Re: vpopmail Problem
Better still, post them to the vchkpw mailing list! R. Paul Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Post the logs? Maybe some config info Paul D. Farber II Farber Technology Ph. 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, 11 Sep 1999, Miguel Carvajal wrote: Hi there!, I installed vpopmail in /home/vpopmail/. The problem I'am having is that when I send an email to one of the users like [EMAIL PROTECTED] the user never recieves it. How can I fix this? Thanks in advance, Miguel Carvajal
Strange open relay problem with qmail due to bad configuration.
I just got a nasty letter from ORBS telling me that one of my SMTP servers was an open relay. The host was a secondary mailserver for some of our domains and it had no hosts in locals and a correctly configured rcpthosts. Its virtualhosts was also empty and it was not configured to allow percent hack. Still user%domain@[ipnumber], where ipnumber was the hosts IP number, was allowed stright through. me was set to a local domain, where another server was was primary and that server was configured to allow relaying for this server. [ipnumber] was changed to the default domain and that was in the rcpthosts file so it was ok. The message was forwarded to the primary smtp server for that domain and that server saw that the mail came from an authorized relayer and past it along... /Sebastian
qmail Digest 12 Sep 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 757
qmail Digest 12 Sep 1999 10:00:01 - Issue 757 Topics (messages 30133 through 30154): qmail distro and UID 30133 by: "Mr. Christopher F. Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30150 by: Kevin Waterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webpage "Send" 30134 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30140 by: James Smallacombe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qmail send 30135 by: Blaine Lefler [EMAIL PROTECTED] simple question 30136 by: "Luka Gerzic" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30138 by: Chris Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30141 by: James Smallacombe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qmail dies over and over 30137 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Claus Färber) Problems while downloading E-Mails with Outlook-Express 30139 by: Cyril Bitterich [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30147 by: Robert Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] vpopmail Problem 30142 by: "Miguel Carvajal" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30144 by: Paul Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30153 by: "Robin Bowes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newbie qmail install problems 30143 by: Barry Dwyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30145 by: "James J. Lippard" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30146 by: Barry Dwyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Compile imap-4.5.vchkpw.new.tar.gz Problem for vpopmail-3.4.8 and 3.4.9 Problem on redhat v6.0 30148 by: "x" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Patches revisited 30149 by: Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30151 by: Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30152 by: "Cris Daniluk" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Strange open relay problem with qmail due to bad configuration. 30154 by: Sebastian Andersson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrivia: To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To bug my human owner, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to the list, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Yes, it is your distribution so you could use whatever uids/gids you want. However, that will make changing systems to and from it and adding packages from other package managers to it difficult and error prone. I'd strongly suggest you use the same userspace as one of the major distributions. Debian, for example, uses these uids: in /etc/passwd: alias:x:70:65534:Postmaster:/var/qmail/alias:/bin/false qmaild:x:71:65534::/var/qmail:/bin/false qmails:x:72:70::/var/qmail:/bin/false qmailr:x:73:70::/var/qmail:/bin/false qmailq:x:74:70::/var/qmail:/bin/false qmaill:x:75:65534::/var/qmail:/bin/false qmailp:x:76:65534::/var/qmail:/bin/false nobody:x:65534:65534:HTTP Access Account:/tmp:/bin/false in groups: qmail:*:70: nogroup::65534: Frankly, it is easier to build qmail from vanilla source than it is from a package. But then you still have to tell the package manager about it. And damn, the package manager wants to put another daemon where you have qmail, and the snowball begins. ;^) Working all that out is the whole point of a distribution, so why fight it? Best, cfm On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 05:19:13AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What should I use in the way of var-qmail. My understanding is that it needs to be compiled on each machine, but as this is a fresh install, but maybe used for upgrades, I am concerned about UID's. Should I simply create a .rpm from the source supplied or can someone recommend a better method. Since this will be your distribution, you can just reserve the qmail uids. In this case, you can get away with a very simple spec file to build qmail (I can tell you if you need it). But you might be concerned about people who would like to upgrade their RH system to yours (probably bad idea though). Then you could test and remove their qmail users if they are not with the specified uids. Or use the var-qmail package as it is now. It does not have to be compiled on the install system at all. As the README explains: 1) take qmail-1.03-*.src.rpm (this does not contain the qmail sources, but the qmail binaries), do rpm --rebuild qmail-1.03-*.src.rpm This adds the qmail users if they do not yet exist, edits the binaries for the qmail uids/gids, and builds qmail-1.03-*.i386.rpm 2) which then can be installed in the usual way. Since you install qmail with the base system, and compilation does not happen, users will not notice at all that you are doing a bit nonstandard rpm install. Mate -- Christopher F. Miller, Publisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039 1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/ Database publishing, e-commerce, office/internet integration, Debian linux. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since this will be your distribution, you can just reserve the qmail uids. In this case, you can get away with a very simple spec file to build qmail (I can tell you if you need it). That would be most
