Re[2]: problem about move to qmail for virtual domain.
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:03:33 -0700 Greg White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:26:21PM +0900, Michael Cheung wrote: > > Hi: > > I move to qmail from sendmail for a virtual domain be added. > > problem is: > > 1. can't deliver to user@domain. > > 2. can't use qmail-popup to recieve mail. > > > > me: > > develop > > I'm not familiar with that TLD -- is this some sort of alternative TLD? > See below... > my qmail server is an internal server on our intranet. my machine is vividy.develop, and the server is server.develop. domain "develop" MX record is point to server.develop it just for internal communication. > > > > locals: > > localhost > > develop > > > > virtual: > > sales > > Nor am I familiar with the 'sales' TLD -- where do these come from? > Unless the internet at large is able to reach your server by looking for > an MX record [1] that matches _exactly_ what's in these control files, > you'll be getting no mail whatsoever... Can people really reach > 'joeuser@sales' and 'joeuser@develop' ? > > Now I want to add a sales domain in server.develop. when I mail to user@localhost or user@develop, server defer the mail, and following error message in bounced mail: can't find develop.server.develop. qmail add the hostname to mail address! > [1] or an A record, of course. > > > > no rcphost file. > > That's 'rcpthosts', I presume. You're not likely to be able to recieve > any mail whatsoever without something in rcpthosts. Virtual domains go > in rcpthosts and virtualdomains, system-account domains go in rcpthosts > and locals. Nothing whatsoever goes in virtualdomains or locals > _without_ going in rcpthosts. > I have deleted the "rcphosts" file, I want the server can relay all mail from anywhere to anywhere, actually just for our intranet. > > > > Can I still use mailbox after I add a virtual domain? > > I have install vmailmgr and create a domain, it use maildir now. > > This is a virtual domain -- why does VSM matter at all? The users have > no shell accounts -- VSM is even more pointless than usual. :) > vmailmgr's checkvpw may only support maildir in any case -- check the > man pages for vmailmgr. I want to leave the system-account as before, so still in mailbox format. as you said, I have to transfer all system-account to maildir format? when I use standard checkpassword in qmail-popup, I can login to my system-account mailbox, but it said "no %USER/Maildir". question here: qmail-popup only support maildir? and when I changed standard "checkpassword" to vmailmgr "checkvpw". I can't login to mailbox. > > SNIP > > Afraid that's all I can help you with for now. I lost myself in too many qmail module and documents, I don't know what is need toinstall for my purpose. Thanks.
Re: change envelope from line
http://www.gmx.net
Re: problem about move to qmail for virtual domain.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:26:21PM +0900, Michael Cheung wrote: > Hi: > I move to qmail from sendmail for a virtual domain be added. > problem is: > 1. can't deliver to user@domain. > 2. can't use qmail-popup to recieve mail. > > me: > develop I'm not familiar with that TLD -- is this some sort of alternative TLD? See below... > > locals: > localhost > develop > > virtual: > sales Nor am I familiar with the 'sales' TLD -- where do these come from? Unless the internet at large is able to reach your server by looking for an MX record [1] that matches _exactly_ what's in these control files, you'll be getting no mail whatsoever... Can people really reach 'joeuser@sales' and 'joeuser@develop' ? [1] or an A record, of course. > > no rcphost file. That's 'rcpthosts', I presume. You're not likely to be able to recieve any mail whatsoever without something in rcpthosts. Virtual domains go in rcpthosts and virtualdomains, system-account domains go in rcpthosts and locals. Nothing whatsoever goes in virtualdomains or locals _without_ going in rcpthosts. > > Can I still use mailbox after I add a virtual domain? > I have install vmailmgr and create a domain, it use maildir now. This is a virtual domain -- why does VSM matter at all? The users have no shell accounts -- VSM is even more pointless than usual. :) vmailmgr's checkvpw may only support maildir in any case -- check the man pages for vmailmgr. SNIP Afraid that's all I can help you with for now. -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Put of tcprules
Hi Miliser I have been setup and configure qmail, i adopted from www.lifewithqmail.org, and has been finish, but i am still confuse where I have to put tcprules for open and start smtpd,pop3d and qmtp if there any script about this matter where I could see, or should I put in rc.local? BTW i would like start smtp,pop3,qmtp when every time my linux box rebooting Thank for any support of u all Best regards, The Afif mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
problem about move to qmail for virtual domain.
Hi: another question: as I want to add virtual domain, which is better vmailmgr and vpopmail or any other choice? Thanks in advance. Regards; Michael
problem about move to qmail for virtual domain.
