Re: SMTP proxies for Windows
"Sam" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Okee-dokee. Configure his mail client to connect to 127.0.0.1 port 25, Actually, a really good proxy would be able to stick that info right into the MUA's config file. For popular ones that's probably doable as such, and in any case it underscores that applications should have programmatic interfaces so that they can be driven by other programs when necessary.
Re: max concurrency remote
On Tue, Mar 02, 1999 at 05:43:52PM -0800, Tracy R Reed wrote: AFAIK, it's something about the concurrency variable being 8 bits long, and 8 bits allow 256 possible values (from 0-255). Could someone refresh my memory why the maximum value for concurrencyremote is 255? I searched the archives and found where people said this but I didn't find out why the limit is 255. No matter what I do I can't squeeze out more than 254 concurrent qmail-remote's. Running multiple qmail queues will get me by for now, I'm just curious as to what limits it. -- See complete headers for address, homepage and phone numbers
Re: SMTP proxies for Windows
Roman V Isaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 03/03, D. J. Bernstein wrote: Right. MUAs can use 127.0.0.1:25 (and 127.0.0.1:110) by default. An ISP can supply its favorite proxy program, including configuration, directly to the users. Some benefits: * Users won't have to type in server addresses. * ISPs won't have to explain how to configure different MUAs. * MUAs won't have to deal with different ISP authentication systems. Today's proxies could provide authenticated mail submission for roaming users. Tomorrow's proxies could support backup servers, faster message injection, and maybe even strong encryption. Yeah, the only question is: WHO will write such proxy? ;-) We did, for IMAP and POP. Was easier to write a proxy that spoke Kerberos than it was to try to get vendors to support Kerberos. SMTP is even simpler than those. (*Much* simpler than IMAP, which is a royal pain of a protocol to write software for.) BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, but I never saw any good SMTP authentication schemes -- all of them send the password in clear :( ssh tunneling should work fairly well. Also, there's no particular reason why one couldn't wrap SMTP with a SASL negotiation, and have the proxy and the server take care of that and then just expose regular SMTP to the client. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
Re: SMTP proxies for Windows
"Roman V. Isaev" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | Yeah, the only question is: WHO will write such proxy? ;-) There was a recent USENIX paper on such a thing.
Re: SMTP proxies for Windows
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Roman V. Isaev wrote: BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, but I never saw any good SMTP authentication schemes -- all of them send the password in clear :( Also, it's quite possible that users will send their passwords to wrong servers... this means passwords must be mangled with MD5 or something like that... wouldn't yu kow it the day after I delete the internet-draft off my had disk someone could make use of it. hopefully there;s an internet draft something like *overall-srap-* which is a draft for a simple roaming acess protocol written by someone at the ISP I use. they have windows and perl agents that run locally. and is intended to authneitcate systems rather than users. (ie this laptop has a valid demon account) otoh some ISPS, like freeserve.co.uk, automatically re-direct SMTP to their relays regardless of the actions of the client neatly avoiding the problems of reconfiguring the SMTP destination between the campus network and the ISP when mobile. (I don't bother to offer a dial-in service at work. pay-for ISPs will provide it for $100/user/year and free ones for nothing (they get 17% of the call charges whilst users are connected) ) The problems of the world can't be solved by fixing the working C. Daniluk
Off topic: Open relay
Hi, sorry for the off-topic: Where do I report open relay complaint (other that the postmaster at the site)? Thanks -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
Re: Off topic: Open relay
- "Petr Novotny" [EMAIL PROTECTED]: | sorry for the off-topic: Where do I report open relay complaint | (other that the postmaster at the site)? Thanks Read URL:http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ and links therein. - Harald
Re: SMTP proxies for Windows
On 03/02, Russ Allbery wrote: Today's proxies could provide authenticated mail submission for roaming users. Tomorrow's proxies could support backup servers, faster message injection, and maybe even strong encryption. Yeah, the only question is: WHO will write such proxy? ;-) We did, for IMAP and POP. Was easier to write a proxy that spoke Kerberos than it was to try to get vendors to support Kerberos. SMTP is even simpler than those. (*Much* simpler than IMAP, which is a royal pain of a protocol to write software for.) Is your proxy in public domain, GPL or whatever? :-) BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, but I never saw any good SMTP authentication schemes -- all of them send the password in clear :( ssh tunneling should work fairly well. Also, there's no particular reason why one couldn't wrap SMTP with a SASL negotiation, and have the proxy and the server take care of that and then just expose regular SMTP to the client. RFC was written in 1997, and now 1999. We still do not have common SMTP authentication. Yes, everything above CAN be done, but it's too complicated for an average programmer, and there are a lot of assinine problems with strong encryption like U.S. export troubles, prohibited strong cryptography in Russia, etc, etc. What we really need is: 1. Simple SASL implementation in public domain, available to everyone without any restriction (quite probably it was done alredy), 2. Easy to use proxy for end-users, speakin this particular SASL, and 3. Someone who will patch every popular MTA and bugger MTA authors to include these in the standard distribution. You know, 99.9% of mailers work in their default configuration... This problem can be solved only with complex actions -- both programming and lobbying particular implementation (I don't like the idea of free-for-all authentication methods -- Micro@#*^$ will come up with their own for sure). And lobbying is much more important... -- Roman V. Isaev http://www.gunlab.com.ru Moscow, Russia