Re: Problems while downloading E-Mails with Outlook-Express
On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 07:38:12PM +0200, Cyril Bitterich wrote: weiss, was gemeint ist, aber keiner kann's so richtig griffig formulieren= .. Vielleicht sollte ich's mal mit "learning by doing" versuchen??? I would like to know why Outlook could take this for a problem. Might it be that the Problem derives form two IP-Pakets that divided the message in one ending with a dot and one starting with a dot? The exact description of the problem is: when one packet ends with a dot, and the next fragment starts with a dot, outlook stops reading input as mail, and returns to command mode. The next word isn't part of normal popserver/popclient communications, and outlook aborts with an error. The curious thing with the whole thing is that the above text is in message nr. 29 and not nr 30 as you could think from the error message. It (incorrectly) assumes message 29 is done, and starts waiting for message 30, when it thinks an error occurred. And it seems that this Problem does not occur when using an ethernet connection but does when using a dial-up line. You have differente MTU's for dial-in and ethernet (576 and 1500) I know that this is not an outlook-probs list. But maybe you can help me in some way. There are no solutions. You can forcefeed all incoming mail through a filter which removes double dots. That will destroy some attachments. You can tell people to use another mailer (all outlook express versions suffer from this problem). You can't download the source and fix it yourself. If people insist on using outlook they will have no choice but to accept this kind of thing happening once in a while. You can sue MICROS~1. I'm sorry if this sounds final, but you, from your side, cannot work around a bug which makes your clients mailprogram stop listening. About the only workaround is for to forward the message to the client's account using pine, mutt or the like, and hope the extra headers will shift the double dot away from the boundary of two packets. But that's a manual workaround. If you have 17000 clients (like I do) it's a lot of extra work. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Strange open relay problem with qmail due to bad configuration.
On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Sebastian Andersson wrote: I just got a nasty letter from ORBS telling me that one of my SMTP servers was an open relay. The host was a secondary mailserver for some of our domains and it had no hosts in locals and a correctly configured rcpthosts. Its virtualhosts was also empty and it was not configured to allow percent hack. Still user%domain@[ipnumber], where ipnumber was the hosts IP number, was allowed stright through. me was set to a local domain, where another server was was primary and that server was configured to allow relaying for this server. [ipnumber] was changed to the default domain and that was in the rcpthosts file so it was ok. The message was forwarded to the primary smtp server for that domain and that server saw that the mail came from an authorized relayer and past it along... Well, yeah... This is a major hole. Plug it up by taking the host A's ip/name out of the relay host's list of allowed relay clients. It'll still receive email from that host, but will only deliver it locally.
Should qmail-103.patch be applied to ucspi-tcp?
I am running qmail-1.03, and have just applied the AOL patch which I obtained from qmail.org (file qmail-103.patch). I note that ucspi-tcp has its own copy of dns.c (content identical to dns.c supplied with qmail-1.03). Should the patch also be applied to ucspi-tcp? I can't find any mention of this in the documentation. -- --- John K. Chester email [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone 212-792-2036fax 212-253-4290 ---
Re: Big mama ISP server
Ira Abramov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: at 150K users, the loads on my server aren't impressive, I'm guessing Israeli users surf and chat more than write Emails, possibly because of the software limitations (very few Right-to-left clients available, fewer agree on the encoding of the characters) My bosses are quite happy with an outgoing Qmail server, so now I want to make all other functions work on Qmail (local delivery, virtual domains, pop, ETRN users moving to AUTORUN etc.) right now an ugly 8 meg password file with a 6 meg shadow sidekick are pushed around the servers with scp. I'm going to move delivery and RADIUS auth all to RDBMs... (anyone done this? It's really hard to find useful info about this online... should I patch them all to lookup CDB files, or lookup an SQL server maybe?) the main question I'd like to pose to people, because getting sun machines just for tests is too expensive an option here, has anyone compared the speed advantage or loss when moving between the following setups: 1. current: sendmail delivers to a local in-house agent written in C (15k tool) that tests for a vacation flag for a user, then delivers to a two level hashed spool directory (/var/spool/mail/u/s/username) mounted from a net appliance box after checking mail quota limits (not standard fs quota). a second machine servers pop with qpopper. 