Hi: I move to qmail from sendmail for a virtual domain be added. problem is: 1. can't deliver to user@domain. 2. can't use qmail-popup to recieve mail. me: develop locals: localhost develop virtual: sales no rcphost file. rc: #!/bin/sh # Using splogger to send the log through syslog. # Using procmail to deliver messages to /var/spool/mail/$USER by default. exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \ qmail-start '|preline procmail' splogger qmail Can I still use mailbox after I add a virtual domain? I have install vmailmgr and create a domain, it use maildir now. use setting below in inetd.conf for pop service: pop-3 stream tcp nowait qmaild /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup qmail-popup linux.justware /var/qmail/vmail mgr/bin/checkvpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d and when I recieve mail from a user which is system user, I got error message: -ERR authorization failed Thanks in advance. Regards; Michael
Re: Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
Spot on Mark, sounds like I'll alarm Q-S, and add your kill suggestion - that'll stop Q-S double-delivering if qmail-smtpd dies. On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 03:48:50AM +, Mark Delany wrote: > All you are really doing is reducing the window of risk to a very > small - but non-zero - size. But non-zero is ok as SMTP is idempotent. Yup - SMTP has always erred on the "duplicate-is-better-than-miss" side - fair enough too... Thanks for the ideas -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:06:02PM +1200, Jason Haar wrote: > Hi there > > I'm the author of Qmail-Scanner - an Email scanning harness that can be used > to block attachments, scan for viruses, etc. It's hooked in as a replacement > for qmail-queue. > > The installation of a rather slow virus scanner on my own systems had lead > me to realise a rare error condition I hadn't expected. This virus scanner > didn't like scanning a 90Mb zip'ped AVI file (ahem) - whereas another vendor > scanner took 1.5minutes to scan it, this one took nearly two hours... > > The sending SMTP server's qmail-remote timed out the SMTP session after 20 > minutes - as being in error - as it had waited "too long" for the final "OK". > However, STDOUT on the receiving box still received the "mail from|rcpt to" > envelope headers, so after 2 hours Qmail-Scanner happily delivered it back > to the real qmail-queue for real delivery. So let me get this right, what's happening is this: o the remote site is connecting to qmail-smtpd o qmail-smtpd is in turn invoking your replacement qmail-queue program called Qmail-Scanner o Qmail-Scanner is in turn invoking the real qmail-queue. Your problem arises when Qmail-Scanner (more correctly the scanner it invokes I guess) takes a long time to process the data. In fact longer than the SMTP timeout of the remote site. Then here's what happens: o the remote site times out and closes the socket thinking the email delivery has failed o meanwhile Qmail-Scanner et al are happily processing the email totally oblivious to the lost connection. Eventually the scan completes and the mail is injected into the local queue with qmail-queue. The key is that Qmail-Scanner doesn't know that the socket has been closed and that qmail-smtpd has exited. My suggestion is that you take a two-pronged approach. First off, introduce a timeout in Qmail-Scanner and exit accordingly (exit(52) according to the qmail-queue man page). Second off, I'd determine the process id of the parent with getppid() and at the point at which the scan is complete - but just prior to completing the qmail-queue - I'd use kill(parent, 0) to determine that qmail-smtpd is still around. All you are really doing is reducing the window of risk to a very small - but non-zero - size. But non-zero is ok as SMTP is idempotent. Your remaining problem is that the sender will never succeed as the mail is too large to process within their SMTP time-frame, so a better strategy might be to disconnect the scanner from SMTP. This is pretty trivial with a two-instance qmail install but it sure adds complexity for your customers. Regards. > > However... back on the sending host, it tried to send it again... > > I had a little loop going there - quite nasty. Can you say "busy system"? :-) > > Anyhoo, the virus scanner is the real culprit here - and that's something > that can be fixed (i.e. get another). The problem is WHY did the recipient > qmail-smtpd send through the envelope headers via STDOUT to > qmail-queue/Qmail-Scanner? Upon noticing the sender going away, shouldn't it > have recognised that as an error condition? > > I'm gonna have to alarm Qmail-Scanner so it also spits the dummy before 20 > minutes (I hope other MTAs don't have shorter timeouts). That way it'll > always be telling the sender MTA it's in trouble. > > Another solution would be to just accept the message before scanning it, and > scan it after the sending server has gone away - but then I'd have to write > an entire requeuing infrastructure to handle transient errors too (not > bl**dy likely ;-) > > Oh yeah - and please don't say "limit the size" - we LIKE sending large > things here :-) [we just don't appear to like receiving them ;-)] > > Am I missing something here? This seems to imply that if you had > /var/qmail/queue on a VERY slow (but otherwise reliable) disk, that you > would see this problem too. I hope I'm just been stupid and missed > something obvious... > > > -- > Cheers > > Jason Haar > > Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ > Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
Solution, stop emailing yer smutty pr0n to everyone.
