daemon mode VS tcpserver

2000-12-11 Thread Linux

Hi all.

I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail.
It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ?
Can anyone give me and advice???

Bye.



Re: daemon mode VS tcpserver

2000-12-11 Thread Vincent Schonau


Linux writes:

 Hi all.
 
 I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail.
 It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ?
 Can anyone give me and advice???

I'm not sure what you mean by 'daemon mode'. Qmail-smtpd needs tcpserver or
inetd to supply it with tcp connections; it cannot run independently.

DJB recommends running qmail-smtpd from tcpserver, not inetd.`

Vince.




qmail, xinetd and rblsmtpd

2000-12-11 Thread Matti Virtanen

Hi!

I'm running qmail 1.03 in a RedHat Linux 7.0 box. Qmail is invoked by
rblsmtpd, which again is invoked by xinetd.

For some reason, rblsmtpd is not working; it passes all messages
through even if the message comes from blackholed host.

I believe the problem is that xinetd is not correctly passing rblsmtpd
the remote host ip. Tcpserver passes the remote host ip in environment
variable TCPREMOTEIP. How can I make xinetd do the same? I've already
tried adding the following line to xinetd's configuration file, but it
didn't help:

passenv +=  TCPREMOTEIP

Thanks in advance!

Yours,

mV



qmail, xinetd and rblsmtpd

2000-12-11 Thread Hannu Kekkinen

Hi!

I'm running qmail 1.03 in a RedHat Linux 7.0 box. Qmail is invoked by
rblsmtpd, which again is invoked by xinetd.

For some reason, rblsmtpd is not working; it passes all messages
through even if the message comes from blackholed host.

I believe the problem is that xinetd is not correctly passing rblsmtpd
the remote host ip. Tcpserver passes the remote host ip in environment
variable TCPREMOTEIP. How can I make xinetd do the same? I've already
tried adding the following line to xinetd's configuration file, but it
didn't help:

passenv +=  TCPREMOTEIP

Thanks in advance!

Yours,

-mV



qmail Digest 11 Dec 2000 11:00:00 -0000 Issue 1210

2000-12-11 Thread qmail-digest-help


qmail Digest 11 Dec 2000 11:00:00 - Issue 1210

Topics (messages 53810 through 53839):

A local mail server in sync with a .com
53810 by: Devrim Erdem
53833 by: andrew.tic.ch

Newbie questions relating to multiple servers
53811 by: Roger Arnold
53816 by: David Dyer-Bennet

Re: all mail forwarding and catching all bounces
53812 by: Charles Cazabon
53818 by: Peter Green
53824 by: Charles Cazabon
53826 by: Alex Kramarov

Re: IPCHAINS and Qmail
53813 by: Steve Manes
53814 by: Phil Oester
53815 by: David Dyer-Bennet
53817 by: Steve Manes
53819 by: Peter Green
53821 by: Colin Palmer
53822 by: Colin Palmer
53823 by: Colin Palmer
53827 by: Sean Reifschneider
53828 by: Henning Brauer

Re: How to get Mail delivery in form cgi´s work
53820 by: Chris Johnson

Re: big-concurrency.patch
53825 by: Martin Volesky

Does qmail really delay a bounce for this long?
53829 by: Rod... Whitworth
53830 by: Alex Pennace
53831 by: Rod... Whitworth
53832 by: Alex Pennace

what is *.da.uu.net?
53834 by: cfm.maine.com
53835 by: Hubbard, David

daemon mode VS tcpserver
53836 by: Linux
53837 by: Vincent Schonau

qmail, xinetd and rblsmtpd
53838 by: Matti Virtanen
53839 by: Matti Virtanen

Administrivia:

To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--



Hi,

I have been looking for a solution for our mail server
problem on net and after reading lots of sendmail and
qmail documents I am totally confused :)

My requirements are  :

1. We have a domain name on net www.machsim.com, the
hosting company provides pop boxes but no SMTP
service. We need the linux box to send the messages.

2. We have a linux server at the company. It runs
squid etc. We want to use this PC for as an internet
and intranet mail server so that when
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sends a mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], message will never need to go
outside and stay in the intranet. Any mail that is
written to some other domain shall be sent via
internet.

3. We want the linux server to send the messages in
the queue and get mails stored in the server outside (
machsim.com ) which is hosted by a hosting company in
US.

Before going in to technical configuration issues, I
feel that I need to understand the big picture. I
would appreciate any suggestions on a model and a
configuration as well as other ideas.

Thanks. A lot.

Devrim Erdem

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/




Devrim,

 I have been looking for a solution for our mail server
 problem on net and after reading lots of sendmail and
 qmail documents I am totally confused :)

Top tip: Sendmail bad. qmail good (particularly on this list...  ;-)
 
 My requirements are  :
 
 1. We have a domain name on net www.machsim.com, the
 hosting company provides pop boxes but no SMTP
 service. We need the linux box to send the messages.

Straight qmail on this box - accept any SMTP message from your local IPs and let qmail
sort out what to do with them using the DNS - you mention squid below, so it looks like
this box can already do DNS lookups.
 
 2. We have a linux server at the company. It runs
 squid etc. We want to use this PC for as an internet
 and intranet mail server so that when
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] sends a mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED], message will never need to go
 outside and stay in the intranet. Any mail that is
 written to some other domain shall be sent via
 internet.

Have machsim.com in control/locals - and accounts for all your users on the Linux box 
to
deliver to.
 
 3. We want the linux server to send the messages in
 the queue and get mails stored in the server outside (
 machsim.com ) which is hosted by a hosting company in
 US.

Erm, you mean the "pop boxes" you mention in item 1.?? Checkout fetchmail, and Dan's
serialmail package (on cr.yp.to website).
 
 Before going in to technical configuration issues, I
 feel that I need to understand the big picture. I
 would appreciate any suggestions on a model and a
 configuration as well as other ideas.

I hope that helps. Your options will vary according to what addtional functionality you
have available from your hosting company - such as ETRN.

cheers,

Andrew.






Roger Arnold wrote:

Sorry if these are stupid questions or is already covered in a how-to,
if it is perhaps someone can point me to it please.

 I need to know is how to setup qmail to work with multiple servers with
a mix of IP and Name based virtual domains on 2 or more servers i.e.:


Re: daemon mode VS tcpserver

2000-12-11 Thread Piotr Kasztelowicz

On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Linux wrote:

 I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail.
 It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ?
 Can anyone give me and advice???

I use with tcpserver, because it seams be better. 

