Re: dnscache, multilog
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 09:44:42PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: exec setuidgid root multilog t s2 n2 -\*cached\* ./main '-* cached *' ./main multilog doesn't use traditional unix/dos shell wildcards. A star stands for "ignore everything up to the next instance of the character following the star" (a star at the end of the pattern matches any string). btw: there a mailinglists for the logging utilities of daemontools and for dnscache. Regards, Uwe
Re: Is there a way to relay mail based on username/password ?
That's what the POP before SMTP solution does. See qmail.org for a couple of different implementations. There has been some work done on authenticated SMTP but it is not universally supported yet. On Sat, 13 May 2000, Dinesh Punjabi wrote: Is it possible to setup relaying based purely on username and password? There are users that use dial up accounts under many ISP's. It becomes very difficult to track users based on IPs and/or domains. - 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: Share queue between servers and other questions.
On Sat, 13 May 2000, Michael Boman wrote: What I want is to be able to share the queue between n+2 servers on each loocation as well as be able to split a single domain's mailstorage so each users doesn't need to download his/hers email from the other end of the world. the queue itself cannot be shared due to qmail's way of ensuring consistancy, however you can share the load between the two machines in several ways: a) give each cluster of machines in each location a local IP address from RFC1918 and configure a name to point to that set of IP addresses. by using IP routing divert traffic to those IP addresses at each location to the cluster of machines. b) use a transport-layer switch to route the trafic c) simpler version of (a) point the same name to all of the machines and don't worry if your user's traffic goes to the wrong location. configure your DNS servers to return IP addresses closest to the user to minimize this as far as mail storage goes, move that off onto a separate cluster of machines and get the mail routers to deliver mail to the machine closest to where the user is, then pick one of a) b) or c) above RjL == You know that. I know that. But when || Austin, Texas you talk to a monkey you have to || Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] grunt and wave your arms -ck ||
Re: fastforward?- new to qmail
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 12:40:51PM -0600, Aaron Reynolds wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Again. My qmail server is not on b.com domain. It is on a.com. I have b.com is neither in virtualdomains nor in locals, right? Then qmail doesn't treat it as local. There are ways around that (involving virtualdomains and a program to send the email - rewritten or not - to another host). put in the fastforward entry in /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-default. What am I doing wrong? Thanks for any help. You are making assumptions about a remote database which you do not control, in that case the mailer configuration on b.com. Regards, Uwe
Re: Purpose of this list
Hi James,
Sad to say, this list's subscribership is just like many of the technical
lists I participate in. There are many who maintain a level of empathy,
exhibit patience and offer resolute advice... BUT ... there a some who
are... uu not exhibiting those qualities.
That kind of reception creates a restricted maillist where people who have
legitimate needs hesitate to post publicly for fear of a public putdown.
So lurkers are born, waiting in the wings, hoping that someone else will
post their same problem and elicit a solution... or they spend valuable
time searching through archives. Kind of sad, imo.
Not that this will make it all better, but typically members the former
group cringed when they see posts from the latter group that berate a
newbie. I, for one, am glad you posted your comments and would encourage
those who have needs to do exactly what you've done, research a solution,
try it, ask for help, ignore the "non-helpful" folks.
Guess we all have to chalk the nasty posts up to one or more of the following:
1) Having a generally bad day
2) Being constipated
3) Probable immaturity
4) Financial problems
5) Dog died
6) Other
:)
HTH,
Nikki
At 06:55 AM 05/13/2000 , you wrote:
Of course I realize that reading the manual, going through the steps of
Life With Qmail or viewing the FAQs is the best first step.. but once one
takes every step mentioned, and things STILL don't work, it's very hard to
maintain calm as people *keep* suggesting that it's a good idea to read
the manual.
Just as those who have been around forever get upset with hearing the same
questions over and over, new users who follow proper steps and STILL have
problems also get tired of hearing about "reading the #$$% manual."