why I can't see my mail in the list
Hi everybody Why now I can't receive the mail I send to the qmail maillist. So now I'm not sure whether I have sent the mail to the maillist. Can you receive? BTW: Thanks Greg White. flint [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[OT] Re: Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
Thus said Jason Haar on Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:06:02 +1200: > me to realise a rare error condition I hadn't expected. This virus scanner > didn't like scanning a 90Mb zip'ped AVI file (ahem) - whereas another vendor > scanner took 1.5minutes to scan it, this one took nearly two hours... Tell them to send MPEG instead. ;-) Andy -- [---[system uptime]] 8:23pm up 12 days, 23:39, 6 users, load average: 1.46, 1.50, 1.45
Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
Hi there I'm the author of Qmail-Scanner - an Email scanning harness that can be used to block attachments, scan for viruses, etc. It's hooked in as a replacement for qmail-queue. The installation of a rather slow virus scanner on my own systems had lead me to realise a rare error condition I hadn't expected. This virus scanner didn't like scanning a 90Mb zip'ped AVI file (ahem) - whereas another vendor scanner took 1.5minutes to scan it, this one took nearly two hours... The sending SMTP server's qmail-remote timed out the SMTP session after 20 minutes - as being in error - as it had waited "too long" for the final "OK". However, STDOUT on the receiving box still received the "mail from|rcpt to" envelope headers, so after 2 hours Qmail-Scanner happily delivered it back to the real qmail-queue for real delivery. However... back on the sending host, it tried to send it again... I had a little loop going there - quite nasty. Can you say "busy system"? :-) Anyhoo, the virus scanner is the real culprit here - and that's something that can be fixed (i.e. get another). The problem is WHY did the recipient qmail-smtpd send through the envelope headers via STDOUT to qmail-queue/Qmail-Scanner? Upon noticing the sender going away, shouldn't it have recognised that as an error condition? I'm gonna have to alarm Qmail-Scanner so it also spits the dummy before 20 minutes (I hope other MTAs don't have shorter timeouts). That way it'll always be telling the sender MTA it's in trouble. Another solution would be to just accept the message before scanning it, and scan it after the sending server has gone away - but then I'd have to write an entire requeuing infrastructure to handle transient errors too (not bl**dy likely ;-) Oh yeah - and please don't say "limit the size" - we LIKE sending large things here :-) [we just don't appear to like receiving them ;-)] Am I missing something here? This seems to imply that if you had /var/qmail/queue on a VERY slow (but otherwise reliable) disk, that you would see this problem too. I hope I'm just been stupid and missed something obvious... -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: 553 Too many Received key words in the mail
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 09:08:43AM +0800, flint wrote: > Hi everybody > >I have installed a new mail machine. Now I find a problem,that when I send to > a mailbox which has been set Forward,the mailbox that is forward to can't receive >mail. > And as postmast,will receive a "Delivery Status Notification" mail,it said: > > This message could not be delivered to the following recipients: > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 202.104.32.232 failed after I sent the message. > Remote host said: 553 Too many Received key words in the mail, should less than 5 > > Reporting-MTA: dns; bouncemessage.net The problem seems pretty obvious - the recieving MTA doesn't like the fact that five MTAs have touched it before it gets there. :) Is it just me, or is five too low for many cases?? This seems like a weak method of loop protection, and it seems to me that it will bounce legitimate mail too often... SNIP
Re: multiple qmail installations vs. big concurrency patch
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 05:31:52PM -0700, Brett wrote: > Setting up /var/qmail1, /var/qmail2, etc. each with a concurrency of, say, > 100, as opposed to one install of qmail with the big concurrency remote > patch with concurrency set to 500. This might, IMHO, have some advantages, especially if /var/qmail1 and /var/qmail2 are different spindles. However, see below. > > Apparently you have to adjust the linux kernel to get your concurrency up to > 500 so wouldn't it be easier to just have multiple qmail installs? Is there > an overall limit of concurrent connections that's unrelated to whether > you're running one or several qmail installs? Thanks. Yes, the kernel is the limit -- maximum running processes, maximum open file descriptors, etc. The kernel limits that you'd likely run into would be the system-wide ones, not just per-process ones. I don't believe that kernel recompiles are required anymore, though -- check /proc/sys/fs/file-max and /proc/sys/fs/inode-max tunables, and 'man bash' for ulimit options -- kernel options for open file descriptors do not seem to be hard-coded anymore (since 2.2.12 IIRC). > > -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: qmail could not send to another host