Piotr
---
Piotr Kasztelowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[http://www.am.torun.pl/~pekasz]




Re: all mail forwarding and catching all bounces

2000-12-11 Thread Peter Green

* Alex Kramarov [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001210 16:53]:
 |grep -q MAILER-DAEMON  || exit 99 - this works, but cause a loop in the
 system because every message forwarded to a user specified after this line
 (me of course) eventually goes again through qmail-queue and gets replicated
 to the log alias again.

Change the whole setup to:

  |grep -q MAILER-DAEMON  || exit 99
  /var/qmail/alias/LOG/

To deliver *locally* to a Maildir/, rather than forwarding it off of the
machine. (You'll want to ``maildirmake'' the destination Maildir/ if you use
the above...)

/pg
-- 
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.




Re: Does qmail really delay a bounce for this long?

2000-12-11 Thread Peter van Dijk

On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 07:16:20PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote:
[snip]
 Plain qmail bounces back shortly after it encounters a permanent failure.

And to add to that, if for over a week (which is configurable) there are
only temporare failure, that is considered permanent too.

"This message has been in the queue too long. I give up. Sorry it didn't
work out." or something similar :)

Greetz, Peter
-- 
dataloss networks
'/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
'Het leven is een stuiterbal, maar de mijne plakt aan t plafond!' - me



Re: what is *.da.uu.net?

2000-12-11 Thread Peter Green

* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001210 21:27]:
 What kind of service is *.tnt.city.state.da.uu.net, or for example
 1Cust147.tnt7.fort-lauderdale.fl.da.uu.net?
 
 SPAM from these addresses is not being blocked by DULS.  traceroute
 suggests to me an above.net colo at uu.net?  (my guess)

Note that there is an intermediate open relay between the da.uu.net address
and your mail server:

 Received: from co-location.ibtoday.iasiaworks.ne.kr (HELO ns.asiatrans.com) 
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
   by gray.maine.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2000 15:42:33 -

Here, your machine accepts the mail from 211.36.253.35 (aka
co-location.ibtoday.iasiaworks.ne.kr).

 Received: from mail1.joymail.com (1Cust147.tnt7.fort-lauderdale.fl.da.uu.net 
[63.25.243.147])
   by ns.asiatrans.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA15685
   for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 00:40:45 +0900

Here the co-location.ibtoday.iasiaworks.ne.kr machine accepts the spam from
the da.uu.net dial-up account and relays it. Lo and behold, this machine
(211.36.253.35) is on the RSS. :-)

 We're running the collected SPAMPATCH patches.  Does it make 
 sense to block *.da.uu.net in badmailpatterns or might there better 
 way of doing it with tcpserver?  Frankly, depending on what tnt 
 is I'm tempted to block all da.uu.net.  The addresses
 along the path change with each instance; only the source
 address seems consistent.

If your customers are not using UUnet dialups (or resold UUnet dialups), go
ahead and block 'em all, I say, whatever method you might use...

/pg
-- 
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You know, by the time you get some with all this, the "Swiss Army
Chainsaw" is going to be more like a Swiss Army Tactical Nuke :-)
--- Brandon Allbery
on perl in [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: big-concurrency.patch

2000-12-11 Thread Federico Edelman Anaya

Martin:
Ok! .. thanks!

U.. It's posible when I apply this change the performance of the machine turn 
slowly?


Martin Volesky wrote:

 On 09/12/00 at 3:21 PM Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:

 A few days ago .. I post on the list many question about
 big-concurrency.patch ...
 
 I was reading other list about Qmail and I get this solution about the
 problem with the FD ..
 
 The solution was:
 
 echo "65536"  /proc/sys/fs/inode-max
 echo "16384"  /proc/sys/fs/file-max
 
 So.. you need to do this every system reboot, I don't know how to make
 this persistent.. anybody have idea or know how to make this persistent?

 Under Liux 2.2.x, the way to make this persistent is to use the sysctl facility.

 add:

 fs.file-max = 16384
 fs.inode-max = 65536

 to the sysctl.conf file in /etc, and it will be loaded up evey time you boot the 
machine.

 Martin Volesky - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 CTO - Deijlabs Corporation
 1221 Mackay, Suite 200
 Montreal, Quebec, Canada
 H3G 2H5
 Tel.: 514.399.9930 Fax.: 514.399.1117




Re: How to get Mail delivery in form cgi´s work

2000-12-11 Thread Kris Kelley

 If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your
signature:

 "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Doe"@example.com

 I don't know if that's a legal address, but its mere presence in an e-mail
 message will cause Outlook Express to freeze and eventually consume all of
your
 memory...

"Thanks for the warning," says the person who read this message with Outlook
Express.  Incidentally, nothing happened, aside from the address being
incorrectly parsed by OE's mailto linker.  I use version 5.

By the way, playing strictly by RFC 821's rules, that is a valid email
address.

---Kris kelley




Re: How to get Mail delivery in form cgi´s work

2000-12-11 Thread Chris Johnson

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:27:08AM -0600, Kris Kelley wrote:
  If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your
  signature:
 
  "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Doe"@example.com
 
  I don't know if that's a legal address, but its mere presence in an e-mail
  message will cause Outlook Express to freeze and eventually consume all of
  your memory...
 
 "Thanks for the warning," says the person who read this message with Outlook
 Express.  Incidentally, nothing happened, aside from the address being
 incorrectly parsed by OE's mailto linker.  I use version 5.

It was version 5.5 that that address killed. Perhaps it's a new feature that
Microsoft decided to introduce.

Chris



qmail, linux and large scale environment

2000-12-11 Thread Van Liedekerke Franky

Hi,

I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
processes,...)
Could those who use it please mail me their findings and settings?

Tx a lot for boosting linux!


Franky



Outlook Express bug

2000-12-11 Thread dG

Great!  The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work today
was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck with
everyone using IE.  Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the same
post.  Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how I can
get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete them
they lock up.

I would have expected better of this list.  It has been a big help but I
don't have time to deal with childish pranksters.  I will be checking the
qmail webpage to see if a more professional list gets off the ground.  Until
then I am signing off.

David




user alias file

2000-12-11 Thread gmo

Hi, i’ve a problem with the user alias file. I’ve got the qmail-pw2u
command and i got the follows assign file:

/var/qmail/users/assign
=gustav:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:::
+gustav-:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:-::

Then i used the qmail-newu command and when i send an email to gustav it
works ok.
But, i want use an "external" name [EMAIL PROTECTED], but it isn’t
work.

example:
mail GUSTAV.MARTIN.OLSEN
Subject: HEAD
FOO,FOO
^D


Whats my problem ?

