Re: Server cluster
> <...> in which case i want a copy, that's the one thing >i could never get "maildrop" to do for me, a text-search on every message >to be received regardless of who it's for...) (hint, hint, if the maildrop >guy is on one of these lists, i don't remember your name right now...) John: I use Sam's qmail patches along with maildrop and so far I love it. I'd say it bounces back 98% of junk mail. This link used to be on qmail.org page, however it is not there any more. http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/5799/qmail-uce.html Besides, I am sure that Sam Varshavchik, the maildrop author, is reading the sqwebmail list. He returns email if you care to ask him a question. Regards, AlexB At 12:57 AM 12/28/99 -0500, John Simpson wrote: >howdy all- > >i got a private email from someone asking for more detail about setting up >clusters of qmail machines to work together. i want to respect this >person's privacy- he asked the question privately rather than through a >list. however, i think the answer should be shared with the world, so to >protect this person's identity i'm cutting out his name and such. enjoy. > >On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, [someone] wrote: > >> 1. When we host & DNS a domain, and we want to mail seomeone that has their >> own mailserver, we need a virtualusertable entry that says: >> @domain.com[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( we do point dns to send mx records to >> mail.domain.com How would qmail deliver and e-mail sent by someone within >> ? would we need a special config as above under sendmail ? > >it sounds like you're trying to force all of the domain's mail to come >through your servers. the only reasons i can think of to do this would be: > >- you have a kick-ass spam filtering system on your mailhub and want to >have your client use it (in which case i want a copy, that's the one thing >i could never get "maildrop" to do for me, a text-search on every message >to be received regardless of who it's for...) (hint, hint, if the maildrop >guy is on one of these lists, i don't remember your name right now...) > >- your client doesn't want the entire world to connect to his mail server, >and has an IP access list which allows only your server(s) to connect. >this could be because they don't want to be an open relay but their >brain-dead mail server program can't be configured that way. (you also >need to set up a packet filter in your routers or terminal servers to make >this work for relay prevention...) > >- you are providing ETRN service for a non-dedicated client > >anyway, to set this up (so their mail is forced into your servers and your >server then hands it to them) ... > >DNS contains records like this, as needed... > client.com IN MX 1 mailhub1.isp.com. > client.com IN MX 2 mailhub2.isp.com. > >/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts (or morercpthosts.cdb) contains > client.com > >/var/qmail/control/smtproutes contains (note that their mail server must >have a static ip in order for mail to be delivered to them) > client.com:12.34.56.78 > >if, on the other had, you want to offer the services of your mailhubs as >just a backup when the client's connection goes down, you set it up like >this (and the client would allow incoming connections from anywhere in the >world) > >DNS contains: > client.com IN MX 1 mail.client.com. > client.com IN MX 2 mailhub1.isp.com. > client.com IN MX 3 mailhub2.isp.com. > >/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts (or morercpthosts.cdb) contains > client.com > >note that setting the MX records this way and having the client set up an >IP restriction list will still accomplish the goal of sending all of their >mail through your servers, but time would be wasted on every message while >the sending server tries first to contact your client's mail server >directly and times out before sending it to your (the ISP's) mail server. >it works but it's less than optimal (and to some that's just as bad as not >working at all.) > >> 2. We also want to provide redundant mail service for our clients mail >> servers, and so we want to use etrn to accomplish this, but it seems like >> nobody is doing this under qmail...any ideas ? > >long ago i found a patch for ETRN on the qmail.org >mega-page-of-doom(tm)... it works, although i added a few syslog() lines >to it myself so i could tell when it was working and not working. i also >added a line that checks to see if the first character of the domain name >being asked for is "@", and if so it skips the "@" before checking the >control/etrn file. this is because some versions of microsoft exchange >server add an "@" sign to the domain name- not standard ETRN but that's >microsoft for you... > >however, i just went and looked at qmail.org again, and it's not there >anymore. (does anyone know why? was there a security hole that i didn't >hear about, do i need to call my old office and tell them about it?) > >anyway, i don't have the patch anymore, but there are programs called >"turnmail" and "pullmail" (for unix and NT, respective
Re: new list.cr.yp.to DNS software
Thus said "D. J. Bernstein" on 19 Dec 1999 16:18:57 GMT: > If you don't receive any messages on Monday or Tuesday, or if you see a > message to list.cr.yp.to stuck in a queue on Thursday, let me know by > sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't anticipate any problems; the > new software is generally much less fragile than BIND. So, any hints as to what this new software is??? :) Andy -- +== Andy == TiK: garbaglio ==+ |Linux is about freedom of choice| +== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
Re: qmail blackout [again]
> Hi, > > During the Xmas, I seem to have experienced some problems with my qmail mail > server. > This list's ezmlm complains: > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >207.241.173.142 does not like recipient. > >Remote host said: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed > rcpthosts (#5.7.1) > >Giving up on 207.241.173.142. > > and I seem to have lost some 40 messages. > Needless to say, altex.ro is listed in locals and rcpthosts. > > There's nothing wrong in the logs. > > How can I track down this blackout ? > > Claudiu > It occured again Today I got the same message from twistedhumor.com (they're using ezmlm too) what's up ? Claudiu
Re: Server cluster
