts svscan, and then tries to start all the supervised processes again... -- Greg White
Re: qmail-smtpd sloooow to respond.
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 02:12:37PM -0700, Abbe DeMoss wrote: > Hiya. > > I'm having a problem with SMTP connections to my mailserver, particularly > those from Outlook, which simply are not working no matter how long I set > the SMTP timeout to be on the client end. If I manually connect to my mail > server (telnet mail 25) I get a 'Connected to..' immediately -- that's > inetd -- but then the next line '220 blah blah ESTMP' doesn't come up for > somewhere between 30 and 120 seconds. However, if I do it locally -- > (telnet localhost 25) I get an immediate ESMTP response. Wow. Been on the list long? This is the number one (IMO) FAQ for qmail. It's been answered at least once _today_. Please try to lurk a little longer next time. It's frustrating to everyone to answer the same question constantly. > > I'm running inetd -> tcpd -> tcp-env -> qmail-smtpd. This is on a mandrake > 7.2 box. > > from my inetd.conf : > > smtpstream tcpnowait qmaild /usr/sbin/tcpd /var/qmail/bin/tcp-env >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd > > > I've also tried this with a -R argument to tcp-env to keep it from doing > ident lookups, and this has made no discernable difference. You need to stop if from doing a reverse DNS lookup, most likely. IMO this is best achieved with tcpserver*. Go forth and read: http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ If that does not get you up and running tcpserver & qmail-smtpd, plus setting RELAYCLIENT properly, within 15 minutes of reading and understanding, then you need more help than anyone can give. :) *1. The reverse lookup might not be for the client -- it might be for TCPLOCALHOST. *2. I hate inetd. I've hated it for years. Most people on this list don't like it either, and don't use it. I've forgotten anything useful about inetd. -- Greg White
Re: failure to deliver to mailboxes
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 11:00:00AM -0600, Michel Rondeau wrote: > > > Hey all, > > I have qmail up and running - only thing is that every now and again, it stops >delivering messages to people's mailboxes - it just queues them. . If I reboot the >server, everything gets delivered properly. Anyone know why this happens? > > Michel All together now: "What Do the Logs Say?" qmail-send should be logging delivery attempts. If it is not, I have an idea what the problem might be. If it is, what is the deferral message? -- Greg White
Re: Slow pop3d
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 12:47:32PM +0200, Dennis Pedersen wrote: > Uhm okai.. > But i am wondering why it is'nt in the FAQ if it a typpical Q.? > (i did try google.com but i didnt fint anything usefull) > But anyways it works not thanx to Ahmad Ridha Dan's FAQ included in the distribution was written long before qmail was as widely deployed as it is now. Dan's FAQ likely covered what were the most common questions asked on his list at the time. Life With qmail (LWQ) is currently (IMHO) the best source of information/FAQs/FGAs for qmail at this point. http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ This problem is in section G.10 of LWQ. -- Greg White
Re: Slow pop3d
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 09:54:17PM +0200, Dennis Pedersen wrote: > Hi! > I have installed Qmail 1.03 by following the 'Life With Qmail'. > My problem is that sometimes the pop3d is very very slow (i can take up to a > min before it 'wakes up' and askes for a user auth) this happens when i try > telnetting localhost 110 and by using a mail client from my workstation :( > Does anyone have an idea what i have missed? (the stranges thing is that > sometimes it works fine(?!)) > > OS : FreeBSD 4.2 > > Regards > Dennis > Please go read the archives... This is asked at _least_ once a week. There are a number of possible causes, and their fixes, all documented quite nicely there. One source of archives: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/ and search the qmail list. -- Greg White
Re: User Masquerading...I think that's what I need?
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 02:16:19AM -0400, Konstantin Rozinov wrote: > Hi folks, > > I am new to the list and to qmail. I just installed it using the Life > with Qmail guide and the Qmail HOWTO. I also checked up on some of the > man pages. So everything seems to work fine so far. > > But I have this question: > > I currently have fast-forward package installed so I am using > /etc/aliases and I have this in it: > > support: ukon, joe, john, mxp > > note: all these are local user accounts. > > So, is it possible to have some user on the internet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and when I (ukon) or joe or john > or mxp answer him (userX), the From: line will have this: > [EMAIL PROTECTED], instead of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc... > This is best done with your mail user agent (MUA) IMHO -- user masquerade is trivial with a decent mail client. Mutt does this quite easily, and I'm sure that any decent MUA can do this to -- right down to the envelope-sender matching the masqueraded from. Indeed, this is one of my qualifiers for a decent MUA... GW
Re: qmail and Redhat 7.1
On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:10:47AM -0600, Alex Leyva wrote: > Hi, im triying to install qmail 1.03 on a Redhat 7.1, when i compile > daemontools i get the following errors: > > ./compile tai64nlocal.c > tai64nlocal.c: In function `main': > tai64nlocal.c:54: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a > cast > tai64nlocal.c:55: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > tai64nlocal.c:56: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > tai64nlocal.c:57: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > tai64nlocal.c:58: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > tai64nlocal.c:59: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > tai64nlocal.c:60: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > make: *** [tai64nlocal.o] Error 1 > > I've tried this with 3 different boxes. > I've checked tai64nlocal.c and i cant find anything wrong. > Thanks. > This is in the archives all over the place. glibc-2.3 changed the location of a time header -- search the archives. -- Greg White
Re: stunnel
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 03:37:41PM +0200, Per-fredrik Pollnow (EPK) wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was wondering if there is anyone(probebly someone) who is using stunnel for the >qmail-pop3d server. I get this error message on the server all the time when I tray >to connect to my pop3d on port 995 with my SSL client. > > > > I start the stunnel like this: /usr/local/sbin/stunnel -p /etc/stunnel.pem -l >"/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1" -f -d 995 > > > > And this is the screenshot from the foreground mode: > > 2001.07.26 15:24:31 LOG5[27215:73728]: Using 'qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1' as >tcpwrapper service name > > 2001.07.26 15:24:31 LOG5[27215:73728]: stunnel 3.16 on i386-unknown-openbsd2.9 >PTHREAD+LIBWRAP > > 2001.07.26 15:25:58 LOG5[27215:75776]: qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 connected from >136.225.42.196:4497 > > 2001.07.26 15:25:58 LOG3[27961:75776]: execvp: No such file or directory (2) > > 2001.07.26 15:29:32 LOG3[27215:77312]: SSL_accept: Peer suddenly disconnected > > 2001.07.26 15:29:32 LOG3[27215:75776]: select: Interrupted system call (4) > > 2001.07.26 15:29:32 LOG5[27215:75776]: Connection reset: 0 bytes sent to SSL, 0 >bytes sent to socket > > > > I'm using qmail on OpenBSD2.9.. > > > > Anyone who knows what's wrong? IIRC, stunnel just wraps an existing daemon, no? Take the example 'run' script from LWQ for pop3 service, and add the stunnel commands, so that the old 'run' script is passed to stunnel as the '-l' argument. -- Greg White
Re: Where's a good place to put a script to filter every mail
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:00:19PM +0700, Kman wrote: > > Yes, it is. It's in the individual domain directory under > > /home/vpopmail/domains. > > Oh, so we need to put the script in every domains > (/home/vpopmail/domains/dom.dom...) right? Isn't there a _single_ place > to do that? > I think there would only be a _single_ place if you weren't using vpopmail. You'd put it in /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-default, and after doing the filtering, you'd add to the script to do the actual delivery to the right place based on headers. Sounds, to me, a lot uglier than maintaining one .qmail-default per-domain, no? (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I cannot see another way.) -- Greg White
Re: stderr not a tty.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 03:00:48PM +1000, Russell Davies wrote: > 2001-07-26 14:58:39.812517500 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 > 2001-07-26 14:58:40.060252500 delivery 3: success: >stderr_is_not_a_tty_-_where_are_you?/did_0+0+1/ > 2001-07-26 14:58:40.060264500 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > 2001-07-26 14:58:40.060268500 end msg 50397 > Subject: Re: Where's a good place to put a script to filter every mail > Folder: rcvstore +qmail 3164 > > I'm getting this error message with every delivery, anybody know how to > fix this? Third column is (from memory) a program delivery -- what program is it, and if it's a short script, could you post it? It probably does something odd with fd2 (stderr)... -- Greg White
Re: Where's a good place to put a script to filter every mail
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:27:26AM +0700, Kman wrote: > > Put this script in .qmail-default > > Make sure you use the -i flag on all grep command so that it won't > miss > > upper case chars. > > > > > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/2001/03/msg01041.ht > ml > > > > Hi: > > /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-default ? > > I'm afraid that's not available in vpopmail scheme. No, but there _is_ a .qmail-default for every domain. Put it in there GW
Re: domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:55:40AM +1000, Christian wrote: > Hi, > I am now faced with the follwing error when sending to outside addresses > "... domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts" > If I add a domain to rcpthosts a can send mail to it fine. > > I can also send message via telneting in or by using qmail-inject > so it's only a prob when sending from a client > > I have the mail domain name listed in rctphosts > and the following in tcp.smtp > 192.168.0.:allow, RELAYCLIENT='' > :allow > > What do I have to change to allow the mail to go thru ?? > > Thanx, Please read: http://www.palomine.net/qmail/relaying.html This is easily either the first or second most FAQ of the FAQ on this list. (It's either this one, or 'Why does it take so long to connect so pop3|smtp?' It really does work perfectly if you follow the directions. Your tcp.smtp file appears slightly mangled, for starters. Recreate it using the examples from the site above. -- Greg White
Re: Unsubscribing Problems
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:58:46AM +0100, John P wrote: > Hi All, > > In order to avoid waking up tomorrow and downloading lots of some Brazilian > idiot's 200k documents, I thought I would unsubscribe from the qmail list > overnight. Not a bad idea, under the circumstances. I guess Dan's not been on-list for awhile, or I bet this idiot would have been blackholed hours ago. > > I sent an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , from the same IP, SMTP > server, e-mail address etc. that I subscribed from (and double-checked the > headers just in case) but got no reply. I tried qmail-help@ and even > qmail-subscribe@ just to see, but still no reply. Thanks to this jackass DoSing the list, messages to/from the list to me seem to be taking almost an hour -- thus the reason I break with my tradition and reply with 'reply-to-all' rather than 'reply-to-list'. > > Any ideas? I'm just glad I have ADSL.. (a month ago, I would have been using > a 28k dialup!). Am I being impatient - I have waited about half an hour? See above. Dan -- please blackhole this idiot, and preferably blackhole the two with the antivirus scanners that refuse to handle mailing lists in anything vaguely resembling a sane manner. -- Greg White
Re: RES: Block Users!