Thank for the help

Best regard,
Gustav

error message:
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mailsvr.my.de.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

~[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line. (#5.4.6)

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 612 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2000 16:50:08 -
Delivered-To: ~[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 598 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2000 16:50:08 -
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 584 invoked by uid 0); 11 Dec 2000 16:50:07 -
Date: 11 Dec 2000 16:50:07 -
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: HEAD

FOO,FOO

-- 
Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net




Re: Outlook Express bug

2000-12-11 Thread Alex Pennace

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:03:49PM -0600, dG wrote:
 Great!  The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work today
 was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck with
 everyone using IE.  Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the same
 post.  Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how I can
 get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete them
 they lock up.
 
 I would have expected better of this list.  It has been a big help but I
 don't have time to deal with childish pranksters.  I will be checking the

The childish pranksters are at Microsoft. Why should we be censored
because your mail client is broken?

 I will be checking the
 qmail webpage to see if a more professional list gets off the ground.  Until
 then I am signing off.

You should also sign off from every list if your client barfs on legal
mail text.

 PGP signature


Re: daemon mode VS tcpserver

2000-12-11 Thread Ricardo Cerqueira

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:31:57AM +0100, Linux wrote:
 Hi all.
 
 I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail.
 It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ?

Search the archives, this question has been asked before.
But, anyway, qmail-smtpd is NOT daemonizable. It needs a tcp wrapper,
whichever it may be.

RC

-- 
+---
| Ricardo Cerqueira  
| PGP Key fingerprint  -  B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E  87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 
| Novis Telecom  -  Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica 
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
| Tel: +351 2 1010  - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459

 PGP signature


Re: Outlook Express bug

2000-12-11 Thread dG

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.  For me it was a
huge annoyance which pissed me off but there are hundreds and thousands of
people out there who are not technical in any way for whom this would be a
major crisis.  Are you going to fuck up their computers just because you
have the ability?  Are you going to punish them because of Microsoft?  If
you say yes, then in my book you are a pathetic human being.  Making
ignorant people suffer for their ignorance is not funny.

David

- Original Message -
From: "Alex Pennace" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "dG" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: Outlook Express bug






Re: user alias file

2000-12-11 Thread Charles Cazabon

[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi, i’ve a problem with the user alias file. I’ve got the qmail-pw2u
 command and i got the follows assign file:
 
 /var/qmail/users/assign
 =gustav:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:::
 +gustav-:gustav:1000:100:/home/gustav:-::
 
 Then i used the qmail-newu command and when i send an email to gustav it
 works ok.  But, i want use an "external" name [EMAIL PROTECTED], but
 it isn’t work.

You do not appear to be handling mail for local "gustav.martin.olsen', at least
according to your 'assign' file above.  read `man qmail-users` perhaps for
more details.  You're only handling mail for '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' and 
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with those entries.

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: Outlook Express bug

2000-12-11 Thread Alex Pennace

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:29:39PM -0600, dG wrote:
 Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.  For me it was a
 huge annoyance which pissed me off but there are hundreds and thousands of
 people out there who are not technical in any way for whom this would be a
 major crisis.  Are you going to fuck up their computers just because you
 have the ability?  Are you going to punish them because of Microsoft?  If
 you say yes, then in my book you are a pathetic human being.  Making
 ignorant people suffer for their ignorance is not funny.

So all of a sudden uttering certain kinds of addresses becomes taboo
just because some mail clients barf on it? Will Congress pass a law
against using the word "Hello" in electronic mail because Outlook 2004
crashes on it?

You are responsible for facilitating your mail. If some arbitrary text
breaks your mail system, fix it. It's quite rude to call us "pathetic
human beings" because your mailer died. I'm not responsible for your
choice of MUA. I'm not responsible for the design of your MUA. And I
refuse to kowtow to being Outlook-correct in my messages, I'm
following published standards.

 PGP signature


Re: [OT] Outlook Express bug

2000-12-11 Thread Chris Johnson

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:04:11PM -0600, dG wrote:
 Great!  The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work today
 was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck with
 everyone using IE.  Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the same
 post.  Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how I can
 get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete them
 they lock up.

Don't open them. If you don't open them, they won't hurt you. If you've opened
one and Outlook Express locks up, kill Outlook Express, start it back up, and
don't read the message again. (I discovered this bug because I received with
Outlook Express a double bounce message with an address like the one I posted
in it. In the course of trying to nail down exactly what triggered the bug I
sent myself half a dozen messages which locked me up. At no time was my client
"pretty much fucked." I just killed it, started it back up, and deleted the
message.)

If you're using Windows, you should be used to it locking up for no apparent
reason and you should know how to deal with it. It comes with the territory.

Chris



Re: Outlook Express bug

2000-12-11 Thread dG




Yeah, your right.  I had preview turned off in Outlook but not in IE.  My
bad.

David

 P.S.  My apolgies for my original rude post, and cursing.

 - Original Message -
 From: "Chris Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: "dG" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 12:13 PM
 Subject: Re: [OT] Outlook Express bug


  On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 12:04:11PM -0600, dG wrote:
   Great!  The last thing I expected to have to do when I came into work
 today
   was to deal with some asshole who thought it would be funny to fuck
with
   everyone using IE.  Even funnier are the idiots who reply back to the
 same
   post.  Now that my client is pretty much fucked any suggestions on how
I
 can
   get these damn emails off my machine since everytime I try to delete
 them
   they lock up.
 
  Don't open them. If you don't open them, they won't hurt you. If you've
 opened
  one and Outlook Express locks up, kill Outlook Express, start it back
up,
 and
  don't read the message again. (I discovered this bug because I received
 with
  Outlook Express a double bounce message with an address like the one I
 posted
  in it. In the course of trying to nail down exactly what triggered the
bug
 I
  sent myself half a dozen messages which locked me up. At no time was my
 client
  "pretty much fucked." I just killed it, started it back up, and deleted
 the
  message.)
 
  If you're using Windows, you should be used to it locking up for no
 apparent
  reason and you should know how to deal with it. It comes with the
 territory.
 
  Chris





Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread martin langhoff

boys and girls,

this is not reasonable.

Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 

Please do you some responsibility towards this tiny community. Thanks.





martin



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Alex Pennace

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
   Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
 wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
 unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
 expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 

No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
for their MUA.

 PGP signature


Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Mike Jackson

Hi,
 Could somebody resend me the original post concerning this? It seems I
deleted it on accident and it may have been removed from the list
archives...

Thanks,
Mike



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Nathan J. Mehl

In the immortal words of Alex Pennace ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
 No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
 for their MUA.

At what point, exactly, did asking someone to act like (a) a
professional and (b) a decent human being become censorship?

Oh, right, the same point at which this list became about adolescent
chest-thumping and OS/MUA advocacy instead of qmail.  Silly me.