John Simpson writes: > > 2. We also want to provide redundant mail service for our clients mail > > servers, and so we want to use etrn to accomplish this, but it seems like > > nobody is doing this under qmail...any ideas ? > > long ago i found a patch for ETRN on the qmail.org > mega-page-of-doom(tm)... it works, although i added a few syslog() lines > to it myself so i could tell when it was working and not working. i also > added a line that checks to see if the first character of the domain name > being asked for is "@", and if so it skips the "@" before checking the > control/etrn file. this is because some versions of microsoft exchange > server add an "@" sign to the domain name- not standard ETRN but that's > microsoft for you... > > however, i just went and looked at qmail.org again, and it's not there > anymore. (does anyone know why? was there a security hole that i didn't > hear about, do i need to call my old office and tell them about it?) It serves no purpose, given serialmail's autoturn facility. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
Re: Server cluster
howdy all- i got a private email from someone asking for more detail about setting up clusters of qmail machines to work together. i want to respect this person's privacy- he asked the question privately rather than through a list. however, i think the answer should be shared with the world, so to protect this person's identity i'm cutting out his name and such. enjoy. On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, [someone] wrote: > 1. When we host & DNS a domain, and we want to mail seomeone that has their > own mailserver, we need a virtualusertable entry that says: > @domain.com[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( we do point dns to send mx records to > mail.domain.com How would qmail deliver and e-mail sent by someone within > ? would we need a special config as above under sendmail ? it sounds like you're trying to force all of the domain's mail to come through your servers. the only reasons i can think of to do this would be: - you have a kick-ass spam filtering system on your mailhub and want to have your client use it (in which case i want a copy, that's the one thing i could never get "maildrop" to do for me, a text-search on every message to be received regardless of who it's for...) (hint, hint, if the maildrop guy is on one of these lists, i don't remember your name right now...) - your client doesn't want the entire world to connect to his mail server, and has an IP access list which allows only your server(s) to connect. this could be because they don't want to be an open relay but their brain-dead mail server program can't be configured that way. (you also need to set up a packet filter in your routers or terminal servers to make this work for relay prevention...) - you are providing ETRN service for a non-dedicated client anyway, to set this up (so their mail is forced into your servers and your server then hands it to them) ... DNS contains records like this, as needed... client.com IN MX 1 mailhub1.isp.com. client.com IN MX 2 mailhub2.isp.com. /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts (or morercpthosts.cdb) contains client.com /var/qmail/control/smtproutes contains (note that their mail server must have a static ip in order for mail to be delivered to them) client.com:12.34.56.78 if, on the other had, you want to offer the services of your mailhubs as just a backup when the client's connection goes down, you set it up like this (and the client would allow incoming connections from anywhere in the world) DNS contains: client.com IN MX 1 mail.client.com. client.com IN MX 2 mailhub1.isp.com. client.com IN MX 3 mailhub2.isp.com. /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts (or morercpthosts.cdb) contains client.com note that setting the MX records this way and having the client set up an IP restriction list will still accomplish the goal of sending all of their mail through your servers, but time would be wasted on every message while the sending server tries first to contact your client's mail server directly and times out before sending it to your (the ISP's) mail server. it works but it's less than optimal (and to some that's just as bad as not working at all.) > 2. We also want to provide redundant mail service for our clients mail > servers, and so we want to use etrn to accomplish this, but it seems like > nobody is doing this under qmail...any ideas ? long ago i found a patch for ETRN on the qmail.org mega-page-of-doom(tm)... it works, although i added a few syslog() lines to it myself so i could tell when it was working and not working. i also added a line that checks to see if the first character of the domain name being asked for is "@", and if so it skips the "@" before checking the control/etrn file. this is because some versions of microsoft exchange server add an "@" sign to the domain name- not standard ETRN but that's microsoft for you... however, i just went and looked at qmail.org again, and it's not there anymore. (does anyone know why? was there a security hole that i didn't hear about, do i need to call my old office and tell them about it?) anyway, i don't have the patch anymore, but there are programs called "turnmail" and "pullmail" (for unix and NT, respectively) that can be used to simulate the results of ETRN functionality. i have no experience with either of them. i don't have the source file anymore (i don't work for the isp anymore) but the changes were trivial. > Also in your redundant solution for mailservers, I agree with the nfs issues > you bring up, but how often were you ssh coping the files back & forth ? were > you using rsyc with ssh protocol or is there an update parameter on scp ? just to clarify, it's only the qmail control files that get copied, no messages. the copies were being done several times a day, basically every time a new domain was added to the virtual mail server. we were using regular old "scp" without worrying about any "update" parameters- if the master had new config files, it was guaranteed that the slave needed them so we went right ahead and overwr
Re: qmail-inject
