RE: Humorous
Brad Johnson writes: > Unfortunately, the qmail list wants to just be a discussion for high-level/ > difficult qmail problems, and not a hand-holding/question-redirect list. Yup. > Is there a solution? Well, the obvious one is to allow people to > ask newbieish questions without being flamed. They don't get flamed. They typically get ignored or someone responds with a reference to LQW. In order to get flamed, you have to be a real jerk. You have to ask lots of stupid questions quickly. You have to ask questions which are in Dan's FAQ. You have to act as if you've never read http://www.qmail.org. In other words, it takes real effort to get flamed. > Another alternative that I find less appealing but perhaps more > qmailian is to create another mailing list that expressly handles > such qmail problems, like [EMAIL PROTECTED] or the such. Or > maybe a whole host of mailing lists. Modularize the list! Nope. Won't work. Feel free to try it. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com | A hate crime makes Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | it illegal to think certain 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | thoughts. The crime is Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | itself already a crime.
Re: Are we acting as an open relay?
Jen Franklin wrote: > > Today the postmaster "account" recevied about 20 messages stating unable > to deliver mail, unable to return to sender. Neither address was a local > address in any of these cases. > > Our rcpthosts file only lists our domains. > When I telneted into port 25 however and tried to mail from: a remote > address and rcpt to: a remote address I recevied a 250 ok. > > I am new to qmail but I have read the "Qmail newbie's guide to relaying" > and I thought when I sent from a remote email address to a remote email > address I should have received a 553 domain not in allowed rcpthosts > message. None of the mail i was trying to deliver has appeared in the > remote accounts I was using. > If the mail never got there, you're not relaying. An open relay would have immediately sent the mail on to the proper SMTP host for delivering to the account in question. The part of qmail that talks to the network has no idea about the part of qmail that knows what users are local, and what are not. At least I can reassure you on that score Perhaps others on the list could be more helpful as to why your server does _not_ say: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) like mine do... GW
RE: Sending all outgoing email through a relay
> Thanks. I'm amazed at how fast I get a response to a question on this > list. The few times I've sent email onto this list it's been very > helpful. > === Al When you make an e-mail easy to follow and professional, I (and others I guess) enjoy responding...when questions are all thrown together in a rush without thought or investigation, and there is even a hint of an attitude, you're asking for either trouble or ignorance from our part. /BR Manager InterPlanetary Solutions http://ipsware.com/
RE: Sending all outgoing email through a relay
Thanks. I'm amazed at how fast I get a response to a question on this list. The few times I've sent email onto this list it's been very helpful. === Al --- Brett Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Put > :mail.productionrelay.com > into /var/qmail/control/smtproutes, and man qmail-remote for more... > > /BR > > > Manager > InterPlanetary Solutions > http://ipsware.com/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
RE: Sending all outgoing email through a relay
Put :mail.productionrelay.com into /var/qmail/control/smtproutes, and man qmail-remote for more... /BR Manager InterPlanetary Solutions http://ipsware.com/ > -Original Message- > From: Al Sparks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 1:09 PM > To: qmail list > Subject: Sending all outgoing email through a relay > > > I've got a test qmail server, and I want to put it into semi > production, for my email account at least. I'd also like to send mail > through it. However, due to the firewall, it won't go to external > addresses. > > Is there a way I can get it to send to the production mail server, for > relay? >=== Al > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. > http://im.yahoo.com/
Sending all outgoing email through a relay
I've got a test qmail server, and I want to put it into semi production, for my email account at least. I'd also like to send mail through it. However, due to the firewall, it won't go to external addresses. Is there a way I can get it to send to the production mail server, for relay? === Al __ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
RE: Humorous
Greg Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 20 September 2000 at 10:52:36 -0400 > It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although I cannot say > that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I have seen it, and it > is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert on qmail, but I have been > successful with several installations of it. Maybe I've been lucky. > > For those of you reading this that have been a party to this undesirable > beahavior, ask yourself this question: > > Were you born with all the knowledge you now posess? Have you studied the > source code to every program you use to determine it's use and function? Or > did someone, somewhere, somehow, answer a question or two for you? Have you > ever read a FAQ, a doc, or (gasp) the replies on a mailing list? No, no, yes, yes. And you know what? I managed to go from being a completely novice sysadmin, to one who's willing to wear his "Qmail expert" t-shirt at least when the other listmembers aren't in the room, *without* starting a flamewar on this mailing list. Makes ya think, doesn't it? -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
Michael French <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 19 September 2000 at 23:33:44 -0400 > I was afraid of just "eyeballing it" and really screwing it up. No, I > don't know exactly what I am doing, I am LEARNING, that is why I asked for > help with a qmail related issue which is what I thought the purpose of this > list was. If you have problems answering a question politely, don't bother > saying anything at all. I realize this list can sometimes get repeative, > but I made the effort to search the list archives and nothing was said about > this except for a few unanswered requests for help. Someone even told me " > don't bother this mailing list" with this question. > I don't understand how a question pertaining to qmail (ie patching the > source) does not belong on this list and why replies to questions have to > terse or even down right rude. Don't get me wrong, people like Dave Sill > and Ken Grieve have been very helpful and patient but others of you only > gone out of your way to be rude. I am not trying to start a flame war a la > "linuxpeople", I am just asking for some common courtsey. I'd guess that many people here think that applying patches and merging patches are basic Unix sysadmin tasks that should be in your toolkit before you take on complex software like an MTA. They're general skills, not specific to qmail. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Re: Tarpitting
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 06:18:13PM -0700, Denis Petrov wrote: > I installed tarpiting patch from Chris Johnson, at least I think I did, I > am not sure what to do next. > I am not sure about syntax of the control/tarpitdelay and > control/tarpitcount. Do those files get created after I install the patch if > they are I did not install it right, but if I create those files manually > what do i put in them just numbers that I choose. You create the files manually, and yes, they do just contain numbers. For example: # echo 10 > /var/qmail/control/tarpitcount # echo 5 > /var/qmail/control/tarpitdelay This would give you a 5-second delay for every recipient after the tenth. > How do I verify that is working. I know only first part telnet on port > 25 > HELO > MAIL FROM :<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > what would be next steps? Add some more RCPT TOs, at least one more than your tarpitcount. If you notice a delay, it's working. Chris
Tarpitting
I installed tarpiting patch from Chris Johnson, at least I think I did, I am not sure what to do next. I am not sure about syntax of the control/tarpitdelay and control/tarpitcount. Do those files get created after I install the patch if they are I did not install it right, but if I create those files manually what do i put in them just numbers that I choose. How do I verify that is working. I know only first part telnet on port 25 HELO MAIL FROM :<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> what would be next steps? Thank you for your help. Denis
stumped with ezmlm
My apologies for sending the following to the wrong list. (Can't believe I did such a stupid, stupid thing! I'll just go ahead and sign off the list! -- I'm new to linux, qmail, fetchmail, serialmail, maildrop... I have linux installed on a small two machine lan and am using a dial-up connection... I own a domain hosted by a another server and maintain a small, low-volume mailing list which I would like to manage from this machine. I've followed the instructions to the best of my ability and read until I'm tired of reading, and still I can't get fetchmail to deliver list mail to "user-list" when it retrieves it from the pop3 server who hosts my domain. It sends everything to "user", not "user-list". Probably something simple and obvious I've overlooked, but I can't seem to see it for the life of me. Any help from users (if there are any) using these programs in this manner will be greatly appreciated. TIA
stumped with ezmlm
I'm new to linux, qmail, fetchmail, serialmail, maildrop... I have linux installed on a small two machine lan and am using a dial-up connection... I own a domain hosted by a another server and maintain a small, low-volume mailing list which I would like to manage from this machine. I've followed the instructions to the best of my ability and read until I'm tired of reading, and still I can't get fetchmail to deliver list mail to "user-list" when it retrieves it from the pop3 server who hosts my domain. It sends everything to "user", not "user-list". Probably something simple and obvious I've overlooked, but I can't seem to see it for the life of me. Any help from users (if there are any) using these programs in this manner will be greatly appreciated. TIA
Re: need help with vpopmail
Simo Lakka wrote: > > re > > When i email something to [EMAIL PROTECTED], then log says: > > >Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/vpopmail/users/domain.net:_file_does_not_exist._(#4.3.0) > and i cant login to pop3... :P > > But but, i have an ohter domain, and that works fine... > > - zrx Does the user 'test' have a home directory to receive the mail into? I would if isn't to much trouble, recreate the account and see if that fixes it. -- Dale Miracle System Administrator Teoi Virtual Web Hosting
RE: Remotely subscribing multiple addresses
A solution someone gave me awhile back was to save the emails to a file, one per line, and do: cat emails.txt | xargs --max-args 20 ezmlm-sub ~/ Worked great. -Original Message- From: Brett Randall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:28 PM To: Ben Beuchler; qmail Subject: RE: Remotely subscribing multiple addresses > Is there any way for a remote admin to subscribe multiple addresses in > one request? I'm guessing not, but it sure would be nice... A work-around way, but set up your own admin user (like multadmin), that has a .qmail file which pipes to a script you made up, which checks that the address it is coming from is an administrator's address, and then feeds the contents of the message line-by-line to ezmlm-sub. You might want to use some method of authentication in the message just so people don't learn about your multiple-subscription method and abuse it via a simple e-mail (could be as simple as your favourite word, or could be as complex and safe as public key encryption). /BR Manager InterPlanetary Solutions http://ipsware.com/
RE: Remotely subscribing multiple addresses