are domain that you sending your email is it up and running? do they run smtp there? try to send your email to my email and see if you get same error.. if not then that other host is down or their mail isn't working proroperly basically it's not no your end.. - Original Message - From: "Dodol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Qmail-milis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 9:03 PM Subject: qmail could not send to another host > Hi miliser > > I am newbie for qmail, but I've been succes for install > qmail+vpopmail+qmailadmin, it good really working for internal > network, but I try to send email to internet its never succes, when > I try see log message I have see like this > > Apr 18 12:17:05 web1 qmail: 987571025.004739 delivery 2: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn > 't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ > Apr 18 12:17:05 web1 qmail: 987571025.004999 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > Apr 18 13:13:41 web1 qmail: 987574421.004567 starting delivery 3: msg 48238 to r > emote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Apr 18 13:13:41 web1 qmail: 987574421.004681 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 > Apr 18 13:13:49 web1 qmail: 987574429.764745 delivery 3: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn > 't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ > Apr 18 13:13:49 web1 qmail: 987574429.764866 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > Apr 18 13:16:29 web1 qmail: 987574589.764434 starting delivery 4: msg 48239 to r > emote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Apr 18 13:16:29 web1 qmail: 987574589.764546 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 > Apr 18 13:17:09 web1 qmail: 987574629.004908 delivery 4: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn > 't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ > > I connect to internet using dial-up,not permanent connection > and my email server different with my DNS server > > any one could help my problem > Thanks for all your support > > > Best regards, > Afif > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >
553 Too many Received key words in the mail
Hi everybody I have installed a new mail machine. Now I find a problem,that when I send to a mailbox which has been set Forward,the mailbox that is forward to can't receive mail. And as postmast,will receive a "Delivery Status Notification" mail,it said: This message could not be delivered to the following recipients: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: 202.104.32.232 failed after I sent the message. Remote host said: 553 Too many Received key words in the mail, should less than 5 Reporting-MTA: dns; bouncemessage.net Final-Recipient: rfc822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: Failed Status: 5.0.0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the mailbox that was forwarded to. What's the problem? flint [EMAIL PROTECTED]
qmail could not send to another host
Hi miliser I am newbie for qmail, but I've been succes for install qmail+vpopmail+qmailadmin, it good really working for internal network, but I try to send email to internet its never succes, when I try see log message I have see like this Apr 18 12:17:05 web1 qmail: 987571025.004739 delivery 2: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn 't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ Apr 18 12:17:05 web1 qmail: 987571025.004999 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Apr 18 13:13:41 web1 qmail: 987574421.004567 starting delivery 3: msg 48238 to r emote [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apr 18 13:13:41 web1 qmail: 987574421.004681 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 Apr 18 13:13:49 web1 qmail: 987574429.764745 delivery 3: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn 't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ Apr 18 13:13:49 web1 qmail: 987574429.764866 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Apr 18 13:16:29 web1 qmail: 987574589.764434 starting delivery 4: msg 48239 to r emote [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apr 18 13:16:29 web1 qmail: 987574589.764546 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 Apr 18 13:17:09 web1 qmail: 987574629.004908 delivery 4: deferral: Sorry,_I_wasn 't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/ I connect to internet using dial-up,not permanent connection and my email server different with my DNS server any one could help my problem Thanks for all your support Best regards, Afif mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
multiple qmail installations vs. big concurrency patch
Setting up /var/qmail1, /var/qmail2, etc. each with a concurrency of, say, 100, as opposed to one install of qmail with the big concurrency remote patch with concurrency set to 500. Apparently you have to adjust the linux kernel to get your concurrency up to 500 so wouldn't it be easier to just have multiple qmail installs? Is there an overall limit of concurrent connections that's unrelated to whether you're running one or several qmail installs? Thanks.