Thanks! I have the solved the problem by switching to shell instead of cshe ll. My new problem is that I get absolutely no response from the system when I execute the same command: echo to: kristina | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject Even /var/log/syslog produces nothing! Why is this command not executing? Thanks in advance, Kristina At 05:37 99/12/28 +0200, you wrote: > Kristina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 28 Dec 1999: > > My qmail is starting okay, however when I try to do a mail test: > > echo to: kristina | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > > > The following error is returned: > > stty: : No such device or address > > > > Does anyone know what could be causing this? > > I'm not sure, but I'm guessing you have a stty command in either your > personal .profile for that user, or in the /etc/profile file. The shell > gets invoked for the pipe, including executing the startup file(s), but > there's no attached tty, and so stty complains. > > If you're using something else than bash (or relative), adjust the above > by substituting your shell's startup files... > > > In any case, it's very likely not a qmail problem, qmail doesn't execute > stty. > > > HTH, > Mikko > -- > // Mikko H$BgO(Bninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/ > // The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator / > // Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs / > I havent't lost my mind -- I'm sure it is backed up somewhere. >
Re: QPopper3.0b26 with Mailbox
The only way I have been told to do this is to link all the ~/Mailbox to /var/mail/(user) or where your sendmail was storing your mail before you changed your Mailer. Hope this helps. On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Luis Bezerra wrote: > Has anyone could help me to configure qpopper3.0b26 using Mailbox > > thanks in advance > > -- > - > Luís Bezerra de A. Junior > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > SecrelNet Informática LTDA > Fortaleza - Ceará - Brasil > Fone: 021852882090 > - > > >
Re: qmail-inject
Kristina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 28 Dec 1999: > My qmail is starting okay, however when I try to do a mail test: > echo to: kristina | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > The following error is returned: > stty: : No such device or address > > Does anyone know what could be causing this? I'm not sure, but I'm guessing you have a stty command in either your personal .profile for that user, or in the /etc/profile file. The shell gets invoked for the pipe, including executing the startup file(s), but there's no attached tty, and so stty complains. If you're using something else than bash (or relative), adjust the above by substituting your shell's startup files... In any case, it's very likely not a qmail problem, qmail doesn't execute stty. HTH, Mikko -- // Mikko Hänninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/ // The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator / // Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs / I havent't lost my mind -- I'm sure it is backed up somewhere.
error with my startup script
i'm using Life with qmail by dave sill.. everyhting was perfect until i execute /usr/local/sbin/qmail start .. and i got the following messages .. [root@pc supervise]# /usr/local/sbin/qmail start Starting qmail: svscan. [root@pc supervise]# supervise: fatal: unable to start qmail smtpd/run: exec formmat error supervise: fatal: unable to start qmail-smtpd/run: exec format error [[root@pc supervise]# /usr/local/sbin/qmail stop Stopping qmail: svscan qmail logging. thanks Ismal Hisham Mohd Darus Supervisor, System Support John Hancock Life Insurance (Malaysia) Berhad
Re: Forcing the queue.
> "M. Richardson ( Technical Support - Big Net Au )" wrote: > > Hi, > > I've looked for this in the FAQ and HOW-TO but to no avail, and > I'm hoping somebody here can help me out. > > What I'm trying to do is combine 7 existing mail servers into one > large (massive) mail server... currently the largest server we have > (1400 users) is running a queue at an average of 20mb before I > merge these seven servers I'm wondering is there a way to have qmail > send messages straight from the queue, without waiting. (Much like > sending qmail an ALRM signal) ? > setup qmail on your new server, test it, then put ':big-mail-server.big.net.au' into /var/qmail/control/smtproutes on each of the little mail servers. Send the qmail-send process a 'ALRM' signal on each of the little servers. They should then attempt to deliver all of their outbound SMTP mail to your big server (thus emptying its queue). You'll then have tested your big server's ability to cope with large queues and sudden influxes of mail as well as moved the mail off the smaller machines. Hope this helps. Richard Letts
Re: Server cluster
Michael Boman wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 08:33:10AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > > Michael Boman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 07:08:01AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > > >> > > >> /var/qmail can't be shared, and shouldn't be remote. > > > > > >How can the mailservers help each other with outgoing mail then? > > > > There's really no way to have multiple servers responsible for > > delivering the same message. You can spread the load across multiple > > servers, but each server will be solely responsible for its messages. > > > > >Is /var/qmail/queue enough to share for that, or is each server for > > >itself? > > > > You can't share /var/qmail/queue. > Let me see if I get this right, it is OK to share the /home/vpopmail > directory, but not the others? Anyone have ideas how to keep the qmail > controlfiles etc up-to-date on each computer, or can I just share that > directory (/var/qmail/control and maybe /var/qmail/alias). > > Please advice Where I worked in the UK we used several machines (post.salford.ac.uk) which shared the same configuration; this was periodically updated using two files, one of which contained the length of the other file to ensure they were copied correctly between machines. (the copying being performed using ssh -- so corruption and security was not an issue). The machines acted purely as message switches storing no messages locally (unless the destination machine was down) If we needed to add more switching capacity another machine could be easily added to the cluster. If a machine blew up or needed upgrading we could take it out of the cluster and it would not affect the others directly. I do not think NFS is a reliable mechanism for sharing configuration files for reliable delivery. I like systems to be minimally dependent on others during normal operation. oh, the post servers could have been writing the mail into pop mailboxes over NFS, except we were using SMTP to move it to the pop mail servers which wrote locally. If qmtp had been built into the qmail-remote servers we would probably have used that too. Richard Letts, Austin, Texas
qmail-inject
My qmail is starting okay, however when I try to do a mail test: echo to: kristina | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject The following error is returned: stty: : No such device or address Does anyone know what could be causing this? Thanks in advance, Kristina
Forcing the queue.