SunTrix Com Management
Nikki Cook
("The Buck Stops Here")
-o-
SunTrix Com Internet Services
Daytona Beach, Florida
PPP and Shell Accounts (904) 258-5434
WEB Design [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.suntrix.com
WEBBnet IRC Network
irc.webbnet.org | irc.us.webbnet.org
~
qmail / mysql (/ldap)
Hi, is there a qmail-mysql-module, like qmail-ldap? Or does anyone have some scripts to bring a database from mysql to ldap? Best Regards, Joerg Ebel Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Purpose of this list
I've received a couple of messages both on this list, and personal email that consistently suggest that I read the manual before posting here. Of course I realize that reading the manual, going through the steps of Life With Qmail or viewing the FAQs is the best first step.. but once one takes every step mentioned, and things STILL don't work, it's very hard to maintain calm as people *keep* suggesting that it's a good idea to read the manual. Just as those who have been around forever get upset with hearing the same questions over and over, new users who follow proper steps and STILL have problems also get tired of hearing about "reading the #$$% manual." For one example.. I have no idea as to why, when I sent a test message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] during one hour it was rejected multiple times, then trying again 4 hours later it goes through just fine.. when I changed *nothing* at all on my server. And one other soapbox spew.. When I receive a question such as "Are you sure you are talking to [your ip address here]?" and I answer "How would I know?".. this doesn't mean I haven't tested ping, or whois, or whereis etc.. because I have, it means that if there is some *other* way of knowing, please tell me now. Many of you have been quite helpful, and I appreciate every answer in reply because I know it takes time, your valuable time, to try and figure out a problem.. but it also takes time and determination to decide to weather out the problems for days in order to make one program work right. Both sides should be commended for effort. Whatever I learn on this list I will do what I can to give back to those who have questions, or run into the same problems I have had here. And even though I try to be thorough in my question posts, I guess I need to be more thorough still with every step I have tried.. because I only ask questions here AFTER I have tried every step I can find in either a FAQ or HOWTO. Again, thanks for all the help and please, some of you, try not to be so hard on those of us asking seemingly trivial questions when often (or at least in my case) hours have already been spent trying to figure out a problem before coming here to ask for help. James
Re: Purpose of this list
On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 03:55:31AM -0700, James wrote:
I've received a couple of messages both on this list, and personal email
that consistently suggest that I read the manual before posting here.
Of course I realize that reading the manual, going through the steps of
Life With Qmail or viewing the FAQs is the best first step.. but once one
takes every step mentioned, and things STILL don't work, it's very hard to
maintain calm as people *keep* suggesting that it's a good idea to read
the manual.
I don't know if you did this, but it MIGHT be a good idea to actually STATE
that you've read Dave Sill's LWQ and the FAQ's and the appropriate man page
before posting
I don't know if you've noticed, but there are *a lot* of questions posted to
this list which could have *easily* been resolved by reading the appropriate
material.
The people on this list are not *mind readers*. If you don't tell them you've
read all the material they, logically, assume that you haven't.
Some people find it easier to ask ("stupid") questions on the list then to
read the rather plentyful documentation.
Another recent example was that someone changed his domain name in a post
on this list.
When he finally told the domain name the problem was *immediately* solved...
And one other soapbox spew.. When I receive a question such as "Are you
sure you are talking to [your ip address here]?" and I answer "How would I
know?".. this doesn't mean I haven't tested ping, or whois, or
whereis etc.. because I have, it means that if there is some *other* way
of knowing, please tell me now.
You're right, but if you don't *STATE* that you've done ping, whois, nslookup
etc. again nobody *knows* you did this ;-)
Whatever I learn on this list I will do what I can to give back to those
who have questions, or run into the same problems I have had here. And
even though I try to be thorough in my question posts, I guess I need to
be more thorough still with every step I have tried.. because I only ask
questions here AFTER I have tried every step I can find in either a FAQ or
HOWTO.
This may be a natural path/assumption for you, but not for others on this list.
James
My 2 cents worth,
Steffan
--
http://therookie.dyndns.org
Re: Share queue between servers and other questions.