I think we'll just add me to the list of disgusted unsubscribers.
Someone please drop me a line if the kids here ever grow up, eh?

-n, unix user since before you figured out how to cop an attitude, thanks.

--[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've got more than one membership / to more than one club
and I owe my life / to the people that I love.  (--Ani DiFranco)
http://www.blank.org/memory/--



Fwd: failure notice

2000-12-11 Thread steves


Howdy!
I just downloaded the queue-fix program. Since
I have installed the big-todo patch for qmail-103, I need
the queue-fix-todo-patch for queue-fix. I got all parts
from the addons link on the main qmail.org site. The 
patch fails. No problems with any other patches..

  FreeBSD 4.2

 Ideas?

$ patch queue-fix-todo-patch 

Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--
|--- queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c-ori   Tue Aug 17 09:43:58 1999
|+++ queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c   Tue Aug 17 09:52:16 1999
--
Patching file queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 445.
Hunk #2 failed at 513.
Hunk #3 failed at 553.
Hunk #4 failed at 684.
4 out of 4 hunks failed--saving rejects to queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c.rej
Hmm...  Ignoring the trailing garbage.
done


 -steve



Moderated lists

2000-12-11 Thread Goran Blazic

Hi to all...

I have been reading mail from this list for quite some time now, and must
say, I have learned a lot.
Most things I knew how to answer (more or less frequently asked questions) I
answered off-list, because I didnt want to trash up the list, as I am using
MS Outlook... I'm not proud of it, but hey, I get paid to use it.

Lately the list is becomming ... how shall I put it... kind of childish...
Ok... I am not against newbies and their "stupid" questions. You all heard
this one: There are no stupid questions, but stupid answers... Now thats
another thing.

My opinion is, that it would be a great waste if the list stopped
functioning. That is why I would suggest a transition to a moderated list.
Would that be possible?

Goran

The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance. 



big mail spool

2000-12-11 Thread Gustavo Vieira Goncalves Coelho Rios

Dear gentleman,

I am managing my email users using mysql, all email addresses are mapped
to a unique id. This id is used to let the id owner to fetch their
messages.

My mail spool is hashed into a directory using a function of my own.
This function takes the id as parameter and returns the user spool from
a given location, for instance:

My spool root is: /var/qmail/mail and every user dir is lied into this
directory.
The user directory is given by a function hash, this function gets the
id and return a path to it, for instance:

id   Relative path to /var/qmail/mail
0   0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
1   0/0/0/0/0/0/0/1
.   
.   
15  0/0/0/0/0/0/0/f
16  0/0/0/0/0/0/1/0
17  0/0/0/0/0/0/1/1

Got the ideia ?

I would like to hear from you if my approach is good (performance in
mind). To get into the user maildir, i get at most 16*8 lookup_dir
routines, so at least it's better than having all user dir into a single
directory. My approach is only better if you have morer than 16*8 pop
accounts.

What you wizards have to say about that ? I plan to have about 2*2^16
users into a single box running qmail+freebsd!



Re: big-concurrency.patch

2000-12-11 Thread Martin Volesky

On 11/12/00 at 12:30 PM Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:

Martin:
Ok! .. thanks!

U.. It's posible when I apply this change the performance of the machine turn 
slowly?


Federico,

There is no reason why your system should run any slower because of the 
sysctl.conf
modifications.


Martin Volesky wrote:
 Under Liux 2.2.x, the way to make this persistent is to use the sysctl facility.

 add:

 fs.file-max = 16384
 fs.inode-max = 65536

 to the sysctl.conf file in /etc, and it will be loaded up evey time you boot the 
machine.


Martin Volesky - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO - Deijlabs Corporation
1221 Mackay, Suite 200
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H3G 2H5
Tel.: 514.399.9930 Fax.: 514.399.1117




queue-fix todo patch failuer

2000-12-11 Thread steves

Ooops sorry, bad subject...


Howdy!
I just downloaded the queue-fix program. Since
I have installed the big-todo patch for qmail-103, I need
the queue-fix-todo-patch for queue-fix. I got all parts
from the addons link on the main qmail.org site. The 
patch fails. No problems with any other patches..

  FreeBSD 4.2

 Ideas?

$ patch queue-fix-todo-patch 

Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--
|--- queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c-ori   Tue Aug 17 09:43:58 1999
|+++ queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c   Tue Aug 17 09:52:16 1999
--
Patching file queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 445.
Hunk #2 failed at 513.
Hunk #3 failed at 553.
Hunk #4 failed at 684.
4 out of 4 hunks failed--saving rejects to queue-fix-1.4/queue-fix.c.rej
Hmm...  Ignoring the trailing garbage.
done

 -steve



Re: big-concurrency.patch

2000-12-11 Thread Charles Cazabon

Martin Volesky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 11/12/00 at 12:30 PM Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:
 
 U.. It's posible when I apply this change the performance of the machine
 turn slowly?
 
 There is no reason why your system should run any slower because of the
 sysctl.conf modifications.

At least as compared to having made the changes manually after boot.
However, his system could exhibit poorer interactive response compared to
before modifying the max-files and max-inodes due to the increased load
from qmail.

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: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Felix von Leitner

Thus spake martin langhoff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
   this is not reasonable.

   Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
 wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
 unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
 expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 

   Please do you some responsibility towards this tiny community. Thanks.

What in the seven hells are you talking about?
Who did what prank that caused Outlook to barf and die?

And if that happened as you insinuate above, why would you blame him and
not Outlook?  Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
mailing list about an Unix MTA?

Probably not.  Windoze people usually don't blame themselves.

Sheesh.

Felix



RE: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Hubbard, David

What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?

-Original Message-
From: Felix von Leitner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 3:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank



Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
mailing list about an Unix MTA?

Probably not.  Windoze people usually don't blame themselves.

Sheesh.

Felix



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread martin langhoff

Alex,

this is not a call for censorchip, please! We are on a public list! 

I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
to destroy. 

Pranksters usually enjoy the power of destruction they gain with a
little knowledge. 

Of course you can be a prankster. Just not here, please. There are
people working, who that rely on this list for discussion and for help
when their mail servers act up. They don't enjoy being the victims of a
prank, whoever clever it might be. 

I'm asking people not to attack other people's programs just because we
know how to. We should not be script kiddies, y'know. 


martin

Alex Pennace wrote:
 No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
 for their MUA.



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Robin S. Socha

* Hubbard, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 What does the MUA have to do with an MTA? 

Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
and I won't show you the difference.

Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
http://learn.to/attribute/
http://learn.to/sign/
http://learn.to/edit_messages/
-- 
Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/LB/



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread martin langhoff

Felix von Leitner wrote:

 Doesn't it seem a little idiotic to use Outlook on a
 mailing list about an Unix MTA?

We are on the *internet*. Welcome. 

Many people, many machines, lots of strange company policies, personal
choices and other constraints. Please refrain from making assumptions on
how somebody else's machine/software should be run, because we are not
here to judge. We're here to share. 

And, of course, you can criticize my MTA and its setup. And even my
MUA. But please, people, it's not funny to kill it!

The way *anyone* runs his/her boxes is not the *right* way. Is just
his/her way. We're discussing qmail, and I'm asking people not to post
things that will make some software blow up. 

I don't know who's to blame, but please, lets be good netizens.



martin



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread martin langhoff

Felix von Leitner wrote:
 What in the seven hells are you talking about?
 Who did what prank that caused Outlook to barf and die?
 
 And if that happened as you insinuate above, why would you blame him and
 not Outlook?  

Felix,

please, inform yourself and you'll save time. A few hours ago some
jokester ( Chris Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) sent a msg that read

 If you want to have fun with Outlook Express users, put this in your signature:
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[replace QUOTE with " ... I didn't know if were using a susceptible MUA]

which is a valid address as per RFC822 -- and a recipe for OE lockup. A
few OE users on this list were hit. Chis knew what he was doing, and I'd
bet he did it for fun. 

Now, however crappy OE may be, locking people's machines for fun is not
a behaviour to be encouraged. 


martin



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Justin Bell

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:03:20PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote:
# On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
#  Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you
#  wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very
#  unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is
#  expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. 
# 
# No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice
# for their MUA.

Also, how would we know what the string is had no one posted it?



-- 
Justin Bell



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Hubbard, David

I'm a competent sysadmin on Solaris  linux and
I use Outlook 2k.  So it has less features and
virtually no standards adherence compared to
other MUAs mentioned on this list, big deal, it
is the corporate standard at my company, I have
no alternatives for connecting to the corporate
Exchange server, and it lets me read this list
which helps me keep quite a few qmail boxes running
very happily.  Either way, my raggedy MUA has
nothing to do with a great MTA.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 4:19 PM
To: Qmail-List
Subject: Re: Outlook Express Prank


Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
and I won't show you the difference.

Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
http://learn.to/attribute/
http://learn.to/sign/
http://learn.to/edit_messages/
-- 
Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/LB/



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Bruno Wolff III

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:19:27PM +0100,
  "Robin S. Socha" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
 http://learn.to/attribute/

I took a look at the attribute page because I had had a recent discussion
with someone over whether or not date and/or time belong in attributions
in usenet posts.

While there is some useful information there, the presentation is poor.
There seems to be a lot of javascript on the web page. There seems
to be a needless break into more than one page for this information.
The first page had less than a paragraph about attribution. The rest of
the first page seemed to be pretty much advertising related.

If there are other sites with similar information, but with better presentation,
those might make a better reference to give to people. I find it hard to
take their recommendations about attribution lines seriously, when the
web page design is so bad.



Re: qmail, linux and large scale environment

2000-12-11 Thread Greg Cope

Van Liedekerke Franky wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
 running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
 their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
 processes,...)
 Could those who use it please mail me their findings and settings?
 
 Tx a lot for boosting linux!
 
 Franky

Well

increase the file inodes and descriptors
Have lots  of ram (use a ram disk)
read LWQ (Life With Qmail) - three times ...

Tweak reddrat - remove inetd, {a.n.other services}, adjust /etc/initab
to only start a few consoles

Get some fast disks 

You could go further and change some underlying Linux things like tcp
window options, and swap/VM stuff - but this is a very specialist area
that comprimised my KISS principle.

Overall RedDrat is quite good overall (IMHO) once you remove all
necessary stuff (both RPMS and services).

Greg



RE: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Goran Blazic

Exactly my point...
I wouldn't say for myself, that I am a competent sysadmin... After all I
take care of only five servers running qmail on Linux...
The company I work for uses Exchange, so I am forced to use Outlook (2k). I
would use anything else, but the smtp port is closed to the outside... so I
have a problem, right? :)

Goran

 I'm a competent sysadmin on Solaris  linux and
 I use Outlook 2k.  So it has less features and
 virtually no standards adherence compared to
 other MUAs mentioned on this list, big deal, it
 is the corporate standard at my company, I have
 no alternatives for connecting to the corporate
 Exchange server, and it lets me read this list
 which helps me keep quite a few qmail boxes running
 very happily.  Either way, my raggedy MUA has
 nothing to do with a great MTA.



can't unsubscribe

2000-12-11 Thread Liberty

Does anyone know the proper address to send an
unsubscribe request for this list?
Thanks,
Gene

=
Gene Whitehead
Founder
American Sons of Liberty
American Sons of Liberty Online:
http://www.americansonsofliberty.com



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Chris Johnson

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
   I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
 joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
 Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
 to destroy. 
 

Everyone needs to take a deep breath and just relax. The message I posted was
in the context of a discussion of certain types of legal addresses that mutt
didn't handle correctly. As an aside, I posted a message with an address in it
that caused Outlook Express to lock up. It didn't "destroy" anything. It wasn't
a virus. It didn't erase files. It simply made it necessary to kill Outlook
Express and restart it.

If you use Windows (and I do), it's a fact of life that programs lock up
frequently and unexpectedly. You kill them, or sometimes you have to reboot
(which in this case you didn't), and life goes on.

So please spare me all this talk of "attacks" and "vicitms" and so forth. If
you want to get angry at someone, get angry at the Microsoft software engineers
who put out an MUA that can be locked up by messages containing certain
sequences of ASCII characters.

Chris



Re: Re: qmail, linux and large scale environment

2000-12-11 Thread rdrake

Hi,
I am doing the same and would find some more discussion on this topic very 
interesting.  I think there are 2 levels to discuss here.  One is the configuring the 
Linux and kernel parameters and two is the layout and architecture.  I am interested 
in how others see a fully redundant arch using qmail.

My thoughts are to have a few front-end hosts running pop3d, smtpd, and qmqpd.  Then I 
would like to have mail stores on the back end that are dedicated to just storing 
local mail.  I guess they would run a queue, qmail-send, and qmail-lspawn.  I don't 
know how I would get qmail to route all of this mail though.   I need to use ldap for 
the authentication.  Is there an LDAP attribute that I could use such that qmail would 
check it for the location of the user's home mailstore?  (say if I split the user base 
on to 2 back end stores).  Or do I have to do some tricks using smtproutes or 
something to get mail to the backend? Or do most people just attach backend's via NFS 
to the front ends?  Are there performance concerns with NFS?