Hi, I've looked for this in the FAQ and HOW-TO but to no avail, and I'm hoping somebody here can help me out. What I'm trying to do is combine 7 existing mail servers into one large (massive) mail server... currently the largest server we have (1400 users) is running a queue at an average of 20mb before I merge these seven servers I'm wondering is there a way to have qmail send messages straight from the queue, without waiting. (Much like sending qmail an ALRM signal) ? Thanks for your time. Michael.
Re: Qmail is driving me nuts!
Actually, Jake, The best thing to do in this case is to have all of the mail MX to this qmail on this machine, and then "smtp" route it to your real mailserver. So, include the [sub-]domain in rcpthosts, but don't include (anything?) the domain name in locals or virtualhosts. Then add a line in smtproutes that points to your "real" mailserver. Here's what I would do /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts = everydomain.com that-you.net wish-to-receive-mail.for /var/qmail/control/smtproutes = everydomain.com:real.mailserver.net that-you.net:real.mailserver.net wish-to-receive-mail.for:real.mailserver.net Now, should your 'real.mailserver.net' go down, qmail will spool the mail for upto /var/qmail/control/queuelifetime (default = 604800 seconds = 7 days). You will doubtless want to know about the command 'qmail-qread', and if you wish any mail to deliver locally, you should read up on the "Life with Qmail" page...it has a number of gems and solid advice. http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html -Martin -- Martin A. Brown --- Wonderfrog Enterprises --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Jake Reynolds wrote: :I've installed per the instructions, and it runs fine... I'm having a :problem though. I want to set up qmail to forward all our email from :ourdomain.com to mailserver.ourdomain.com : :Basicly I want it to act as a cacheing mail forwarder, should our mail :system go down. I'm trying to avoid bounce messages from being sent over :the internet should the mail server crash. I assumed I could set up a :virtual domain and then change the MX record, but I can't seem to get the :system to forward the mail properly at this moment, and am therefore :reluctant to change the MX record... : :Jake Reynolds :Systems Technician : :v ) s t r e a m :1157 Century Drive :Louisville, CO 80027 :phone 800.878.7326 ext. 2446 :Direct Dial 303.928.2446 :fax 303.928.2832 :www.vstream.com : : :
Qmail is driving me nuts!
I've installed per the instructions, and it runs fine... I'm having a problem though. I want to set up qmail to forward all our email from ourdomain.com to mailserver.ourdomain.com Basicly I want it to act as a cacheing mail forwarder, should our mail system go down. I'm trying to avoid bounce messages from being sent over the internet should the mail server crash. I assumed I could set up a virtual domain and then change the MX record, but I can't seem to get the system to forward the mail properly at this moment, and am therefore reluctant to change the MX record... Jake Reynolds Systems Technician v ) s t r e a m 1157 Century Drive Louisville, CO 80027 phone 800.878.7326 ext. 2446 Direct Dial 303.928.2446 fax 303.928.2832 www.vstream.com
trouble with unusually high mbuf usage?
I have a FreeBSD 3.1r server running qmail 1.03 with ezmlm and vchkpw 3.12. It's been running fine for 9 months or so now until last week. The server crashed (hardware related and fixed) and there was rather extensive FS corruption..after cleaning it and re-starting qmail, the mbufs which normally never spike over 300 or so topped 7k, crashed the server simply trying to start qmail. I raised max-users and thats fixed it, however for a server to suddently need over twice the mbufs with no real changes aside from addition of users (not enough to account for that much change) bothers me. I can find nothing wrong with it..I did have some 330+ messages in the queue, however I've restarted it with more before..even a kill -ALRM would cause a crash before I increased the limit, which never was a problem in the past. Has anyone else experienced this or have any ideas on where I can look to track it down? Thanks in advance, -- Stephen Comoletti Systems Administrator Delanet, Inc. http://www.delanet.com ph: (302) 326-5800 fax: (302) 326-5802
Re: Server cluster
> I am writing to you all looking for some answers for a future project.. Is > it possible to do a cluster of qmail servers using DNS and NFS? It's okay to put your home directories on nfs, but don't put /var/qmail/queue on nfs. Once you get to a high volume of incoming mail, your first bottleneck will likely be the disk hosting /var/qmail/queue. As John Simpson points out, do watch out for nfs as far as security goes. Brian
Re: Corel Linux ships with qmail installed, but not running
"Chris L. Mason" wrote: > > Perhaps Corel is planning to use qmail in future versions and it just wasn't > ready for 1.0? I've been waiting awhile for a Linux distribution to come > out that uses qmail as the default MTA (or at least offers the choice of > using it over sendmail in the installation.) > > Chris I think linux distributors are waiting for qmail to be able to combine non-VERP messages for same remote machine into single transmissions; or perhaps for a configuration GUI. (it would thave to be standard and extensible, so qmail extensions could extend the GUI as well) Where's your distribution, then, Chris? Does not the existence of easily available qmail RPMs qualify? __ David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED] grep -v 0 /proc/*/where
Re: QPopper3.0b26 with Mailbox
> Has anyone could help me to configure qpopper3.0b26 using Mailbox > > thanks in advance Edit popper.h and uncomment the #define for qmail. Then build as normal. Qmail support for mbox style mailboxes is now built in to qpopper ver3. Vince. -- == Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSHemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.pop4.net 128K ISDN: $24.95/mo or less - 56K Dialup: $17.95/mo or less at Pop4 Online Campground Directoryhttp://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstorehttp://www.cloudninegifts.com ==
QPopper3.0b26 with Mailbox
Has anyone could help me to configure qpopper3.0b26 using Mailbox thanks in advance -- - Luís Bezerra de A. Junior [EMAIL PROTECTED] SecrelNet Informática LTDA Fortaleza - Ceará - Brasil Fone: 021852882090 -
Re: Using mutt and qmail.