Re: Max Email for each user
if you find the sollution there please let me know (just in case if i'll be off the list then) thanks in advance - Original Message - From: "Kirti S. Bajwa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Alan R.'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:37 PM Subject: RE: Max Email for each user Good idea. If it is possible, I rather see a solution where as if a use send more than a certain number of emails (say 100), the system holds the sending of emails but inform the webmaster who can review the email. I am sure with all the brain power on this list, someone can come up with a routine to just do that. Kirti -Original Message- From: Alan R. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Max Email for each user To make sure that a configured user didn´t start doing SPAM with my SMTP -Original Message- From: alexus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: quinta-feira, 19 de abril de 2001 20:01 To: Alan R.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Max Email for each user just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? - Original Message - From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM Subject: Max Email for each user > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each user > ? > > Thanks, > Alan > >
Re: The Golden Monkey Has Arrived!! (OT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Dear Friends & Future Millionaire: > ... more spam *chuckles* Off topic; but isn't it ironic that this guy decided to send spam to a list of e-mail admins? I know I'll be tracking him down and reporting it. -- Keith <-- still fighting in the holy war on spam Network Engineer Triton Technologies, Inc.
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
it's not like i'm "demanding" and i didn't realize that there are an archive for that that i can search.. basically i'm very new to all this list stuff.. so i'm trying to do my best to "fit in".. most of that "high qulified IT professionals" are same as me who's just looking for help.. if i knew that product well and someone would ask me for help i'd help.. for now i don't and i'm looking for help at any source is possible.. - Original Message - From: "Markus Stumpf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:42 PM Subject: Re: store and forward incoming e-mail > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 06:59:05PM -0400, alexus wrote: > > i just joined that list > > yeah sure, and because your time is so worthwhile, you can't spend ten > minutes searching the archives. Rather than that you try to steal the time > of some 100 high qualified IT professionals and demand help. > > I am not a prophet, but with this attitude you will have a hard time on > this list. > > > if you don't want to "bothered" unsubscribe from this list.. > > If you don't want to have to wear asbestos underwear you'd better do some > preliminary research and RTFM in the future. > > \Maex > > -- > A few weeks of development and testing can save an afternoon in the library. > >
RE: Max Email for each user
Good idea. If it is possible, I rather see a solution where as if a use send more than a certain number of emails (say 100), the system holds the sending of emails but inform the webmaster who can review the email. I am sure with all the brain power on this list, someone can come up with a routine to just do that. Kirti -Original Message- From: Alan R. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Max Email for each user To make sure that a configured user didn´t start doing SPAM with my SMTP -Original Message- From: alexus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: quinta-feira, 19 de abril de 2001 20:01 To: Alan R.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Max Email for each user just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? - Original Message - From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM Subject: Max Email for each user > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each user > ? > > Thanks, > Alan > >
Re: Max Email for each user
i figured it now.. thanks - Original Message - From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:37 PM Subject: RE: Max Email for each user > To make sure that a configured user didn´t start doing SPAM with my SMTP > > -Original Message- > From: alexus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: quinta-feira, 19 de abril de 2001 20:01 > To: Alan R.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Max Email for each user > > > just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? > > - Original Message - > From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM > Subject: Max Email for each user > > > > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each > user > > ? > > > > Thanks, > > Alan > > > > > > >
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 06:59:05PM -0400, alexus wrote: > i just joined that list yeah sure, and because your time is so worthwhile, you can't spend ten minutes searching the archives. Rather than that you try to steal the time of some 100 high qualified IT professionals and demand help. I am not a prophet, but with this attitude you will have a hard time on this list. > if you don't want to "bothered" unsubscribe from this list.. If you don't want to have to wear asbestos underwear you'd better do some preliminary research and RTFM in the future. \Maex -- A few weeks of development and testing can save an afternoon in the library.
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
> i just joined that list Huh? http://lists.omnipotent.net/qmail/200104/msg00039.html > if you don't want to "bothered" unsubscribe from this list.. I thought I was pretty nice. I mean, I gave you the answer, and I didn't use a single swear word, call you any names, or do anything to imply you were below average intelligence. If this is the kind if response I get, maybe I should follow Robin's lead...
RE: Max Email for each user
To make sure that a configured user didn´t start doing SPAM with my SMTP -Original Message- From: alexus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: quinta-feira, 19 de abril de 2001 20:01 To: Alan R.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Max Email for each user just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? - Original Message - From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM Subject: Max Email for each user > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each user > ? > > Thanks, > Alan > >
Re: Max Email for each user
just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? - Original Message - From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM Subject: Max Email for each user > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each user > ? > > Thanks, > Alan > >
qmail@list.cr.yp.to
To keep one of his customers/users from sending to all 10 million of his closest friends telling them about how they too can get a diploma online and cheap. -- Michael Boyiazis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail Architect, NetZero, Inc. > -Original Message- > From: alexus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 4:01 PM > To: Alan R.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Max Email for each user > > > just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? > > - Original Message - > From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM > Subject: Max Email for each user > > > > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a > day by each > user > > ? > > > > Thanks, > > Alan > > > > >
RE: store and forward incoming e-mail
David: I looked at the site your link pointed to. I am glad because I would like to check/read as many as archive which are out there. Is it possible for readers of this list to provide links to some other achieve (which they consult)? Kirti -Original Message- From: David Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 7:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: store and forward incoming e-mail > i just joined that list Huh? http://lists.omnipotent.net/qmail/200104/msg00039.html > if you don't want to "bothered" unsubscribe from this list.. I thought I was pretty nice. I mean, I gave you the answer, and I didn't use a single swear word, call you any names, or do anything to imply you were below average intelligence. If this is the kind if response I get, maybe I should follow Robin's lead...
