Slightly Off Topic
Kinda off topic, but with the intelligent people in this group hopefully I can get an answer. Since qmail doesn't support fallback smtp hosts, does anyone know how to setup linux to go out a different way...let me explain. I have 2 dsl connections to the internet with seperate providers. As it stands know if the one with the default route dies I am sunk unless I am here to change. I would like to have 2 default routes and have it use one as the primary and the other as the secondary default route. I have tried many different things but cannot get it to work. I have tried putting both in as default and one having a slightly higher metric and pulled the plug on the main on, but nothing goes out until I plug it back in. Any ideas??? Thanks, Shane Wise For the latest Nashville Weather Conditions Check http://www.nashvilleweather.net
RE: Alias Support Question
Tim, Thank you for the previous recommendations. However, it still is not working... (this is crazy) To answer you directly: 1) In /var/qmail/control does rcpthosts and locals have: missionprinting.org in them? ANSWER: rcpthosts did have it. locals did not have it. Instructions provided at: http://www.tibus.net/pgregg/projects/qmail/single-uid-howto.html specifically said not to add . to the locals file as it would disturb delivery of EMAIL. I tried it, and the server would receive EMAIL for everyone, but would not place the EMAIL in anyone's boxes. 2) Users are defined as you documented below in the assign file. 3) START/STOP QMAIL. At this point, I am rebooting the server just to be sure... *** More suggestions will be welcomed. Please keep me in mind! Thanks! Tom Sarratt -Original Message- From: Timothy Lorenc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 12:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Alias Support Question Tom, In /var/qmail/control does rcpthosts and locals have: missionprinting.org in them? And the next thing I can think of is where does the email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] point to? Is it defined in /var/qmail/users/assign file? =tom.sarrett.jr::UID:GID And then you created the cdb file using the /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu command? Or is it an aliases that is defined in /etc/aliases that is used by fastforward? I am just throwing out ideas... to debug this... And after all the changes, have you stopped and started qmail? I have attached a PDF which helps to show the flow through qmail (the Big Picture)... -Tim -Original Message- From: tom.sarratt.jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 9:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Alias Support Question Tim, Thanks for the suggestion, however, after changing ownership and acces params, it still would not work. Therefore, this is how the .qmail-postmaster file looks now: Filename: /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-postmaster access params: 0644 owner: root group: qmail File Contents: START OF FILE [EMAIL PROTECTED] END OF FILE Exact contents of the error message: *** START OF CONTENTS *** Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: (qmail 3525 invoked by uid 508); 5 Sep 2000 02:24:40 - Received: from unknown (HELO sarrtport1) (158.95.210.54) by mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org with SMTP; 5 Sep 2000 02:24:40 - Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "tom.sarratt.jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FW: TEST Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:23:35 -0500 Message-ID: <001901c016e0$4b73cea0$36d25f9e@sarrtport1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal ANOTHER TEST -Original Message- From: tom.sarratt.jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 9:22 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:TEST *** END OF CONTENTS *** Do anyone have any suggestions as to why the ALIAS support feature does not work? Thanks! Tom Sarratt -Original Message- From: Timothy Legant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 8:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Alias Support Question On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 11:04:10AM -0500, tom.sarratt.jr wrote: > [snip...] > Rights to the .qmail-postmaster file: > > access params:0664 > owner:alias > group:qmail [snip...] According to INSTALL.alias, you should create the ~alias/.qmail-XXX files by touching them. Presumably you *wouldn't* be logged in as alias, so the owner wouldn't be alias. Maybe that doesn't matter, but upon inspection, I find all my ~alias/.qmail-XXX files are owned by root:qmail. Also, and more importantly, the dot-qmail man page says: If .qmail is world-writable or group-writable, qmail-local stops and indicates a temporary failure. Your permissions are group writable. chmod 644 .qmail-postmaster and see if the delivery works. Tim -- Tim Legant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I have a problem
Ima Guru wrote: > > I have a problem with qmail. Can someone tell me how to fix it? Thanks! > > - Ima Guru Can you please stop being so verbose with your requests. You're clogging up the requests with redundant information in your question ;) Since you're so full in and descriptive in your question, here's the answer: maybe
I have a problem
I have a problem with qmail. Can someone tell me how to fix it? Thanks! - Ima Guru _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
RE: Alias Support Question
Dave, Earlier, you asked me for the data from the logfiles showing the event of sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] After some study, I found this information. Here it is: *** BEGINNING OF TRANSACTION *** Sep 5 04:01:36 mpmail smtpd: 968122896.088214 tcpserver: status: 1/32 Sep 5 04:01:36 mpmail smtpd: 968122896.089696 tcpserver: pid 3755 from 158.95.210.54 Sep 5 04:01:36 mpmail smtpd: 968122896.094373 tcpserver: ok 3755 mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org:158.95.210.7:25 :158.95.210.54::1069 Sep 5 04:01:36 mpmail smtpd: 968122896.143675 tcpserver: end 3755 status 0 Sep 5 04:01:36 mpmail smtpd: 968122896.143814 tcpserver: status: 0/32 *** END OF TRANSACTION *** Is this what you asked for? Thank you for any assistance you can send my way on this. Regards, Tom -Original Message- From: tom.sarratt.jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 9:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Alias Support Question Tim, Thanks for the suggestion, however, after changing ownership and acces params, it still would not work. Therefore, this is how the .qmail-postmaster file looks now: Filename: /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-postmaster access params: 0644 owner: root group: qmail File Contents: START OF FILE [EMAIL PROTECTED] END OF FILE Exact contents of the error message: *** START OF CONTENTS *** Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: (qmail 3525 invoked