2. wanted: qmail uses qmail-users or an external lookup (of CDB or some SQL?) to deliver to a a single-UID hash of maildirs if within quota, while checking for a vacation flag and executing if necessary. POP is served from another machine using qmail-pop3d. no dialup users have a UID or an entry in the /etc/passwd (YEAH!!!) is qmail-pop3d up to such volumes? is the 2-order growth in number of directories and files on the fileserver a speed damper? should I let qmail deliver to the existing hash and keep Qualcomm's popper poppin'? all sugestions and experianced tips are welcome, on-list or off it. TIA! Ira. (Oh yeah, and Russel, if you have a ready-made solution you can offer for a fee, send me an offer!) Your (2) wanted isn't that difficult to do. We have a MySQL DB holding account details of all users and our mailhub uses the ~alias/.qmail-default to deliver all mail to a custom built program which then a) Checks to see if the hash directory exists /u/domain.com/u/s/username and if so delivers to the Maildir in that directory (mail would have been sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) b) If not, then it performs a Mysql lookup to see if the account exists and isn't disabled or locked. If ok then makes the directory and performs as a) above. c) If a and b fail then bounces the message with No such user. checkpoppasswd currectly is custom written to check the same DB (but for speed I'm going to change it so that cron produces a cdb of the password file). Both smtp and pop3 run on the same box and we've 7,500 users now (not one of them involved any human intervention in setting up the account or management of the mailhub). As regards, speed advantage. On the delivery, you should be able to use a slightly modified version of your existing C delivery program. As such you won't see any great speed difference, other than less memory usage overall. On the Pop3 your checkpasswd is going to be your potential slow problem (which is why I need to get away from direct DB querying). Paul Gregg -- Email pgregg at tibus.netT: +44 (0) 1232 424190 | CLUB24 INTERNET | Technical Director F: +44 (0) 1232 424709 |Free Access| The Internet Business LtdW: http://www.tibus.net | www.club24.co.uk |
Re: Still 533
Paul Farber writes: still getting my ass kicked by qmail. I've gotten it down to one file... if rcpthosts exists then I get the 533 (#5.7.1) not allowed message. You should track down what's really happened: 1. Make sure you are logging tcpserver's activity. 2. From the tcpserver's log, identify the IP address from which a relaying was attempted. 3. For the IP address identified, try out rules for tcpserver with the tcprulescheck program. Does it say RELAYCLIENT will be set? there are no log file entries, and I am running tcpserver with -v -H -R. There should be some log messages from tcpserver. But beaware that the log file for tcpserver is not always the same as the one for qmail-send. With the -v option, tcpserver puts log messages on its standard error. So the actual log file location depends on how you start tcpserver, which you should know. -- Tetsu Ushijima
Strange problems...
Hello! I'm using QMAIL and UW-IMAP patched for mailbox format. There are complaints from our users that they're unable to delete some messages using IMAP. They mark message as "deleted" in their mail agent, and when they do "folder compact" it remains undeleted and unmarked as deleted. When I look into their homedir where mailbox file resides, there are some files with long names which looks like temporary files (with "$" in filenames). When I delete them, all the problems disappear until next such situation. Does anybody know what can be the source of this problem? Any suggestions about how to resolve the problem? -- Regards, Dmitry Niqiforoff [tel. +7 8462 427427] Kraft-S, Ltd. Samara, Russia
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 02:15:56AM +0200, Stephan Hadan wrote: I really don't want to use M$ Exchange to use the wanted features of Outlook. Absolutely no way. Outlook Professional is a MAPI mail client - that means it needs to talk to a MAPI server - and the only ones available are on M$ platforms. To do "proper" Internet-standards based Email in a company environment, there's nothing that beats IMAP - but it's an Email protocol - not a Groupware one. MS Outlook connected to MS Exchange server allows you to share calendars (so you can plan meetings), share contacts lists and share messages via a Public Folder system. To do the same in an Internet-standards environment you'd need: IMAP for Email LDAP for addressbooks (although this isn't commonly used to allow users to share personal addressbooks) NNTP for sharing messages - but there's NOTHING to do Calendars. That just hasn't come up. I find that Outlook Express - which is free with Internet Explorer 4/5 - can be used instead of Outlook Professional to do most of what Professional can do. It's internal Calendar can even be used to plan meetings with other Outlook Express users - the only thing it doesn't allow is for the user to view anothers calendar - but that could be possible via Samba shares? (getting out of my personal area here...). Anyway, I manage an Exchange server here - and it's the ONLY thing I loose sleep over. It's truly a "fair weather friend" - really good when it's going - but if it dies - you wish you could just pick up and leave for another job -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 3391 377 Fax: +64 3 3391 417
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
Didn't I read in trade rags that HP was planning to release a **drop in** alternative to Exchange by year end? I can't remember if it was going to be Open Source or not. cfm On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 09:25:26AM +1200, Jason Haar wrote: On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 02:15:56AM +0200, Stephan Hadan wrote: I really don't want to use M$ Exchange to use the wanted features of Outlook. Absolutely no way. Outlook Professional is a MAPI mail client - that means it needs to talk to a MAPI server - and the only ones available are on M$ platforms. To do -- Christopher F. Miller, Publisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039 1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/ Database publishing, e-commerce, office/internet integration, Debian linux.