> Is there any way for a remote admin to subscribe multiple addresses in > one request? I'm guessing not, but it sure would be nice... A work-around way, but set up your own admin user (like multadmin), that has a .qmail file which pipes to a script you made up, which checks that the address it is coming from is an administrator's address, and then feeds the contents of the message line-by-line to ezmlm-sub. You might want to use some method of authentication in the message just so people don't learn about your multiple-subscription method and abuse it via a simple e-mail (could be as simple as your favourite word, or could be as complex and safe as public key encryption). /BR Manager InterPlanetary Solutions http://ipsware.com/
Re: DNS ERROR
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 06:29:49PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > My domain is : mydomain.com > and the name of my email-server is: server.mydomain.com Please give REAL Domain names! And don't claim that existing domain names (and mydomain.com DOES exist) belong to you. If there are problems with your DNS, we can check by doing some DNS queries, but we can't if you hide your domain name for whatever reasons. \Maex -- SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research & Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
DNS ERROR
Hi friends I have something messages in queue than can't send The logfile in /var/log/qmail/qmail-send/current show me this: @400039c93a902a17eeac status: local 0/100 remote 45/255 @400039c93a91018ff4ac delivery 1367: deferral: Connected_to_161.132.0.21_but_sender_was_rejected./ Remote_host_said:_450-defer_'<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'./450-Sender_address_targe t_'mydomain.com'_cannot_be_verified_at_this_time./450-Reason_given_was:_verify_ sender():_DNS_error:_Hostname_lookup_failure./450_Try_again_later./ My domain is : mydomain.com and the name of my email-server is: server.mydomain.com I have in /var/qmail/control/ that files in this order: defauldomain : mydomain.com locals : localhost mydomain.com server.mydomain.com me : server.mydomain.com mydomain.com plusdomain : mydomain.com queuelifetime: 14400 rcpthosts: mydomain.com timeoutconnect: 240 timeoutremote : 4800 timeoutsmtpd : 4800 I can send e-mail to hotmail, usa.net, yahoo, bum t can't send to mixmail.com , and others domains. Please How I should have my files into of /var/qmail/control? Please help me. Thanks
Re: tcprules question
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 06:13:39PM -0500, Brice Ruth wrote: > This would make sense, wouldn't it? But, it doesn't work :( > > I'm using tcprulescheck with a file that looks like this: > > .domain.net:allow,RELAYHOST=" " > :deny > > and the response I get from tcprulescheck with TCPREMOTEHOST set to > host.domain.net is: > > rule : > deny connection >From the tcprules page on DJB's site: tcpserver looks for rules with various addresses: 1) $TCPREMOTEINFO@$TCPREMOTEIP, if $TCPREMOTEINFO is set; 2) $TCPREMOTEINFO@=$TCPREMOTEHOST, if $TCPREMOTEINFO is set and $TCPREMOTEHOST is set; 3) $TCPREMOTEIP; 4) =$TCPREMOTEHOST, if $TCPREMOTEHOST is set; 5) shorter and shorter prefixes of $TCPREMOTEIP ending with a dot; 6) shorter and shorter suffixes of $TCPREMOTEHOST starting with a dot, preceded by =, if $TCPREMOTEHOST is set; 7) =, if $TCPREMOTEHOST is set; and finally 8) the empty string. It sounds to me like you want #6. Ben -- Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED] MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101 Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
Re: tcprules question
This would make sense, wouldn't it? But, it doesn't work :( I'm using tcprulescheck with a file that looks like this: .domain.net:allow,RELAYHOST=" " :deny and the response I get from tcprulescheck with TCPREMOTEHOST set to host.domain.net is: rule : deny connection :( -Brice Andrew Gray wrote: > the way I would try it is > > for all hosts at a domain > .domain.net.au:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > for just one host > host.domain.net.au:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > similarly for IP based block, a whole class C > 10.29.184.:deny > > a single IP > 10.29.184.1:deny > > Regards > > Andrew Gray > Network Administrator > NetConnect Communications > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ph +61 3 5332 2140 > > required email legal disclaimer > http://gray.ballarat.net.au/disclaimer.htm > > > -Original Message- > > From: Brice Ruth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 8:43 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: tcprules question > > > > > > Apparently since version 0.86 of ucspi-tcp, you can make rules based on > > TCPREMOTEHOST. Furthermore, this ought to be the syntax: > > > > (1) tcp.smtp: > > =host.domain.net:allow,RELAYHOST=" " > > :allow > > > > this allows relaying to connections coming from host.domain.net > > > > (2) tcp.smtp: > > domain.net:allow, RELAYHOST=" " > > :allow > > > > this allows relaying to connections coming from *.domain.net > > > > The second one doesn't work - I can't get anything to work besides > > relaying for a particular host. > > > > Any clues? Help is as always much appreciated! :) > > > > -Brice Ruth > > > >
RE: unsubscribe please
I went to the qmail site. There is a link for the 'discussion group' that initiates e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] On a gamble, I put 'help' in the subject line, and this is what it sent back to me: --- Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. This is a generic help message. The message I received wasn't sent to any of my command addresses. See http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail.html for more information about qmail. Please read http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail/faq.html before sending your question to the qmail mailing list. --- Here are the ezmlm command addresses. I can handle administrative requests automatically. Just send an empty note to any of these addresses: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Receive future messages sent to the mailing list. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Stop receiving messages. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Retrieve a copy of message 12345 from the archive. DO NOT SEND ADMINISTRATIVE REQUESTS TO THE MAILING LIST! If you do, I won't see them, and subscribers will yell at you. To specify [EMAIL PROTECTED] as your subscription address, send mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. I'll send a confirmation message to that address; when you receive that message, simply reply to it to complete your subscription. --- So consider yourself yelled at. Was what I did so hard to intuit? :P David > -Original Message- > From: Mervyn at ifwdc.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 3:40 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: unsubscribe please > > > unsubscribe please > > (If this gets to the list, appologies, and could someone tell > me how to > unsubscribe?) > > > Merv. >
Re: qmail syntax problem
hi, while checking that qmail installation i found the problem: /var/qmail/control/me was empty ! after telling this to my customer, he told me that he has re-installed qmail because of some other problems and forgot to fill ../control/me with life again ! thanks for your help! > Remote host said: 501 syntactically invalid HELO argument(s) > Remote host said: 501 HELO requires domain address > > i haven't found anything about this in the docs. somebody here who can > explain to me what's going on there ? -- jens --- instant networks - netzwerkmanagment & internetfullservices http://www.instant-networks.de
unsubscribe please
unsubscribe please (If this gets to the list, appologies, and could someone tell me how to unsubscribe?) Merv.
tcprules question
Apparently since version 0.86 of ucspi-tcp, you can make rules based on TCPREMOTEHOST. Furthermore, this ought to be the syntax: (1) tcp.smtp: =host.domain.net:allow,RELAYHOST=" " :allow this allows relaying to connections coming from host.domain.net (2) tcp.smtp: domain.net:allow, RELAYHOST=" " :allow this allows relaying to connections coming from *.domain.net The second one doesn't work - I can't get anything to work besides relaying for a particular host. Any clues? Help is as always much appreciated! :) -Brice Ruth
Re: similar to the scripting question...
Oops...I have both lists going to the same folder and I wasn't thinking...thanks for the response though. =G=
Re: similar to the scripting question...
Galen Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > |/path/to/ezmlm-issubn DIR > |/path/to/count list domain > > ok, that much works as expected...what I need it to do is for anyone not > subscribed send them a message explaining why they aren't getting a > response to the request (ie, list-count@host) immediately such as "I'm > sorry but you must be subscribed to this list in order to make this > request." instead of never getting a response or at least not until it > times out. You might want to try the ezmlm list instead of qmail, but...I would think you could do this with 'bouncesaying', another djb tool which is included in his (mublemumble) package (qmail itself? can't recall at the moment). You would modify the above to something like: | bouncesaying "Only list members can request a membership count" |/path/to/ezmlm-issubn DIR | /path/to/count list domain Note this will only work if bouncesaying and ezmlm-issubn agree on exit codes. Since they're both djb tools, I wouldn't be surprised if it's fine out of the box. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
similar to the scripting question...
Ok, I need someone to point in the right direction on this.. I've set up my own command as described in the FAQI've also set it up so that only subscribers can access it...the .qmail file looks similar to the following: |/path/to/ezmlm-issubn DIR |/path/to/count list domain ok, that much works as expected...what I need it to do is for anyone not subscribed send them a message explaining why they aren't getting a response to the request (ie, list-count@host) immediately such as "I'm sorry but you must be subscribed to this list in order to make this request." instead of never getting a response or at least not until it times out. Any help would be appreciated. =G=
Re: pop3 running as...
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 05:14:54PM -0400, andy wrote: > As per the "humorous" thread, none of you are obliged to answer, and > if I in any way come off as and asshole or idiot feel free to harass > me. ( Oh shit! that wasn't an asshole thing to say was it? ) Hmmm... No comment. ;-) > Is qmail-popup\qmail-pop3d supposed to run as root? Aye. Otherwise it would be unable to spawn kids as the necessary user. Ben -- Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED] MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101 Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
Re: pop3 running as...
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, andy wrote: > Just one question for y'all. > > As per the "humorous" thread, none of you are obliged to answer, and if I in any way >come off as and asshole or idiot feel free to harass me. ( Oh shit! that wasn't an >asshole thing to say was it? ) > > Is qmail-popup\qmail-pop3d supposed to run as root? Yes. It needs to be able to change it's uid/gid to the authenticated user, and only root can use the seteuid/setuid and geteuid/getuid calls. -- Regards Peter -- Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate) Phone: +1 613 368 4398 Fax: +1 613 564 7739 e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Re: dotqmail scripting
Actually, I modified the script to just do the inject. That worked, but then I got an email about the already built 'forward'. I decided to switch to that since it is probably a whole lot more tested thanks guys. On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:37:57 -0600, Charles Cazabon said: > Gary Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I want to do something like: > > > > &`scriptname` > > > > to have it forward to a specific address. Can I do this with a simple script > > or am I going to have to reinject the message instead of redirecting it? > > Reinject. It's not as painful as it sounds; read `man qmail-inject` or > even `man mailsubj` for details. .qmail- files don't allow you to do > quite what you want above. conredirect might suffice, but we don't know > enough about what you want to accomplish. > > Charles > -- > -- > Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > QCC Communications Corporation Saskatoon, SK > My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my employer. > -- > >
pop3 running as...