by uid 508); 5 Sep 2000 02:24:40 - Received: from unknown (HELO sarrtport1) (158.95.210.54) by mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org with SMTP; 5 Sep 2000 02:24:40 - Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "tom.sarratt.jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FW: TEST Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:23:35 -0500 Message-ID: <001901c016e0$4b73cea0$36d25f9e@sarrtport1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal ANOTHER TEST -Original Message- From: tom.sarratt.jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 9:22 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:TEST *** END OF CONTENTS *** Do anyone have any suggestions as to why the ALIAS support feature does not work? Thanks! Tom Sarratt -Original Message- From: Timothy Legant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 8:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Alias Support Question On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 11:04:10AM -0500, tom.sarratt.jr wrote: > [snip...] > Rights to the .qmail-postmaster file: > > access params:0664 > owner:alias > group:qmail [snip...] According to INSTALL.alias, you should create the ~alias/.qmail-XXX files by touching them. Presumably you *wouldn't* be logged in as alias, so the owner wouldn't be alias. Maybe that doesn't matter, but upon inspection, I find all my ~alias/.qmail-XXX files are owned by root:qmail. Also, and more importantly, the dot-qmail man page says: If .qmail is world-writable or group-writable, qmail-local stops and indicates a temporary failure. Your permissions are group writable. chmod 644 .qmail-postmaster and see if the delivery works. Tim -- Tim Legant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Limiting qmail to save OS
Hi , To increase the number of file descriptors on Redhat 6.x add this to then end of /etc/rc.d/rc.local . # increase max files echo "32768" > /proc/sys/fs/file-max # increase max inodes echo "131072" > /proc/sys/fs/inode-max Adjust the numbers to suit your install. You can also set the /proc values on the fly. To see how many files and inodes are in use cat /proc/sys/fs/file-nr cat /proc/sys/fs/inode-nr It gets a bit more complex than this as some programs set there maximum file descriptors at compile time ( eg squid) , dont think qmail falls into this category. You need to tweak some kernel include files for these ones /usr/include/linux/limits.h /usr/include/linux/tasks.h Regards Simon. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, 5 September 2000 5:46 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: FW: Limiting qmail to save OS > > > hello all > > frequently (about 2 times a month) the file limits are being > exceeded by > qmail haveing to many files open. The box only has qmail/vpopmail and > pop3 running on it. > > I have traced the 'failure' to 2 messages with 1053 > reciepients listed. > > Evidently there is no way I can find to increase the 1024 > open file limit > on my 2.2.12 Red Hat box. > > How do you control the incoming mail as to not force the > system to error > out because of not open file resources? > > Why dose qmail itself keep accepting SMTP connections (and having to > open a file to dump the mail to) when it must be getting an > error about no > more open handles available??? > > Is anyone else runnng into this? > > Paul Farber > Farber Technology > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Ph 570-628-5303 > Fax 570-628-5545 > >
RE: Alias Support Question
Tim, Thanks for the suggestion, however, after changing ownership and acces params, it still would not work. Therefore, this is how the .qmail-postmaster file looks now: Filename: /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-postmaster access params: 0644 owner: root group: qmail File Contents: START OF FILE [EMAIL PROTECTED] END OF FILE Exact contents of the error message: *** START OF CONTENTS *** Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: (qmail 3525 invoked by uid 508); 5 Sep 2000 02:24:40 - Received: from unknown (HELO sarrtport1) (158.95.210.54) by mpmail.inside.missionprinting.org with SMTP; 5 Sep 2000 02:24:40 - Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "tom.sarratt.jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FW: TEST Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:23:35 -0500 Message-ID: <001901c016e0$4b73cea0$36d25f9e@sarrtport1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal ANOTHER TEST -Original Message- From: tom.sarratt.jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 9:22 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:TEST *** END OF CONTENTS *** Do anyone have any suggestions as to why the ALIAS support feature does not work? Thanks! Tom Sarratt -Original Message- From: Timothy Legant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 8:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Alias Support Question On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 11:04:10AM -0500, tom.sarratt.jr wrote: > [snip...] > Rights to the .qmail-postmaster file: > > access params:0664 > owner:alias > group:qmail [snip...] According to INSTALL.alias, you should create the ~alias/.qmail-XXX files by touching them. Presumably you *wouldn't* be logged in as alias, so the owner wouldn't be alias. Maybe that doesn't matter, but upon inspection, I find all my ~alias/.qmail-XXX files are owned by root:qmail. Also, and more importantly, the dot-qmail man page says: If .qmail is world-writable or group-writable, qmail-local stops and indicates a temporary failure. Your permissions are group writable. chmod 644 .qmail-postmaster and see if the delivery works. Tim -- Tim Legant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
Peter Janett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 4 September 2000 at 18:06:17 -0600 > Thanks for the responses. > > Let me make sure I understand. > > If newmediaone.net is in rcpthosts, and some spammer send this message via > SMTP: > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > BCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: whatever > > Will the message be delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but not the other > addresses listed? Don't confuse headers with SMTP envelope recipients. There's no necessary relationship at all; and to the MTA, the message hearders are nothing but data. They're carried along, but they don't control anything. If a spammer sent that message with an envelope recipient of [EMAIL PROTECTED], it would be accepted because newmediaone.net is in rcpthosts. If the spammer sent a second envelope recipient of [EMAIL PROTECTED], and aol.com is NOT in your rcpthosts, he'd get an error on that recipient (unless RELAYCLIENT had been set through tcpserver when this connection was accepted). -- Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