Re: SMTP proxies for Windows
Roman V Isaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 03/02, Russ Allbery wrote: We did, for IMAP and POP. Was easier to write a proxy that spoke Kerberos than it was to try to get vendors to support Kerberos. SMTP is even simpler than those. (*Much* simpler than IMAP, which is a royal pain of a protocol to write software for.) Is your proxy in public domain, GPL or whatever? :-) Good question. Answer is, I don't know. I'll try to find that out. It was a project that various people here were working on in conjuction with other projects, one of which I think we're not releasing for export reasons and such not, and the other of which was in cooperation with a particular vendor. So the licensing is probably confused. The part I personally did was a proof of concept server-side proxy implementation (see below) that were I to turn into an actual release I'd probably clean up and rework a good bit anyway. RFC was written in 1997, and now 1999. We still do not have common SMTP authentication. Yes, everything above CAN be done, but it's too complicated for an average programmer, and there are a lot of assinine problems with strong encryption like U.S. export troubles, prohibited strong cryptography in Russia, etc, etc. What we really need is: SASL's actually pretty straightforward. I wrote an IMAP Kerberos 4 proxy that uses SASL in about two days from blank screen to fully debugged and working (if not maximally feature-full or robust) code, and most of that time was spent fighting with the IMAP protocol, not with the SASL pieces. 1. Simple SASL implementation in public domain, available to everyone without any restriction (quite probably it was done alredy), I rolled my own, but I wouldn't recommend that anyone else does this. Best starting point is probably heading to URL:ftp://ftp.andrew.cmu.edu/pub/cyrus-mail/ and grabbing the latest version of cyrus-sasl. 2. Easy to use proxy for end-users, speakin this particular SASL, and This part is the part that takes some time, since they need dialog boxes to put their password, auth credentials, and what have you in somewhere. And if they're using Kerberos, some way of interacting with whatever else on the system is obtaining Kerberos credentials. 3. Someone who will patch every popular MTA and bugger MTA authors to include these in the standard distribution. You don't need to do that, actually. Proxy both ends. Run a daemon on the Unix side that speaks SASL to a client and runs on a different port. You don't have to run the thing on port 25, since you control the client end as well with the client proxy. The server proxy and the client proxy speak authentication to each other and then turn into passthroughs for the pieces that want to talk SMTP on both ends. This is what I did to Kerberize an IMAP server that I couldn't munge directly. And that way on the SMTP end all that remains is to allow unlimited relaying from localhost, since the proxied incoming connection will appear to be from there. The Unix-side server proxy is seriously only a day or two of work, if someone just sits down and writes it straight through. Maybe less, with the SASL library from Cyrus. The PC/Mac client end is harder, since you have to actually worry about a user interface and whatnot. But it's still pretty straightforward. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
Re: qmail strangeness
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Bill Parker wrote: I am running qmail v1.03, but when I try to telnet to my SMTP port (25) it takes upwards of 60 seconds or more to respond. Does anyone have an idea as to what could be wrong? I am using tcpserver to control qmail's control It's probably your nameserver that cant't resolve a hostname for some reason. After about 60 secounds you get a timeout and the smtpd is happy. Check your nameserver configuration or read the tcpserver manpages in order to disable the lookups. -Eike
Re: Off topic: Open relay
Petr Novotny writes: sorry for the off-topic: Where do I report open relay complaint (other that the postmaster at the site)? Thanks If they're abusing you, and the postmaster is unresponsive over a period of time, and attempts to contact them offline (e.g. a phone call) have no effect, report them (along with the offending spam and a report of the contacts) to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://crynwr.com/~nelson Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
Re: max concurrency remote
At 08:55 AM 3/3/99 +0100, Balazs Nagy wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Anand Buddhdev wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 1999 at 05:43:52PM -0800, Tracy R Reed wrote:
AFAIK, it's something about the concurrency variable being 8 bits long, and
8 bits allow 256 possible values (from 0-255).
there's in auto_spawn.c:
int auto_spawn = 255;
AFAIK int isn't 8 bits long. BTW I had asked it a day or two before.