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 10:07:34AM -0400, Greg Owen wrote: I _need_ What is need, compared to the path? Share queue between ... several servers (atleast 4 servers) on different sites can process the queue. I'm heavily editing here, but are you REALLY saying you want a queue shared between different sites which: spread all over the world, and the connection to the HQ is not always acceptible when it comes to speed and quality (not becasue HQ is in a bad place, but that the braches don't have that high-speed and good lines to the 'net). So your sites are: 1) seperated by great distance, which rules out any SAN or NAS 2) Connected by questionable data links, which may suffer from low performance or occassional downtime. So, because of the distance, you'll need to use a networked filesystem like NFS, AFS, etc. But networked filesystems are designed for LAN environments where performance is reasonable and link downtime is rare. If you attempt to share your queue (or your mail store) like this, you are guaranteeing that performance and reliability will suffer. Please help me with a solution to this problem else I'll end up installing sendmail sometime next week. You don't want a solution to your problem, you want an implementation for your solution. But your proposed solution is suboptimal to say the least. Why don't you state the problem instead? What I want is to be able to share the queue between n+2 servers on each loocation as well as be able to split a single domain's mailstorage so each users doesn't need to download his/hers email from the other end of the world. Best regards Michael Boman -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- W I Z O F F I C E . C O M L T D - Your Online Office Wizard 16 Tannery Lane, Crystal Time Building, #04-00, Singapore 347778 Voice : (+65) 844 3228 [extension 118] Fax : (+65) 842 7228 Pager : (+65) 92 93 29 49 ICQ : 5566009 Mobile: (+65) 97 87 39 14 eMail : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
Re: Wrong subject line
That last message I sent had the wrong subject line after "FIXED".. God my brain is fried tonight. It should have said: Problem FIXED (was Help me understand "allowed rcpthosts") Sorry about that.. I'm not sure if Bob Brown fixed his problem or not. James
Problem FIXED (was qmail-smtp appears to work but doesn't)
I don't know why, but when I sent a few email tests to my server at around 4:30 this afternoon (about 6 hours ago), it kept coming back rejected. When I got home and did another test, the mail went through fine. I did nothing since my last test (I had to leave). I don't really care why it started working, I'm just happy it is now. Thanks for all the help and suggestions. James
Is there a way to relay mail based on username/password ?
Is it possible to setup relaying based purely on username and password? There are users that use dial up accounts under many ISP's. It becomes very difficult to track users based on IPs and/or domains. Is there a way to authenticate users, based on some password (possibly the same one as their email account!) which will determine their ability to relay email (smtp). Thanks, I am extremely grateful to this mailing list for all your continued help and support. __ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
Qmail doesn't deliver local mail via localhost
Bob Brown and I seem to have a similar problem with qmail. I had this working originally before I started working on vpopmail, but after trying to help Bob out with his problem I found I now have the problem as well. I can't speak for Bob on this part but I know that I can send e-mail to my account and I get the message and see the info in the log file showing that. If I try to e-mail an account on my system qmail reports it sent the mail but there is no mail to be found. I have disabled vpopmail, pop3 daemons, the only thing running currently is qmail and qmail-smtpd. To me it sounds like a problem with qmail local can't deliver mail that is created locally because I can get mail from another account fine. Here is something interesting someone could explain to me. I found this in my log it is a previous (before working on vpopmail) entry : new msg 28803 info msg 28803: bytes 205 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] qp 7636 uid 0 starting delivery 1: msg 28803 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 delivery 1: success: did_1+0+0/ status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 end msg 28803 Here is what my log says now when I try to e-mail my self on the same machine: new msg 28807 info msg 28807: bytes 214 from qp 23995 uid 2850 starting delivery 3: msg 28807 to local @atlas.teoi.net status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 delivery 4: success: status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 end msg 28807 Notice the info msg line it says from uid 2850 (which on my system uid 2850 is qmaild), on the log entry above that, that worked originally the info msg line says [EMAIL PROTECTED] uid 0 (root). I have enabled vpopmail and tried to e-mail a virtual domain and the same thing happened, re-disabled vpopmail and pop3d until this is working. Something is stripping the address out of locally created messages because smtpd delivered messages work fine. I am using Openbsd 2.6 and qmail 1.03 Anyone have any suggestions? Thanks! Dale
Re: Filtering