Thanks for the responses. Let me make sure I understand. If newmediaone.net is in rcpthosts, and some spammer send this message via SMTP: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: whatever Will the message be delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but not the other addresses listed? Thanks! Peter Janett New Media One Web Services WEB HOSTING FOR WEB DEVELOPERS -> Sun, IRIX, NT, Linux <- PHP, MySQL, Perl, Cold Fusion, MS SQL, ASP, SSI, SSL http://www.newmediaone.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] (303)828-9882 - Original Message - From: David Dyer-Bennet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Peter Janett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Qmail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 5:08 PM Subject: Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam? > Peter Janett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 4 September 2000 at 15:57:45 -0600 > > I apologize of this is in the docs somewhere, but I didn't see it. > > > > If I understand what rcpthosts does, I would think that this file should be > > empty. My understanding is that if the "To:" address contains a domain name > > listed in rcpthosts, then it will relay that email. So, a spammer can send > > a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and to a bunch of > > spam victums in the cc and bcc fields. > > Don't think "relay". Think "deliver". That's why it's named > "rcpthosts". That's "receipt hosts". That's "hosts you will > *receive* mail for". So it should list, like, all the hosts you will > unrestrictedly receive mail for. Which generally means the ones > listed in locals plus the ones listed in virtualdomains. You want any > site in the world to be able to send you mail for those sites. > > I *think* the reason so many people get confused about this is because > of using POP clients, which send their outgoing mail via smtp. That's > an anomaly and a distortion. Thinking about that as your normal model > makes all the terminology come out wrong and causes confusion. In the > *normal* unix world, locally-originated mail is injected into the > queue via qmail-inject, not delivered via smtp. > > (Nothing at all wrong with using pop clients and such, it's just that > they don't follow the normal mail model, so trying to think about MTAs > from a pop client perspective seems to cause confusion.) > > Now, "relaying" means "accept via SMTP mail that will NOT be delivered > locally, but will instead be sent on via SMTP". > > Because of the need for relaying (if you act as a smart host for > system hidden behind you, or because of the need to relay for POP > clients), there are *two* kinds of mail you want to accept via SMTP: > > First, mail intended for the local environment. This is determined by > examing the envelope RCPT field; rcpthosts identifies which mail > should be accepted for this reason. > > Second, mail which you wish to relay to its destination. This mail is > identified based on where it comes *from* (the IP address of the > system initiating the SMTP connection), not where it's going *to*. > This mail is identified by the RELAYCLIENT environment variable set by > tcpserver, based on the originating IP address, either statically, or > dynamically using pop-before-smtp. (or is injected locally using > qmail-inject; mail injected locally will never be bounced based on > anti-relaying rules). > -- > Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon > Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b > David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
qmail and mail problem
Hi, i have recently installed qmail and everything is working fine bar one thing... on our website we run a cut down version of slashcode which allows users to sign up for accounts and personalise their view of our site, during the registration procedure the site sends the user their user name and password to them via email... its does this by using the program "mail" which worked fine when using sendmail, however since switching to qmail when ever someone tries to sign up they never get their password we get this error in the apache logs "newaliases: fatal: unable to create /etc/aliases.tmp: access denied" now i was wondering if there is a "mail" variant for qmail... any help would be greately appreciated Cheers Danny
Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
Peter Janett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 4 September 2000 at 15:57:45 -0600 > I apologize of this is in the docs somewhere, but I didn't see it. > > If I understand what rcpthosts does, I would think that this file should be > empty. My understanding is that if the "To:" address contains a domain name > listed in rcpthosts, then it will relay that email. So, a spammer can send > a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and to a bunch of > spam victums in the cc and bcc fields. Don't think "relay". Think "deliver". That's why it's named "rcpthosts". That's "receipt hosts". That's "hosts you will *receive* mail for". So it should list, like, all the hosts you will unrestrictedly receive mail for. Which generally means the ones listed in locals plus the ones listed in virtualdomains. You want any site in the world to be able to send you mail for those sites. I *think* the reason so many people get confused about this is because of using POP clients, which send their outgoing mail via smtp. That's an anomaly and a distortion. Thinking about that as your normal model makes all the terminology come out wrong and causes confusion. In the *normal* unix world, locally-originated mail is injected into the queue via qmail-inject, not delivered via smtp. (Nothing at all wrong with using pop clients and such, it's just that they don't follow the normal mail model, so trying to think about MTAs from a pop client perspective seems to cause confusion.) Now, "relaying" means "accept via SMTP mail that will NOT be delivered locally, but will instead be sent on via SMTP". Because of the need for relaying (if you act as a smart host for system hidden behind you, or because of the need to relay for POP clients), there are *two* kinds of mail you want to accept via SMTP: First, mail intended for the local environment. This is determined by examing the envelope RCPT field; rcpthosts identifies which mail should be accepted for this reason. Second, mail which you wish to relay to its destination. This mail is identified based on where it comes *from* (the IP address of the system initiating the SMTP connection), not where it's going *to*. This mail is identified by the RELAYCLIENT environment variable set by tcpserver, based on the originating IP address, either statically, or dynamically using pop-before-smtp. (or is injected locally using qmail-inject; mail injected locally will never be bounced based on anti-relaying rules). -- Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What am i missing?