Just one question for y'all. As per the "humorous" thread, none of you are obliged to answer, and if I in any way come off as and asshole or idiot feel free to harass me. ( Oh shit! that wasn't an asshole thing to say was it? ) Is qmail-popup\qmail-pop3d supposed to run as root? Thanks in advance, -Andy
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 12:16:20PM +0200, J.J.Gallardo wrote: > > > I got the QMAILQUEUE patch the other day so I could get scan4virus working. > > When I tried running the patch on the qmail source, it failed out. Could this > > be because I used the DNS qmail patch? If so, should I > > Yes this is why it failed. > > Anybody knowns if there is a 'documented problem' if you have patched Qmail with > Spamcontrol 1.3.0 and you gonna patch later with scan4virus? It's the next step i > will do next days. Just try it and see :-) In general, patches will "live happily together" if each of them is small and only alters parts of the same file that aren't related. -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: Send a mail
please can some body tell me how to unsubscribe from the list
i am having isp problems
I am extremly sorry if this feels like spaming
--
---
Signature Follows :-
Rishi Maker |Quote Of The Mail|
Senior Developer|... the heat come 'round and busted me for |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |smiling on a cloudy day. |
Tel : 91-22-5374892 | |
ICQ UIN :-56551784 | |
www.rishimaker.com | |
---
The Following has been stolen from fortune cookies-
---
| :::-:::::::::|
| guru, n: A computer owner who can read the manual.|---
| :::-:::::::::|
---
if (argc > 1 && strcmp(argv[1], "-advice") == 0) {
printf("Don't Panic!\n");
exit(42);
}
(Arnold Robbins in the LJ of February '95, describing RCS)
---
We are using Linux daily to UP our productivity - so UP yours!
(Adapted from Pat Paulsen by Joe Sloan)
---
`When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows", people just stare at
you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, *for free*".'
(By Linus Torvalds)
---
Copyleft --:- ®Ø§hì Måkër -:--
---
Re: Send a mail
At 01:05 PM 9/20/2000, you wrote: >Jerry Lynde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Did you run qmail-pw2u and qmail-newu ?? > >If not, then even though the users are valid (meaning listed in > >/etc/passwd) qmail doesn't know about them... > >Not true. The use of qmail-users (users/assign) is completely >optional. > > >In the default install, you should find a list of valid users in > >/var/qmail/users/assign. > >Nope. Mah bad... felt like a default setup to me... never mind :o)
Re: messages on queue with no "To:" address
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Donovan, Laura wrote: > Any idea how the To address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is not appearing in > the message header? Because the To: header is part of the RFC822 headers, while the delivery involves the RFC821 "mail from:" and "rcpt to:" headers. Consider this telnet exchange telnet allspice 25 Trying 192.168.16.20... Connected to allspice.e-smith.net. Escape character is '^]'. 220 e-smith.net ESMTP helo risotto 250 e-smith.net RFC821 mail from: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 ok RFC821 rcpt to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 ok data 354 go ahead RFC822 Subject: no other headers here bye now . 250 ok 969477228 qp 26202 quit 221 e-smith.net Connection closed by foreign host. The message was delivered to the recipient as specified by the RFC821 rcpt to: header above. The delivery has nothing to do with the headers that you see when you actually read the message. That's how spammers can send mail to you, even though it looks like it should have been sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] qmail will deliver the message with a Return-Path: RFC822 header that contains the information contained in the RFC821 mail from: header. -- Regards Peter -- Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate) Phone: +1 613 368 4398 Fax: +1 613 564 7739 e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Re: Send a mail
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Jerry Lynde wrote: > > Did you run qmail-pw2u and qmail-newu ?? > If not, then even though the users are valid (meaning listed in > /etc/passwd) qmail doesn't know about them... > In the default install, you should find a list of valid users in > /var/qmail/users/assign. > If they're not there, either create the assign file by hand as per > http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html section 3.6 > or run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pw2u and then run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu. That's not true. In a default install there are NO /var/qmail/users/assign /var/qmail/users/cdb files. qmail-lspawn will examine /var/qmail/users/cdb for any username overrides. If it does not find a match, it will then call qmail-getpw to interrogate the passwd database via getpwnam(3). See the qmail pictures for a more detailed explanation of what happens. It's a good idea to create /var/qmail/users/assign from qmail-pw2u and then create /var/qmail/users/cdb but it is NOT mandatory. The user's problem is almost certainly to do with the fact that he is either delivering to a mailbox called Maildir (instead of delivering to a maildir called Maildir/) and the existence of a directory called Maildir/ is stopping delivery, or the Maildir/ is owned by root instead of the correct user. -- Regards Peter -- Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate) Phone: +1 613 368 4398 Fax: +1 613 564 7739 e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Re: Send a mail
Jerry Lynde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Did you run qmail-pw2u and qmail-newu ?? >If not, then even though the users are valid (meaning listed in >/etc/passwd) qmail doesn't know about them... Not true. The use of qmail-users (users/assign) is completely optional. >In the default install, you should find a list of valid users in >/var/qmail/users/assign. Nope. -Dave
messages on queue with no "To:" address
Hello, I'm running a store & forward server with qmail 1.03. We only relay for domains we put in /var/qmail/rcpthosts and for one ip address (the mail server itself) in /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb. Lately we've been finding spam on our queue with no "To:" address in the header field, although when I inspect the maillog I can see that the recipient is for a user at one of our domains (i.e. one of the domains in the rcpthosts file). For example, here's a header from today: -- MESSAGE NUMBER 917539 -- Received: (qmail 15374 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2000 11:09:41 - Received: from unknown (HELO exch01.Fex.com) (209.179.82.60) by ourserver.ourdomain.com with SMTP; 14 Sep 2000 11:09:41 - Received: from 70p3iB95p ([10.0.0.1]) by exch01.Fex.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exc hange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id SKM5R528; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 03:37:52 -0700 DATE: 14 Sep 00 2:11:50 AM FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <5hBKWsxRdIi> SUBJECT: >> Planes, Trains, & Automobiles! What do they all have in common? When I looked up message 917539 in the maillog, I found this: Sep 14 07:09:41 voodoo qmail: 968929781.869508 new msg 917539 Sep 14 07:09:41 voodoo qmail: 968929781.872968 info msg 917539: bytes 10947 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 15374 uid 701 Sep 14 07:09:41 voodoo qmail: 968929781.881842 starting delivery 541: msg 917539 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sep 14 07:09:41 voodoo qmail: 968929781.887705 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 Sep 14 07:09:42 voodoo qmail: 968929782.099443 delivery 541: deferral: Sorry,_I_ wasn't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ Any idea how the To address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is not appearing in the message header? -Laura
Re: Send a mail
Allama Hicham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'don't know how an account in /etc/passwd can be a "normal" user for >qmail. >From "man qmail-getpw": RULES qmail-getpw considers an account in /etc/passwd to be a user if (1) the account has a nonzero uid, (2) the account's home directory exists (and is visible to qmail- getpw), and (3) the account owns its home directory. qmail-getpw ignores account names containing uppercase letters. qmail-getpw also assumes that all account names are shorter than 32 characters. >When a send a mail to user (in /etc/passwd) Which user? >I have created the Maildir : ># maildirmake $HOME/Maildir > $HOME it is the account's home directory appers in /etc/passwd ? $HOME is the current user's home directory. The "#" prompt leads me to believe you're doing this as root. The root user has uid 0, and is therefore *not* a valid mail account. > I have read the qmail-getpw, but I don't know how account's >homedirectory can be visible to qmail-getpw. Accessible by user qmailp. Generally, user home directories are readable and executable by "other", so qmailp *can* access them. -Dave
Re: Send a mail
At 12:15 AM 9/20/2000, you wrote: >Hi everyone, >I'm using qmail and Unix. >I'm using Life with qmail. >I'm chosing the Maildir. >I'don't know how an account in /etc/passwd can be a "normal" user for >qmail. >When a send a mail to user (in /etc/passwd) and I open the >/var/log/syslog, I >find that message > "delivery26.: failure :Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/" >I have read the INSTALL.maildir : >I have created the Maildir : > # maildirmake $HOME/Maildir > $HOME it is the account's home directory appers in /etc/passwd ? > # echo ./Maildir/ > ~/.qmail > I m replacing ./Mailbox with ./Maildir in /var/qmail/rc > I have read the qmail-getpw, but I don't know how account's >homedirectory can be > visible to qmail-getpw. >Thank you all, > Allama. Did you run qmail-pw2u and qmail-newu ?? If not, then even though the users are valid (meaning listed in /etc/passwd) qmail doesn't know about them... In the default install, you should find a list of valid users in /var/qmail/users/assign. If they're not there, either create the assign file by hand as per http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html section 3.6 or run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pw2u and then run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-newu. enjoy :o) Jer
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
John W. Lemons III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think I've figured out their problem... They are using FTGate to retrieve > the mail from their ISP who places all their mail in a multi-drop mailbox. > Then the "smartpop" stuff in FTGate pulls the info from the ISPs drop box > and distributes it to the various local mail boxes, but can't distribute > some of the messages because the ISP is not modifying the message headers to > append the "expected" X-Recipient header derived from the RECV TO: > information from the envelope. Is it just me, or does this sound > non-standard? Any RFCs on this? It's commonly done. fetchmail and getmail support this type of thing; it would help if the ISP used something which inserted Delivered-To: headers, like qmail. However, relying on this for business purposes is broken, as it is trying to do something that SMTP/POP3 was never designed to do. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: Send a mail
Have you set the proper ownership of the directories $cd /home/user $ls -l Maildir If Maildir is not owned by the user then: $chown user.group -R Maildir David - Original Message - From: "Allama Hicham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 1:15 AM Subject: Send a mail > Hi everyone, > I'm using qmail and Unix. > I'm using Life with qmail. > I'm chosing the Maildir. > I'don't know how an account in /etc/passwd can be a "normal" user for > qmail. > When a send a mail to user (in /etc/passwd) and I open the > /var/log/syslog, I > find that message > "delivery26.: failure :Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/" > I have read the INSTALL.maildir : > I have created the Maildir : > # maildirmake $HOME/Maildir > $HOME it is the account's home directory appers in /etc/passwd ? > # echo ./Maildir/ > ~/.qmail > I m replacing ./Mailbox with ./Maildir in /var/qmail/rc > I have read the qmail-getpw, but I don't know how account's > homedirectory can be > visible to qmail-getpw. > Thank you all, > Allama. >
Re: Users don't recieve mail...