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 11:40:32AM -0300, Daniel Abad wrote: > Yes... It's done but not working I can telnet at 110 with the user and > send the message... > > Daniel. How precisely have you configured your server so that talking to the POP3 daemon can send a message? P.S. -- badmailfrom only blocks the sender _envelope_, not the 'From:' line. Please verify that what you've got in badmailfrom actually matches the envelope... GW
Re: several /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd and bin/qmail-queue
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 01:23:13PM -0400, alexus wrote: > bash-2.05$ ls -al /var/qmail/doc/INTERNALS > ls: /var/qmail/doc/INTERNALS: No such file or directory > bash-2.05$ > Apologies. Installing those files in /var/qmail/doc is a port-ism from FreeBSD. It's in the source tree only in a default install. GW -- Greg White
Re: Having problems with postmaster....
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 12:50:20PM -0400, David Gartner wrote: > alias:x:19:502::/home/alias:/bin/bash > > Opps Is that the problem? > Yep: alias:*:81:81::/var/qmail/alias:/nonexistent ls -lad /var/qmail/alias: drwxr-sr-x 2 aliasqmail 512 May 15 08:53 /var/qmail/alias -- Greg White
Re: several /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd and bin/qmail-queue
On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 09:58:04PM -0400, alexus wrote: > i was checking something and i founds this > > my mail server seems to have tons of > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd and bin/qmail-queue > > running at the same time.. about 30 of them > The process actually listening on port 25 forks a qmail-smtpd for every incoming conneciton. qmail-queue is then run to place the mail safely in the queue. > any ideas why? Read /var/qmail/doc/INTERNALS. > > nothin intersting in maillog > I find that hard to believe. At the moment you see that many qmail-queues hanging around, qmail-smtpd's logs should read something like so, if logged through tcpserver: @40003b5cd7620a221bcc tcpserver: status: 30/xx where xx is either 40 or whatever is specified in the 'run' file for qmail-smtpd. ISTR that inetd does some sort of logging of how many processes it has opened, but it's been so long since I used inetd for anything that I've forgotten. -- Greg White
Re: Stopping server relays
On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 01:30:18PM -0600, David J Jackson wrote: > Greg -- > Thanks for your reply... this has me somewhat perplexed? > > There is no other boxes Windoz or other wise on pickledbeans.com if that's what you >mean? Just me and my 24K dailup to Qwest.net?? > > > 1. control/rcpthosts empty. > /var/qmail/crontrol/rcpthosts : > mail.pickledbeans.com # box sitting on my desk > pickledbeans.com# domain mapped -> mail.pickledbeans.com (dyndns) OK, no possibility there. > > > 2. RELAYCLIENT set for all/wrong addresses in /etc/tcp.smtp[.cdb] > > (or wherever you keep that file) if using tcpserver > not using tcpserver Using inetd then? Ugh. ;) > > > 3. RELAYCLIENT set for all addresses in /etc/hosts.allow if using inetd. > /etc/hosts.allow is emtpy /etc/hosts.deny is empty > /etc/host.equiv: > localhost > mail.pickledbeans.com pickledbeans.com host.equiv is not relevant to this discussion. So, you're not setting RELAYCLIENT there... > > > > 4. An insecure .cgi script on your machine (not possible if not running > > a cgi-capable webserver on your mail host), and RELAYCLIENT set for > > localhost. > > > I suppose it could be except I only have one cgi script a simple chat > room thing? Not likely. So, you're not setting RELAYCLIENT for anyone? Noone uses this server to send mail at all (except scripts on the mailserver, of course)? That's odd, but possible. Check out Dave's possibility (I too almost got burned by this one -- apparently M$ Exchange makes it non-trivial to turn _off_ percenthack, and enables it by default). Other than that (an evil 'smarthost' setup), I can't see how anyone could be relaying through you, except legitimately. Hey, since you're on dialup and dyndns, isn't it possible that some Windoze user dialed up, got an old IP address that at one time was pickledbeans.com's dyndns, and sent this mail? The mail you forwarded specifically said 'from your IP address'??? If you're not setting RELAYCLIENT anywhere, then even your local LAN cannot be sending this mail... Just a thought. -- Greg White
Re: Stopping server relays
On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 12:40:22PM -0600, David J Jackson wrote: > Greetings --- > How can I stop my server from being used to relay mail? > I got an email from a admin somewhere claiming that emails were being > sent from my server with virus attached? It's only me and one other person > has access to this box? I doubt you're being used by a third party to relay. It seems much more likely that some Windoze box on your network is infected, and that's where the source of this problem is. Get a good virus scanner. You really have to try to make qmail relay. Possible sources of relay: 1. control/rcpthosts empty. 2. RELAYCLIENT set for all/wrong addresses in /etc/tcp.smtp[.cdb] (or wherever you keep that file) if using tcpserver 3. RELAYCLIENT set for all addresses in /etc/hosts.allow if using inetd. 4. An insecure .cgi script on your machine (not possible if not running a cgi-capable webserver on your mail host), and RELAYCLIENT set for localhost. > Related question could this be the source of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (I set up an .qmail-52 aliases to try to catch these emails) I suppose it might be. Read some of the caught mail. The virus looked like 'Snow White' tho, and that uses a null envelope sender, just like a bounce message does. > > > This question is part of the Forged Emails post I sent eailer from > [EMAIL PROTECTED] In future, please keep things on the same topic in the same thread -- some of us use threaded mail readers for just this purpose. ;) -- Greg White
Re: DNS bug: CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily
On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 09:53:19AM +0700, Vu Xuan Ngoc wrote: > 1. "head -2 /etc/resolv.conf" have result: > search localdomain > nameserver 203.162.0.11 Good. A nameserver. ;) > > 2. "dnsqr mx yahoo.com"have result: SNIP valid result. It apparently works. > > > 3. "dnsq mx yahoo.com ns1.yahoo.com" have result: This was unnecessary, my fault. Apologies. My request should have been for hotmail. Thanks for realizing my mistake. (I always mix those two up -- giant free email service that causes lotsa problems). > > > 4."dnsqr mx hotmail.com" have result: > 15 hotmail.com: > 504 bytes, 1+12+5+8 records, response, noerror > query: 15 hotmail.com > This result is what I expected. hotmail intentionally keeps their MX response to under 512 bytes to avoid problems with, e.g., qmail. Your recursive resolver appears to provide the same additionals as a direct query to hotmail's ns (dnscache does not, which was why I asked for the dnsq output). So, now that Greg has his domains straight, we've proven that: 1. Your server successfully looks up hotmail's MX records. 2. The patch to qmail was unnecessary (but should not be a problem). Odd. Can we please get: qmail-showctl (unedited, please) and some log file snippets, from mail creation/injection to delivery attempt, of a failed hotmail delivery? -- Greg White
Re: DNS bug: CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily
On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 06:57:58PM +0700, Vu Xuan Ngoc wrote: > I am new with qmail. > > I have a proplem with DNS bug. I have used DNS patch at > http://www.ckdhr.com/ckd/qmail-103.patch , but qmail still infor > "CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily" when I send mail to hotmail.com's > email address. > > Please help me. > Thank you very much > Please post the results of the following commands: 1. head -2 /etc/resolv.conf 2. dnsqr mx yahoo.com (dig mx yahoo.com also acceptable) 3. dnsq mx yahoo.com ns1.yahoo.com (dig mx yahoo.com @ns1.yahoo.com also acceptable) Then maybe we'll see if this is a 'bug'. ;) -- Greg White
Re: How to create dynamic users for IMAP Email services
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 01:00:56PM -0500, Robin S. Socha wrote: > * Greg White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010719 12:58]: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 09:53:23PM +0530, KK wrote: > > > > 1. How do I create dynamic system users (and assign them passwords) > > > and the mail directories within the users home directories from > > > inside an email-client application, which uses the IMAP protocol to > > > access emails (just like it is done on hotmail.com or any other > > > web-based email systems)? > > > > Let me see if I understand this correctly -- you want to create mail > > accounts from within an MUA? If that's what you're asking, it cannot be > > done, and if it could I would run* as from from qmail as humanly > > possible. Even Microsoft does not have this "feature". If this is not > > what you're asking, please restate the nature of the problem. > > Eh. You're in Unixland, not in Redmon. Sure it could be done. man > procmail maildrop if you're into deviant sexual practices. Hmmm... come > to think of it, man dotqmail would even do. Wicked. qmail itself does not do this. Of course, you _could_ cook up some setuid mess that created arbitrary virtual users (or even system users) upon receipt of mail, but would you? Yuck. Better that the OP believe that it is impossible. IMHO it is impossible to do securely. -- Greg White
Re: How to create dynamic users for IMAP Email services
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 09:53:23PM +0530, KK wrote: > Hello Everyone - > > I am a new entrant to the "qmail" world and have recently installed the qmail_1.03 >server on a Red Hat Linux 6.0. I have also istalled the UW-imap server with Maildir >support. I have successfully configured NS-Communicator to send and receive mails >using the IMAP ptotocol using qmail. I am even able to send and receive emails using >Outlook Express from other Windows systems in the local network. For accessing thses >emails, I was creating system users by logging-in as root and using the LInuxConf >utility. Now my questions are: > > 1. How do I create dynamic system users (and assign them passwords) and the mail >directories within the users home directories from inside an email-client >application, which uses the IMAP protocol to access emails (just like it is done on >hotmail.com or any other web-based email systems)? Let me see if I understand this correctly -- you want to create mail accounts from within an MUA? If that's what you're asking, it cannot be done, and if it could I would run* as from from qmail as humanly possible. Even Microsoft does not have this "feature". If this is not what you're asking, please restate the nature of the problem. *screaming. > > 2. Is the creation of system users avoidable for generating email addresses? For eg. >can I have an email addrress account hosted on the above email server - >[EMAIL PROTECTED] without creating a system user named "joe"? If yes, how can I >make this possible, both as a root user and also from within an email-client >application? Is there a readymade script available to do this? Lots of options available here. Start with 'man qmail-users'. Look into the 'vpopmail' package, or its alternative (whose name escapes me at this moment). System accounts are not a requirement, and there are tons of ways to attack the problem. -- Greg White