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 06:06:44PM -0300, Maximo wrote: > When i start qmail , all i get is a lot of lines like this: > #multilog: fatal: unable to switch to current directory: access denied Add a 'cd /' to your startup script before qmail (with multilog) is started. Greetz, Peter.
Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
Wrong. qmail looks at the envelope recipient, not at the headers. Besides... Having an empty rcpthosts would block mail allright... Even your own local mail. RC On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 03:57:45PM -0600, Peter Janett wrote: > I apologize of this is in the docs somewhere, but I didn't see it. > > If I understand what rcpthosts does, I would think that this file should be > empty. My understanding is that if the "To:" address contains a domain name > listed in rcpthosts, then it will relay that email. So, a spammer can send > a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and to a bunch of > spam victums in the cc and bcc fields. > > If that's correct, and I'm using POP before SMTP, should I have an empty > rcpthosts file? > > Thanks, > > Peter Janett > > New Media One Web Services > > WEB HOSTING FOR WEB DEVELOPERS > > -> Sun, IRIX, NT, Linux <- > PHP, MySQL, Perl, Cold Fusion, > MS SQL, ASP, SSI, SSL > http://www.newmediaone.net > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (303)828-9882 > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
I apologize of this is in the docs somewhere, but I didn't see it. If I understand what rcpthosts does, I would think that this file should be empty. My understanding is that if the "To:" address contains a domain name listed in rcpthosts, then it will relay that email. So, a spammer can send a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and to a bunch of spam victums in the cc and bcc fields. If that's correct, and I'm using POP before SMTP, should I have an empty rcpthosts file? Thanks, Peter Janett New Media One Web Services WEB HOSTING FOR WEB DEVELOPERS -> Sun, IRIX, NT, Linux <- PHP, MySQL, Perl, Cold Fusion, MS SQL, ASP, SSI, SSL http://www.newmediaone.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] (303)828-9882
What am i missing?
When i start qmail , all i get is a lot of lines like this: #multilog: fatal: unable to switch to current directory: access denied Thanks Max
Re: Limiting qmail to save OS
> frequently (about 2 times a month) the file limits are being exceeded by > qmail haveing to many files open. The box only has qmail/vpopmail and > pop3 running on it. > > I have traced the 'failure' to 2 messages with 1053 reciepients listed. > > Evidently there is no way I can find to increase the 1024 open file limit > on my 2.2.12 Red Hat box. I'm not familiar enough with the internals of qmail to give you any advice on it's behaviour, but it is certainly possible to increase the number of open files above 1024 on Linux. see: http://customer.support.redhat.com/rhoaprod/plsql/xxrh_know_pkg.srch2?p_id=3 52 While those instructions were written for the 2.0.x kernels, I've used the same procedure on 2.2.x, 2.3.x, and 2.4.x kernels. steve
Re: outgoing mail
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 12:07:21PM +0200, Stano Paska wrote: > I have subdomain sss.ddd.com First out: give us real domain names. Avoids confusion. > Domain has mail server on mmm.ddd.com > My qmail is running on computer ccc.sss.ddd.com > I want send every mail that is not addressed to subdomain sss.ddd.com > to computer mmm.ddd.com > I think this is done by smtproutes, but what? > In smtproutes I can define domains, but I need ALL, except my domain Where do you want mail to the domain sss.ddd.com to go? If you want it handled locally, try putting :mmm.ddd.com into control/smtproutes -Johan -- Johan Almqvist
Rules Antispam
Hi, friends Sorry, because I'm new in the world qmail I need know where is the information about rules antispam I won't be a open relay. Please send me URL's for this configuration and also for the way of try than my configuration is OK. Where can I try my configuration? I tried make a telnet mailabuse.org Is it a good try? Thanks.