Re: Max Email for each user
Which is a good question, except sometimes a user means some spamming applicationbut I suppose a warpper around qmail-inject can do that... alexus wrote: > just out of curiosity.. why would you want to do something like that? > > - Original Message - > From: "Alan R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:56 PM > Subject: Max Email for each user > > > Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each > user > > ? > > > > Thanks, > > Alan > > > > -- === Medi Montaseri, [EMAIL PROTECTED], 408-450-7114 Prepass Inc, IT/Operations, Software Eng. ===
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
i just joined that list if you don't want to "bothered" unsubscribe from this list.. - Original Message - From: "David Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:55 PM Subject: Re: store and forward incoming e-mail > > do i need & infront of email? > > My goodness, do you read the other posts on this list? This was answered > just today: > > > On 19 Apr 2001 Kris Kelley wrote: > >> The ampersand is optional if the address begins with a letter or number, as > >> it does in this case. "man dot-qmail" > >
Max Email for each user
Someone Knows how can i limit the number of email sent in a day by each user ? Thanks, Alan
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
> do i need & infront of email? My goodness, do you read the other posts on this list? This was answered just today: > On 19 Apr 2001 Kris Kelley wrote: >> The ampersand is optional if the address begins with a letter or number, as >> it does in this case. "man dot-qmail"
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
thanks do i need & infront of email? - Original Message - From: "Markus Stumpf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 5:26 PM Subject: Re: store and forward incoming e-mail > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 05:16:28PM -0400, alexus wrote: > > how can i store and forward all incoming emails > > Put in your .qmail file: > # > ./Maildir/ > &[EMAIL PROTECTED] > # > > This will put a copy of your email into the maildir named "Maildir" > (please note the triling "/") in your $HOME and it will forward a copy of > the email to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". > If you use mailbox delivery change the first line to e.g. > # > ./Mailbox > &[EMAIL PROTECTED] > # > (no trailing "/" this time ;-) > > \Maex > > -- > SpaceNet AG| Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 > Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen| Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 > Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen > asleep yet. >
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
"alexus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > .forward > first line i put my user id > and second line email where to forward Read the man page of dot-qmail. If you put in your userid this creates a forward to itself. > can i do same w/ .qmail? For example with .qmail: -- &[EMAIL PROTECTED] ./Maildir/ -- This forwards the mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and stores it in your Maildir. Regards, Frank
Re: store and forward incoming e-mail
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 05:16:28PM -0400, alexus wrote: > how can i store and forward all incoming emails Put in your .qmail file: # ./Maildir/ &[EMAIL PROTECTED] # This will put a copy of your email into the maildir named "Maildir" (please note the triling "/") in your $HOME and it will forward a copy of the email to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". If you use mailbox delivery change the first line to e.g. # ./Mailbox &[EMAIL PROTECTED] # (no trailing "/" this time ;-) \Maex -- SpaceNet AG| Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen| Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen asleep yet.
Re: alias and Maildir
> is there a way due to i have few aliases somehow to store e-mail in another > Maildir See the manual page for dot-qmail: entry descriptions (4) or (5) depending on your delivery method will give you what you need. Beware that the maildirs or mailboxes have to be owned by alias. Regards, Frank
.forward/.qmail w/ maidir
how can i store and forward all incoming emails w/ .forward i used to do that .forward first line i put my user id and second line email where to forward can i do same w/ .qmail? i've tryed that but i'm getin error that email going in loop
alias and Maildir
is there a way due to i have few aliases somehow to store e-mail in another Maildir or something per each alias?