HI there, > from my sendmail days i remember creating aliases in /etc/aliases like > UserName:username > > but here the problem seems to be the other way around, > is there a way to fix it? > (phew, luckily we only have lower case usernames here :) users/assign! > >Another thing, my main user account > >has 2 uppercase letters, so I tried using the -u option, but nothing > again. > > qmail doesn't deliver to accounts with uppercase letters.[3] qmail does deliver to these accounts. But not out of the box. We did it the following way: Username: Bitterich E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] entry in users/assign: =Cyril.Bitterich:Bitterich:1003:102:/wwwroot/gun/Bitterich::: Ciao, Cyril
Re: Send a mail
Allama Hicham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have created the Maildir : > # maildirmake $HOME/Maildir > ~/.qmail I m replacing ./Mailbox with ./Maildir in /var/qmail/rc That should be ./Maildir/ -- note the trailing slash. > I have read > the qmail-getpw, but I don't know how account's homedirectory can be visible > to qmail-getpw. The permissions of the directories above it in the tree have to allow searching by the user qmail-getpw runs as. This isn't normally a problem. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: Users don't recieve mail...
wolfgang zeikat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >from my sendmail days i remember creating aliases in /etc/aliases like >UserName:username > >but here the problem seems to be the other way around, >is there a way to fix it? >(phew, luckily we only have lower case usernames here :) Yes, you can use qmail-users to match the usernames case insensitively and specify the uid/gid/home directory of the mixed-case user. I should add a note to that effect to the LWQ gotcha entry. -Dave
Re: Humorous
Thus spake Brad Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Is there a solution? I don't see a reason to change anything about this mailing list. People who ask intelligent questions in a nice way will always be helped. I have never seen a friendly and intelligent question ridiculed by people who aren't obvious saboteurs or idiots. Of course, every society has their share of bozos that will post crap in Usenet and on mailing lists. You can't fix that, so you might as well ignore it or regard those people as free entertainment. If your question shows that you read the documentation, thought about the problem yourself and tried the obvious things and it still does not work, then people will be delighted to help you. Talking about people who can't spell, didn't read the manual, post FAQs, can't quote or do other offensive stuff is a complete waste of time. Even following up on their dumb questions is a waste of time. Don't reply. No reply is better than a nasty reply. And if you must send a nasty reply, do it in private email and not on the mailing list. Come on, people, this should be common sense. Now let's stop this worthless thread that has been done a million times on Usenet and will be repeated a milling times on Usenet and use the bandwidth for something better. Now that you all have a lot of new spare time *bg*, you can help me writing IPv6 support for qmail. ;-) Felix PS: Outlook users, please read http://www2.merton.ox.ac.uk/~rejs/outlook.html or http://learn.to/quote (German only, unfortunately) If the style of your message looks ugly, people are less likely to help you. This is a fact. So watch your spelling and grammar!
Send a mail
Hi everyone, I'm using qmail and Unix. I'm using Life with qmail. I'm chosing the Maildir. I'don't know how an account in /etc/passwd can be a "normal" user for qmail. When a send a mail to user (in /etc/passwd) and I open the /var/log/syslog, I find that message "delivery26.: failure :Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/" I have read the INSTALL.maildir : I have created the Maildir : # maildirmake $HOME/Maildir $HOME it is the account's home directory appers in /etc/passwd ? # echo ./Maildir/ > ~/.qmail I m replacing ./Mailbox with ./Maildir in /var/qmail/rc I have read the qmail-getpw, but I don't know how account's homedirectory can be visible to qmail-getpw. Thank you all, Allama.
RE: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
I think I've figured out their problem... They are using FTGate to retrieve the mail from their ISP who places all their mail in a multi-drop mailbox. Then the "smartpop" stuff in FTGate pulls the info from the ISPs drop box and distributes it to the various local mail boxes, but can't distribute some of the messages because the ISP is not modifying the message headers to append the "expected" X-Recipient header derived from the RECV TO: information from the envelope. Is it just me, or does this sound non-standard? Any RFCs on this?
Re: dotqmail scripting
Gary Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I want to do something like: > > &`scriptname` > > to have it forward to a specific address. Can I do this with a simple script > or am I going to have to reinject the message instead of redirecting it? Reinject. It's not as painful as it sounds; read `man qmail-inject` or even `man mailsubj` for details. .qmail- files don't allow you to do quite what you want above. conredirect might suffice, but we don't know enough about what you want to accomplish. Charles -- -- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> QCC Communications Corporation Saskatoon, SK My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my employer. --
Re: dotqmail scripting
On 20 Sep 2000, Gary Richardson wrote: > > Hey, > > I'm still having troubles with the dotqmail scripting. I can not go > > |scriptname > > as someone suggested since my script simple prints the email address the > message is supposed to go to. Is there some way to use variables in the .qmail > files? > > I want to do something like: > > &`scriptname` Use this instead | forward `scriptname` forward is part of the qmail package. See man -M /var/qmail/man forward -- Regards Peter -- Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate) Phone: +1 613 368 4398 Fax: +1 613 564 7739 e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada "If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Re: dotqmail scripting
Thus spake Gary Richardson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > I want to do something like: > > &`scriptname` > > to have it forward to a specific address. Can I do this with a simple > script or am I going to have to reinject the message instead of > redirecting it? There is no 'or'. You can do this with a _simple_ script which reinjects the message. In terms of the design of qmail 'redirecting' _is_ a special case of 'reinjecting'. cheers, oec
Re: Users don't recieve mail...
from my sendmail days i remember creating aliases in /etc/aliases like UserName:username but here the problem seems to be the other way around, is there a way to fix it? (phew, luckily we only have lower case usernames here :) wolfgang Also sprach Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 20.09.2000: >Another thing, my main user account >has 2 uppercase letters, so I tried using the -u option, but nothing again. qmail doesn't deliver to accounts with uppercase letters.[3]
Re: Mailman -> qmail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Plesk installed qmail. I didn't have any choice, but I don't have any >particular problem with it, since when I configure mail via the Plesk >administration interface, it works just fine. > >Plesk allows open relaying, pop'n'drop relaying and SMTP relaying. >I have chosen pop'n'drop relaying and SMPT for those who wish to >use it. > >There is nothing in hosts.allow. I took at look at Plesk, and it allows you specify a "white list": a list of IP's that are allowed to relay at all times. You need to make sure that the local system is listed by its IP address(es), as well as 127.0.0.0/24. -Dave
dotqmail scripting
Hey, I'm still having troubles with the dotqmail scripting. I can not go |scriptname as someone suggested since my script simple prints the email address the message is supposed to go to. Is there some way to use variables in the .qmail files? I want to do something like: &`scriptname` to have it forward to a specific address. Can I do this with a simple script or am I going to have to reinject the message instead of redirecting it? thanks.
Re: Users don't recieve mail...
Hi Jim, > When I send the message it looks like it works, it doesn't error out or > anything. But when I telnet into my linux box, I can't find the email > anywhere. How are you telnetting into your box? via telnet yourbox or via telnet yourbox 110 > I had a heck of a time shuffling thru the directions/installation documents. > It didn't seem very clear, but it was probably me. Maybe you shouöd have tried Dave Sills "Life with qmail". Look for it on the qmail homepage. > there is nothing in my /var/qmail/users directory. From what I could make > out, there should be an assign file in there but I'm not clear on the > format. the format is: =aliasname:user_name:UID:GID:user/directory/::: . the dot has to be in the last line of your file! One of the expired entries in my server is for example: =Andreas.Bitterich:ABitterich:1243:102:/wwwroot/gun/ABitterich::: > Another thing, my main user account > has 2 uppercase letters, so I tried using the -u option, but nothing again. As you have read correctly you have to have your main users in the users/assign file if they have uppercase letters in it. > I wasn't sure if I need the POP3 thing, but I installed it anyways since I > notice the properties on my windows mail server account has POP indicated. > I put in my inetd too, just like the documentation said. But there seems to be one of your problems. > Before I installed the POP3, I created a dummy account (flapjack) and sent > some mail to it thru the win workstation. It showed up in the ~/Maildir/new > dir. I was excited for a moment. I tried another and it worked too. Try to get to that point again. Thin about everything you did after that worked. > Here is the bottom portion of my /var/logs/messages file: > Sep 19 22:26:58 alita gnu-pop3d[511]: Session ended for user: flapjack ^^ Here is your problem. gnu-pop3d does not know anything about Maildirs. You need to take the pop3-server provided with the qmail-package. Have at look at the qmail-docu on how to install it. If you can't figure it out I can look in my archives if I have an old configuration of mine. > Sep 19 22:35:43 alita qmail: 969417343.977842 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 > Sep 19 22:35:43 alita qmail: 969417343.987402 delivery 28: deferral: > Uh-oh:_home > _directory_is_writable._(#4.7.0)/ And here we have another problem. See to it that you have the following rights with the home-directory of the user you tried to send mail to. ls -lad ~flapjack drwxr-xr-x you get them by chown 755 ~flapjack Tell me wether it worked or not. Ciao, Cyril
Re: Users don't recieve mail...
"jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi, I'm new to qmail and one year old in linux. Welcome, newbie! >When I send the message it looks like it works, it doesn't error out or >anything. But when I telnet into my linux box, I can't find the email >anywhere. The receiving user's home directory is apparently world-writable. See below. >I had a heck of a time shuffling thru the directions/installation documents. >It didn't seem very clear, but it was probably me. Have you seen "Life with qmail"[1] (also known as LWQ)? >I'm using the ./Maildir method. > >My .qmail file is: > >./Maildir/ > >My rc is: > >#!/bin/sh > ># Using splogger to send the log through syslog. ># Using qmail-local to deliver messages to ~/Mailbox by default. > >exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \ >qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail That all looks OK. The .qmail file is unnecessary since it contains the default delivery instructions, that's not a problem. >there is nothing in my /var/qmail/users directory. From what I could make >out, there should be an assign file in there but I'm not clear on the >format. users/assign is completely optional, and if you don't know whether you need it or not, you probably don't. >I tried to use the command qmail-pw2u but it just hangs up and does >nothing, I have to hit the Control-C to stop it. Am I using it >wrong? Yes, see the man page or LWQ[2] for more information on usage. >Another thing, my main user account >has 2 uppercase letters, so I tried using the -u option, but nothing again. qmail doesn't deliver to accounts with uppercase letters.[3] >I didn't instal the anti-spamming package or the daemontools since it's a >very small LAN. I'm using inetd instead of ucspi-tcp. There's no system too small for daemontools and ucspi-tcp. I recommend them everywhere. >I wasn't sure if I need the POP3 thing, but I installed it anyways since I >notice the properties on my windows mail server account has POP indicated. >I put in my inetd too, just like the documentation said. Which POP3 thing did you install? It doesn't look like qmail-pop3d, based on the log entries below, so it probably won't work with maildirs. >Sep 19 22:35:43 alita qmail: 969417343.987402 delivery 28: deferral: >Uh-oh:_home_directory_is_writable._(#4.7.0)/ That's why messages aren't being delivered. Thanks for including lots of details, especially the log file snippet. -Dave Footnotes: [1] http://lwq.w3.to [2] http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#qmail-users [3] http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#uppercase-usernames
Re: Humorous
> Is there a solution? Well, the obvious one is to allow people to ask > newbieish > questions without being flamed. Even though qmail is logical, it's complex; > just because something is logical and coherent, doesn't mean it's > comprehensible. > Quantum physics theory is even more elegant, but considerably less > comprehensible. > > But I understand that many people don't want the list inundated and their > mailboxes > invaded. I think that's perfectly reasonable. So, is there any alternative? I agree with others that it's not that the question may be simple, it's that fundamentally many of us believe that the questioner has had to make a reasonable attempt to help themselves. Reasonable to their own abilities. If they can find this list and email to it, then it's hard to believe that they cannot find the FAQ/INSTALL docs that come with the package they've installed. But even if they don't find existing docs in the first instance, when pointed to such docs I expect the questioner to go to the trouble of reading and trying to understand those docs. If the docs are insufficient, I expect the questioner to help evolve the docs by identifying where they are insufficient and what they'd like to see in them. Most authors appreciate useful feedback! Alternatively, if the questioner believes their situation is different, then it's reasonable to expect that they will say "I read this, but my situation seems different because of..." In short. Many of us would rather teach people how to fish rather than give them fish. So, when people insist on freebie fish, some of us get a little frustrated. Regards.
RE: Humorous
Your original post served no purpose. It had no point. This post here, serves no purpose and has no point. No one called him a moron. The original poster ruffled the feathers by posting what he posted on linuxpeople.cc -- not here. You rehashed his post here and 'backed' his argument. I am simply trying to get a point across to you that this list is by no means obligated to help anyone out. The user felt that we were under some obligation, and you seemed to agree with him. This is not the case. Any help here should be considered gratis, and not expected. I dont know where you got 'calling him a moron publicly' from -- i never called anyone a moron. On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Greg Kopp wrote: | And you're trying to tell me the orignal poster had an attitude? | | Sorry, my intention was not to ruffle feathers. Yes, there are those that | can't read a manual or an FAQ. But it was a while after I started using | qmail that I discovered the LWQ page. I did do it all on my own, digging up | as much information as I could. I guess it's the compasionate side of me. I | know how complex it can be. When I see a question on the list that is | obviously newbie-ish, I typically send them a PRIVATE email telling them | where to find the asnwer, or I just give it to them straight out if it's | simple enough. | | I just think, IMHO, that it's not for me to PUBLICLY call a moron a moron. -- ___ _ __ _ __ /___ ___ /__ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC! _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)439-0200/fax-437-3052 /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com [-[system info]---] 10:20am up 13 days, 15:49, 5 users, load average: 0.26, 0.23, 0.64
Re: SMTP connections timing out
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20 Sep 2000, at 11:05, Albert Hopkins wrote: > If I telnet directly to port 25 I immediately get a connection, but it > takes over a minute to get a 220 reply from the server. 60 seconds is the usual time for DNS timeout; reverse DNS query issued by tcpserver (or DNS query issued by rblsmtpd?) times out. Find out why, or instruct tcpserver not to issue reverse DNS queries (-H option). [There may also be ident (auth) queries timing out, but the default timeout for those is 26 seconds.] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 -- QDPGP 2.61b Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBOcjWAFMwP8g7qbw/EQLkOwCg6Pi/Nf9oOFbGycU5ZPk4dx55SXoAoI1a TbAvRPlgs0bIlb6CWTCu88SN =ynOV -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
Re: Humorous
* Brad Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000920 11:48]: > > From: Greg Kopp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although I > > cannot say that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I > > have seen it, and it is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert > > on qmail, but I have been successful with several installations of > > it. Maybe I've been lucky. > > > Unfortunately, the qmail list wants to just be a discussion for > high-level/ difficult qmail problems, and not a > hand-holding/question-redirect list. What's unfortunate about it? > There aren't really any other forums for the discussion. What discussion? You have a problem - you read the docs. You still have a problem - you ask here in an acceptable fashion (which includes the use of an MUA that's apt for participation in public mailing lists (hint: not yours)). And - lo! - you're helped. Well, fine. > Is there a solution? Well, the obvious one is to allow people to ask > newbieish questions without being flamed. "Never attribute to malice..." Wise up, Brad - you don't have to be an idiot just because you're new to qmail. And qmail being a complex program to be used by seasoned admins, you really *shouldn't* be. Ever seen some clueful person get flamed for asking a sensible question? > Even though qmail is logical, it's complex; just because something is > logical and coherent, doesn't mean it's comprehensible. Quantum > physics theory is even more elegant, but considerably less > comprehensible. But equally well documented. Now, what would you say about some retarted highschool student going "dude, I'm gonna build myself some nice quantum thingy - you gonna help or what?!?"? [Alternatives] > Another alternative that I find less appealing but perhaps more > qmailian is to create another mailing list that expressly handles such > qmail problems, like [EMAIL PROTECTED] or the such. Or maybe a > whole host of mailing lists. Modularize the list! Not enough traffic. After "killfiling", there's about 20 messages per day left. Fine. > I'm attaching below my earlier post in support of comp.mail.qmail. [...] > 3) Usenet is Useless! (i.e. it used to be better than mailing lists, > now its not). [...] > 3) Usenet needs updating. I've got some ideas on that, and anyone who > is interested in some bold ideas for shaking up the newsgroups should > drop me a line. U... I think I'll let this one pass. Somehow "shake up" and "I use Windows" don't mix in a way I think I'd like. So, thanks but no thanks. > I hope there are some points here that seem to make sense. There's always hope, Brad...
Re: Two @ signs in RCPT TO - how to reject?
"Brett Randall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >There's a long story that I don't want to tell, but is there any way of >rejecting e-mail with two @ signs in the 'RCPT TO' part of the SMTP >conversation? During the SMTP dialogue? Perhaps using one of the patches available from www.qmail.org. After the dialogue? That should happen automatically unless you've got a ~alias/.qmail-default that's catching them. -Dave
RE: Humorous
And you're trying to tell me the orignal poster had an attitude? Sorry, my intention was not to ruffle feathers. Yes, there are those that can't read a manual or an FAQ. But it was a while after I started using qmail that I discovered the LWQ page. I did do it all on my own, digging up as much information as I could. I guess it's the compasionate side of me. I know how complex it can be. When I see a question on the list that is obviously newbie-ish, I typically send them a PRIVATE email telling them where to find the asnwer, or I just give it to them straight out if it's simple enough. I just think, IMHO, that it's not for me to PUBLICLY call a moron a moron. > -Original Message- > From: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 11:13 AM > To: Greg Kopp > Cc: qmail-list > Subject: RE: Humorous > > > > Maybee it's not the peoples on the lists JOB to support users that are too > lazy to try and help themselves. > > Maybee the person writing the article could have asked in a manner that > would prompt list users to be more apt to reply to him. > > Maybee the person writing the article asked a simple question contained in > the FAQ, and|or did not paste necessary log file info for proper > answering. > > Perhaps, i will give the person writing the article a full refund for the > services that he paid the list for? Would this be appropriate? > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Greg Kopp wrote: > > | It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although I > cannot say > | that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I have seen > it, and it > | is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert on qmail, but I have been > | successful with several installations of it. Maybe I've been lucky. > | > | For those of you reading this that have been a party to this undesirable > | beahavior, ask yourself this question: > | > | Were you born with all the knowledge you now posess? Have you > studied the > | source code to every program you use to determine it's use and > function? Or > | did someone, somewhere, somehow, answer a question or two for > you? Have you > | ever read a FAQ, a doc, or (gasp) the replies on a mailing list? > | > | Maybe you're not the genius you thought you were. > | > | My 2 cents only. > > -- > ___ _ __ _ > __ /___ ___ /__ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech > __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC! > _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)439-0200/fax-437-3052 > /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com > [-[system info]---] > 9:10am up 13 days, 14:39, 5 users, load average: 0.13, 0.15, 0.15 > >
RE: Humorous
Brad Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Unfortunately, the qmail list wants to just be a discussion for high-level/ >difficult qmail problems, and not a hand-holding/question-redirect list. I disagree. The list is pretty newbie-tolerant. The only newbies that get smacked down are the annoying ones. Check the list archives and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. >What's unfortunate about it? There aren't really any other forums for the >discussion. There's nothing stopping anyone from creating a qmail-newbies list. Or, alternatively, a qmail-masters list. I've toyed with doing the latter, but I'm not sure what it would gain. >In fact, there are several [alternatives]. I think the best is to >create a qmail newsgroup, as that's the perfect forum for both >newbieish and slightly less newbieish discussion. There's already a qmail newsgroup: alt.comp.mail.qmail, and it's fairly active. Creating a comp.mail.qmail newsgroup would be a tedious, lengthy process for whomever takes it on. I'd vote for it, of course. -Dave
SMTP connections timing out
I have two qmail servers which are load balancing for our domain, however, one of our servers is taking a long time to respond. If I telnet directly to port 25 I immediately get a connection, but it takes over a minute to get a 220 reply from the server. The log files show nothing out of the ordinary. Both machines are on the same network with the same configuration. Anyone have any idea how I can figure out what qmail is doing to take so long to respond?