Re: Procmail
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 05:35:02PM +0200, Xavier Pegenaute wrote: > I can do it only if i put ".qmail-default" in ../alias/ ? > > I think its right .. > > Thanks for all ...:-) > - Original Message - > From: Xavier Pegenaute > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 5:16 PM > Subject: Procmail > > > Hi all... > > Please, i need that Qmail exec "procmail" for every user in mine system, this >procmail is a little different than normal procmail, this one, zip all messages and >store the messages in his own folder ... > > But i'm not sure about how i can do it .., any one know ..? > > Thanks. No, you do not need .qmail-default anywhere. A quick google search returned: 1. Dan's own instructions, _contained in the qmail-1.03 distribution_. 2. Numerous other sources. Just hit www.google.com with 'qmail procmail' and you will find your answers. -- Greg White
Re: mailbombed
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 05:03:34PM -0700, Jon Rust wrote: > Anyway, it's been running all day with the new smtproute and the alias > entry. Logs confirm the messages are being "delivered." I'm all the way > down to 140,000 queued msgs now. That's after about 7 hours worth of > processing. For future reference, how unsafe is just removing the files > from mess, info, and remote with qmail running? > It's extremely unsafe -- you will destroy your queue. You shouldn't have to worry about stopping qmail long enough to do this, tho, it will only generate a few deferrals, even on a moderately busy mailserver. GW -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: Why
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 08:53:25PM -0600, Chris Bolt wrote: > > Hi,I install qmail-1.03 in RedHat 7.1, > > and i start qmail such as '/var/qmail/bin/qmail-start ./Maildir > > splogger qmail > > Add a trailing slash to Maildir > > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail > > Without the trailing slash, qmail thinks it's a Mailbox, not a Maildir. > The OP will now find that local deliveries will fail with "Uh-oh: home directory is writable." if he posted correct information in his first post. A quick google search finds the solution to both these problems. (just cut'n'paste the exact qmail error into google's search). HTH, -- Greg White
Re: Moving queue directory
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 06:55:51PM -0400, Mark Douglas wrote: > I would like to move my queue directory to another location. Is there a > feasible way to do this while qmail is running, No. > > or should I shut it down and > move the directory, and then bring qmail back up? Yes. > > Thanks, You're welcome. > > Mark > I presume that you're moving mount points around, right? Done it, no problem. Just mount /var/qmail/queue (or /var/qmail, or whatever you're doing), 'make setup check' in the source, and away you go (after clearing and deleting the existing queue, of course). -- Greg White
Re: qmail-smtpd.c
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 06:01:10PM -0300, Renato Dobelin wrote:
> Olá for all,
> I looked for of some forms to prevent leaving the qmail with the opened Relay, used
>patch of the Mrs. Brisby's to legalize the together smtp with the RPM of the qmail of
>Bruce Guenter (obviously I created a new package RPM), but exactly thus the qmail
>still was disapproved in the test with the " telnet relay-test.mail-abuse.org ", the
>Wildmat I I did not obtain to make to function in my system, I decided to look at
>qmail-smtpd.c inside and to look a reply of as to prevent the not authorized Relay
>and found the function "smtp_rcpt(arg)" and includes the following strings:
>
> void smtp_rcpt(arg) char *arg; {
>
> int x=0; /* new code
> for(x=0; arg[x]!=0; x++) if ((arg[x]==37) || (arg[x]==34) || (arg[x]==91) ||
>(arg[x]==33)) { err_syntax(); return; } */new code
> if (!seenmail) { err_wantmail(); return; }
> if (!addrparse(arg)) { err_syntax(); return; }
> if (flagbarf) { err_bmf(); return; }
> if (relayclient) {
> --addr.len;
> if (!stralloc_cats(&addr,relayclient)) die_nomem();
> if (!stralloc_0(&addr)) die_nomem();
> }
> ...
>
> After to compile the qmail and to restart the job again, I run the " telnet again
>relay-test.mail-abuse.org " and now it passed in all the tests. The code looks for
>the characters ",[,!,% in rcpt.
> I am not programmer and therefore I was with the following one doubts: It will be
>that I will have problems with emails we legitimos with this alteration?
>
> Renato Dobelin
I cannot see that it would be a problem, unless legtimate mail actually
used some of these characters (which most does not, precisely because of
sendmail's dirty UUCP hacks ;) ). You may have a problem with refusing
mail to postmaster@[your.ip.add.ress], which IIRC is an RFC requirement.
You're also trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist -- qmail will
_never_ deliver mail differently because of a bangpath style address
'!', nor will it relay for '%', unless you specifically tell it to. Try
to actually relay mail using any of the methods that are reported to
'fail' -- you cannot, unless you've configured percenthack, or set
RELAYCLIENT for the connecting IP address. Period. Accepting these
characters in an SMTP conversation _does not_ allow relay.
--
Greg White
Re: if all else fails, send to
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 04:36:16PM -0400, Gary MacKay wrote: > Thanks Greg. No offence taken. I had tried man pages but didn't try the > right key word and found that the man pages had been installed under > /var/qmail so they wouldn't have shown up if I did. Oh well. > > .qmail-default works fine. However, in preperation for handling multiple > domains, I would like to do this on a per domain basis. The man page > says to use .qmail-"ext" but I can't seem to get that to work. Am I > misreading the man page? > Well, for it to work on an individual domain basis, each domain would have to be virtual, and separate. Then you create a .qmail-default in each virtual domain. I've successfully used vpopmail to do precisely this in a number of circumstances -- I find it works well. BTW: either 'cp -Rp /var/qmail/man/* /usr/local/man/*' or globally set MANPATH to include /var/qmail/man -- it's worth it. :) GW
Re: if all else fails, send to
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 04:10:46PM -0400, Gary MacKay wrote: > How do I tell qmail to send any incoming messages to unknown users to a > particular user? Lots of times a sender will misspell a users name and > my client would like to have all "unknown user" type messages forwarded > to a person who can look at it, then pass it on to the proper > person/spelling. Try 'man dot-qmail', and look for 'default'. Your answer is there. (Not trying to be rude or short with you, but the docs are good. If you can't understand the docs, post back with what you don't understand in the docs.) -- Greg White
Re: smtproutes and mail still in queue
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 06:36:41AM +, Subba Rao wrote: > Hi, > > My mail client is Mutt. Few days ago I have subscribed to their mailing list. > Their list server is at gbnet.net. The list server attempts to authenticate > my server by calling to identd. I have opened up ipchains to access identd for > the gbnet.net domain and the mail is still the mail queue. > > Since my initial subscription (sometime ago) to Mutt list, I have added the > gbnet.net in the /var/qmail/control/smtproutes file. The relaying server is my > ISP's mail server. In this case, this mail should have left my system long time > ago but it still remains in the mail queue. Why is it trying to authenticate my > system via identd when the smtproutes has been defined for this domain? qmail does not ignore control files. Verify that /var/qmail/control/smtproutes contains the correct information (and is named correctly), restart qmail, send qmail-send an ALRM signal to retry all queued mail, and watch the mail fly off to your ISP. > > Thank you in advance for any help. NP. :) -- Greg White
Re: localhost setup
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:40:56AM -0500, cyberruz wrote: > Lukas Beeler wrote: > > > are your sure that you did type > > > > telnet localhost 25 > > ^^ > > The 25 marks the smtp port > > if you just type > > telnet localhost > > you will try to access your port 23 [standard telnet port] > > > > if you did type the 25, your smtp server is down... > > check www.lifewithqmail.org and try again > > > > I got it working...didn't have qmail-smtp in the inetd.conf file > > Thanks...unfortunately the LWQ doesn't mention the inetd.conf file (or > xinetd.conf file)...unless I didn't look in the right spot. > > Rob.. LWQ doesn't mention inetd.conf because it doesn't _use_ inetd.conf at all. Read the instructions again, carefully -- it includes directions on using tcpserver instead of inetd. > > > -- Greg White
Re: Life-with-qmail question
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 05:52:28PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote: > It's me again, > > who has another newbie question. Like some of you suggested I'm now reading > "Life with qmail" instead "Running qmail". I got to the point in the > document where the author describes the qmailctl script. But I don't really > understand what to do with it... I understand the script and I figured out > that it needs an argument. But the author wants me to put it into > /var/qmail/bin and to create a link to my init.d directory as far as I > understood him. At first I'm not sure what my init.d dir on my FreeBSX box > is. Isn't it /usr/local/etc/rc.d? If I'm right then I don't understand why > to create a link because the script expects an argument and FreeBSD is just > executing the link at startup _without_ any arguments AFAIK. What do I > misunderstand? > If you're running FreeBSD-4.3, or FreeBSD-stable, scripts in /usr/local/etc/rc.d are executed with a 'start' argument. Cannot recall exactly when this was implemented, but it was sometine between 4.1-RELEASE and 4.3. IIRC, this should work just fine with the qmailctl script.* Alternatively, you could avoid the link thing altogether and simply call '/var/qmail/bin/qmailctl start' from /usr/local/etc/rc.d/qmail.sh. (Scripts that parse no arguments still work just fine.) * see /etc/rc and /etc/rc.shutdown -- rc.shutdown also runs '*.sh stop' in the local startup directories. > Please more enlightenment, > -Moritz > Start from 'man man' and work outwards. ;) -- Greg White
Re: easy one
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 09:39:30PM -0500, Chris Woods wrote: > I have installed qmail and everything is working. Now I need to get POP3 working. >In the 'Life with Qmail' book it talks about editing the 'qmailctl' file to control >qmail. However I have 'svscan' running. > > Can these run in parallel? Will having both installed cause any problems? > > TIA > chris. Just follow LWQ -- it knows what it's doing. Honest. The instructions there work quite well. Once it's done, and it works (and it will), examine what was done, and I'll bet you'll figure out why it works. ;) -- Greg White
Re: Hotmail, CNAME lookup failure, zone transfer...WTF?