Patrick Berry (Fri 12.0500-15:52): Try using /var/qmail/control/databytes i was about to ask the same question, but your answer made me check my installation and upgrade to 1.03. however, i miss the functionality of control/recipientmap, since several automatic processes on my system use different methods to denote "localhost". can i rely entirely on control/locals? or should i (ab)use control/virtualdomains to canonicalize the name of this local-host? i am puzzled: how have meanings changed from 1.01 to 1.03? -- clemens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
qmail Digest 13 May 2000 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1000
qmail Digest 13 May 2000 10:00:00 - Issue 1000 Topics (messages 41601 through 41678): Re: Virtual domain bounce 41601 by: Juan E Suris qmail: can't create subfolder 41602 by: Derek Smith 41605 by: Tim Hunter 41614 by: Derek Smith Ezmlm web front 41603 by: Rodney Edwards 41606 by: Ben Beuchler 41635 by: Steffan Hoeke 41646 by: Chester Chee 41648 by: Steffan Hoeke 41663 by: Peter Green Re: Share queue between servers and other questions. 41604 by: Greg Owen usage of maildrop 41607 by: Mark Lo Re: Usage for Maildrop or Promcmail 41608 by: Dave Sill Subject:SMTP POP ports are non responding 41609 by: ravivr.hss.hns.com SMTP POP ports are non responding 41610 by: ravivr.hss.hns.com Re: What is wrong, then? 41611 by: Dave Sill Re: MailDrop or Procamail 41612 by: Dave Sill bypassing relaydomains (reverse DNS issues) 41613 by: Dinesh Punjabi 41671 by: ino-waiting.gmx.net Re: spool vs individual files 41615 by: Dave Sill 41620 by: Mikko Hänninen 41623 by: David L. Nicol 41624 by: Chin Fang 41670 by: ino-waiting.gmx.net Auto Resolve sender's domain 41616 by: Mark Lo 41618 by: Dave Sill Re: tcpserver error message in /var/log/qmail/smtpd/current 41617 by: Dave Sill 41629 by: Eric Fletcher Improving queue performance using the noatime mount option in Solaris? 41619 by: Chin Fang 41621 by: markd.bushwire.net 41622 by: Chin Fang Re: running qmail smtpd at a different port 41625 by: Chester Chee 41626 by: Dave Sill 41628 by: Chester Chee Re: Hanging smtpd processes - Again w/more info 41627 by: markd.bushwire.net Re: Port 25 41630 by: Eric Cox 41653 by: Dale Miracle fastforward?- new to qmail 41631 by: Aaron Reynolds 41678 by: Uwe Ohse Looking for pointers with qmail delivery problems (additional inf o provided with original message) 41632 by: Narvekar, Ashish "What is wrong then" FIXED 41633 by: James dnscache, multilog 41634 by: ino-waiting.gmx.net 41677 by: Uwe Ohse Need help with Novell/GW SMTP and QMail 41636 by: Jose de Leon Help me understand "allowed rcpthosts" 41637 by: James 41638 by: Kai MacTane 41639 by: James 41640 by: James 41641 by: Eric Cox 41642 by: Tim Hunter 41643 by: Matthew 41644 by: James 41645 by: Chris Johnson 41647 by: James 41649 by: Tim Hunter 41650 by: Chris Johnson 41651 by: James 41652 by: Chris Johnson Re: qmail-smtpd appears to work but doesn't 41654 by: Dale Miracle 41656 by: James 41674 by: Bob Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] 41655 by: James 41668 by: Ricardo Cerqueira Filtering 41657 by: pom.online.bg 41659 by: Patrick Berry 41660 by: pom.online.bg 41661 by: Thorkild Stray 41662 by: Jon Rust 41664 by: Einar Bordewich Re: How do you do it? 41658 by: Aled Treharne automatically resolve dns 41665 by: Mark Lo 41666 by: Chris Johnson 41667 by: Mark Lo Vertify the e-mail address; 41669 by: Mark Lo 41673 by: Steve Wolfe qfilelog... 41672 by: Jason Ingham Problem FIXED (was qmail-smtp appears to work but doesn't) 41675 by: James Re: Wrong subject line 41676 by: James 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] -- Peter van Dijk writes: On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 01:44:53AM +, Juan E Suris wrote: Peter van Dijk writes: On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 01:36:28AM +, Juan E Suris wrote: Hi All, I know that when a bounce is generated, qmail will use control/me as the bouncehost. is there a way to overide this? I would like bounces from a virtual domain to have itself as the bouncehost and not control/me. Can this be done? No. As far as I know, ther are no patches to do so. Thanks. Well, I was thinking of just having another qmail installation to handle bounces and set control/me to the virtual domain, but that seemed a little bit of an overkill. Any suggestions? That would involve one qmail installation per qmail domain, which would be overkill indeed. True in the case of many domains, but I will just have 2, the local domain plus 1 virtual domain. So, only two instalations would be needed. Still, I hope there is a better solution. JES Hi, I'm using courier IMAP (don't
Re: qmail-smtpd appears to work but doesn't
Dale Miracle (Fri 12.0500-18:13): Mailbox or Maildir file (depending on which method you are using). You should be able to view the Mailbox or Maildir with a text editor or with the more or less pager less filename.ext or more filename.ext . ...or with your favourite mail program (like i do7^). -- clemens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is there a way to relay mail based on username/password ?
Dinesh Punjabi wrote: Is it possible to setup relaying based purely on username and password? There are users that use dial up accounts under many ISP's. It becomes very difficult to track users based on IPs and/or domains. Is there a way to authenticate users, based on some password (possibly the same one as their email account!) which will determine their ability to relay email (smtp). Thanks, I am extremely grateful to this mailing list for all your continued help and support. __ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ A real easy one to setup and configure is vpopmail from www.inter7.com/vchkpw , I haven't personally tried that feature but it does support that. Later, Dale