True.
However I think qmail-send get concurrency[remote|local] back from
qmail-[r|l]spawn as a char that is then cast into an int.
char is 8 bit long.
Here is the code:
r = read(chanfdin[c],ch,1);
while ((r == -1) (errno == error_intr));
if (r 1)
{ log1("alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire?\n");
_exit(111)
; }
u = (unsigned int) (unsigned char) ch;
if (concurrency[c] u) concurrency[c] = u;
numjobs += concurrency[c];
David.
500.000+ users mailserver
Hello. We are in the planing stage of a 500.000+ users mailserver (pop smtp only, no shell's or anything). During our brainstorm we've came to few questions: We assume that every account will run on the same UID (to break 65k uid's limit). a) how can we arrange an universal group-quota in this kind of system? we don't want to use unix groups because it would limit us to 65k groups and we don't want it. And keep in mind that we need a FAST solutions as quotas has to be checked/changed on every delivery/download. b) what is the fastes database system that we can use for authentication/user info (like maildir location etc.). It doesn't have to be a relational one, only thing that is important is SPEED. If this database will be used also for quota storage then also modification/addition speed is important. Please try to think a bit about it and share your findings. This may help setting up quite a nice server (it could be used as an example of "enterprise scale qmail setup" to convince your boss' all around :)) ). If someone implements/implemented this kind of server then please let me know, i would like to discuss about it. Krzysiek
Re: Second attempt - rewriting outgoing mail addresses
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Martin Green wrote: Hi all, A week or two ago, I posted a message asking if it was possible to rewrite outgoing mail. The problem is that I belong to two organisations, with exclusive sets of recipients for each organisation. I would like to ensure that an outgoing message always has the correct from address, based on which set the recipient belongs to. Assuming that you're on unix and have access to perl and are using a mail client which can be told which program to run to inject mail, you could make my tms (Tagged Message Sender) do this. It was intended to automatically generate tagged envelope addresses like on this message, but you could make some minor changes to cause it to generate completely different addresses instead. See http://silverlock.dgim.crc.ca/~terskine/qmail/tms In other words If I mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] - the message should be from [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] - the message should be from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note that this should work for replies to - if fred mails me, and I reply, it must correctly drop in my 'fruitconsultants' ID. I am quite happy to maintain a mapping of recipient domains and the corresponding from addresses in an ascii file.. -- My last message generated a couple of replies, both stating a) that this is an MUA problem b) I should look at Mutt and c) why on earth am I using Outlook... Well: a. I don't believe it's an MUA problem, because the mapping as described applies to my assistant as much as myself, and maybe to other employees. Moreover, I want the process automated. Using a client that relies on my remembering to switch identity before accessing messages is far too error-prone. b. I can't seem to find Mutt on the PC, and I don't want a character-mode client thanks. c. Even if outlook breaks every RFC in the book, it still has a semi-decent integrated contacts database, which I particularly appreciate. -- So - how do I modify the Qmail suite to allow me to examine the To address of an outgoing message and fixup the reply address?? Any suggestions? Thanks Martin Green -- "Life is much too important to be taken seriously." Thomas Erskine[EMAIL PROTECTED](613) 998-2836
Re: 500.000+ users mailserver
On Wed, 03 Mar 1999 17:44:47 +0100, Krzysztof Dabrowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: K Hello. We are in the planing stage of a 500.000+ users mailserver (pop K smtp only, no shell's or anything). During our brainstorm we've came K to few questions: K We assume that every account will run on the same UID (to break 65k K uid's limit). If you're looking to handle this many mail accounts, I'd strongly recommend you use multiple servers. PCs aren't that expensive, especially since you don't need super-fast CPUs; you do need multiple fast drives and a decent network connection. If you had a "server farm" with (say) 10 PCs, you don't have to worry about UID limits, even with versions of Unix that don't support 32-bit UIDs. You also don't have to worry about putting all of your users out of business if one server goes down, and chores like backups become much easier. I don't know much about proxies; is there some nifty way for a user to connect to a large mail-server, have the server tell the user's machine "your mail is actually on server03", and then redirect the POP/SMTP requests to the correct PC without having all of the resulting traffic pass through one machine? This would allow you to load-balance by moving mail accounts around without inconveniencing the user. -- Karl Vogel ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 500.000+ users mailserver
At 2:13 pm -0500 3/3/99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know much about proxies; is there some nifty way for a user to connect to a large mail-server, have the server tell the user's machine "your mail is actually on server03", and then redirect the POP/SMTP requests to the correct PC without having all of the resulting traffic pass through one machine? This would allow you to load-balance by moving mail accounts around without inconveniencing the user. surely, if your user accounts are dealt with by NIS, and their home directories mounted via NFS, then it doesn't matter which of the cluster they connect to? Or is there a 32K+ limit on NIS user ids as well? Peter. -- peter at gradwell dot com; online @ http://www.gradwell.com/ "To look back all the time is boring. Excitement lies in tomorrow"