Does qmail support such an architecture?  I am even thinking of breaking the queuing 
onto a seperate server?

Any thoughts?
thanks.





From: Greg Cope [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 21:40:59 +
To: Van Liedekerke Franky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: 'qmail list' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail, linux and large scale environment

Van Liedekerke Franky wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
 running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
 their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
 processes,...)
 Could those who use it please mail me their findings and settings?
 
 Tx a lot for boosting linux!
 
 Franky

Well

increase the file inodes and descriptors
Have lots  of ram (use a ram disk)
read LWQ (Life With Qmail) - three times ...

Tweak reddrat - remove inetd, {a.n.other services}, adjust /etc/initab
to only start a few consoles

Get some fast disks 

You could go further and change some underlying Linux things like tcp
window options, and swap/VM stuff - but this is a very specialist area
that comprimised my KISS principle.

Overall RedDrat is quite good overall (IMHO) once you remove all
necessary stuff (both RPMS and services).

Greg





Qmail server set to forward to another host on the local ethernet.

2000-12-11 Thread Rawlinsons Group \(Brisbane\)

I haven't done this yet so I can't provide real internet names.

I will have the following:

Computer A (On ISP Primary)
 | - Linked via 100Mbps ethernet
Computer B (On ISP Secondary)

I'd like to setup A as the first MX record for host blah.com and B as the
secondary MX record for blah.com both on different ISPs and connected via
100Mbps ethernet.

If A is down and B starts receiving email for A, how do I forward all the
emails B receives to A over the ethernet and not keep copies of those emails
on server B?

Thankyou very much.




Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Amitai Schlair

martin langhoff wrote:

 We are on the *internet*. Welcome.

Precisely. If you must use software that cannot handle the full spectrum
of demands the Internet presents, don't blame the Internet.

- Amitai



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread James Stevens

Well let's see.. Been Managing Unix systems for about 5 years now .. Did 
start on Mac's then Windows then Unix so yeah I kinda went the long way 
but I have been using Outlook Express almost since the beging.. It has 
just been recently that I have started using other MUA's ... However I 
don't run your stock Outlook Express either. I know of just about every 
trick that can be played on Outlook and Outlook express.. Although if 
anyones using Outlook then there much braver than I am. Hell I can tell 
you which bugs/tricks work on which versions.

Without going into a 20 page technical look at every bug here's some 
simple tips even biggeners should know.

1. Don't use the 'Preview' plane.
2. Don't let or set Outlook to open messages automatically.
3. Don't open any executable or any other microsoft attachement unless 
it's from someone you know and trust. VBS bugs are kewl but are a 'PAIN 
IN THE ASS'.
4. Know your damm system.. Spacifically know where the mail is stored on 
your computer.. It's simple to go delete the damm inbox.mbx file when one 
pesky message is bugging you. If your good you can even get rid of the 
one message without loosing the rest of your inbox.
5. Goto windowsupdate.microsoft.com and make sure you have all the 
security patches for your current version. Microsoft is famous for 
releasing about a dozzen security patches a month for OutLook and OutLook 
Express amoung other things.

And Number 6... Use common sense and quit belly aching when someone 
screws up.

If someone purposely screwed you up then fix your computer then go and 
send them a nice email thanking them for the 'grand experienece' .. If 
they wana be pricks then leave them be, there not worth getting heart 
burn or teary eye'd over.. If you wana put yourself down to there level 
for pay back then hey, more power to ya.


As you can tell I'm not a Microsoft Lover but I'm not a hatter either. 
Microsoft has it's up's and down's (Okay, more downs than up's) just like 
any of the other Major OS's around the world but if your gona use it then 
you'd better dam well learn it and most of all learn how to deal with it.

I think just about every admin on this list would agree with that last 
statement, however I expect varying flames regarding the rest (grin)

--JT

 Original Message 

On 12/11/00, 1:19:27 PM, Robin "S." Socha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote regarding 
Re: Outlook Express Prank:


 * Hubbard, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  What does the MUA have to do with an MTA?

 Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
 and I won't show you the difference.

 Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
 http://learn.to/attribute/
 http://learn.to/sign/
 http://learn.to/edit_messages/
 --
 Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/LB/



Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Alex Pennace

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:45:40PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote:
   I'm asking for a bit of professionalism. Whoever posted that practical
 joke was doing it on purpose -- and that's not professional at all.
 Professionals know that it takes a lot of work to build, and very little
 to destroy. 
 
   Pranksters usually enjoy the power of destruction they gain with a
 little knowledge. 

While I'm not a prankster, I find it unnecessary to refrain from
posting any text that may cause Outlook Express to crash. I am
operating within standards, and I forced no one to use a broken
MUA. Its rather unprofessional to come onto the Internet and complain
when something of yours blows up.

Outlook is broken. Fix it instead of jury rigging the Internet to work
around it.

 PGP signature


Re: Outlook Express Prank

2000-12-11 Thread Jason Brooke

Just when you thought he couldn't possibly more clearly define the word
moronic through his typed dialogue...

jason

This email brought to you by Outlook Express - accept it


 Show me a competent Unix admin using Outlook or a similar abomination
 and I won't show you the difference.

 Recommended reading for obvious newbies like yourself:
 http://learn.to/attribute/
 http://learn.to/sign/
 http://learn.to/edit_messages/
 --
 Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/LB/







Qmail source files - developer version

2000-12-11 Thread Alex Kramarov











  Maybe I am asking on the wrong forum, but boes anybody know, if there 
  is a "developer" version of qmail sources with at lease some remarks and 
  functionality description in the code so it would be more readable ? Or if 
  there is a site that has some description on the way qmail is written. I 
  want to write an addon to qmail, so it could forward mail to another 
  server before it hits the queve, splitted to several copies, one for each 
  recipient domain. I think many could benefit from this feature, in terms 
  of bandwidth conservation.
  
  Alex
  Incredimail Admin
  



	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	



__Created and best viewed 
with IncrediMail!Get your free copy at: www.incredimail.com



FreeBSD, Qmail, and NFS

2000-12-11 Thread Delanet Administration

I have a project I am about to undertake and would like some opinions
before I begin.

We currently have a single server running Qmail on FreeBSD 3.2, with
customer Maildirs on a NFS attached external raid connected from another
server. This for the most part works fine. We occasionally have problems
where the mail server is unable to read the contents of user directories
(the NFS server can see them fine). At these times the only fix has been
to move the contents of the directory into a temporary location and
delete the directory, add it back and move the files back. This happens
once every 2 or 3 months.