Limiting qmail to save OS
hello all frequently (about 2 times a month) the file limits are being exceeded by qmail haveing to many files open. The box only has qmail/vpopmail and pop3 running on it. I have traced the 'failure' to 2 messages with 1053 reciepients listed. Evidently there is no way I can find to increase the 1024 open file limit on my 2.2.12 Red Hat box. How do you control the incoming mail as to not force the system to error out because of not open file resources? Why dose qmail itself keep accepting SMTP connections (and having to open a file to dump the mail to) when it must be getting an error about no more open handles available??? Is anyone else runnng into this? Paul Farber Farber Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545
Re: trouble injecting ....
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 11:44:02PM +1200, Chris K. Young wrote: > Quoted from Adam McKenna: > > Most likely you have the wrong permissions set on qmail-queue, it should look > > like this: > > > > -rws--x--x1 qmailq qmail 11308 May 2 02:57 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue > > I initally thought that too, but then I read the whole of Fabio's > message, and realised that Fabio's qmail-queue has exactly the same > ownership and permissions. > > I suspect that /var was mounted with nosuid or somesuch. Or rather, > that was my conclusion when I first read the message, since I have > not given it further thought since. Yes, I had an offline conversation with him that determined exactly that. --Adam
Re: Open relay test.
"OK 2 NET - André Paulsberg" wrote: > > > I imagine that more than one person on this list has spoken to ORBS > > about their misleading relay test? How many people have ended up on the > > ORBS list simply because their qmail installations accepted emails with > > "%" or "!" in the To: field? > > NO ONE! > > ORBS tester requires the E-Mail to reach them at their test account, > this can only happen if you are an Open Relay server. > They also keep the relayed message at their site for verification. AH good. =) -Stephen-
Re: Problem in sending one message to few lists I own
You could always do this: ezmlm-make . newlist ... ezmlm-list list1 > subs ezmlm-list list2 >>subs ... ezmlm-sub `cat subs |sort|uniq` I haven't tried, but it should work. Henrik. At 07:03 PM 9/4/00 +0200, you wrote: >Hello, >I own few ezmlm lists, I want to send a message to some of the lists at >once, >there are clients subscribed to more than one list, >is there a tool that prevents this situation of clients getting more >than one copy of the message ? >Thanks, >Yair > >
Problem in sending one message to few lists I own
Hello, I own few ezmlm lists, I want to send a message to some of the lists at once, there are clients subscribed to more than one list, is there a tool that prevents this situation of clients getting more than one copy of the message ? Thanks, Yair
usage of qmailanalog
hi, can somebody please tell me how to analyse /var/log/mail using the qmailanalog utils ? i followed the manpages, but output is always empty. -- regards, jens --- department computer science, university of dortmund linux ... life's too short for reboots! begin:vcard n:Georg;Jens x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:University of Dortmund, Germany;computer science adr:;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:Jens Georg end:vcard
Popbull-related problem
Got strange problems with popbull (Qmail 1.03 + popbull patch 1.03): the new popbull patch isn't using 'cur' timestamp, but the stamp on the '.timestamp' file in Maildir sub-dir. If I properly understood the popbull's way of working, it should compare the time of the bulletins with the time of the '.timestamp' - when bulletin is older, it shouldn't make a symlink in /home/user/Maildir/new, when bulletin is newer, it should make a symlink, and refresh the time of '.timestamp' (am I right?), to avoid sending the bulletin over and over again. And this is exactly my problem: the users are receiving bulletins still over and over, because (if I properly understand) time of the '.timestamp' is not refreshed after receiving the bulletin; it remain's still the same. When I erase .timestamp file, it's created by popbull anew, but then it remains with it's date of creation forever. Popbull is invoked in the following way: /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -t3 -H -l pirx.ispid.com.pl 0 pop3 \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup pirx.ispid.com.pl /bin/checkpassword \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popbull /var/spool/bulletins /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & (last line, of course, isn't divided like above - 3. and 4. line are the same line) Perhaps somebody has a tip, how to get this to work properly? pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
Re: file /users/assign
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 04:25:28PM +0200, Marco wrote: > The question is: what is the syntax for this file and what is its > role in the message delivering to a user created with qmailadmin? man qmail-users It specifies what user local deliveries will be carried out as, and which .qmail file(s) to use. > It's not functioning properly. Perhaps you could elaborate on that a bit? Regards, james -- James Raftery (JBR54) - Programmer Hostmaster - IE TLD Hostmaster IE Domain Registry - www.domainregistry.ie - (+353 1) 706 2375 "Managing 4000 customer domains with BIND has been a lot like herding cats." - Mike Batchelor, on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
file /users/assign
Hi,
I tried the diagnostic utility www.qmail.org/qmail-lint-0.55 and
I received this message:
Warning: users/assign checking not
implemented
The file contains the following:
+{domain.name}-:{domain.name}:{vpopmailUID}:{vpopmailGID}:/home/vpopmail/domains/{domain.name}:-::
.