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 05:25:04PM +0200, Marek Gutkowski wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Perfectly normal behaviour, if Hotmail's DNS is broken, or your resolver > is > > broken. > > I agree. Hotmail's DNS is broken. That's not the point. > > > It doesn't. snort is lying -- don't worry, it lies about a lot of other > > things, too. Take everything snort says with a grain of salt. Please do > not > > followup with any further snort discussion; it's offtopic for this list. > > > > First - thanks for a quick reply. > > Snort is just a tool, and my previous post was about qmail, not snort :) > Snort is not lying. You think it took the packet dump out of the blue sky? > I also ran tcpdump and it says the same. Is tcpdump also lying? Snort is lying. tcpdump is being misunderstood* by someone who doesn't understand the DNS protocol -- and who is being rude to someone who is trying to help as a result. * Unless tcpdump is actually saying 'Zone transfer', or showing you AXFR requests, or something like that. In which case it's lying too. ;) qmail _does not do AXFR_, nor can it cause an AXFR. > > Mail server really tries to connect to the DNS with tcp dport 53. It does. > It does. I'm sure. I'm sure it does too. Connections on port 53/TCP _do not_ have to be zone transfer requests. RTFM, RFC 1035. Sounds like your qmail might require the big-dns patch.** You should be able to find it on the qmail home page. ** Odd, though, as my queries for hotmail MX records show 504 bytes, inside the limit for UDPThey seem to have intentionally stayed inside this limit, on purpose. Could we see the results of (both or either): dig mx hotmail.com @ns1.hotmail.com dnsq mx hotmail.com ns1.hotmail.com Specifically, I'd like to see the byte count. -- Greg White
Re: tcpserver / queue cleaning
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 08:26:45PM +0200, Moritz Schmitt wrote: > Hello, > > I got too questions about qmail and tcpserver. If the tcpserver program is > off topic here, please advise me to the right list. > > 1. How can I delete every message existing in the queue? If this isn't a FAQ, it should be. Stop all qmail processes. Have the compile qmail source handy. 'rm -rf /var/qmail/queue', and 'make setup check' in the qmail source directory. (There are other ways, but this way is, IMHO, the simplest for someone who doesn't understand the architecture of qmail.) > > 2. I'm using tcpserver to start qmail and it seems to work. But there is a > little thing I don't understand. On my FreeBSD 4.2 RELEASE machine I added > the follwing configuration file into /etc/rc: > > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u 82 -g 81 0 smtp \ > /var/qmail/bin/smtpd Wow. It's strongly recommended, even in the file itself, not to play with /etc/rc. If you want to stick with files in /etc, use rc.local. I personally am now a big fan of /usr/local/etc/rc.d/*.sh -- FreeBSD now runs any files matching that specification at boot time. I use this method to start svscan, which then starts all the tcpserver processes (qmail-smtpd, qmail-pop3d, et al) for me* -- see Life With qmail: http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ and modify the 'run' scripts to taste. * Of course, it also starts dnscache, tinydns, axfrdns, and publicfile. I love DJBware. ;) > > After I added this line I rebooted the machine and it stopped right at the > point where it was supposed to excute the line above. It didn't crash and I > was able to talk to my server on port 25 it just didn't proccess the rest of > the startup scripts. Because it looked the way that > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd was waiting on stdin I added an ampersand at the > and of the line so /bin/sh would start it as a background process. It seems > to work that way but I'm confused because I read twice in two different docs > that no ampersand is needed. At least it wasn't printed there. Can anyone > enlighten me? > > -Moritz See above -- if you're going to run tcpserver, I highly recommend that you go whole hog and use daemontools to bring stuff up as well. Can't wait until openssh has an option that runs under daemontools without too much extra overhead! -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: HELP: 4.4.2 error
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 11:45:32PM -0300, Eduardo Gargiulo wrote: > Hi all. > > I'm running qmail and ezmlm-idx. > Yesterday, the log start to say > > deferral: Connected_to_200.0.218.99_but_connection_died._(#4.4.2)/ > > for each address with doamin siderar.com. The problem is that 74% of > the subscribers have this kind of addresses. How can I solve this > problem ??? > Looks to me from some quick testing that this particular host is broken. Thanks for not munging the address or the domain name -- it allows me to give you some advice that should work. Drop this in smtproutes: siderar.com:smtpsrv2.techint.net Looks to me like their primary MX is broken, and in a way that breaks delivery for qmail -- it accepts the TCP connection, and then drops it. qmail will continue to try to deliver to this host. You may wish to inform postmaster@ of the problem -- the host may just be down temporarily. -- Greg White
Re: setting quotas. . .
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 10:38:28AM -0500, Norvell Spearman wrote: > I know single user mode would be best; I could do the quota stuff late at > night. But what would happen if mail comes to the server and qmail isn't > running? Does it simply bounce back to the sender, does the originating > smtp server keep trying for a while, or does all that depend on how the > destination mail server is configured? > Unless the sending mail server is completely broken, it will queue and retry. > > I'm trying to avoid having my users > yell at me if they don't get an e-mail they're expecting, or if they can't > send e-mail out. That's why I originally asked about whether qmail can > accept mail for delivery (local and remote) while not delivering mail > locally. > svc -d /service/qmail-send will allow qmail to accept mail via SMTP and queue it, but not deliver it. Making all possible delivery directories sticky will postpone all deliveries. IMHO, single-user mode, unmount filesystem, set up quotas, back to multiuser mode is probably your best bet. Your odds of losing any mail during this transaction are extremely low, unless the sending mail servers are totally useless... -- Greg White
Re: deferral: /bin/sh:_./Maildir/:_is_a_directory/
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 09:41:18AM -0500, Stephen Froehlich wrote: > I have a couple of users who aren't receiving mail with the following error > message > > delivery XX: deferral: /bin/sh:_./Maildir/:_is_a_directory/ > Here's a tip -- _directory_ delivery instructions end in a trailing slash. _File_ delivery instructions do not. Check .qmail files and the default delivery method -- Greg White
Re: [Fwd: bad gid being passed?]