store and forward incoming e-mail
how can i store and forward all incoming emails w/ .forward i used to do that .forward first line i put my user id and second line email where to forward can i do same w/ .qmail? i've tryed that but i'm getin error that email going in loop
Re: FW: failure notice (Check end of message)
I write to both you and the mailinglist because messages to your server seem to bounce sometimes. You should not subscribe to mailinglists until your server is running without problems. First about your problems sending mails: It seems that you use a dialup connection to your provider. Some (maybe many) mail systems tend to block mail coming from a dialup system because often SPAM originates there. I don't agree to this practice but it is used, so you have to find a workaround for problematic receivers. You may include a smtproute entry for problematic receivers that points to the smarthost at your provider. This problem only affects you. Worse is you setup regarding receiving mails. For example: > : > Sorry, I couldn't find any host named localhost. (#5.1.2) Possibly you should check your fetchmail setup or establish a deliverable alias postmaster@localhost. You have to include localhost in locals and create the postmaster alias (like the installation instructions will tell you). > X-Fetchmail-Warning: recipient address [EMAIL PROTECTED] didn't match any > local name It seems that you use one POP account for the whole domain. You shouldn't do this when receiving mailinglists. Exception: if the provider uses Qmails delivered-to: headers, you may turn on fetchmails option to separate messages by this header. At the current stage your fetchmail setup tries to get the receivers from mail headers, which will break for mailinglists. Because you didn't define the default receiver correctly you bounce received mails. These bounces go again to the wrong addresses: because fetchmail has no information about the envelope sender it uses the From: header. This is wrong in the case of mailinglists. Please fix this or unsubscribe the mailinglist. At current your mail system pesters every poster to the mailinglist with bounces. Regards, Frank
Re: /var/qmail/control ?
Thanks Rizwan,it's just one of the hundreds of things I'd like to learn about qmail/fetchmail. Marco. On 19-Apr-2001 Rizwan wrote: > > > I mean use the ip_address of the SMTP server in the .fetchmailrc file > > Rizwan > > On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Marco Calistri wrote: >> Hello this is a very elementary question but I had mail lost >> due to a wrong configuration of my /var/qmail/control/locals. >> >> Using fetchmail as mail retrieval I used the line: >> >> smtphost localhost >> into .fetchmailrc >> >> Then since qmail host has an unknown domain name, >> I changed the file /var/qmail/control/defaulthost >> from linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org (private unknow name) >> to ik5bcu.ampr.org (my AMPRNET domain name) >> >> Messages are now accepted also from servers who require >> a FQDN (kernel.vger.edu): >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Connected to 199.183.24.194 but sender was rejected. >> Remote host said: 553 5.4.3 For MAIL FROM address >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the policy analysis reports DNS error with >> your >> source domain. >> >> But MAILER-DAEMON@qmail now seems to be addressed to >> ik5bcu.ampr.org instead to linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org >> >> : >> Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host, >> it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6) >> --- Below this line is a copy of the message. >> >> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Received: (qmail 1289 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2001 12:57:27 - >> Received: from localhost (HELO box.tin.it) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >> by localhost with SMTP; 18 Apr 2001 12:57:27 - >> Received: from linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org ([213.217.186.123]) >> by fep22-svc.tin.it (InterMail vM.4.01.03.13 201-229-121-113) >> with SMTP >> >> So ignoring where the problem was I changed >> .fetchmailrc putting the line: >> ssmtphost linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org >> and removing localhost from /var/qmail/control/locals >> >> I did this on the wrong moment:qmail was running with >> previous configuration so when I retrieved mail from >> my ISP 73 messages have been lost because they was >> addressed to localhost. >> >> The final of this long and unclear description is: >> what is the right and safe use of localhost >> (if any!) >> inside /control/locals or /control/rcpthosts? >> >> What a better workaround about DNS problem: >> using qmail hostname linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org as defaulthost >> without servers complains as vger.kernel.edu? >> >> -- >> Regards,: Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> gpg key available on http://www.qsl.net/ik5bcu >> Xfmail 1.4.7p2 on linux RedHat 6.2 > -- > In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful > -- > Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the world; >Most Gracious, Most Merciful; >Master of the Day of Judgment. > Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek. > Show us the straight way, >The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, > those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray. > Qur'aan Ch:1 >
Re: Resource Load with qmail