The question is: what is the syntax for this file
and what is its role in the message delivering to a user created with
qmailadmin?
It's not functioning properly.
Thank you
Marco
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Real slow shutdown of RedHat 6.x
Quoted from Brett Randall: > When I go to shutdown/restart a linux box, the killing of the > kernel logger and system logger takes absolutely ages, whereas without qmail > running (ie if none of it is alive when I shut the machine down) then it > shuts down just as normal. Hmm. /me thinks. Do you use svscan to start up your supervise processes? There was a time when I neglected to have svscan killed off first, so when I started killing off the supervise processes, they get respawned. This, needless to say, does not make for a smooth shutdown. All this is just a wild guess, of course. ---Chris K. -- Chris, the Young One |_ but what's a dropped message between friends? Auckland, New Zealand |_ this is UDP, not TCP after all ;) ---John H. http://cloud9.hedgee.com/ |_ Robinson, IV
Re: domain
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 10:43:52AM +0200, Stano Paska wrote: > Imagine: > I have domain ddd.com > Qmail runs on computer ccc (FQDN is ccc.ddd.com) > Some user is uuu > Qmail works well, but only when I send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > If I try send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it fails > (I have MX record in my DNS server) > > What can I do? Do you have ddd.com in control/rcpthosts? Do you want to have the domain local or virtual? Have you restarted qmail? Also: check out http://x42.com/qmail/cookbook/domains/ /magnus -- http://x42.com/
Re: trouble injecting ....
Quoted from Adam McKenna: > Most likely you have the wrong permissions set on qmail-queue, it should look > like this: > > -rws--x--x1 qmailq qmail 11308 May 2 02:57 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue I initally thought that too, but then I read the whole of Fabio's message, and realised that Fabio's qmail-queue has exactly the same ownership and permissions. I suspect that /var was mounted with nosuid or somesuch. Or rather, that was my conclusion when I first read the message, since I have not given it further thought since. ---Chris K. -- Chris, the Young One |_ but what's a dropped message between friends? Auckland, New Zealand |_ this is UDP, not TCP after all ;) ---John H. http://cloud9.hedgee.com/ |_ Robinson, IV
Re: smtproutes examples ?
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 08:05:43AM +0200, mailing wrote: > Hello, > >Could someone possibly send a few control/smtproutes examples, I haven't been >able to find much info in the docs. > man 8 qmail-remote > Is it possible to forward all mail for adomain.com to mailserver.domain.com using >this ? > Yes, it is. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Real slow shutdown of RedHat 6.x
Hi guys I have had this problem for awhile now with every Linux + qmail box I have set up. I have used all RedHat 6.x, running qmail with tcpserver on the qmail and pop3 daemons, and supervise to keep an eye on it all, logging with multilog. When I go to shutdown/restart a linux box, the killing of the kernel logger and system logger takes absolutely ages, whereas without qmail running (ie if none of it is alive when I shut the machine down) then it shuts down just as normal. I have set up all as per Life With Qmail, so I don't believe you need to read through my startup scripts since they are virtually exactly the same as LWQ (with the obvious changes). Has anyone had these problems, and more importantly has anyone solved them? Thanks, /BR Manager InterPlanetary Solutions http://ipsware.com/
outgoing mail
Imagine: I have subdomain sss.ddd.com Domain has mail server on mmm.ddd.com My qmail is running on computer ccc.sss.ddd.com I want send every mail that is not addressed to subdomain sss.ddd.com to computer mmm.ddd.com I think this is done by smtproutes, but what? In smtproutes I can define domains, but I need ALL, except my domain Stano Paska
qmail Digest 4 Sep 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1113
qmail Digest 4 Sep 2000 10:00:01 - Issue 1113
Topics (messages 47865 through 47907):
qmail & SSL
47865 by: Petre Rodan
Open relay test.
47866 by: Sean C Truman
47867 by: wolfgang zeikat
47868 by: Magnus Bodin
47869 by: wolfgang zeikat
47870 by: Sean C Truman
47871 by: Sean C Truman
47872 by: Magnus Bodin
47873 by: wolfgang zeikat
47874 by: Sean C Truman
47875 by: Sean C Truman
47876 by: Magnus Bodin
47877 by: wolfgang zeikat
47878 by: Sean C Truman
47879 by: Stephen F. Bosch
47883 by: Eric Cox
47884 by: Eric Cox
47886 by: Russ Allbery
47905 by: Peter van Dijk
47907 by: OK 2 NET - André Paulsberg
smtproutes examples ?