If you installed from source, simply rm '-rf /var/qmail'. Use vipw so that /etc/passwd and friends all agree as to what is what, unpack a clean tarball, and run 'make && make setup check'. Reconfigure to taste. Serves 1-millions. ;) (If you installed via some other method, it probably has its own oddball way of doing things, like e.g. rpm --ugh). GW On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 05:01:50PM -0700, Amanda wrote: > Still looking for suggestions on completely uninstalling qmail. > I've tried just about everything I can think of, from the clever to > the brute-force, and still can't get the darn program completely > uninstalled. > -- Greg White
Re: CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 06:24:43PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote: > Hello, I've noticed that all mails sent from my qmail box to any email in > hotmail.com ends with the error "CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily" after 25 > minutes that qmail-remote is lunched. (yes!, qmail-remote sleeps 25 minutes > before log the error). > SNIP nslookup data... > I think is a problem with the bug "oversize DNS", but i'm not shure. I don't think so -- I could be misinterpreting the logs, but my dnscache logs show a 280 byte query for hotmail's MX records -- this is well within the limit for a UDP query (512 bytes). I suppose it's still possible tho -- can we see some logs, with a transaction before, during and after a hotmail delivery attempt? > Any here has the same problem with hotmail.com ? No -- I'm forced to send to them all the time, and it seems to be OK... -- Greg White
Re: restart without rebooting
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 09:55:24PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > That is not true, killall only kills the specified command with the > specified signal. > Bzzt! Wrong! Some *nixes have a killall command that kills all processes. See: http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/csg/manuals/all-manual-pages/solaris/usr/man/man1m/killall.1m.html (pardon possible bad linewrap) There _is_ a reason people don't say 'use killall' in generic advice -- it does not necessarily do the same thing on all platforms. Sent to the list in case some poor soul on Solaris (or other platform, who knows?) actually used this advice -- Greg White
Re: qmail Multiple MX Problem
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 10:03:20AM -0700, mjt mjt wrote: > Hi all > > I have this problem delivering mail to certain hosts > that have multiple MX entries. Other than that > everything is working fine. Let me explain the > scenario more. > > I have mail being sent to some user at server A and > server B. Server A and B have 3 MX entries in their > lookup. The first two entries in these are higher in > preference but are unavailable to the net traffic (for > some reason ). What i think is happening is that > qmail is trying to connect to the first MX entry and > for some reason the server sends SMTP serrvice not > available to qmail at my end. So the mail is put in > queue and then qmail retries the first server in MX > entry. If the recieving server answers on SMTP, AFAIK qmail is _obligated_ to talk to it -- if it cannot accept mail, it should not accept connections. Whether or not this is a requirement, this is the way qmail behaves. The recieving servers are being silly -- if you're too busy to accept connections, why open a connection to say so?? > > I have found a work-around in the sense that i entered > smtproute individually for thse two servers A and B. > It is working now, but i was wondering if anyone had > more insight on why qmail was not looking up the other > 3 mx records. See above -- qmail is looking up all three, and talking to the best preference. What is the receiving MTA for this domain? I'd like to know for future reference -- it's behaving quite badly... -- Greg White
Re: smtp router
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 03:48:23PM +, Ahmad Ridha wrote: > Federico writes: > > > I need to make this possible with qmail: > > > > I've this structure INTERNETQMAIL-EXCHANGE > > > > i need that ALL incoming mail from internet are sent directly to exchange and the >outgoing mail are sent normally. > > > > it is possible? > > how? > > > > (In /var/qmail/control/) > Create a file called smtproutes containing: > > : > > and remove the entries of locals and virtualdomains > > Regards, > > Ahmad Ridha Umm, that would be, to put it mildly, bad, unless you intend to _relay_ all mail from the Exchange server as well as sending all inbound mail to it. If the OP sets up his Exchange server with qmail as the smarthost (which is what he sounds like he wants), this will create a mail loop. Only domains in rcpthosts should be in smtproutes with the setup it sounds to me like he's asking for... -- Greg White
Re: smtp router
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 05:14:48PM +0200, Federico wrote: > I need to make this possible with qmail: > > I've this structure INTERNETQMAIL-EXCHANGE > > i need that ALL incoming mail from internet are sent directly to exchange and the >outgoing mail are sent normally. > > it is possible? > how? > It's trivial, presuming that all incoming domains are known -- use /var/qmail/control/smtproutes. Warning, ISTR that Exchange servers are vulnerable to dirty percenthack relay vulnerabilites, and it is non-trivial to disable. Other than that, we used that exact setup when execs at a former company of mine insisted that Exchange was the only way to go, and all the admins refused to connect the Exchange server directly to the internet. ;) -- Greg White
Re: error #5.1.2 qmail can't resolve host name?
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 10:47:18AM -0700, Alex Tsang wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, I couldn't find any host named yahoo.com?. > (#5.1.2)' Looks like you messed up your RELAYCLIENT settings. ISTR that RELAYCLIENT=" " as opposed to RELAYCLIENT="" will cause that problem. > But when I changed the system back from qmail to > sendmail, it works properly. So I think the problem > was on the qmail configuration. Anyone can help me? Looks to me like a chair-keyboard interface issue -- let me or the list know if this was the case. ;) GW
Re: tai64nlocal problem
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:29:10PM +0200, Lou Hevly wrote: > I would like to begin using multilog instead of splogger. I've > installed daemontools and run the tests for tai64nlocal successfully: > > [root:/usr/local/src/daemontools-0.70]$ date | ./tai64n | ./tai64nlocal > 2001-06-15 16:11:06.389339500 Fri Jun 15 16:11:06 GMT 2001 > > The docs say that tai64nlocal reads lines from stdin. But for me > it just hangs until I hit Ctrl+C: > > [root:/usr/local/src/daemontools-0.70]$ ./tai64nlocal > @400037c219bf2ef02e94 > ^C > [root:/usr/local/src/daemontools-0.70]$ > tai64nlocal _does_ read from STDIN. From my machine here: gregw@frodo:~$ tai64nlocal @40003b225d8422c3027c 2001-06-09 10:31:38.583205500 The tai timestamp was obtained from a multilog file. The local date was output by tai64nlocal. Try this timestamp as input (cut 'n' paste): @40003b225d8422c3027c Your timestamp above gave me: gregw@frodo:~$ tai64nlocal @400037c219bf2ef02e94 1999-08-23 21:04:05.787492500 Did you terminate that timestamp by pressing enter? Or did you just leave it there...? -- Greg White
Re: help : qmail-popup3d
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 12:11:24PM +0100, Carlos Baptista wrote: > well, the logs doesn't say anything useful. > this problem starts when i came back from my hollidays. > i have a few dozens mb of mail... it doens't matter the number of messages or the >size. > i tried to retrevieve the mail from my home (cable) or in the office (lan) and the >result is the same: after 1 minute it's disconnect. > this are two configurations for starting qmail-popup3d that i have used: > > inetd.conf > pop3 stream tcp nowait root/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup qmail-popup >quadriga.pt /bin/checkpasswordnt /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Mail > > tcpserver > tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup quadriga.pt \ >/bin/checkpasswordnt /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Mail 2>&1 | \ >/var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d & > > > cb I knew I'd seen that 'connection dies after one minute' before -- the problem is in checkpasswordnt. ISTR that the OP of that thread actually did find a solution, but I can't seem to find anything except the actual report from the OP that removing/replacing checkpasswordnt solved the problem. Try researching in the archives: http://msgs.securepoint.com/qmail and search on checkpasswordnt -- I'm sure fifteen minutes there will find the answer for you (I'm not gonna search for fifteen minutes. ;) ) -- Greg White
Re: qmail-remote (cry wolf?)
I think we may have red-herringed on the OS thing -- if RH6.2, as deployed, had this sort of problem, I think we would have run across it before this, no? The inclusion of a FreeBSD-4.2-STABLE in the mix seems to nix a RH specific bug as well (althought it obviously does not rule it out entirely*). Perhaps we're overlooking some other, more subtle commonality between these four setups? Could at least two of the OP's please detail (for me, if not for the list, at least) the devices that sit between the NIC of the host in question and the Big Bad Internet? Routers, hubs, transparent firewalls, everything? *I highly recommend that the FreeBSD-4.2-STABLE user at least upgrade to 4.3R -- I'm not sure at which point in 4.2-STABLE you froze your local tree, but a whole bunch of fixes made it into 4.3, and it's been running great for me. -- Greg White
Re: Rejected Messages!!
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 09:32:43AM -0700, Greg White wrote: > Problem is, it's not his SMTP, it's list.cr.yp.to -- is it worth > notifying [EMAIL PROTECTED]? (I suspect that Dan already knows...) > This is not the first time that this domain has had this problem -- > postmaster has bounced for a long time.. Next time, Greg will read headers more carefully before talking out his butt. Sorry, all, obviously brain dead today. Bounces are from the host in question. Never had to black hole a host like this, but I will now GW
Re: Rejected Messages!!
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 08:24:52AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Kirti S. Bajwa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I am getting the following message: > > > > Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: > > > > test test (Mailbox or Conference is full.) > > > > after something is posted on qmail list. Are others getting the same > > message?? > > There are various people subscribed to the qmail mailing list or a sublist > thereof, and whose accounts reside on horribly broken mail servers. These > servers notice a problem like the above, and then generate a bounce -- > unfortunately, they violate RFC2821 in doing so, because they send the bounce > to the address in the From: header (i.e., you) instead of the envelope sender > (i.e. ezmlm on list.cr.yp.to). > > I suggest you do what I do: > > 1. After this happens the first time, send an email message to postmaster at > the offending domain. Explain the problem, and why they should fix it. Kirti, Charles, and the rest of the list -- I have already done this. postmaster bounces in this case. root may also bounce, but I sent one after adding him to badmailfrom. ;) > > 2. If they make good-faith efforts to resolve the problem, stop here. See above. > > 3. If "postmaster@domain" bounces, or the postmaster refuses to consider the > possibility that they are causing problems for the net at large, refuse SMTP > connections from that host. Problem is, it's not his SMTP, it's list.cr.yp.to -- is it worth notifying [EMAIL PROTECTED]? (I suspect that Dan already knows...) This is not the first time that this domain has had this problem -- postmaster has bounced for a long time... -- Greg White
Re: Not able to connect through outlook express
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 05:02:46PM -0700, Harry wrote: > hi all, > > I have qmail running on linux, i am able to receive and send emails through SQWEB >mail, but i am not able to get my emails through outlook express. I get error " there >was problem logging onto your mail server. Your passowrd was rejected. Protocol:POP3, >Server Response:-ERR Bad login, Port:110, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 0x800CC90, >Error Number: 0x800CCC92" > > Please help. > > Regards, > har You've very likely misconfigured your POP3 daemon. Please post either the line in inetd.conf or the 'run' script from supervise that you use to start your POP3 daemon, and maybe the list can help... -- Greg White
Re: qmail-remote (cry wolf?)