Quoting Magnus Bodin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 05:57:30PM +0100, Arne Hanssen wrote: > > Anyone who wants to comment on this (and perhaps explaing "things" > > to me)? ;-) Perhaps there are better ways to set the correct > > Return-Path. > > In your .muttrc: > > set hostname = go.telia.no Hmmm that didn't really work for me. I've had to take care of this by setting QMAILSHOST in my environment. Aaron
Re: Using mutt and qmail.
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 05:57:30PM +0100, Arne Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) Some days ago on this list, some guys were discussing whether >Return-Path is set by the MUA or the MTA. This is an issue for > me as I have (had?) problems with this, using mutt. Even if I try > to include a "my_hdr" it will not work; my mail is refused by my > ISP because "sender domain must exist", and of course Return-Path > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (my local machine) does not exist. I want > Return-Path to be <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Return-Path is set by the MTA at final delivery (which may include programs). > Reading docs I discover that qmail-inject strips away any occurence > of Return-Path (the person arguing that this header value was solely > a matter of the MUA must be wrong, or I'm missing something?). qmail-inject allows you to use this header to set the envelope sender address. It is possible to set this a couple of different ways. > I have now made a change in .muttrc (set sendmail="..qmail-inject > [EMAIL PROTECTED]") and it might be working now. Hopefully there is > no drawbacks(?) > Anyone who wants to comment on this (and perhaps explaing "things" > to me)? ;-) Perhaps there are better ways to set the correct > Return-Path. You might want to use the environment variable QMAILHOST to set this for you.
Re: Server cluster
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Michael Boman wrote: > I am writing to you all looking for some answers for a future > project.. Is it possible to do a cluster of qmail servers using DNS > and NFS? yes, although i'm not a big fan of nfs unless it's behind a STRONG firewall. i set up something similar at the isp where i used to work, to distribute the load among several mail servers. the system is still running just as i set it up, although they've re-done one of the machines (changed it from suse to redhat to match all of the others.) it does not use nfs at all. the trick is that we had several "mailhub" machines, with separate servers for pop3 and virtual domains. the publicly visible MX records all point to the mailhubs only, and the /var/qmail/control/smtproutes file on each mailhub points each domain to the correct machine (pop3 or virtual). this forces all incoming mail to traverse one of these three machines, but removes that load from the pop3 server entirely. i wrote a set of perl scripts that used ssh to automatically update the config files on the various servers so that everything was in sync with each other. it took a while to put together but once i finished it, it worked really well (and is still working, even though i'm not there anymore.) the MX records for all domains point to "smtp1.blah.net", "smtp2.blah.net", and "smtp3.blah.net" with non-equal weights. the trick which distributes the load is that there are multiple A records. the zone file for the primary domain (here called "blah.net") looks like this: smtp1.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.5 smtp1.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.6 smtp1.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.7 smtp2.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.6 smtp2.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.7 smtp2.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.5 smtp3.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.7 smtp3.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.5 smtp3.blah.net.IN A 10.0.0.6 blah.net. IN MX1 smtp1.blah.net. blah.net. IN MX2 smtp2.blah.net. blah.net. IN MX3 smtp3.blah.net. smtp.blah.net. IN CNAME smtp1.blah.net. pop3.blah.net. IN A 10.0.0.9 virtual.blah.net. IN A 10.0.0.13 client domains are configured thusly... client.com IN MX 1 smtp1.blah.net. client.com IN MX 2 smtp2.blah.net. client.com IN MX 3 smtp3.blah.net. and the "smtproutes" files on the mailhubs looks like this: blah.net:pop3.blah.net client.com:virtual.blah.net client2.com:virtual.blah.net client3.com:virtual.blah.net note again that this setup does not need nfs at all. the only need for nfs would be if you had multiple machines doing pop3 duty, and nfs would almost be wasted because the machine which physically housed the mailbox directories would still be a single point of failure. note also that all machines other than the mail servers (dns servers, web servers, etc...) are running "mini-qmail" as detailed on one of djb's pages, and the mailhubs are all running "qmail-qmqpd" under "tcpserver" with the appropriate access control in order to handle outgoing mail. the mailhubs should also be running "named", configured to only answer queries from the localhost interface (i.e. they only serve themselves.) if your site uses multiple name servers which update each other, the name servers on the mailhubs should be updated with the name servers' normal update cycle. this will save the network traffic from DNS queries and will speed up qmail, since most DNS queries will be answered within the same machine, and usually from named's cache. the mailhubs are running qmail 1.03 with some anti-spam patches. they don't need to be powerhouses, the ones i set up ranged from a pentium 166 to a pentium 350, each with 128MB RAM and 2-4GB disk each, running redhat. the pop3 server is running qmail 1.03 with djb's "checkpassword" and the imap server that comes as part of pine, with the bloodhound maildir patches applied. the tcp-access list for the smtp/qmtp servers only allows the mailhubs to send mail into the machine. sqwebmail with system passwords could probably be installed here, but one of the other guys there wrote a web-based mail reader in php that uses imap on the local machine, and he's the one who now maintains the machine so that's what is running. (i didn't find out about the inter7 programs until after i left.) the machine should have fast disks with enough space to store your users' mailboxes, lots of memory, and enough CPU to drive it all. ours was a sparc 2000e with 6 cpu's, 1GB RAM, and a 9GB scsi ultra-wide hard drive on a dedicated differential controller for nothing but mailboxes, running solaris because linux didn't quite work on the multi-processor sparc machines when we got it. the virtual domain server is running a custom-written interface that i did long ago in perl and c, although the inter7 programs (vpopmail, qmailadmin, sqwebmail, etc.) could be used here just as easily, and probably would have smaller cpu and memory loads since the perl interpreter wouldn't be use
Re: Using mutt and qmail.
