Re: Outlook with Dovecot
On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 18:22, Elise wrote: > Op 12-12-20 om 17:20 schreef Elise: > > > dovecot-2.3.11.3_1 > > Providing the correct email address and password. > > I think the origin of this issue is caused by Outlook itself. > Setting up a new account in Outlook, one has to provide an email address > instead of a user name. With using BSD usermanager, adding a user named > 'i...@mydomain.com' is converted automatically to user 'ilse'. > > I am not expecting that Microsoft will solve this issue on short term > though. Will stick with Thunderbird (as I already planned) but how nice > it would be to make Outlook my backup mail client with > IMAP/Dovecot/Postfix... > > Best, E. > Elise, your problem is simple. And yes, I am a *BSD diehard for donkey years. You want to setup a system that handles virtual users. The BSD usermanager creates system accounts (/etc/passwd) and those cannot be made to be user@domain by default, although Dovecot authenticating system users and concatenating the domain is possible. So what you need to focus on is whether you want to authenticate system users or virtual users. Read Postfix docs about this. For Dovecot, it is easy. Just look at the passdb and userdb configs and Dovecot will do whatever you decide from the above choices. It can actually do both - and many! I have a system where dovecot authenticates system accounts and vurtual accounts (MySQL and SambaAD) . I am an Exim user though. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 "Oh, the cruft.", grep ^[^#] :-)
Re: Disallow acces via imap, but keep lmtp running
> On 16/12/2020 09:02 Ionel Spanachi {HfG}
> wrote:
>
>
> On 16.12.20 00:05, Julian Kippels wrote:
> > I thought about that, but that would also kill their access to wifi and
> > other services, because it all comes from the same LDAP.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > Am Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:37:58 +0100
> > schrieb Jos :
> >
> >> You could change their password temporily and do the migration?
> >>
> >> — Verstuurd via een mobiele telefoon
> >>
> >>> Op 15 dec. 2020 om 23:22 heeft Julian Kippels het
> >>> volgende geschreven:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> what is the best way to temporarily disable access to a mailbox via
> >>> imap, but keep it possible to deliver to the mailbox via lmtp?
> >>> I want to migrate some mailboxes around and would like to ensure
> >>> that the users cannot access their mail while doing so.
> >>> I would like to keep the users from logging in entirely rather than
> >>> setting ACLs.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks in advance
> >>> Julian
>
> Temporarily modify ldap filters (presumably in
> /etc/dovecot/dovecot-ldap.conf.ext) in such a way, that it never matches?
That would break LMTP delivery...
You could just do
protocols = lmtp
in your config file to temporarily disable other protocols. make sure you don't
have setting later on that will revert this, so verify with `doveconf
protocols` after dovecot restart.
Aki
Re: Disallow acces via imap, but keep lmtp running
On 16.12.20 00:05, Julian Kippels wrote: I thought about that, but that would also kill their access to wifi and other services, because it all comes from the same LDAP. Julian Am Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:37:58 +0100 schrieb Jos : You could change their password temporily and do the migration? — Verstuurd via een mobiele telefoon Op 15 dec. 2020 om 23:22 heeft Julian Kippels het volgende geschreven: Hi all, what is the best way to temporarily disable access to a mailbox via imap, but keep it possible to deliver to the mailbox via lmtp? I want to migrate some mailboxes around and would like to ensure that the users cannot access their mail while doing so. I would like to keep the users from logging in entirely rather than setting ACLs. Thanks in advance Julian Temporarily modify ldap filters (presumably in /etc/dovecot/dovecot-ldap.conf.ext) in such a way, that it never matches? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Outlook with Dovecot
Elise, 13.12.20: I think the origin of this issue is caused by Outlook itself. Setting up a new account in Outlook, one has to provide an email address instead of a user name. With using BSD usermanager, adding a user named 'i...@mydomain.com' is converted automatically to user 'ilse'. I am not expecting that Microsoft will solve this issue on short term though. Good old "Control Panel" -> "Mail" offers some more detailed configuration options. Just use this way to set up mail accounts instead of doing it with Outlook. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind Regards Christian Schmidt -- Signature not available. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Disallow acces via imap, but keep lmtp running
On 16/12/2020 06.16, Julian Kippels wrote: > what is the best way to temporarily disable access to a mailbox via > imap, but keep it possible to deliver to the mailbox via lmtp? Block IMAP ports on the firewall? P.
Re: Disallow acces via imap, but keep lmtp running
On 16/12/20 6:16 am, Julian Kippels wrote: Hi all, what is the best way to temporarily disable access to a mailbox via imap, but keep it possible to deliver to the mailbox via lmtp? I want to migrate some mailboxes around and would like to ensure that the users cannot access their mail while doing so. I would like to keep the users from logging in entirely rather than setting ACLs. Thanks in advance Julian Comment out the sections in dovecot.conf that configure the imap service but leave the lmtp service running. Alternatively set an iptables rule to block the imap and imaps ports. -- Jeremy OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Disallow acces via imap, but keep lmtp running
I thought about that, but that would also kill their access to wifi and other services, because it all comes from the same LDAP. Julian Am Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:37:58 +0100 schrieb Jos : > You could change their password temporily and do the migration? > > — Verstuurd via een mobiele telefoon > > > Op 15 dec. 2020 om 23:22 heeft Julian Kippels het > > volgende geschreven: > > > > Hi all, > > > > what is the best way to temporarily disable access to a mailbox via > > imap, but keep it possible to deliver to the mailbox via lmtp? > > I want to migrate some mailboxes around and would like to ensure > > that the users cannot access their mail while doing so. > > I would like to keep the users from logging in entirely rather than > > setting ACLs. > > > > Thanks in advance > > Julian
Disallow acces via imap, but keep lmtp running
Hi all, what is the best way to temporarily disable access to a mailbox via imap, but keep it possible to deliver to the mailbox via lmtp? I want to migrate some mailboxes around and would like to ensure that the users cannot access their mail while doing so. I would like to keep the users from logging in entirely rather than setting ACLs. Thanks in advance Julian
Re: Dovecot Director scaling / performance
From my short experience, we run 2 directors and 3 dovecot servers behind them, with approx. 800 concurent users/dovecot server without any problems. During peak times, they go as high as 2000-2200 users/dovecot server, again without any problems. These 2 directors are behind a haproxy, so i'd say each director handles at approx. 1200-3500 concurent connections without problems. You may face problems with limitations on your OS if you plan to serve such an amount of users though. It depends on the OS you use. i hope this helps, John On 15/12/2020 13:25, t...@linux-daus.de wrote: Hi, currently i'm going to evaluate the Dovecot Director. Are there someone with experience how the Dovecot Director does scale? The last current information i could find was a post on this mailing list from 2012: 4 Directors are well known, >75 are too much. Are there any more up to date experience regarding how many user (current and new/s) a single Dovecot Director/proxy node could handle and how many director nodes in a ring are known to work (well)? Best regards, Tim
Dovecot Director scaling / performance
Hi, currently i'm going to evaluate the Dovecot Director. Are there someone with experience how the Dovecot Director does scale? The last current information i could find was a post on this mailing list from 2012: 4 Directors are well known, >75 are too much. Are there any more up to date experience regarding how many user (current and new/s) a single Dovecot Director/proxy node could handle and how many director nodes in a ring are known to work (well)? Best regards, Tim