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:36:53PM +0200, Jörgen Persson wrote: > Sorry, but I'm not all comfortable with this... > > There's been 4 similar reports of qmail-remote not behaving properly to > this list during the last month. > > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/2001/05/msg00558.html > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/2001/05/msg01332.html > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/2001/06/msg00283.html > http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/2001/06/msg00426.html > > We still haven't been able to help any of them... Could Neil Kandalgaonkar, Eric Wang, Troy Settle, and Yevgeniy Miretskiy perhaps get together and compare notes? Do you all share an OS (I noticed that two posters appeared to mention RH6.2 -- is this the case for all? Is there another factor that you all share? (I do note that geography does not appear to be a factor)... This information could allow us to get somewhere. If needed, I'm willing to create a mini-list ala .qmail-something to address all four of the OPs > > This doesn't look like a coincidence to me since two of the reports > concerned the same recipient server (outblaze.com). Unfortunately it > seems related to network programming, which I know very little about. It's really tough to even know what to look at at this point... As soon as I saw that outblaze was in HK, I thought of geographical/routing issues, but none of the posters seems to share common geography. Hmmm... -- Greg White
Re: suddenly cannot receive email
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 04:52:41PM -0400, Chris Johnson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:40:31PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 6/7/01 12:55:37 PM Central Daylight Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > > > > From this information, and the information you've provided below, it > > > looks to me that you probably did something like this: > > > > > > echo "example.com:example.com" > /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains > > > > > What I actually did was: > > > > echo "www.garnette.com:alias-garnette" >/var/qmail/control/virtualdomains > > echo "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]" >~alias/.qmail-garnette-monte > > echo "garnette.com" >>/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts > > It sounds like you didn't send qmail-send a SIGHUP. You need to do that to get > it to reread virtualdomains. Just to be clear, for the sake of the archives, problem was that the 'main' domain for the box, chismtrail.com, was _already in virtualdomains_ when then above single redirection was issued. IMHO everyone should get in the habit of triple-checking single redirects, or change their mental default to append, a double redirect. You only need to get burned by this type of thing once to be paranoid for life. Speaking as a man with some very old scars of this variety, -- Greg White
Re: suddenly cannot receive email
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:41:11PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 6/7/01 1:30:31 PM Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > Make sure you check in /var/qmail/users/assign and make sure that is > > pointing to the correct place for your virtual domains and check that the > > uid/gid is correct. > > This is in /var/qmail/users/assign (and I am such a newbie that I have no > idea if that is right!): > > +cmarc.com-:cmarc.com:142:142:/var/vpopmail/domains/cmarc.com:-:: > +chismtrail.com-:chismtrail.com:142:142:/var/vpopmail/users:-:: Doesn't chismtrail.com need to go back in virtualdomains? echo "chismtrail.com:chismtrail.com" >> \ /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: suddenly cannot receive email
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 04:28:38PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 6/7/01 3:18:07 PM Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > Doesn't chismtrail.com need to go back in virtualdomains? > > > > echo "chismtrail.com:chismtrail.com" >> \ > > /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains > > I'll try that. I guess I need to restart qmail after the change? ISTR that a restart is required for virtualdomains, yes. I would have done it anyway, unless it's one that I know is read every time, like badmailfrom, etc. -- Greg White
Re: suddenly cannot receive email
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 11:00:35AM -0500, Virginia Chism wrote: > Until I get this mess fixed, please cc responses to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sorry, but it is the only way I can receive email right now. > > I seem to have done something to break my qmail. Yesterday afternoon, I > added a virtual user in /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains and put his > forwarding address in alias/.qmail-garnette-monte and added his domain to > rcpthosts then restarted. I did not notice at the time (because I left work > right after that), but I have not received ANY email since I did that. We > have a UNIX box running BSDi 4.0, QMail, Apache and FP. > > This morning I did a 'tail -f /var/log/maillog' and found tons of bounce > messages going out and the following messages about incoming mail: > > Jun 7 09:57:54 midnightsun qmail: 991925874.483380 starting delivery 434: > msg 2 > 77962 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Jun 7 09:57:54 midnightsun qmail: 991925874.490779 status: local 0/10 > remote 1/ > 20 > Jun 7 09:57:54 midnightsun qmail: 991925874.510962 delivery 434: failure: > Sorry > ._Although_I'm_listed_as_a_best-preference_MX_or_A_for_that_host,/it_isn't_i > n_my > _control/locals_file,_so_I_don't_treat_it_as_local._(#5.4.6)/ >From this information, and the information you've provided below, it looks to me that you probably did something like this: echo "example.com:example.com" > /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains I doubt that this is what you wanted... see below. > > I cehecked control/locals and found my main server, > 'midnightsun.chismtrail.com' so I added just plain 'chismtrail.com' in case > that might be the problem, even though it has been working like that just > fine in the past. It did not help. Now I am getting the following > messages: SNIP logs... > > There is a [EMAIL PROTECTED], in > > /usr/var/vpopmail/users > SNIP listing. >From this alone, it appears that chismtrail.com was a virtual domain, and should never have been in 'locals'. Add it back to virtualdomains, and put 'locals' back the way it was. Please let us know if I nailed it first try...;) -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: Problem with "me" and hostname
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 11:58:08AM -0300, Ari Arantes Filho wrote: > Hi, > > An user is trying to send an email and I see this in log: > > 2001-06-07 09:13:34.292253500 delivery 21640: deferral: > Connected_to_200.251.234.142_but_my_name_was_rejected./Remote_host_said:_501 > _dd002.domain.com,_ > why_do_you_say_you_are_mail.domain.com?/ > > The hostname is dd002.domain.com, but I don't say this name in "me", > every machine has a different name, so I can very easy change the qmail or > ftp or other service to other machine. > The hostname is not dd002.domain.com: gregw@frodo:~$ dnsqr a dd002.domain.com 1 dd002.domain.com: 34 bytes, 1+0+0+0 records, response, authoritative, nxdomain query: 1 dd002.domain.com Or perhaps this is the cause of your problem? (Yes, I am aware that you made this name up. If you must use made up names, at least clearly state this, and try to use 'example.com', 'example.net' or 'example.org'* in your munged data. In this particular instance, the real domain names would be extremely helpful, as this appears to be at least partially a question of public DNS records... Knowing the recieving server may also be helpful). *See RFC 2606 for more examples of acceptable bogus domain names. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2606.html -- Greg White
Re: Line Feed
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 10:49:58AM -0400, Marc Knoop wrote: > I have been requested to make a change to one of my qmail servers [see > below], though I am unsure of how to do this. Search the archives for 'fixcrio' -- it's intended for just such broken clients. > > Also, can anyone confirm that there is an RFC stating that a CR is a LF? I think that your word choices here are poor. No RFC that I am aware of states that a CR is a LF, however, RFC821/2821 defines a line as a string of characters terminated by CR and LF. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html HTH, -- Greg White
Re: backup server
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 11:33:02AM +1000, David Ryan wrote: > G'day all, > I have looked through the archives for info about setting up a > secondary mail server. I have followed the steps in the replies I found > but I am confused about one point. I have tcpserver running on the > secondary and it accepts mail coming into it. I can see the message in > the queue. What I don't get is how it sends that message to the primary > server once the primary comes back up? > > I figure it has to be qmail-send but am not sure how/where to start this > on the secondary. What have I missed? > You've missed the fact that if the primary has a better MX for the same domain name, the secondary will just send it -- providing that the domain name in question is not in locals or virtualdomains on the secondary. It's really that simple. That's what MX 'distance' is for. Of course, this also presumes that qmail-send is actually running. I don't think that's what you were asking? -- Greg White
Re: [OT] [useless thread] Re: ORBS, and RFC-ignorant blacklists
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 05:10:32PM +0200, Piotr Kasztelowicz wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > > You have shown us no proof. That you are unable to for external > > reasons is too bad, but I suggest that you do not claim the above > > until you can show us proof. > > I don't believe you. Why I should believe you, when A. Brown > has presented arrogant behavior to me? Please, please, everyone, let's not let this guy waste another week of the list members' time and energy! Doesn't anyone remember what happened when people tried rational arguments on this guy last time? AFAICT, he's simply a troll -- ignore him... -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: qmail ONLY selectively receiving mail from outside
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 03:11:36PM -0700, Ashe Coutts wrote: > I have set up a qmail system (RedHat linux 7.1, kernel 2.4.5, xinetd, > qmail 1.03 RPMs, U of Wash pop3 and imap, etc.). with a domain name of > sbcacademy.org (machine name mail.sbcacademy.org) with the following > configuration files: > > === start /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts > localhost > sbcacademy.org > mail.sbcacademy.org > === end /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts > > === start excerpt from /etc/hosts.allow > ### The qmail outgoing/retrieval stuff > ipop3d, imapd : ALL > > ### The qmail selective relaying stuff > tcp-env : xx.yy.zz.: setenv RELAYCLIENT > tcp-env : aa.bb.cc.dd : setenv RELAYCLIENT > tcp-env : localhost : setenv RELAYCLIENT > === end excerpt from /etc/hosts.allow > > The system "works" but will not receive mail from outside the select > few I > list in the /etc/hosts.allow file. > > I think I now understand what is going on but not why. > SNIP Don't set RELAYCLIENT for anyone but hosts you can explicitly trust. hosts.allow (if you insist on using inetd/xinetd) should be configured to _allow_ connections from anywhere, but only to set RELAYCLIENT for hosts you should relay for. Most definitely you do _not_ want to allow relay to hotmail. ;) To set this up under inetd/xinetd, consult the man pages for their respective programs. You might be better off to avoid inetd/xinetd altogether, and use tcpserver instead. Great instructions for qmail & tcpserver can be found in Life With Qmail (aka LWQ) at: http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ HTH, -- Greg White
Re: smtp on a specific IP
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 08:48:42AM -0700, Ross Davis - Data Anywhere wrote: > >> > >> here is my smtpd run from the supervise directory > >> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > >> env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ > >> tcpserver -v -p -u vpopmail -g vchkpw 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd > 2>&1 >> attribution Re-added by GW: Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: > >^ > >this is the address to bind to. > >http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/tcpserver.html > > > >cheers > >/k > > I must be missing something then. I see that I can tell it what IP to send > out on for all domains, but how do I tell mail.domain1.com to use IP > xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx and mail.domain2.com to use yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy > > That is the part I don't understand. > You misunderstand the tcpserver options. Karsten has supplied the correct answer above. When an address is supplied in place of the '0' option to tcpserver, that is the address that the child process binds to. You have no control whatsoever as to which IP is used to send outbound mail*. Simply run two qmail-smtpd's, one each bound to the two IPs in question. I think that to get what you seem to want, you may have to run a second copy of qmail -- if you simply run two different qmail-smtpds, both will use the same control files. Depends on why you want separate instances of qmail-smtpd. Examples: Where mail1.example.com is IP 192.168.0.1 and mail2.example.com is 172.16.0.1, with appropriate MX records: run file for mail1.example.com: #!/bin/sh QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild` NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild` MAXSMTPD=`/bin/cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming` exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver \ -vPHR -c "$MAXSMTPD" -x /var/qmail/cdb/smtp.cdb \ -u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 192.168.0.1 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 run file for mail2.example.com: #!/bin/sh QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild` NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild` MAXSMTPD=`/bin/cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming` exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver \ -vPHR -c "$MAXSMTPD" -x /var/qmail/cdb/smtp.cdb \ -u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 172.16.0.1 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 Note that your run file differs from mine, I simply mangled my own rather than hand-type one... If this is simply for traffic analysis purposes, this should do the trick... * Your operating system's routing table, or NAT method, or whatever, may provide you with a way to control which IP address is used to send outbound mail. IIRC, there are patches that force qmail to always send using a specified IP address. Stock qmail, in and of itself, provides no way to control the IP address used to send mail on, AFAIK. -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: SMTP doesn't respond
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:17:39AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Mark Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > from /var/log/qmail/smtpd/current > > > > @40003b1518da3494b75c tcpserver: status: 0/0 > > And that is indeed the log from qmail-smtpd (well, from its tcpserver > instance, anyway). Were there any error messages in this log? > Isn't that tcpserver status line an error of sorts? It seems to state that tcpserver is running zero out of a possible zero instances of the child process The setup looks very LWQish, so the relevant scripts are likely in /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd or somesuch. Please, Mark, post the contents of /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run. (or whichever 'run' file is actually appropriate -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: Backup mail server.