need help with vpopmail
re When i email something to [EMAIL PROTECTED], then log says: Unable_to_switch_to_/var/qmail/vpopmail/users/domain.net:_file_does_not_exist._(#4.3.0) and i cant login to pop3... :P But but, i have an ohter domain, and that works fine... - zrx
Re: patch to qmail-remote outgoingip patch
It's here: http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">Markus Stumpf has a http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/software/qmail/">pair of qmail patches, one to cause qmail-smtpd to log its disposition of mail, and another to convince qmail-remote to use a fixed IP address other than the one you get without binding to an address. Andy Repton has ported the fixed IP address patch to qmail 1.03. Damir Cifer has better instructions for his http://tycho.edico.si/linuxtnt/#qmail-patch">port. Magnus Bodin writes: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 12:39:42PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote: > > > > Yes. This answer is _very_ late. > > > > On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 02:20:13AM -0800, Aaron Nabil wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the "qmail-remote outgoingip patch", I was able to > > > > Who contributed this, and where? > > Has anything been done to this further? Making it possible to bind > > qmail-remote to a specific interface. > > OK. I found it. Here: http://www.qmail.org/outgoingip.patch > > But it wasn't linked anywhere. > > /magnus > > -- > http://x42.com/
Re: Humorous
Personally, my problem was not with the questions that he asked or his ignorance. I can be and am very ignorant most of the time. My problem was with the way he asked those questions and the way in which he responded to the various emails. Its about the manner in which someone acts and responds not the questions they ask. If you can't see from his traffic here and his "News" on his website, that he is a major asshole then too bad for you. All your questions about the knowledge that I had, have, and will have are moot. I never claimed to be a genius. And what pray tell is so undesirable about telling a moron that he is a moron? David aka "The Elephant Man" "I am not a genius, I am a human being" ;) - Original Message - From: "Greg Kopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Chris Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 9:52 AM Subject: RE: Humorous > It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although I cannot say > that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I have seen it, and it > is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert on qmail, but I have been > successful with several installations of it. Maybe I've been lucky. > > For those of you reading this that have been a party to this undesirable > beahavior, ask yourself this question: > > Were you born with all the knowledge you now posess? Have you studied the > source code to every program you use to determine it's use and function? Or > did someone, somewhere, somehow, answer a question or two for you? Have you > ever read a FAQ, a doc, or (gasp) the replies on a mailing list? > > Maybe you're not the genius you thought you were. > > My 2 cents only. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 2:52 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Humorous > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 01:16:14PM -0500, dG wrote: > > > For all fans of linuxpeople, this is the latest news on his website, > > > www.linuxpeople.cc. > > > > > > September 14th, qmail: WHAT @ FSCKING JOKE! > > > Brought to you from the "Do not even waste your time department" > > > > I'm famous! From http://www.linuxpeople.cc/qmail.htm: > > > > "Even Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> author of 'The > > qmail newbie's > > guide to relaying' acted like a complete jerk." > > > > Chris > > >
RE: Humorous
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Kopp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:53 AM
> To: Chris Johnson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Humorous
>
>
> It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although
> I cannot say
> that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I have
> seen it, and it
> is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert on qmail, but I
> have been
> successful with several installations of it. Maybe I've been lucky.
>
Unfortunately, the qmail list wants to just be a discussion for high-level/
difficult qmail problems, and not a hand-holding/question-redirect list.
What's unfortunate about it? There aren't really any other forums for the
discussion.
Is there a solution? Well, the obvious one is to allow people to ask
newbieish
questions without being flamed. Even though qmail is logical, it's complex;
just because something is logical and coherent, doesn't mean it's
comprehensible.
Quantum physics theory is even more elegant, but considerably less
comprehensible.
But I understand that many people don't want the list inundated and their
mailboxes
invaded. I think that's perfectly reasonable. So, is there any alternative?
In fact, there are several. I think the best is to create a qmail newsgroup,
as that's
the perfect forum for both newbieish and slightly less newbieish discussion.
Contrary
to the opinions that were stated when a newsgroup was recently proposed
(first week of
June), I don't think a newsgroup would unnecessarily or improperly infringe
upon the
mailing list; rather, the mailing list would remain as a high-quality, low
volume
discussion of complex or arcane or theoretical qmail issues.
Another alternative that I find less appealing but perhaps more qmailian is
to create
another mailing list that expressly handles such qmail problems, like
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or the such. Or maybe a whole host of mailing lists. Modularize the list!
I hope this isn't improper, but I'm attaching below my earlier post in
support of
comp.mail.qmail.
>
> On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 08:36:43AM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> > I agree with you in general, Russ. The only benefit I can see to
> > comp.mail.qmail is that there is also a comp.mail.sendmail.
>
> The impression I gain is that reception amidst vocal
> qmail advocates is at best lukewarm. How many replied ?
> 4 or 5 on a list containing upwards of 800 list members.
Though I didn't comment, especially as I am not yet seasoned,
I want to state that I am in favor of comp.mail.qmail. I
intended my silence to be interpreted as implicit agreement
with the idea of forming the group; as it seemed that the RFD
would likely be presented to the news.groups, I didn't see
where my words would be particularly necessary.
Now, can I justify my position of wanting the newsgroup?
The primary arguments I found against the formation of
comp.mail.qmail are 1) The current situation is fine;
2) a newsgroup would take traffic away from the mailing
list 3) Usenet is Useless! (i.e. it used to be better than
mailing lists, now its not).
I don't personally see 1) as a real argument against the formation
of the newsgroup, unless it's coupled with 2). Yes, the current
situation is good, but it could be better.
2) is a slightly strange one. I'd actually like traffic on the
qmail list to go down, or more, stay where it is. Mailing lists
are good for small, relatively closed communities; ones that I
subscribe to include the excellent libwww-perl which is mainly
trafficked by the module owners, plus some newbie-q traffic.
Higher volume lists like the WWWAC list and Perl-Win-32-Web are
a pretty big mess.
3) Usenet needs updating. I've got some ideas on that, and anyone
who is interested in some bold ideas for shaking up the newsgroups
should drop me a line. However, I still think it's better than
mailing lists for a number of reasons, the first being threading.
Also, when traffic gets high, then newsgroups are clearly are
more rational option, as fewer copies of the messages are sent out.
Etc. etc.
These rejoinders offer some reasons for a newsgroup, but I want to
add that in my opinion, qmail is at the stage where a newsgroup is
appropriate. It's well-documented and tested, and I do expect it
to supplant sendmail over time. A newsgroup not only allows the
qmail community to grow gracefully, but it also serves as an excellent
advertisement for qmail. ("sendmail has its own newsgroup, but qmail
doesn't. Hmm, guess qmail isn't really ready/well supported/well
advocated.")
I hope there are some points here that seem to make sense.
Re: Number of user-processes
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 11:02:28AM +0200, Christoffer Hall-Frederiksen wrote: > I am currently running with a concurrencylocal of 40. But if problems > arise with a mailbox (eg. no more quota) peoples procmail processes > hang for a long time and ties up all the local processes. I can soulve It's actually a tricky problem as a user can hog all of the concurrencylocal by having a .qmail file with "| sleep 10" as a delivery instruction. Your procmail problem is exhibiting the same effect. > this partially with /etc/procmailrc but thats not really a solution. > Will qmail handle a pr. user process-limit (set by the OS) of eg 5 or > 10 gracefully or are there any pitfalls or bette ways to limit the > problem? That's about the best solution if it's one particular user who's causing the problem. qmail will simply attempt to re-deliver using it's usual delivery schedule. You have correctly pointed out though that solving the problem in procmail is a better long-term solution. Does procmail normally just wait and retry if there is no quota? If you wanted to, you can probably get procmail to generate a bounce message saying "over quota", by judicious use of the exit codes recognized in qmail-local processing. Regards.