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
On Sun, Sep 12, 1999 at 05:06:24PM -0500, Mr. Christopher F. Miller wrote: Didn't I read in trade rags that HP was planning to release a **drop in** alternative to Exchange by year end? I can't remember if it was going to be Open Source or not. If you are talking about OpenMail, it is already released for Linux. What exactly it does I know not and can't spare the 200 megabytes or so to find out. Also would not want to take down qmail to try it :-) cfm On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 09:25:26AM +1200, Jason Haar wrote: On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 02:15:56AM +0200, Stephan Hadan wrote: I really don't want to use M$ Exchange to use the wanted features of Outlook. Absolutely no way. Outlook Professional is a MAPI mail client - that means it needs to talk to a MAPI server - and the only ones available are on M$ platforms. To do -- Christopher F. Miller, Publisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039 1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/ Database publishing, e-commerce, office/internet integration, Debian linux. -- D. W. Wieboldt - - - - - - - - - - [EMAIL PROTECTED] This computer is running Linux! - - - - http://www.debian.org
Re: qmail relay detection
On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, James J. Lippard wrote: I agree with Sam on this one. My experience supports his view. I've never seen any systematic attempts to grab usernames via SMTP. I've seen quite a few mailbombs with bounces, though. Funny you should mention this. Last week I received a request from some folks asking me how much it would cost to modify qmail to extract email addresses from various domains (aol, hotmail and juno). These people were in the business of selling email addresses. I politely told them where to go. Regards Peter -- Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED] Technical Consultantor at present: eServ. Pty Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +61 2 9206 3410 Fax: +61 2 9281 1301 "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
Jason Haar writes: To do the same in an Internet-standards environment you'd need: IMAP for Email LDAP for addressbooks (although this isn't commonly used to allow users to share personal addressbooks) NNTP for sharing messages Actually, with a smart IMAP server you don't need NNTP. Smart IMAP servers can implement shared message folders. -- Sam
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 09:25:26AM +1200, Jason Haar wrote: - but there's NOTHING to do Calendars. That just hasn't come up. There's an open specification for a calendar file format, vCal, which is used by Netscape^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HIplanet for their calendar-thingy. For *nix-clients there's iCal, gnomecal and korganizer, and probably more. All that is needed is for somebody to implement some protocol to share 'open', common calenders, and a secure way to store private calenders. I think the authors of the above three will pick up on this in *no* time. I've been thinking about this for a couple of days. Perhaps I will cook up a draft vcal:// spec, and make it a RFC, if that hasn't been done allready. You can simulate something like it with a cronjob, a shared file and some scripting magic. Have a look at above three and their docs. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 02:54:58AM +0200, Ruben van der Leij wrote: vcal:// spec, and make it a RFC, if that hasn't been done allready. Which it turns out to be. -[ICAL] specifies a core specification of objects, data types, properties and property parameters; -[ITIP] specifies an interoperability protocol for scheduling between different implementations; -[IMIP] specifies a messaging-based protocol binding for [ITIP]. Searching on URL below will point you to the right drafts. http://search.ietf.org:80/search/cgi-bin/BrokerQuery.pl.cgi?broker=internet-draftsquery=calendarcaseflag=onwordflag=offerrorflag=0maxlineflag=50maxresultflag=1000descflag=onsort=by-NMLverbose=onmaxobjflag=25 Netscape is working towards these standards, they say. M$ will probably ignore them 'till they cannot ignore the standard without losing many customers. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