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:21:57AM +1000, Grant wrote: > I accidentally deleted an email and couldn't find it on the qmail > archives. The question is: > > What do I need to do for a backup mx record to store emails until the > first mx comes back. I put the domain in rcpthosts, but not in > locals, as I want it to store them until the first mx comes back. Was > there anything else I needed to do, because it is bouncing the > emails at the moment, giving a looping error? Sorry for the broad > question, but hopefully the person who answered this for me last time will > know. > Requirements for a proper secondary MX: 1. a primary MX, with a better preference (lower #) 2. a secondary MX, with a worse preference (higher #) 3. domain name in rcpthosts but not locals on the secondary. That's literally it. This should not cause any 'loop' issues -- can you please post the bounce, and the output of qmail-showctl from both servers, plus the results of either 'dig mx yourdomain.example' or 'dnsmx yourdomain.example', where yourdomain.example is the _real name_ of the domain in question. -- Greg White
Re: leave a copy of messages on server
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Roberto Marzialetti wrote: > Hi boys > > have got a problem... > well... if i active the option "leave a copy > of messages on server " on my email client, the messages > doesn't leave on my server :o(( > > have you got some solution ? > What did you expect to happen when you specified that mail should be left on the server? Both the client and the server are doing exactly what they are told. The options: 1. Realize that this is what you wanted. 2. Turn off this client option. -- Greg White
Re: Can't stop open relay
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:03:50AM -0400, John Kuhn wrote: > I've managed compile and setup Qmail along with courier thanks to the > fabulous docs and howto's on it.. but I'm running into a fairly serious > problem here.. I suspect that you haven't really read them too well... > > the problem > it's seems no matter what I put in /etc/tcp.smtp anyone can relay mail off > my server it will not deny anyone I've taken everything out besides the > localhost address and recompiled with tcprules > > 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > :allow > > compile it.. restart qmail.. and it's still an open relay.. people from any > network can bounce email off me.. the only way I can stop it is to add my > domain to /var/qmail/rcpthosts which will then bounce any email not sent to > my domain. Can you tell us why, precisely, populating rcpthosts is a problem? That is the way it is supposed to be configured. From 'man qmail-smtpd': rcpthosts Allowed RCPT domains. If rcpthosts is supplied, qmail-smtpd will reject any envelope recipient address with a domain not listed in rcpthosts. Exception: If the environment variable RELAYCLIENT is set, qmail-smtpd will ignore rcpthosts, and will append the value of RELAYCLIENT to each incoming recipient address. You _must_ populate rcpthosts. P.S. If the documents you have read do not state that populating rcpthosts is a requirement, please point them out to me, or the list, so that I/we can tell the whole world to stay away from them. -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: delivering problem
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:35:19PM -0400, Oscar Rodriguez Rodriguez wrote: (a bunch of stuff in HTML). Please don't post HTML to any technical list, anywhere. Your question is a FAQ, but does not seem to be explicitly covered in the FAQs. It is, however, mentioned in doc/SECURITY, and the manpage for dot-qmail. From 'man dot-qmail': qmail-local will temporarily defer delivery of any message to you if your home directory is sticky (or group-writable or other-writable, which should never happen). Don't allow any home directory to be writable by anyone but the owner. This is a good idea in any case. HTH, GW
Re: Login SMTP Errors
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:51:54AM -0400, Christopher Tarricone wrote: > I am can recieve errors displayed on the console from qmail-smtpd that look like > > qmail-smtpd: pid 29533 from 207.69.200.246 Invalid SENDER address: MAIL from: ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]@pop.mindspring.com>, RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I would like to log all of that information to a file. > This is what I put in my qmail startup script. But the information is still printed >to the console. Is there way to make qmail-smtpd write to a log file? > > > env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ > tcpserver -H -R -c100 -u503 -g501 0 smtp \ > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2> $1 > /var/log/qmail/smtpd.log > Don't know what that '$1' is supposed to be for, and even if it was correct, '2>&1' before '>/file' puts STDERR on your tty*. Try: env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ tcpserver -H -R -c100 -u503 -g501 0 smtp \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd >/var/log/qmail/smtpd.log 2>&1 This puts STDOUT and STDERR into /var/log/qmail/smtpd.log. I would really recommend looking into using multilog instead. http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ has some great stuff on how to set up qmail+tcpserver+daemontools/multilog. * I know that seems counter-intuitive, it did to me as well starting out. Just be aware that it processes the arguments in order. HTH, -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: alias to my self
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 09:04:46AM +0300, Martín Marqués wrote: > In my times with sendmail I used to have an acount that had a .forward like > this in my $HOME dir at domain1: > > # CUT HERE ### > martin@domain1 > martin@domain2 > # CUT HERE ### > > So all my mail staid on my acount on domain1, but I had a copy in domain2. > > Now, how do I do this with qmail, because when I put a .qmail on my home with > the 2 addresses (with the &), it delivers it to martin@domain2, > Local delivery, by the time it gets to your .qmail file, should be to a Maildir or a mbox-type mailbox. Check your default delivery method (it is specified somehow on the command line for starting qmail-send), and try _something like_ the following: .qmail: ./Maildir/ &martin@domain2 HTH, -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: remote smtp problem
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 05:21:48PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > When ever a remote client tries to send mail thru my qmail box, qmail > appends a question mark to the end of the domain i.e > Sorry, I couldn't find any host named rbi.co.uk?. (#5.1.2) Doesn't setting 'RELAYCLIENT="?"' do that? Check your tcp rules file... > > It does this before qmail performs nslookup and so qmail cannot find > anyname.com? because it obviously doesnt exist. qmail doesn't (thank goodness) 'perform' any 'nslookup'. qmail does use DNS to lookup MX and/or A records... > This only occurs when remote agents use the box. Sending mail locally works > beautifully. I suspect you'll find the above to be the cause of the problem. > SNIP GW
Re: qmail undeliverables - return to sender?
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 10:45:45AM -0500, Joy Hundley wrote: > Hi - I am new to this mailing list and to qmail, so if my question is worded > incorrectly - please be patient with me. > > I want to have e-mails with an incorrect recipient name/address to be > returned to the sender immediately -- can this be done? If so, how? I > would prefer not to alter the queuelifetime, as a server down is a different > problem altogether than an incorrect address. This should already be done, in both possible cases. Case 1: Sender relaying from your server*. qmail delivers it, the remote server bounces it with 5.1.1. (IIRC) No such user, qmail delivers the bounce. Takes place very quickly. * Or sending directly from your server, or whatever. Case 2: Message to your server, with invalid local recipient. qmail accepts the message, dumps it in the queue, and attempts delivery. Delivery fails with (again IIRC) 5.1.1., no such user. qmail delivers bounce to sending SMTP server. Sending SMTP server delivers bounce. Takes place very quickly. Which case are you perceiving a problem with? GW
Re: assign file being overwritten regularly
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 06:42:20PM -0400, Carl J. Danowski wrote: > Does anyone know why the 'assign' file in /etc/qmail/users would continually be >overwritten? > > I edit it and run qmail-newu and everything works great... > > then, at some point later, assign is re-written and the addresses don't work anymore. qmail+patches RPM? Search the following page for 'cron': http://untroubled.org/qmail+patches/ That ought to get you startedIf you didn't install from the above RPM, let me know -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: convert user
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:33:41AM +0700, Yanurul Anwar wrote: > hi all > > recently i convert mail server into qmail. we used a new comp and instaled it. i'm >trying to convert user from /etc/passwd from the old server (about 1500 user) into >qmail user in the new server (including the password). > is there any easy way to do this? rather than typing it one by one? > any manual? man qmail-pw2u. It's that easy. > HTH, -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: rcpthosts default allow all ?