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 05:57:30PM +0100, Arne Hanssen wrote: > I'm no Linux expert and have some questions regarding mail handling. > My system is PentiumII, RedHat 6.1, kernel 2.2.13 and qmail 1.03 > without tcpserver and such recommended stuff (it works without so far). > I'm using KDE 1.1.2 (I think) and qmail was installed before upgrading > RH from 5.2 to 6.x (first 6.0, then 6.1). After which qmail claims > to be dead, but runs all the same - seems quite ok! ;-/ > > 1) Some days ago on this list, some guys were discussing whether >Return-Path is set by the MUA or the MTA. This is an issue for > me as I have (had?) problems with this, using mutt. Even if I try > to include a "my_hdr" it will not work; my mail is refused by my > ISP because "sender domain must exist", and of course Return-Path > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (my local machine) does not exist. I want > Return-Path to be <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > Reading docs I discover that qmail-inject strips away any occurence > of Return-Path (the person arguing that this header value was solely > a matter of the MUA must be wrong, or I'm missing something?). > I have now made a change in .muttrc (set sendmail="..qmail-inject > [EMAIL PROTECTED]") and it might be working now. Hopefully there is > no drawbacks(?) > Anyone who wants to comment on this (and perhaps explaing "things" > to me)? ;-) Perhaps there are better ways to set the correct > Return-Path. In your .muttrc: set hostname = go.telia.no gott nytt år! /magnus -- http://x42.com/ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Say NO to HTML in email and news x
Using mutt and qmail.
I'm no Linux expert and have some questions regarding mail handling. My system is PentiumII, RedHat 6.1, kernel 2.2.13 and qmail 1.03 without tcpserver and such recommended stuff (it works without so far). I'm using KDE 1.1.2 (I think) and qmail was installed before upgrading RH from 5.2 to 6.x (first 6.0, then 6.1). After which qmail claims to be dead, but runs all the same - seems quite ok! ;-/ 1) Some days ago on this list, some guys were discussing whether Return-Path is set by the MUA or the MTA. This is an issue for me as I have (had?) problems with this, using mutt. Even if I try to include a "my_hdr" it will not work; my mail is refused by my ISP because "sender domain must exist", and of course Return-Path <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (my local machine) does not exist. I want Return-Path to be <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Reading docs I discover that qmail-inject strips away any occurence of Return-Path (the person arguing that this header value was solely a matter of the MUA must be wrong, or I'm missing something?). I have now made a change in .muttrc (set sendmail="..qmail-inject [EMAIL PROTECTED]") and it might be working now. Hopefully there is no drawbacks(?) Anyone who wants to comment on this (and perhaps explaing "things" to me)? ;-) Perhaps there are better ways to set the correct Return-Path. 2) Perhaps this is a mutt question, but is it possible to prevent my outoing mail to be sent immediately (my router making a call for every single mail)? With KMail this was no problem as KMail did not send until requested. If this isn't easily solved from mutt, is there a way to configure qmail to not send remote mail until requested or something like that? Seems to me that that would be the preferred way. Thank you! ;-) -- Vennlig hilsen / Best regards |\ ___,,--,_ Arne Hanssen, Senja, Norway /,`--''\-,,__,'/ http://home.telia.no/ahh/|,4 ) )_) /~-' '---^~(_/-_)--(_/_)---
Strange mail deliver
Hi there, my system is called "mohawk.n-online.net" Sometime is recieve (postmaster) mails with the following header : --- Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 26510 invoked by alias); 27 Dec 1999 14:04:46 - Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 26506 invoked from network); 27 Dec 1999 14:04:45 - Received: from unknown (HELO pc1) (195.30.220.10) by mohawk.n-online.net with SMTP; 27 Dec 1999 14:04:45 - Message-ID: <001d01bf5073$1e6a3040$2109a8c0@pc1> From: "mohr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sch=F6pe=2C_Alex?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Stromabschaltung Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 15:02:51 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_NextPart_000_001A_01BF507B.72239FC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 --- As you can see, there is a delivered-to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" So i told our customer to check the recipient of the email. An hour later i receieved the same message again, resend by our customer. So what could this be the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", because our customers don't know the realname of our mailserver. Seems that qmail mixes up some adresses ?!?! Thanks for your Help, Thomas
Re: Server cluster