We are now planning to expand our mail system. We would like to keep
Qmail and FreeBSD both. We were wishing to have 3 or 4 load balanced
front end servers to split the load of the mail servers, with a common
fibre channel raid back end.

This brings up some obvious issues. First, we wanted to have all 4 hosts
processing and able to access the raid simultaneously with ability for
live failover and the ability to remove/upgrade individual parts of the
cluster at any time. NFS under FreeBSD (as of the posts I saw from Nov
2000) has no support for per client file locking. GFS was my other
choice, however Sistina Software said there will not be a copy ported to
FreeBSD until Q2/Q3 2001. I do not know of any other file systems that
are capable of per client file locking for FreeBSD that will offer
reliability and the performance we wish it achieve (If anyone else does,
I'd really like to know).

This leads to the next question, is file locking necessary under Qmail
when using the Maildir style directory structure for the mail store?
SMTP will never be accessing any files after it writes them to the
Maildir. Pop3 should not interfere either. Perhaps if a user tries to
access via pop3 multiple times simultaneously, but otherwise I see no
reason for file locking in this environment. If this is the case, what
do people think of this cluster configuration with a fibre channel back
end raid? Or should we use NFS instead? And if we do use NFS, has the
problem we experienced (noted above) been resolved in the more recent
releases of FreeBSD or is this a configuration issue on our end?

Also, If anyone else has clustered FreeBSD with Qmail already, we would
like also to know how you achieved it and any tips you may have as to
configuration of such a setup.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

--

Stephen Comoletti - Network Engineer / Systems Administrator
Delanet Inc. http://www.delanet.com
Frontline Communications Corp. http://www.fcc.net
phone: (302) 326-5800 fax: (302) 326-5802 x312
262 Quigley Blvd, New Castle, DE 19720, USA




 S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Re: Qmail server set to forward to another host on the local ethernet.

2000-12-11 Thread andrew

 I will have the following:
 
 Computer A (On ISP Primary)
  | - Linked via 100Mbps ethernet
 Computer B (On ISP Secondary)
 
 I'd like to setup A as the first MX record for host blah.com and B as the
 secondary MX record for blah.com both on different ISPs and connected via
 100Mbps ethernet.
 
 If A is down and B starts receiving email for A, how do I forward all the
 emails B receives to A over the ethernet and not keep copies of those emails
 on server B?

Hi,

This is straightforward, using control/locals, control/rcpthosts and optionally
control/smtproutes:
Your primary MX, "A" is where the mail is delivered, so put your domain in 
control/locals
and control/rcpthosts. Your secondary MX, "B", where mail is not delivered, merely held
while "A" is unreachable, has your domain in control/rcpthosts but not control/locals 
- so
that any mail accepted by this machine is not regarded as local and will be queued for
later remote delivery. Remote delivery will be attempted periodically by qmail (see the
man pages for details of this). You didn't mention if the 100MBps link was a public or
private link. If the latter, you need to add the private address of "A" to
control/smtproutes for your domain - this overrides the DNS entry for "A".

More details on all the above in the standard sources of documentation - start at
www.qmail.org, esp. see the man pages, Dan's site (cr.yp.to), Dave Sill's Life with 
qmail
and the qmail howto.

cheers,

Andrew.




Re: Qmail server set to forward to another host on the local ethernet.

2000-12-11 Thread Chris Johnson

On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 08:21:09AM +1000, Rawlinsons Group (Brisbane) wrote:
 Computer A (On ISP Primary)
  | - Linked via 100Mbps ethernet
 Computer B (On ISP Secondary)
 
 I'd like to setup A as the first MX record for host blah.com and B as the
 secondary MX record for blah.com both on different ISPs and connected via
 100Mbps ethernet.
 
 If A is down and B starts receiving email for A, how do I forward all the
 emails B receives to A over the ethernet and not keep copies of those emails
 on server B?

On B, put blah.com in control/rcpthosts *only*. That's all you have to do.

Chris



Limiting rcpt to

2000-12-11 Thread Gan
Hi, I am Using Qmail for 1/2 year and very happy with it,
Here is my question :
is there any way to limit rcpto to s in qmail smtp session?
like:

rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
etc...

rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

No more than N time

idea is that after count of rcpt to reaches N qmail expects rset or
kills the connection


Re: Limiting rcpt to

2000-12-11 Thread andrew

Gan,

 is there any way to limit rcpto to s in qmail smtp session?

This sounds very similar to the tarpit patch - find this from www.qmail.org - you 
should
be able to modify this to give you the behaviour you desire.

cheers,

Andrew.





RE: Limiting rcpt to

2000-12-11 Thread Wong, Wing-Kin

There is a patch 'qmail-1.03-maxrcpt.patch' that is to limit the max. no. of
rcpt tos.
http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1999/11/msg00245.html

regards,
Kent
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 10:22 AM
 To:   Gan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject:  Re: Limiting rcpt to
 
 Gan,
 
  is there any way to limit rcpto to s in qmail smtp session?
 
 This sounds very similar to the tarpit patch - find this from
 www.qmail.org - you should
 be able to modify this to give you the behaviour you desire.
 
 cheers,
 
 Andrew.
 



Qmail and RFC1894 - Delivery Status Notifications

2000-12-11 Thread James Morgenstein

All-

I have a need to process mail server bounces in an automated fashion and
planned to make use of RFC1894 - An Extensible Message Format for Delivery
Status Notifications.

This appears to be used by most of the public mail servers that I have
tested against, but when a mail bounces out of one of my local qmail
machines (e.g., cannot connect after the maximum queue time), the message
that I am receiving back from qmail does not appear to follow the RFC
specification for reporting this error.

Do I have something mis-configured?  Is there a patch to bounce using
RFC1894 standards?

Thanks for the help.

James




Re: big-concurrency.patch

2000-12-11 Thread Martin Volesky


On 11/12/00 at 2:25 PM Charles Cazabon wrote:


At least as compared to having made the changes manually after boot.
However, his system could exhibit poorer interactive response compared to
before modifying the max-files and max-inodes due to the increased load
from qmail.

Charles

Yes Charles, I agree with all your points.

Martin Volesky - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO - Deijlabs Corporation
1221 Mackay, Suite 200
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H3G 2H5
Tel.: 514.399.9930 Fax.: 514.399.1117




different mail relays?

2000-12-11 Thread Thomas Haberland

Hi,

searching through the available qmail docs and FAQ I can't find an answer, if 
and how solutions for the below described problems are possible.

Situation:
My qmail server is located into a bigger company Intranet network. Each 
location has their own mail server, their own mail domain (sub's of an 
Intranet top level domain - that is no problem) and own DNS. Relaying mail 
works fine, no problems.
Now one location offers a mail gateway to the public Internet.