47880 by: mailing
trouble injecting
47881 by: Fabio Pedrazzoli
47882 by: Adam McKenna
Re: outgoing mail masquerading and /bin/mail
47885 by: Stephen F. Bosch
Re: can not send email, but can receive email
47887 by: ms7.url.com.tw
47895 by: ms7.url.com.tw
47897 by: Christopher Tolley
Re: Forbid the access to some accounts
47888 by: Russell Nelson
Error Sending
47889 by: ms7.url.com.tw
47890 by: Brett Randall
telnet localhost 25 can not work
47891 by: ms7.url.com.tw
47892 by: Brett Randall
what happen
47893 by: ms7.url.com.tw
47894 by: Brett Randall
47896 by: ms7.url.com.tw
47898 by: Brett Randall
47899 by: Brett Randall
deferral message 451
47900 by: Dale Miracle
47901 by: Christopher Tolley
47902 by: Dale Miracle
47903 by: Christopher Tolley
Slow local deliveries
47904 by: Brian Baquiran
domain
47906 by: Stano Pa¹ka
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 folks,
Did anyone tryed a SSL (TLS) and qmail combination so far? If so please
give me some pointers.
I've found something at http://opensource.3gi.com/sendmail-tls/ but I'm
not sure how to make it work with qmail. By default (used with sendmail)
it requires this line in inetd.conf:
smtps stream tcp nowait root/var/qmail/bin/sendmail-tls
sendmail-tls -l ssl3 -u nobody -p /etc/smtps.pem -- /usr/sbin/sendmail
-bs -C/etc/sendmail.relay.cf
My problem is after the '--' where the MTA (qmail) should be started.
I've tried
cd /var/qmail/supervise
/var/qmail/bin/sendmail-tls -l ssl3 -u nobody -p /etc/smtps.pem -- env -
PATH="$PATH" svscan
but no luck ...
Did anyone do a start script for this wrapper (for use with qmail)?
Something outside inetd.conf would be just great ...
Thanks,
Peter
Hey all,
I have put together a small OPEN
relay tester. It runs the same test ORBS runs.
http://www.prodigysolutions.com/relay_test.html
Sean Truman[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.prodigysolutions.com/
i tested your tester, thanks :)
(*erm*, wouldnt it be easier if you could copy/paste from the results page
without having to open the page source and seeing those *tons* of
color/font tags? :)
however, your test claims i am running an open relay due to these results:
MAIL FROM:([EMAIL PROTECTED]@62.96.181.213)
250 ok
RCPT TO:("nobody%prodigysolutions.com")
250 ok
250 flushed
and
MAIL FROM:([EMAIL PROTECTED]@62.96.181.213)
250 ok
RCPT TO:("prodigysolutions.com!nobody")
250 ok
250 flushed
i tried both procedures from a shell that is not in my relayclients,
and qmail accepted the mails but then tried to deliver them to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and domain.ext!user
which are non-existing users, so the mails ended up in the
~/alias/.qmail-default handling. so they were not forwarded to any
external address (at least). so i wonder if your tester's final judgement:
"You are running a Open Relay" is fully correct.
so i wonder:
1. are those two "leaks" in the antirelay settings really a problem? and
2. how could i fix them.
cheers
wolfgang
Also sprach Sean C Truman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on
03.09.2000:
Hey all,
I have put together a small OPEN relay tester. It runs the same
test
ORBS runs.
http://www.prodigysolutions.com/relay_test.html
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 09:49:19AM -0400, Sean C Truman wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I have put together a small OPEN relay tester. It runs the same test ORBS runs.
>
> http://www.prodigysolutions.com/relay_test.html
It also states falsely that if a host that handles mail for the
"example.com" domain e.g. accepts
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@example.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
then it is an open relay although it
Re: Open relay test.
> I imagine that more than one person on this list has spoken to ORBS > about their misleading relay test? How many people have ended up on the > ORBS list simply because their qmail installations accepted emails with > "%" or "!" in the To: field? NO ONE! ORBS tester requires the E-Mail to reach them at their test account, this can only happen if you are an Open Relay server. They also keep the relayed message at their site for verification. MVH André Paulsberg
domain
Imagine: I have domain ddd.com Qmail runs on computer ccc (FQDN is ccc.ddd.com) Some user is uuu Qmail works well, but only when I send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I try send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it fails (I have MX record in my DNS server) What can I do? Stano Paska
Re: Open relay test.