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 10:07:04AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Michael Boman spake unto me and said: > > Let me see if I get this right, it is OK to share the /home/vpopmail > > directory, but not the others? Anyone have ideas how to keep the qmail > > controlfiles etc up-to-date on each computer, or can I just share that > > directory (/var/qmail/control and maybe /var/qmail/alias). > > > /var/qmail/queue > > /var/qmail/queue is the one thing you simply CANNOT share; qmail cannot > queue messages through NFS. (Read INSTALL.maildir; you'll see that Dan > takes a dim view of NFS.) > > > /var/qmail/control > > Sharing /var/qmail/control is possible, if you're careful. It probably > means that home directories are NFS mounted, and passwords are NIS > shared. This in turn means: > > 1. mbox delivery is deprecated; use Maildir. See INSTALL.maildir, > INSTALL.mbox and INSTALL.vsm. > > 2. Mail will bounce unless you follow the steps in FAQ 4.9: "How do > I make qmail defer messages during NFS or NIS outages?" > > An alternative to sharing is to use sed and rsync (with "-e ssh"). > The qmail Makefile contains an elegant use of sed for that purpose. > > > /var/qmail/bin > > You certainly can share /var/qmail/bin if you want. Make sure the > qmail users and groups have the same IDs on every host. Also, paths > need to agree: for example /var/qmail/queue should always get you to > the right place. > > > /var/qmail/alias > > Can be shared. Remember, it's a home directory; use Maildir. Also, > it's your problem to make sure that .qmail-* files work everywhere. > > > HTH, > Len. The boxes will be identical clones of each other except the hostname and the hardware... /Mike -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Cristal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Server cluster
Michael Boman spake unto me and said: > Let me see if I get this right, it is OK to share the /home/vpopmail > directory, but not the others? Anyone have ideas how to keep the qmail > controlfiles etc up-to-date on each computer, or can I just share that > directory (/var/qmail/control and maybe /var/qmail/alias). /var/qmail/queue /var/qmail/queue is the one thing you simply CANNOT share; qmail cannot queue messages through NFS. (Read INSTALL.maildir; you'll see that Dan takes a dim view of NFS.) /var/qmail/control Sharing /var/qmail/control is possible, if you're careful. It probably means that home directories are NFS mounted, and passwords are NIS shared. This in turn means: 1. mbox delivery is deprecated; use Maildir. See INSTALL.maildir, INSTALL.mbox and INSTALL.vsm. 2. Mail will bounce unless you follow the steps in FAQ 4.9: "How do I make qmail defer messages during NFS or NIS outages?" An alternative to sharing is to use sed and rsync (with "-e ssh"). The qmail Makefile contains an elegant use of sed for that purpose. /var/qmail/bin You certainly can share /var/qmail/bin if you want. Make sure the qmail users and groups have the same IDs on every host. Also, paths need to agree: for example /var/qmail/queue should always get you to the right place. /var/qmail/alias Can be shared. Remember, it's a home directory; use Maildir. Also, it's your problem to make sure that .qmail-* files work everywhere. HTH, Len.
Re: Server cluster
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 08:33:10AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > Michael Boman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 07:08:01AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > >> > >> /var/qmail can't be shared, and shouldn't be remote. > > > >How can the mailservers help each other with outgoing mail then? > > There's really no way to have multiple servers responsible for > delivering the same message. You can spread the load across multiple > servers, but each server will be solely responsible for its messages. > > >Is /var/qmail/queue enough to share for that, or is each server for > >itself? > > You can't share /var/qmail/queue. > > -Dave Let me see if I get this right, it is OK to share the /home/vpopmail directory, but not the others? Anyone have ideas how to keep the qmail controlfiles etc up-to-date on each computer, or can I just share that directory (/var/qmail/control and maybe /var/qmail/alias). Please advice /Michael -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Cristal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Server cluster
Michael Boman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 07:08:01AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: >> >> /var/qmail can't be shared, and shouldn't be remote. > >How can the mailservers help each other with outgoing mail then? There's really no way to have multiple servers responsible for delivering the same message. You can spread the load across multiple servers, but each server will be solely responsible for its messages. >Is /var/qmail/queue enough to share for that, or is each server for >itself? You can't share /var/qmail/queue. -Dave
Re: Server cluster
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 07:08:01AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > Michael Boman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >mail01-xx: Slave servers. Same software configuration except that the > >/home/vpopmail and /var/qmail/ is NFS mounted from mail00. Running on > >a cheaper computer (no raid). > > /var/qmail can't be shared, and shouldn't be remote. > > -Dave How can the mailservers help each other with outgoing mail then? Is /var/qmail/queue enough to share for that, or is each server for itself? Please advice /Michael Boman -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Cristal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Server cluster
Michael Boman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >mail01-xx: Slave servers. Same software configuration except that the >/home/vpopmail and /var/qmail/ is NFS mounted from mail00. Running on >a cheaper computer (no raid). /var/qmail can't be shared, and shouldn't be remote. -Dave
Re: Server cluster