Re: Number of user-processes
Christoffer Hall-Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I am currently running with a concurrencylocal of 40. But if problems >arise with a mailbox (eg. no more quota) peoples procmail processes >hang for a long time and ties up all the local processes. Hmm. I'd look into why procmail is hanging around. >Will qmail handle a pr. user process-limit (set by the OS) of eg 5 or >10 gracefully or are there any pitfalls or bette ways to limit the >problem? I haven't tried it, but I'm almost certain qmail will handle such a limit gracefully. If it can't spawn a qmail-local, it should log an error and try again later. -Dave
RE: Humorous
Maybee it's not the peoples on the lists JOB to support users that are too lazy to try and help themselves. Maybee the person writing the article could have asked in a manner that would prompt list users to be more apt to reply to him. Maybee the person writing the article asked a simple question contained in the FAQ, and|or did not paste necessary log file info for proper answering. Perhaps, i will give the person writing the article a full refund for the services that he paid the list for? Would this be appropriate? On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Greg Kopp wrote: | It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although I cannot say | that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I have seen it, and it | is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert on qmail, but I have been | successful with several installations of it. Maybe I've been lucky. | | For those of you reading this that have been a party to this undesirable | beahavior, ask yourself this question: | | Were you born with all the knowledge you now posess? Have you studied the | source code to every program you use to determine it's use and function? Or | did someone, somewhere, somehow, answer a question or two for you? Have you | ever read a FAQ, a doc, or (gasp) the replies on a mailing list? | | Maybe you're not the genius you thought you were. | | My 2 cents only. -- ___ _ __ _ __ /___ ___ /__ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC! _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)439-0200/fax-437-3052 /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com [-[system info]---] 9:10am up 13 days, 14:39, 5 users, load average: 0.13, 0.15, 0.15
Re: Mail in the Q
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20 Sep 2000, at 10:40, Doug Schmidt wrote: > i.e.- > 18 Sep 2000 21:29:49 GMT #577964 5553 <> > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] this is a bounce message > and also: > 19 Sep 2000 02:59:55 GMT #578031 1649 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > How is mail getting into the Q, which is not from our domain.? That's what the logs are for. It can be one of your trusted users, using envelope address of his "home account" at hotmail or something... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 -- QDPGP 2.61b Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBOcjCy1MwP8g7qbw/EQIONACeKPRq33opqu5i1lR5R0Eetlpb5HYAoPq0 6O+WBk0TvdFOSXhctFsCJfdb =t1PB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
RE: Humorous
It's too bad that the article was somewhat accurate. Although I cannot say that I have experienced the same kind of treatment, I have seen it, and it is deplorable. I don't pretend I am an expert on qmail, but I have been successful with several installations of it. Maybe I've been lucky. For those of you reading this that have been a party to this undesirable beahavior, ask yourself this question: Were you born with all the knowledge you now posess? Have you studied the source code to every program you use to determine it's use and function? Or did someone, somewhere, somehow, answer a question or two for you? Have you ever read a FAQ, a doc, or (gasp) the replies on a mailing list? Maybe you're not the genius you thought you were. My 2 cents only. > -Original Message- > From: Chris Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 2:52 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Humorous > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 01:16:14PM -0500, dG wrote: > > For all fans of linuxpeople, this is the latest news on his website, > > www.linuxpeople.cc. > > > > September 14th, qmail: WHAT @ FSCKING JOKE! > > Brought to you from the "Do not even waste your time department" > > I'm famous! From http://www.linuxpeople.cc/qmail.htm: > > "Even Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> author of 'The > qmail newbie's > guide to relaying' acted like a complete jerk." > > Chris >
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > John W. Lemons III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That makes good sense. Any way to capture the envelope that qmail > > is sending so I can see what they are getting? Why bother? Their bounce message clearly states that the reason for bouncing the message is that they didn't like the To: header field. > > I suspect they have > > a seriously broke mail server, but I'd rather have my ducks in a row > > before telling them this. Then simply create a bcc-like message body and feed it to their mailserver via telnet to smtp port; see if you get the bounce. Example: telnet their.server 25 220 hi this is me HELO your.server 250 ok MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 ok RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 ok DATA 354 go on From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: undisclosed_recipients Subject: test test . 250 ok quit 221 goodbye Tune the message body to resemble what you actually send. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 -- QDPGP 2.61b Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBOci/R1MwP8g7qbw/EQJZWwCfX1Ffj5mZ6utszWVypx+56ua18rMAoLk4 lIy8768e5E3huq+hG0TozdOO =DFmo -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
Mail in the Q
Hi, I have searched through the archives, but have not been able to find info regarding this problem. On our qmail server we are using ucspi-tcp-0.88 to control relaying. I notice from qmail-qread some messages sitting in the Q. i.e.- 18 Sep 2000 21:29:49 GMT #577964 5553 <> remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] and also: 19 Sep 2000 02:59:55 GMT #578031 1649 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] How is mail getting into the Q, which is not from our domain.? I know that the first example is probably just from someone internally feeding mail with no from header info, but its the second example that Im not sure about. Any help would be great. ~Doug
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 08:26:27AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: [snip] > > That makes good sense. Any way to capture the envelope that qmail is sending > > so I can see what they are getting? I suspect they have a seriously broke > > mail server, but I'd rather have my ducks in a row before telling them this. > > Hmmm. Capturing an outgoing SMTP envelope? tcpdump comes to mind :). > Set it up to capture all TCP sessions going to port 25 on the IP address > of their MX and you should be set. There's probably an easier way -- perhaps > temporarily replacing qmail-remote with a wrapper around it that uses > recordio or something like that, but I haven't done that myself. Looking at the qmail logfiles is just about as informative :) Greetz, Peter -- dataloss networks '/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
Re: Mail billing software for qmail
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 06:04:33PM +0530, hitesh wrote: > I want to know if any one is using mail billing software which can do: > > 1. No. of outgoing mails per user per virtual domain per day/month can be found in the log, but only for local users using the server als smtp server > 2. No. Of incoming mails per user per virtual domain per day/month a perlscript looking at the logs should do it. > 4. No .of POP access per day/month depends of the pop daemon... if you use vmailmgr, you can setup some scripts to log the access. Regards, Olivier -- _ Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland PGP signature
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
John W. Lemons III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The people you're talking to aren't compentent to run a mail server. The > >SMTP envelope doesn't contain any 'headers' -- those are part of the > >message, not the envelope. The envelope contains exactly two things, a > >sender and a recipient (specified with MAIL FROM: and RCPT TO:). Their mail > >system should be delivering based on the contents of the RCPT TO: and > >_nothing else_. > That makes good sense. Any way to capture the envelope that qmail is sending > so I can see what they are getting? I suspect they have a seriously broke > mail server, but I'd rather have my ducks in a row before telling them this. Hmmm. Capturing an outgoing SMTP envelope? tcpdump comes to mind :). Set it up to capture all TCP sessions going to port 25 on the IP address of their MX and you should be set. There's probably an easier way -- perhaps temporarily replacing qmail-remote with a wrapper around it that uses recordio or something like that, but I haven't done that myself. Charles -- -- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20 Sep 2000, at 9:11, John W. Lemons III wrote: > When a user BCCs a list of people, their message gets delivered to all > but one of the people on the list. Their mail server bounces it. According to the bounce you attached, they expect to have the name of the recipient in To: (or perhaps Cc:), effectively disabling any possibility of Bcc: addressing. > Apparently, tech support for their mail server claims that the > envelope is invalid because it doesn't contain an X-Recipient header. That's fertilizer. Anything X-* is strictly non-standard and optional. You can't prevent them bouncing the mail (and you can't prevent them bouncing the mail because "we only accept e-mails from Exchange servers"); you can try to educate them, and you surely have to educate their customers. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 -- QDPGP 2.61b Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBOci6F1MwP8g7qbw/EQIlmACgwrMn2tKYSOJ+0kcsMRM/LS2TJoEAoIwr /TdFPrfAvqydfh/sJ+gmvLsh =m74B -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 09:11:51AM -0500, John W. Lemons III wrote: > When a user BCCs a list of people, their message gets delivered to all but > one of the people on the list. Their mail server bounces it. Apparently, > tech support for their mail server claims that the envelope is invalid > because it doesn't contain an X-Recipient header. I dug through some RFCs > and can't find any mention of X-Recipient. I'd assume it hasn't been > adopted yet, and they are relying on an experimental header. Since this > message goes everywhere but there, I'd like some info as to why they are > broke so I can convince them to fix it or change servers. It sounds like > their tech support doesn't know what they are talking about, but I'd > appreciate any info. Their mailserver is broken. *any* mailserver that looks at headers to do delivery is *slightly* broken, and any mailserver that *bounces* messages based on headers or missing headers is *severely* broken. That's what you should tell them, and you should not believe anything else. I have never heard of X-Recipient, and no matter what it means, hedaers should not be relevant in delivery. RFC821 says so. Greetz, Peter -- dataloss networks '/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
Re: some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
John W. Lemons III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When a user BCCs a list of people, their message gets delivered to all but > one of the people on the list. Their mail server bounces it. Apparently, > tech support for their mail server claims that the envelope is invalid > because it doesn't contain an X-Recipient header. The people you're talking to aren't compentent to run a mail server. The SMTP envelope doesn't contain any 'headers' -- those are part of the message, not the envelope. The envelope contains exactly two things, a sender and a recipient (specified with MAIL FROM: and RCPT TO:). Their mail system should be delivering based on the contents of the RCPT TO: and _nothing else_. Besides, when talking about mail headers, I thought X- was essentially a way of saying explicityly that a header is non-standard. Charles -- -- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> QCC Communications Corporation Saskatoon, SK My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my employer. --
some qmail message not being delivered to a certain smtp server. header questions
When a user BCCs a list of people, their message gets delivered to all but one of the people on the list. Their mail server bounces it. Apparently, tech support for their mail server claims that the envelope is invalid because it doesn't contain an X-Recipient header. I dug through some RFCs and can't find any mention of X-Recipient. I'd assume it hasn't been adopted yet, and they are relying on an experimental header. Since this message goes everywhere but there, I'd like some info as to why they are broke so I can convince them to fix it or change servers. It sounds like their tech support doesn't know what they are talking about, but I'd appreciate any info. Here are a few example envelopes: > >> The attached message could not be delivered due to the following error: > >> No resolvable mailbox address in: > >> TO:(recipient list suppressed), > >> > >> Received: from mail.borg.com by FTGate SmartPop; > >> Thu, 13 Jul 2000 10:00:55 -0400 > >> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Received: (qmail 11416 invoked by alias); 13 Jul 2000 09:44:10 -0400 > >> Delivered-To: alias^[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Received: (qmail 11406 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2000 09:44:10 -0400 > >> Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (000.000.000.000) > >> by mx1.thebiz.net with SMTP; 13 Jul 2000 09:44:10 -0400 > >> Received: from (.dialup.mindspring.com [000.000.000.000]) > >> by .mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA32413; > >> Thu, 13 Jul 2000 09:44:01 -0400 (EDT) > >> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) > >> Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 09:44:00 -0400 > >> To: (Recipient list suppressed) > >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Subject: Thursday AM comments > >> Mime-Version: 1.0 > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >> > >> Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\f0007131000550459.txt" The attached message could not be delivered due to the following error: No resolvable mailbox address in: TO:"me \(personal\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Received: from mail.borg.com by FTGate SmartPop; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:42:08 -0400 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 29552 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2000 16:19:46 -0400 Delivered-To: alias^[EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 29499 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2000 16:19:45 -0400 Received: from kcll-tx.216-90-210-252.adsl.alpha1.net >>>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by mx1.thebiz.net with SMTP; 18 Sep 2000 16:19:45 -0400 Received: (qmail 2676 invoked by uid 0); 18 Sep 2000 20:21:37 - Received: from unknown (HELO johnl) (206.28.117.254) by kcll-tx.216-90-210-252.adsl.alpha1.net with SMTP; 18 Sep 2000 >>>20:21:37 - From: "John W. Lemons III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Me \(Personal\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Ok, this it completely and totally cool Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 15:22:49 -0500 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\f00091816420800D7.txt"
Mail billing software for qmail
Dear Qmail techies, I want to know if any one is using mail billing software which can do: 1. No. of outgoing mails per user per virtual domain per day/month 2. No. Of incoming mails per user per virtual domain per day/month 3. Total mails per virtual domain ( Incoming & outgoing) 4. No .of POP access per day/month Thanks in advance. Hitesh - Original Message - From: dG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 6:29 PM Subject: Controlling resources. > Since configuring qmail to start up via 'svscan' and 'supervise', I have > noticed what seems to be a slowdown on the server. When checking the stats > I see that 'supervise' is taking up, on average 3%-4% of the processor time > with spikes up to 8%. Would someone point me in a direction that will > explain to me how I limit the system resources a program uses. > > Thanks, > > David >
Re: Controlling resources.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20 Sep 2000, at 7:59, dG wrote: > Since configuring qmail to start up via 'svscan' and 'supervise', I > have noticed what seems to be a slowdown on the server. When checking > the stats I see that 'supervise' is taking up, on average 3%-4% of the > processor time with spikes up to 8%. Something is odd about your system. supervise should wait in select() for a communication through the named pipe, or for a signal from the child. It should take 0% CPU. Try to attach strace or truss to your supervise, and tell us what it actually does (or post a strace log on some website). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 -- QDPGP 2.61b Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBOciaNVMwP8g7qbw/EQJ27wCfWVtgR1OlLfnKmWTlYDpwxJL7yTsAoKwK P0/oxTe03wFQu/Rp5Rl9gIdJ =1W7D -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
Controlling resources.