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 02:07:25PM -0700, Eric Cox wrote: [snip] > > I am adding the non-colors, table feature.. I do not like the colors or > > tags. GUI people like it.. I will add a Bool for the Graphics and table > > format.. so that you can switch from either mode.. however as you reported > > at the bottom it is not considered a open relay.. But if ORBS runs the test > > and it fails then you are added to the ORBS database.. > > I don't think that's true. They bad-mouth qmail for doing this in their > tech section, but I'm almost certain that the mail has to actually be > relayed to get listed. The badmouthing at www.orbs.org is about qmail being an open relay if rcpthosts doesn't exist. And yes, orbs only lists you if the relay test message gets delivered. Greetz, Peter. -- [ircoper][EMAIL PROTECTED] - Peter van Dijk / Hardbeat [student]Undernet:#groningen/wallops | IRCnet:/#alliance [developer]_ [disbeliever - the world is backwards](__VuurWerk__(--*-
Slow local deliveries
Local deliveries are very slow -- I cannot seem to get local concurrency to go to double digits, even if the number of queued messages is high (say 20k). This results in the local queue building up rapidly. All remote deliveries go out to a separate machine listed in smtproutes. qmail has the big-concurrency patch applied. It's mostly set up according to LWQ, except that we also run qmail-qmqpd. Linux has been patched to increase NR_TASKS to 4090. This is for a quad Xeon, 2GB RAM machine. Filesystem is ext2 on RAID5. The permissions on /var/qmail/queue/lock/trigger are as expected, prw--w--w-. I can provide additional info if needed. qmail-showctl output is quite extensive, as we host many virtual domains with vpopmail. Here's output from `vmstat 10`: procs memoryswap io system cpu r b w swpd free buff cache si sobibo incs us sy id 0 3 0 8 3184 1836572 59792 0 0 812 1512 6 3 13 0 9 1 8 3024 1835872 59476 0 059 188 640 1617 2 3 95 0 2 0 8 3480 1834692 59708 0 038 169 777 1732 3 4 93 2 11 1 8 2740 1832468 59208 0 058 184 669 1569 3 4 93 1 2 0 8 6304 1821128 64148 0 051 275 674 2171 15 5 80 0 3 0 8 18976 1824612 52284 0 061 124 606 1522 14 22 63 0 1 0 8 20396 1824612 53752 0 021 297 792 2114 4 4 92 Here's some of my qmail-send logs. I've been watching the logs roll by for the entire day and I don't see anything strange. 210.16.71.8 is our outgoing mail machine. @400039b348ff1b00fc9c new msg 521463 @400039b348ff1b02f09c info msg 521463: bytes 10113 from qp 2353 uid 502 @400039b348ff24f7f37c new msg 521464 @400039b348ff24fa29e4 info msg 521464: bytes 8204 from qp 2355 uid 502 @400039b348ff2eb6465c starting delivery 3020: msg 499042 to local edsamail.c [EMAIL PROTECTED] @400039b348ff2eb6b3bc status: local 2/120 remote 31/500 @400039b348ff2eb874f4 starting delivery 3021: msg 500497 to remote bluer@gop lay.com @400039b348ff2eb8e254 status: local 2/120 remote 32/500 @400039b348ff2ebf5e7c delivery 3018: failure: User_is_over_quota_email_retur ned/ @400039b348ff2ed5865c status: local 1/120 remote 32/500 @400039b348ff2ed795b4 delivery 3019: success: 210.16.71.8_accepted_message./ Remote_host_said:_250_ok_968050802_qp_3363/ @400039b348ff2eda1a3c status: local 1/120 remote 31/500 @400039b348ff2ef0a7ac new msg 521506 @400039b348ff2ef2d25c info msg 521506: bytes 1942 from qp 2929 uid 502 Any hints would be appreciated. Thanks. //bbaquian
Re: deferral message 451
Damn...Since I messed that up completely, here is another try: Your IP reverses back to this: 42.147.30.206.in-addr.arpa. 1D IN PTR server.lsbsolutions.com. Same potential problem. The PTR should point to lsbsolutions.com, not server.lsbsolutions.com Also, you should be using CNAMEs instead of multiple A records. The only time you need more than one A record in a zone is when it's different. $ORIGIN lsbsolutions.com. @ 1D IN SOA atlas.teoi.net. dale.atlas.teoi.net. ( 281601 ; serial 12H ; refresh 2H ; retry 1W ; expiry 1D ); minimum 1D IN NSatlas.teoi.net. 1D IN NStethys.teoi.net. 1D IN MX10 atlas.teoi.net. 1D IN A 206.30.147.42 smtp1D IN CNAME serverTo: "qmail list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 12:20 AM Subject: deferral message 451 > Hello Everyone, > > I searched through the archive on this and it seems to be a subject that > has been beat pretty well so I will get to the point. I know the > problem is with dns but with who's is a good question and why it is > sporadic. > > I have noticed in my logs that the same virtual domain gets the error > "Sender_domain_must_resolve" from the same 3 mail servers quite often > though the mail eventually does go through after as many as 100 retries. > > delivery 70: deferral: > >Connected_to_204.210.223.23_but_sender_was_rejected./Remote_host_said:_451_<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>..._Sender_domain_must_resolve/ > > That ip address according to ARIN is Timewarner Cable cable modem > service > The other two ip's that is always having this error is: > 207.180.206.1 which ARIN reports is North Coast Web > 216.196.0.17 which is my isp's mail server. I host the domains on my > servers and they only have a reverse. > > I have a couple friends on warners cable service and send mail to them > quite often and never get this error when sending them mail but this > virtual domain always seems to get the error. > This virtual domain is setup to use my MX in dns. If I use nslookup on > the above ip's, my isp can do a look up of lsbsolutions.com with no > problem. North Coast web can only look up my domain (teoi.net) and one > other virtual domain on my box but not any other (which are on