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 07:06:36PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote: > I am writing to you all looking for some answers for a future project.. Is > it possible to do a cluster of qmail servers using DNS and NFS? > > This is what I am planning to do: > > DNS: > > > Add serveral MX records in the DNS > > Add a few mashines with different IP but the same hostname in the DNS > (So the DNS will switch between the servers). I'm doing the same thing with one MX record which points to a name with multiple IPs on it. Same idea, more transparent. > The computers: > == > > mail00: The master server, using raid 5, have allot of diskspace, > memory etc.. Like our comin-up NetApp :) > mail01-xx: Slave servers. Same software configuration except that the > /home/vpopmail and /var/qmail/ is NFS mounted from mail00. Running on > a cheaper computer (no raid). > > I am running: > > qmail 1.03 > ezmlm 0.53 > vpopmail 3.4.10 > sqwebmail 0.26 > qmailadmin 0.25 > > Services provided: SMTP/POP3/IMAP(?)/WebBased mail > > Can you see any problems with this setup? What should I think about? The big problem is your mail00 - if that one goes down, all is gone. There are basically 2 ways to solve your problem: this one, or having front-end mailservers that know which users are on which system, and something similar to that for POP. casema.net is running this, for example. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Server cluster
I am writing to you all looking for some answers for a future project.. Is it possible to do a cluster of qmail servers using DNS and NFS? This is what I am planning to do: DNS: Add serveral MX records in the DNS Add a few mashines with different IP but the same hostname in the DNS (So the DNS will switch between the servers). The computers: == mail00: The master server, using raid 5, have allot of diskspace, memory etc.. mail01-xx: Slave servers. Same software configuration except that the /home/vpopmail and /var/qmail/ is NFS mounted from mail00. Running on a cheaper computer (no raid). I am running: qmail 1.03 ezmlm 0.53 vpopmail 3.4.10 sqwebmail 0.26 qmailadmin 0.25 Services provided: SMTP/POP3/IMAP(?)/WebBased mail Can you see any problems with this setup? What should I think about? Please advice /Michael Boman -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M - Your Online Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Cristal Time Building, #06-00, Singapore 347778 Ring : (65) 844 3228 [ext 118] Fax : (65) 842 7228 email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
qmail Digest 27 Dec 1999 11:00:00 -0000 Issue 862
qmail Digest 27 Dec 1999 11:00:00 - Issue 862 Topics (messages 34805 through 34808): Re: Problem with Amavis 34805 by: Carsten Witt qmail blackout 34806 by: Claudiu Balciza Setting Up a POP3 server 34807 by: David Uzzell 34808 by: Keith Warno Administrivia: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To bug my human owner, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to the list, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Hi, here is the the old and the new script. I don't know what exectly is wrong. The old Version works fine. But ... The new works finer. If you see what is wrong you could tell me please. Thanks Carsten - Original Message - From: Rainer Link <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Carsten Witt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 12:54 PM Subject: Re: Problem with Amavis > On 26 Dec 99, at 2:30, Carsten Witt wrote: > > > it is running. > > Thanks, thanks, thanks. > > It was my mistake. My startup script was wrong. > > I've changed it and it runs. Sorry. > > Can you please tell us (or at least Chris), which startup script was wrong and > what (exactly) in the startup script was wrong? > This could be helpful for the future to improve our support (maybe anyone in the > future will have a similar problem.) > > > At last can you tell me with price the mcafee cost for a university? > > Well, have a look at www.mcafee.de or www.mcafee.com (www.nai.com) > Via eMail it should be for Germany either > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Via telephone here in Germany (0800) 100 52 62 > > HTH > > best regards, > Rainer Link > > > > Rainer Link, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://rainer.w3.to > qmail.new qmail.old Hi, During the Xmas, I seem to have experienced some problems with my qmail mail server. This list's ezmlm complains: ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >207.241.173.142 does not like recipient. >Remote host said: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) >Giving up on 207.241.173.142. and I seem to have lost some 40 messages. Needless to say, altex.ro is listed in locals and rcpthosts. There's nothing wrong in the logs. How can I track down this blackout ? Claudiu I am haveing trouble setting up a POP3 server on qmail/FreeBSD3.3. I have tried to get qpopper to work with the patch to use ~/Mailbox format. Can someone help or can I setup up an IMAP server for ~/Mailbox dirs. I would like this much better. If someone could help with either Thanks. Workaround (although a dirty one): Make a symlink /var/spool/mail/$USER (replace /var/spool/mail/ with the path to where your mail spool would normally live it you were using that holey sendmail beast) to $HOME/Mailbox. Do this for each $USER. Make sure /var/spool/mail/ (or whatever) has those evil 1777 permissions too. I think there is a blurb in the FAQ about this. Although it's dirty it should allow for both your POP and IMAP server to work _without_being_patched_. While on the subject, I had to do this symlink crap for my mx box. It makes me cringe. Using mbox mail delivery makes me cringe yet again but currently it's a necessary evil. I would switch to Maildir but everyone at my place here (excluding myself) uses IMAP for fetching their mail. Qmail comes with a nice Maildir popper, but is there an IMAP demon that works with Maildir delivery??? - Original Message - From: "David Uzzell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 27, 1999 2:14 AM Subject: Setting Up a POP3 server | I am haveing trouble setting up a POP3 server on qmail/FreeBSD3.3. | | I have tried to get qpopper to work with the patch to use ~/Mailbox format. | Can someone help or can I setup up an IMAP server for ~/Mailbox dirs. I | would like this much better. If someone could help with either Thanks. | |