Since configuring qmail to start up via 'svscan' and 'supervise', I have noticed what seems to be a slowdown on the server. When checking the stats I see that 'supervise' is taking up, on average 3%-4% of the processor time with spikes up to 8%. Would someone point me in a direction that will explain to me how I limit the system resources a program uses. Thanks, David
Re: SMTP
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 12:39:28PM +0100, Nick Davies wrote: > Can qmail be used on a office server without a permanent connection? To > pull mail say every hour.. Yes, and no. qmail can be the mail server for this setup, but another program (like fetchmail) would have to do the actual "pulling". That applies for all other common mail servers (such as sendmail or postfix) also. -Johan -- Johan Almqvist
SMTP
Can qmail be used on a office server without a permanent connection? To pull mail say every hour.. Thanks. Nick -- Nick Davies
Re: qmail syntax problem
qmail announces itself to other SMTP servers with "HELO ..." and then it adds either with what is in your file /var/qmail/control/me or (if it exists) the file /var/qmail/control/helohost so make sure you have a hostname with a valid DNS entry in /var/qmail/control/me or at least in /var/qmail/control/helohost wolfgang Also sprach Jens Georg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 20.09.2000: hi, while trying to send mails to aol, qmail always reports the following: Remote host said: 501 syntactically invalid HELO argument(s) Remote host said: 501 HELO requires domain address i haven't found anything about this in the docs. somebody here who can explain to me what's going on there ?
Re: qmail syntax problem
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 12:39:31PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote: > Show us your contents of > > /var/qmail/control/me > > and (if it exists) > > cat /var/qmail/control/helohost And (wild guess) make sure there are no CRs in them like after transferring from a windoze machine in binary mode. Jost -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please help stamp out spam! | | Postmaster, JAPH, resident answer machine am RZ der RUB | | Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate | | William of Ockham (1285-1347/49) |
Re: qmail syntax problem
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 12:17:23PM +0200, Jens Georg wrote: > hi, > > while trying to send mails to aol, qmail always reports the following: > > Remote host said: 501 syntactically invalid HELO argument(s) > Remote host said: 501 HELO requires domain address > > i haven't found anything about this in the docs. somebody here who can > explain to me what's going on there ? Show us your contents of /var/qmail/control/me and (if it exists) cat /var/qmail/control/helohost /magnus -- http://x42.com/
qmail syntax problem
hi, while trying to send mails to aol, qmail always reports the following: Remote host said: 501 syntactically invalid HELO argument(s) Remote host said: 501 HELO requires domain address i haven't found anything about this in the docs. somebody here who can explain to me what's going on there ? -- jens --- instant networks - netzwerkmanagment & internetfullservices http://www.instant-networks.de
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
Jason Haar escribió: > > I got the QMAILQUEUE patch the other day so I could get scan4virus working. > When I tried running the patch on the qmail source, it failed out. Could this > be because I used the DNS qmail patch? If so, should I > Yes this is why it failed. Anybody knowns if there is a 'documented problem' if you have patched Qmail with Spamcontrol 1.3.0 and you gonna patch later with scan4virus? It's the next step i will do next days.
Re: patch to qmail-remote outgoingip patch
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 12:39:42PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote: > > Yes. This answer is _very_ late. > > On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 02:20:13AM -0800, Aaron Nabil wrote: > > > > Thanks for the "qmail-remote outgoingip patch", I was able to > > Who contributed this, and where? > Has anything been done to this further? Making it possible to bind > qmail-remote to a specific interface. OK. I found it. Here: http://www.qmail.org/outgoingip.patch But it wasn't linked anywhere. /magnus -- http://x42.com/
qmail Digest 20 Sep 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1129
qmail Digest 20 Sep 2000 10:00:01 - Issue 1129 Topics (messages 48934 through 49008): Re: Create Mailbox 48934 by: Stano Paska 48939 by: Dave Sill Re: patch to qmail-remote outgoingip patch 48935 by: Magnus Bodin Re: port 25 cannot telnet 48936 by: Paul Schinder 48979 by: denpetrov.home.com 48992 by: Paul Schinder 48995 by: denpetrov.home.com Re: Problems receiving mail 48937 by: Wagner R. Landgraf 48941 by: Austad, Jay 48942 by: Daniel Augusto Fernandes 48947 by: Wagner R. Landgraf 48948 by: Kris Kelley 48952 by: Wagner R. Landgraf 48970 by: Wagner R. Landgraf unsubscribe qmail 48938 by: hitesh 49007 by: carl Re: concurrency remote patch 48940 by: Austad, Jay 48949 by: James T. Perry 48955 by: Austad, Jay 48962 by: Peter van Dijk 48964 by: James T. Perry 48966 by: Adam McKenna 48968 by: Peter van Dijk 48977 by: Austad, Jay 48996 by: James T. Perry Pointers on qmail + vpopmail? 48943 by: Jonathan J. Smith 48946 by: Ben Beuchler Re: DNS conundrum - more information 48944 by: Stephen F. Bosch 48945 by: Petr Novotny 48950 by: Stephen F. Bosch 48953 by: Petr Novotny store/forward scenario 48951 by: Dave Gresham Humorous 48954 by: dG 48956 by: Stephen F. Bosch 48957 by: Erich Zigler 48959 by: Stephen F. Bosch 48961 by: Scott D. Yelich 48963 by: Chris Johnson No Mail For Root 48958 by: Mark van der Putten 48960 by: wolfgang zeikat 48997 by: Dale Miracle Virtualdomains - AGAIN 48965 by: Stephen F. Bosch 48976 by: Charles Cazabon 48978 by: Adam McKenna 48980 by: Stephen F. Bosch 48981 by: Charles Cazabon 48982 by: Travis Leuthauser 48985 by: dG 48986 by: Peter van Dijk 48987 by: Travis Leuthauser 49003 by: Stephen F. Bosch Are we acting as an open relay? 48967 by: Jen Franklin 48969 by: Greg Owen 48971 by: wolfgang zeikat qmail error 48972 by: Jens Georg 48974 by: Austad, Jay 48975 by: markd.bushwire.net log analyzers 48973 by: Austad, Jay abuse.net results...was 'RE: Are we acting as an open relay?' 48983 by: zealot 48984 by: Peter van Dijk 48988 by: Greg Owen Re: QMAILQUEUE patch 48989 by: Jason Haar 48990 by: wolfgang zeikat 49000 by: Michael French Qmail and php3 ? 48991 by: Danny Hay 48993 by: Chris Johnson not receiving, but doin everything else 48994 by: Najati R Imam Tarpitting help 48998 by: tigre21.gamma.qnet.com.pe Users don't recieve mail... 48999 by: jim Two @ signs in RCPT TO - how to reject? 49001 by: Brett Randall 49002 by: Brett Randall Config problem 49004 by: jjc How to setup selective relaying at qmail 49005 by: Paulus Hendarwan 49006 by: Brett Randall Number of user-processes 49008 by: Christoffer Hall-Frederiksen 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] -- read INSTALL.maildir there is something like this: - create structure ~/Maildir in every user directory with maildirmake $HOME/Maildir - add file .qmail with content ./Maildir/ into user's directory and replace ./Mailbox with ./Maildir/ in /var/qmail/rc Stano. - Original Message - From: Allama Hicham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 10:08 PM Subject: Create Mailbox > Hi everyone, > I'm working With Unix and Solaris and I'm insttaling Qmail. > When I send a mail to a local user and I open the /var/log/syslog, I > find that message > "delivery26.: failure :Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/" > So I must create a Mailbox! > But I don't now how can i do that! > Thank you for Anser! > > Allama Hicham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm working With Unix and Solaris and I'm insttaling Qmail. >When I send a mail to a local user and I open the /var/log/syslog, I >find that message > "delivery26.: failure :Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/" >So I must create a Mailbox! What that message means is that the local recipient is not a valid address. That can happen if the recipient: - is not a user - has the UID 0 - doesn't own their home directory - has a home directory that isn't visible to user qmailp - has a username containing uppercase characters - has a username longer than 32 characters - isn't handled by an alias or catch-all .
Number of user-processes
I am currently running with a concurrencylocal of 40. But if problems arise with a mailbox (eg. no more quota) peoples procmail processes hang for a long time and ties up all the local processes. I can soulve this partially with /etc/procmailrc but thats not really a solution. Will qmail handle a pr. user process-limit (set by the OS) of eg 5 or 10 gracefully or are there any pitfalls or bette ways to limit the problem? -- Christoffer
unsubscribe qmail
unsubscribe qmail
RE: How to setup selective relaying at qmail
> How to implement POP-before-SMTP at qmail ? Look at open-smtp on www.qmail.org/top.html. The doco isn't very good (actually, it's crap but I think Russ was paid to make it by a client, then distributed it after without doco for free, so that's understandable). But take a look, and I hope you have some initiative, cos you're gonna need it... /BR Manager InterPlanetary Solutions http://ipsware.com/
How to setup selective relaying at qmail
Dear Qmail-ers, I want to setup selective relaying at my qmail servers but until now I still got open. My qmail server running on AIX v4.3.3 platform. How to implement POP-before-SMTP at qmail ? Thanks in advance. Best Regards, Paulus Hendarwan __ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