rblsmtp
hey all, i figure this is related to qmail, cuz i use it with qmail. anyway i looked thru the rblsmtp page and the rblsmtp manpage, but i didn't see anything reguarding usage of -r, ie: say i want to use rbl.maps.vix.com AND dul.maps.vix.com, could i use two -r flags? or do i need to run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance? thanks end \\ Greg Albrecht([EMAIL PROTECTED])\\ \\ Safari Internet (www.safari.net)\\ \\ 1-888-537-9550 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) \\
Re: 500.000+ users mailserver
On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 07:19:06PM +, Peter Gradwell wrote: At 2:13 pm -0500 3/3/99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know much about proxies; is there some nifty way for a user to connect to a large mail-server, have the server tell the user's machine "your mail is actually on server03", and then redirect the POP/SMTP requests to the correct PC without having all of the resulting traffic pass through one machine? This would allow you to load-balance by moving mail accounts around without inconveniencing the user. surely, if your user accounts are dealt with by NIS, and their home directories mounted via NFS, then it doesn't matter which of the cluster they connect to? Or is there a 32K+ limit on NIS user ids as well? ofcourse there is. NIS is just a way to manage your /etc/passwd centrally (no, don't start flaming now :) Greetz, Peter. -- .| Peter van Dijk | mo|VERWEG stoned worden of coden .| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | mo|VERWEG dat is de levensvraag | mo|VERWEG coden of stoned worden | mo|VERWEG stonend worden En coden | mo|VERWEG hmm | mo|VERWEG dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
Simple Qmail Questions.
I want to use qmail on a new server I am building. I need to know how to do some things I currently do with sendmail though. If some of these are answered in the FAQ, sorry. 1. How can I point all the mail from a single domain to one user? 2. How can I point from from virtualhost [EMAIL PROTECTED] user1 and then virtualhost [EMAIL PROTECTED] user2? 3. Whats the best way to make use of procmail to parse the mail? Thanks for the time. -andy -- --- Andy WaldenWork Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator, Pers Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MTCO CommunicationsPhone: (800) 859-6826 " Reality is just Chaos with better lighting. "
Re: Simple Qmail Questions.
On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 02:15:59PM -0600, Andy Walden wrote: I want to use qmail on a new server I am building. I need to know how to do some things I currently do with sendmail though. If some of these are answered in the FAQ, sorry. 1. How can I point all the mail from a single domain to one user? Set up virtualdomains in control/virtualdomains. 2. How can I point from from virtualhost [EMAIL PROTECTED] user1 and then virtualhost [EMAIL PROTECTED] user2? Set up virtualusers in control/virtualdomains. 3. Whats the best way to make use of procmail to parse the mail? Please read the INSTALL* docs, look at the PIC* files, read the FAQ, and if you still have questions, let us know. -- --- Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis
Re: 500.000+ users mailserver
At 20:13 +0100 03-03-99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you had a "server farm" with (say) 10 PCs, you don't have to worry about UID limits, even with versions of Unix that don't support 32-bit UIDs. You also don't have to worry about putting all of your users out of business if one server goes down, and chores like backups become much easier. Sun Solaris supports 32-bit uids. I don't know much about proxies; is there some nifty way for a user to connect to a large mail-server, have the server tell the user's machine "your mail is actually on server03", and then redirect the POP/SMTP requests to the correct PC without having all of the resulting traffic pass through one machine? This would allow you to load-balance by moving mail accounts around without inconveniencing the user. Yes, there is. There is a software package that can redirect users to different servers based on the database of your choice. It's called deligate if I'm not mistaken. (It can be used to redirect many protocols, such as POP, IMAP, HTTP, SMTP, etc.) You can achieve much of the same functionality by just using qmail. This has been discussed before on this list. One thing's for sure though, do not trust NFS-delivery in such a large enviroment. -frode-
Re: 500.000+ users mailserver
Or is there a 32K+ limit on NIS user ids as well? ofcourse there is. NIS is just a way to manage your /etc/passwd centrally (no, don't start flaming now :) Somewhere within the Sun NIS+ doco it talks about optimal sizes of around 10K objects. I've never been able to confirm what sort of degradation happens when you exceed that number by over an order of magnitude. I don't know whether this limitation applies to independent implementations (of which there is one I know of). The "large server" syndrome has been discussed on this list a number of times and the archives will show that you really only have two readily available solutions. One is to use one heck of a mother NFS server (a NetAPP or similar) and a fleet of front-end boxes that handle POP via layer 4 switching (eg Cisco Local Director or similar). The other is to allocate people on different physical servers - this is a lot cheaper, but suffers from failure modes and administrative pains. Regards.