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 08:42:10AM -0700, D . Cook wrote: > Hi all, > > I can't find the syntax for /var/qmail/control in the manual. Please > bear with me. As said, try 'man qmail-control'. > > What's the syntax for allowing all by default in rcpthosts and only > selected hosts are banned? Something like > allow all > reject *.online-sex.com Are you really sure this is what you want to do? Setting up a domain in rcpthosts means 'I want to recieve mail _for_ this domain', not 'I want to recieve mail _from_ this domain'. If one could actually set up rcpthosts the way you are asking, you would be placed in ORBS and RSS faster than you could say 'open relay'. This is a Very Bad Idea(tm). If you need assistance with selective relay, start here: http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/servers.html#authorized-relay You can 'ban' the sites you want by IP address using ':deny' in place of ':allow' in tcprules. You can ban specific envelope senders with /var/qmail/control/badmailfrom. There are also some spamcontrol patches, see: http://www.qmail.org/qmail/top.html#spam > > Thanks. > NP. I noticed the first reply to your message mentioned the spamcontrol patches, but did not point out the implied error in your thinking. Please feel free to flame away if I misunderstood your question, but it does imply a misunderstanding of the nature of 'rcpthosts' and selective relay. HTH, -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: Can MX record be CNAME?
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 12:53:44PM -0400, Kris von Mach wrote: > At 08:34 AM 5/3/2001 -0600, you wrote: > > Unfortunately I do not control my PTR records so I have to do the dns name > > change with CNAME. > > > > My questions are: > > > > Can MX record point to a CNAME? > CC --> No, never. > > Charles, > > Why can't it be a CNAME? Is there a reason for this? I am currently using it > as a CNAME and it's been working fine for a year or so... If there is a good > reason for it, I sure would like to know so I can make changes. It's not actually a _violation_, as such, but RFC1034 (one of the DNS specification RFCs) says that: "If a CNAME RR is present at a node, no other data should be present; this ensures that the data for a canonical name and its aliases cannot be different. This rule also insures that a cached CNAME can be used without checking with an authoritative server for other RR types." This means that pointing MX, NS, and SOA (at least) at a CNAME is not recommended. Personally, I hate CNAME, and I almost never use it. I can think of only one specialized use where CNAME comes in handy (third-party hosting). Nearly everything else can be done more efficiently with multiple A records IMHO. P.S. If someone has a reference to an RFC which says 'must not' rather than 'should not', I'll be happy to use it from now on. :)
Re: SPAM Patches recomendations.
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 10:30:52AM -0500, q question wrote: SNIP > > > 2) How is it so clear that the machine didn't relay mail? > > > >-these types of questions come up every week on this mailing list > >-qmail has _never_ relayed mail unless the administrator specifically > >configures it to do so. > > > I know the qmail documentation says that the default for qmail is not to > relay. I need to see proof, not just be told to assume that the > documentation is correct. As I said above, I'll need time to reflect on > this. I appreciate that someone else suggested asking ORBS to do a relay > test. However, that doesn't necessarily reassure me that the Prodygy > Solutions relay test results should be ignored. I don't know anything > specific about the Prodygy relay test "failures" but I don't just ignore > something because someone else said to. 'Proof'? If the relay test in question was acceptable, the OP would already have proof. A proper relay test involves the _actual receipt of relayed mail_. Try your own relay test, if you have addresses at multiple domains available, along the exact same lines as the 'tests' performed by prodigysolutions[1]. If you don't have another address available, use a friend's email account. If you manage to relay third-party mail through a qmail server with rcpthosts populated only with domains that you should actually deliver for (present in locals or virtualdomains[2]), and a properly set RELAYCLIENT environment variable, I will eat a bug on camera, and give you links to watch it on the web. :) [1] I didn't recall seeing recent results for the 'user@destination@relay' test, so I did them myself. Delivery attempt is to local user 'user@destination', which is unlikely to exist and in any case is not a relay. The '%' and '!' garbage comes up at least once a month, and is known _not_ to be a problem. Check that for yourself as well, if you like. [2] Or, of course, a domain that you're an MX for, but not the best-preference MX. > > I do appreciate your reply and I realize full well that I may end up > deciding to ignore the Prodygy relay test failures someday myself. Avoid the rush! Start ignoring them today! 'Tests' which assume that they know better than the MTA they are testing how it will deliver mail are inherently broken. 'Tests' which do not actually attempt to deliver mail anywhere, and do not only count the _actual receipt of mail_ as a successful relay (failed test) are inherently broken. As far as I am concerned, any 'test' that does not actually attempt delivery should immediately be ignored. SNIP GW
Re: incorrect_user@correct_domain accepted
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:52:54PM -0700, Ketan Bajaj wrote: > i think i haven't been clear enough in explaining the problem... > again, > A (local smtp server)B (remote smtp server) > > B is at domain schwab.com, about which i do not know anything, whether it > has qmail, sendmail, exchange or anything else. > > 1. when A is setup as qmail, and remote address is incorrect@B there is no > bounce from B and the message is accepted at B. I see this at the qmail logs > on A. In sending them a test message, I too see the remote host accept the message, but it promptly bounces it with '550 User Unknown'. Your qmail server is likely configured incorrectly -- you should be seeing the bounces. Please send a message, _headers and all_, that you sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from your qmail server... GW
Re: qmail could not send to another host
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 09:51:22AM +, Marc Knoop wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 08:03:10AM +0700, Dodol wrote: SNIP > > > > Apr 18 13:13:41 web1 qmail: 987574421.004567 starting delivery 3: msg 48238 to r > > emote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > dnsq on both their name servers times out for me when querying for their MX records. > > > -- > ../mk This is a routing issue of some sort -- I can reach their nameservers from some networks, and not from others. I suspect that since yahoo.com is also failing (and quite quickly IIRC), that this is an unrelated issue. :) -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: problem about move to qmail for virtual domain.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:26:21PM +0900, Michael Cheung wrote: > Hi: > I move to qmail from sendmail for a virtual domain be added. > problem is: > 1. can't deliver to user@domain. > 2. can't use qmail-popup to recieve mail. > > me: > develop I'm not familiar with that TLD -- is this some sort of alternative TLD? See below... > > locals: > localhost > develop > > virtual: > sales Nor am I familiar with the 'sales' TLD -- where do these come from? Unless the internet at large is able to reach your server by looking for an MX record [1] that matches _exactly_ what's in these control files, you'll be getting no mail whatsoever... Can people really reach 'joeuser@sales' and 'joeuser@develop' ? [1] or an A record, of course. > > no rcphost file. That's 'rcpthosts', I presume. You're not likely to be able to recieve any mail whatsoever without something in rcpthosts. Virtual domains go in rcpthosts and virtualdomains, system-account domains go in rcpthosts and locals. Nothing whatsoever goes in virtualdomains or locals _without_ going in rcpthosts. > > Can I still use mailbox after I add a virtual domain? > I have install vmailmgr and create a domain, it use maildir now. This is a virtual domain -- why does VSM matter at all? The users have no shell accounts -- VSM is even more pointless than usual. :) vmailmgr's checkvpw may only support maildir in any case -- check the man pages for vmailmgr. SNIP Afraid that's all I can help you with for now. -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: 553 Too many Received key words in the mail
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 09:08:43AM +0800, flint wrote: > Hi everybody > >I have installed a new mail machine. Now I find a problem,that when I send to > a mailbox which has been set Forward,the mailbox that is forward to can't receive >mail. > And as postmast,will receive a "Delivery Status Notification" mail,it said: > > This message could not be delivered to the following recipients: > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 202.104.32.232 failed after I sent the message. > Remote host said: 553 Too many Received key words in the mail, should less than 5 > > Reporting-MTA: dns; bouncemessage.net The problem seems pretty obvious - the recieving MTA doesn't like the fact that five MTAs have touched it before it gets there. :) Is it just me, or is five too low for many cases?? This seems like a weak method of loop protection, and it seems to me that it will bounce legitimate mail too often... SNIP
Re: multiple qmail installations vs. big concurrency patch
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 05:31:52PM -0700, Brett wrote: > Setting up /var/qmail1, /var/qmail2, etc. each with a concurrency of, say, > 100, as opposed to one install of qmail with the big concurrency remote > patch with concurrency set to 500. This might, IMHO, have some advantages, especially if /var/qmail1 and /var/qmail2 are different spindles. However, see below. > > Apparently you have to adjust the linux kernel to get your concurrency up to > 500 so wouldn't it be easier to just have multiple qmail installs? Is there > an overall limit of concurrent connections that's unrelated to whether > you're running one or several qmail installs? Thanks. Yes, the kernel is the limit -- maximum running processes, maximum open file descriptors, etc. The kernel limits that you'd likely run into would be the system-wide ones, not just per-process ones. I don't believe that kernel recompiles are required anymore, though -- check /proc/sys/fs/file-max and /proc/sys/fs/inode-max tunables, and 'man bash' for ulimit options -- kernel options for open file descriptors do not seem to be hard-coded anymore (since 2.2.12 IIRC). > > -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: Doh! does qmail still have my messages?
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:57:52AM -0600, Jerry Lynde wrote: > Howdy folks, > > Here's the deal > > I installed vpopmail about halfway yesterday, just enough to break mail > delivery. > vpopmail took over diligence.com as a virtual domain with no users, and > started bouncing > messages... Does anyone know a way to get those bounced messages back here? Nope. They bounced. The original senders are (or should be[1]) aware that their messages did not get through, and will resend them (or call the person they emailed, and complain, ;) ). > I hope they will just automagically find their way back here...but I have a > suspicion that > this hope is in vain. [SNIP] See above -- this hope is in vain, but perhaps not as bad as you think. > > Jer > The Humble Sysdamin > [1] That is, if their sending SMTP server is not a broken piece of junk that refuses bounces, or some other such silliness. -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