The two questions are:

- Intranet mail relaying should keep working, but how do I seperate relaying 
of Intranet mails to [location].myintranet.dom and outside to the Internet 
for all other mails?
The Internet mail gateway has a different IP address.

- is it possible to grant access to use the Internet mail gateway (relay) for 
specific users or user groups? How?

Note: I am using qmail only for relaying outside mails. My primary local mail 
server is Hawkeye (on top of a MySQL database).

Thanks,
Thomas



alias account problem, pls help!

2000-12-11 Thread mok swee loong

hi all,
- i'm using vpopmail + qmail.
- i have a virtual domain setup mydomainname.com.
under my /home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com, i have always use a
.qmail-aliasname file to create alias account that deliver mail to multiple
users, the format of the file is:

/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user1/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user2/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user3/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user4/Maildir/
/home/vpopmail/domains/mydomainname.com/user5/Maildir/

and i have no problem with all the alias accounts all this while. BUT one
particular alias account does give me this weird problem!
when someone send mail to this alias account - some of the users in this
list will receive MULTIPLE copies of the same mail, and some dun receive any
copy at all!!

and in the log i found something suspicious:

starting delivery 74: msg 32174 to local
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
delivery 74: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/
status: local 0/10 remote 0/20

- obviously an alias account doesnt have any real maildir, any idea what
could cause this error?
- and this particular alias acount contains 65 entries, is the biggest alias
in my setup, could this be a problem?

i try to read eveything that i can find, but don't seems to come across
anything like this, pls help!

thanks in advance!!

best regards,
mok swee loong.






Email hosting solutions?

2000-12-11 Thread Benjamin Lee

Hi all,
Was looking for some comments on two things...


Number one, I was wondering if anyone has put together (or knows of)
'plug-n-play' email hosting solutions?

I'm thinking of something quite complete like:

qmail/postfix/sendmail + [ procmail ] + courier / cyrus / uw / other?
plus...
virtual domains + web admin (qmailadmin?) + web email (IMP?)



Number two, correct me if I'm wrong but, there are two ways to do 'virtual
domain' hosting (retrieval) of email. (I'm not talking about the delivery
-- MTA -- part. Yup, I should send this part to another more appropriate
list. ;-P )

1.  IP based
Mail server gets multiple IP addresses, IMAP or POP looks up different
accounts depending on IP address... blah blah.

2.  Name mapping based
User email addresses are mapped to different accounts, therefore, IMAP
or POP don't do anything special.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]- jdoe-first
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   - jdoe-second


Cheers,
Ben.

-- 
B.  http://makelinux.org/"Always real."http://realthought.net/
__
Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way. When it isn't,
don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery, or simple bad luck.
-- Joseph Heller, "God Knows"



Re: Qmail and RFC1894 - Delivery Status Notifications

2000-12-11 Thread Sean Reifschneider

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:04:14PM -0500, James Morgenstein wrote:
This appears to be used by most of the public mail servers that I have
tested against, but when a mail bounces out of one of my local qmail

The problem with DSN is that *EVERY* machine that the message passes through
must support DSN, or it fails.  QMail doesn't support DSN (unless there's
a patch, you have looked at www.qmail.org, right?).  Check out 
VERPs -- Variable Envelope Return Paths.  Searching google
should provide some good hits.

Sean
-- 
 I never thought I would live in a country which had a
 self-declared president.
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python



Re: different mail relays?

2000-12-11 Thread Mark Delany

On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 02:08:29AM +0100, Thomas Haberland wrote:

 The two questions are:
 
 - Intranet mail relaying should keep working, but how do I seperate relaying 
 of Intranet mails to [location].myintranet.dom and outside to the Internet 
 for all other mails?

That depends on a number of factors.

1. Can these internal mail systems connect to the internet directly
(perhaps via a NAT)?

2. Is your internal DNS setup such that queries about non local
domains are answered correctly?

If the answer is "yes" to both questions, then qmail will work without
any special configuration.

If the answer is "no" to either question, then you need to add a
special smtproutes entry such that mail to your domain use the DNS
while all other mails are forwarded to your "Internet Mail
Gateway". The man page for qmail-remote discusses this very
requirement, but using your sample domain, the smtproutes file would
have:

.myintranet.dom:
:Internet-gateway.myintranet.dom

What this means is that all mail address to .myintranet.dom will use
the name server to resolve the MX and anything else will be
unconditionally forwarded to Internet-gateway.myintranet.dom which is
meant to be the name of your Internet Mail Gateway, which I assume is
in your internal DNS.

 The Internet mail gateway has a different IP address.

I'm not sure what the significant of that statement is. A different IP
address from what exactly? As long as it's in your internal DNS and as
long as it's reachable by your internal qmail servers, then it's not a
problem.

 - is it possible to grant access to use the Internet mail gateway (relay) for 
 specific users or user groups? How?

No. You'd have to write code to do this. It's sort of possible if you
can identify users by IP address and thus redirect them to different
instances of qmail, but there is no general nor easy mechanism.


Regards.



emergency: tell me, how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list files by text editor?

2000-12-11 Thread bora



who knows how can I edit ezmlm mailing-list by text 
editor?

I'm using qmail with ezmlm-0.53.

as a root or owner of mailinglist
(of course , except auto-subscribing)

how canI add so many mail address by text 
editor?

please help me!


===Regards 
Sangbin Lim


Re: big mail spool

2000-12-11 Thread Gjermund Sorseth


   My spool root is: /var/qmail/mail and every user dir is lied into this
   directory.
   The user directory is given by a function hash, this function gets the
   id and return a path to it, for instance:
  
   id   Relative path to /var/qmail/mail
   0   0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
   1   0/0/0/0/0/0/0/1
   .   
   .   
   15  0/0/0/0/0/0/0/f
   16  0/0/0/0/0/0/1/0
   17  0/0/0/0/0/0/1/1
  
   Got the ideia ?
  
   I would like to hear from you if my approach is good (performance in
   mind). To get into the user maildir, i get at most 16*8 lookup_dir
   routines, so at least it's better than having all user dir into a single
   directory. My approach is only better if you have morer than 16*8 pop
   accounts.


The basic idea is good, but I think your directory tree is
much deeper than neccesary. If you use NFS, I think it will have
a performance impact.

On my system I also map each account to a number which is used to
construct the path to the mailbox, but I only use three levels,
something like this:

/var/mail/26/83/username

These mailboxes are distrubuted across 100 x 100 = 1 directories,
which is probably sufficient for up to 10 million users.

-- 
Gjermund Sorseth