Re: Second attempt - rewriting outgoing mail addresses
On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 02:00:38PM -0600, Fred Lindberg wrote: With qmail and the subaccounts system (patch to checkpassword on www.qmail.org) it's very easy. I have a number of subaccounts for Which patch are you referring to? pop-subaddr? Does not that require maildir support from the MUA? --- Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis
Re: Off topic: Open relay
hi, At 16:58 03.03.99 , Edward S. Marshall wrote: http://www.orbs.org/ is this the place where bad guys coming in the RBL? Is there any place to inform these people? bye, Michael
Re: Second attempt - rewriting outgoing mail addresses
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999 14:54:55 -0600, Mate Wierdl wrote: Which patch are you referring to? pop-subaddr? Does not that require maildir support from the MUA? Yes. Yes, it requires maildir support from the MUA or the pop3 server (qmail-pop3d). Several users here use it with Windows MUA (PMMail) and pop3. I also use it with Mutt. -Sincerely, Fred (Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
Re: rblsmtp
ok thanks, i tried this: nice --10 \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrelays.orbs.org \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rdul.maps.vix.com \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrbl.maps.vix.com \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rdssl.imrss.org \ tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -v -u 7791 -g 2108 0 smtp \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \ 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 but it doesn't seem to be blocking the DUL list (rbl works, others i haven't tested.) mabey i'm doing something wrong. none the less, there it is. thanks for the help end \\ Greg Albrecht([EMAIL PROTECTED])\\ \\ Safari Internet (www.safari.net)\\ \\ 1-888-537-9550 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) \\ On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Timothy L. Mayo wrote: On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, xs wrote: hey all, i figure this is related to qmail, cuz i use it with qmail. anyway i looked thru the rblsmtp page and the rblsmtp manpage, but i didn't see anything reguarding usage of -r, ie: say i want to use rbl.maps.vix.com AND dul.maps.vix.com, could i use two -r flags? or do i need to run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance? The latter, run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance. - Timothy L. Mayomailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Administrator localconnect(sm) http://www.localconnect.net/ The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/ One Monroeville Center, Suite 850 Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 810- Phone (412) 810-8886 Fax
Re: rblsmtp
This seems a little ridiculous. Why can't there just be a control file/CDB with the nameservers to use? --Adam -Original Message- From: xs [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Timothy L. Mayo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 4:28 PM Subject: Re: rblsmtp ok thanks, i tried this: nice --10 \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrelays.orbs.org \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rdul.maps.vix.com \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrbl.maps.vix.com \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rdssl.imrss.org \ tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -v -u 7791 -g 2108 0 smtp \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \ 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 but it doesn't seem to be blocking the DUL list (rbl works, others i haven't tested.) mabey i'm doing something wrong. none the less, there it is. thanks for the help end \\ Greg Albrecht([EMAIL PROTECTED])\\ \\ Safari Internet (www.safari.net)\\ \\ 1-888-537-9550 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) \\ On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Timothy L. Mayo wrote: On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, xs wrote: hey all, i figure this is related to qmail, cuz i use it with qmail. anyway i looked thru the rblsmtp page and the rblsmtp manpage, but i didn't see anything reguarding usage of -r, ie: say i want to use rbl.maps.vix.com AND dul.maps.vix.com, could i use two -r flags? or do i need to run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance? The latter, run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance. - Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Administrator localconnect(sm) http://www.localconnect.net/ The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/ One Monroeville Center, Suite 850 Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 810- Phone (412) 810-8886 Fax
Re: rblsmtp
i do wish to correct my original post, i should start rblsmtp AFTER tcpserver =p end \\ Greg Albrecht([EMAIL PROTECTED])\\ \\ Safari Internet (www.safari.net)\\ \\ 1-888-537-9550 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) \\ On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Adam D. McKenna wrote: This seems a little ridiculous. Why can't there just be a control file/CDB with the nameservers to use? --Adam -Original Message- From: xs [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Timothy L. Mayo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 4:28 PM Subject: Re: rblsmtp ok thanks, i tried this: nice --10 \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrelays.orbs.org \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rdul.maps.vix.com \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rrbl.maps.vix.com \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -rdssl.imrss.org \ tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -v -u 7791 -g 2108 0 smtp \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \ 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 but it doesn't seem to be blocking the DUL list (rbl works, others i haven't tested.) mabey i'm doing something wrong. none the less, there it is. thanks for the help end \\ Greg Albrecht([EMAIL PROTECTED])\\ \\ Safari Internet (www.safari.net)\\ \\ 1-888-537-9550 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) \\ On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Timothy L. Mayo wrote: On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, xs wrote: hey all, i figure this is related to qmail, cuz i use it with qmail. anyway i looked thru the rblsmtp page and the rblsmtp manpage, but i didn't see anything reguarding usage of -r, ie: say i want to use rbl.maps.vix.com AND dul.maps.vix.com, could i use two -r flags? or do i need to run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance? The latter, run rblsmtp inside another rblsmtp instance. - Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Administrator localconnect(sm) http://www.localconnect.net/ The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/ One Monroeville Center, Suite 850 Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 810- Phone (412) 810-8886 Fax
maildir
Who invented maildir? Greetz, Peter. -- .| Peter van Dijk | mo|VERWEG stoned worden of coden .| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | mo|VERWEG dat is de levensvraag | mo|VERWEG coden of stoned worden | mo|VERWEG stonend worden En coden | mo|VERWEG hmm | mo|VERWEG dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
qmail and setuid for perl scripts
Hi! I have a perl script which is using setuid, which should work since perl 5 support setuid. However, if the script invoked from an qmail alias, the setuid didn't work. That is, if an .qmail-.. file from alias directory invokes a perl script owned by a particular user with setuid bit set, the script still run under the alias uid ($ will return the alias uid). Is this a bug, a feature, or I just lack something here? BTW, here is the script I used to tested it: #!/usr/bin/perl -wT print "Running as UID $ GID $) \n"; exit 100 Thank you. S. P. Arif Sahari Wibowo _ _ _ _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] / // // / http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/arifsaha _/ / // _/
strange new problem w/ qmail 1.03
Hi - Sorry if this is a faq, but i haven't seen it in my recent bit of research. I have a sparc 1 acting as the mailserver for my wife's business. It is running Sunos 4.1.3. I installed qmail 1.03 last summer when I brought up her site. It has been running fine the whole time until yesterday. The server hit the process table limit (also for the first time since last summer) and I've had some strange problems since rebooting it. Now doing the "insert"ing a mail message works, but when I try to test by telnet'ing to port 25 when I get to the part that you type "data" the server closes the connection. test mail messages are getting "read errors". All the processes are running, the directories look in order. Suggestions other than just reinstalling? thanks - tom (sorry - I'm not on the list -- didn't need to be until today)
Re: Off topic: Open relay
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Michael Bracker wrote: At 16:58 03.03.99 , Edward S. Marshall wrote: http://www.orbs.org/ is this the place where bad guys coming in the RBL? Is there any place to inform these people? www.orbs.org hosts a system (ORBS) which allows you to enter the IP addresses of systems which you believe are open relays. It will test this, and if they are, notify (as best it can) the administrators of the system involved, and add the system to a list of other open relays, until such time as they fix their problem. ORBS works in a similar manner (technically) to the MAPS RBL, but is completely automated, unlike MAPS. Hope that answered your question, since I wasn't quite sure what you were asking... -- Edward S. Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ What goes up, must come down. ] http://www.logic.net/~emarshal/ [ Ask any system administrator. ] Linux labyrinth 2.2.2-pre2 #2 Sun Feb 14 15:24:09 CST 1999 i586 unknown 8:45pm up 16 days, 21:21, 4 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