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 05:00:00PM -0300, jpablo wrote: > hardware requirements for high traffic qmail/vpopmail instalations. define high traffic. > In a heavy loaded machine, with a lot of maildirs, wich will define lot of maildirs. > be the bottleneck? Disk i/o? CPU? Memory? Network troughput? If > any of you are running high-load qmail servers please tell me the > quantity of maildirs and the hardware used. Thanks in advance. We have a medium sized POP3 server. 16000 users (i.e. "Maildirs") 30 pop3 connects/day (about 50% remote access, from "outside" of our networks, causing smtp after pop enabling). both plain pop3 and ssl tunneled pop3 supported 5 SMTP connects/day 6 messages per SMTP/day 13 deliveries a day (we do an extra delivery per message for accounting reasons) The machine is also running a few small mailing lists, a webmail interface (perl + apache), a MySQL database (user authentication) and a djbdns dnscache server (cachesize 100 MB). The bandwidth in/out is approx the same proportion throughout the day and is at 300 KByte/s (i.e. 150 KBs in + 150 KBs out) during prime time (9 to 18) with a few rare peaks up to 300-500 KBs We have a range of 15 to 50 parallel pop3 connections during prime time hours. Medium is around 25-30. The max average load in a 15 minute interval is usually not over 0.5 $ swapinfo Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity Type /dev/amrd0s1b 10484480 1048448 0%Interleaved The machine is FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE CPU: Pentium III/Pentium III Xeon/Celeron (796.54-MHz 686-class CPU) dual processor real memory = 536805376 (524224K bytes) amr0: amr0: Firmware H795, BIOS 2.03, 32MB RAM amrd0: on amr0 amrd0: 70004MB (143368192 sectors) RAID 5 (optimal) ahc0: aic7896/97: Wide Channel A, SCSI Id=7, 32/255 SCBs ahc1: aic7896/97: Wide Channel B, SCSI Id=7, 32/255 SCBs fxp0: I'd say this machine is currently well prepared for at least the double number of users without any problems. \Maex -- SpaceNet AG| Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen| Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen asleep yet.
FW: failure notice (Check end of message)
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 12:58 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: failure notice Hi. This is the qmail-send program at chs.com. 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. : Sorry, I couldn't find any host named localhost. (#5.1.2) --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: (qmail 3763 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2001 17:57:43 - Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by 127.0.0.1 with SMTP; 19 Apr 2001 17:57:43 - Received: from 206.230.41.2 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for postmaster@localhost (multi-drop); Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:57:43 -0500 (CDT) Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (muncher.math.uic.edu [131.193.178.181]) by comsys.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA00567 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:50:06 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 20396 invoked by uid 1002); 19 Apr 2001 14:29:09 - Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 28129 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2001 14:29:08 - Received: from dyn-66-72-116-62.chicago.il.ameritech.net (HELO chs.com) (66.72.116.62) by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 19 Apr 2001 14:29:08 - Received: (qmail 3088 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2001 14:17:28 - Received: from unknown (HELO ns1) (192.1.1.54) by 192.1.1.254 with SMTP; 19 Apr 2001 14:17:28 - From: "Kevin Phipps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Sending Problem Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:13:18 -0500 Message-ID: <004001c0c8da$e1c0ab60$[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 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-UIDL: b112a76bdc6e63907bd8560b8aed33bc X-Fetchmail-Warning: recipient address [EMAIL PROTECTED] didn't match any local name Qmail Support: Problem comes when Qmail takes Q'd mail and tries sending it. Whets very strange, is most messages go out, but few do not get out. I have people in the company come up and complain that a message didn't go through properly. I check the maillog file, and sure enough, there is some sort of error. Usualy the error reads: 1) Connected_to_206.132.105.32_but_connection_died. _Possible_duplicate!_(#4.4.2) 2) 209.228.4.201 _failed_after_I_sent_the_message./Remote_host_said:_451_timeout_ Most of my errors are basically that 'but connection died'. It appears to usually happen to a few users, so I don't really know if it's their client or not. I get that very rarely, but it seems other users get it more then others. I don't know if there is something I can try or check out. There is a specific server that no messages will get to. It's up.com and azcon.net. A employee here continuously gets the e-mail back. Now, I check the logs, I get that connection died error every time it tries sending it out. I have actually did a dig mx on the server and then connected via telnet to the server port 25 and connected fine. So there is no real problem with the network connection. Any suggestions? Anything at all? I'm pretty desperate now because a lot of important documents and e-mails are not getting out reliably :( Thanks .-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-. . . . Kevin Phipps . . Chicago Heights Steel. . [EMAIL PROTECTED]. . (708) 756-5626 . . . .-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-.
Re: Resource Load with qmail
jpablo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I need to know some of your experiences related to > hardware requirements for high traffic qmail/vpopmail instalations. Define high traffic, specifically. How many unique messages a day, what average size, how many recipients per message (local and remote), etc. > In a heavy loaded machine, with a lot of maildirs, wich will be the > bottleneck? Disk i/o? CPU? Memory? Network troughput? Depends on OS and configuration. There's a section on large servers at www.qmail.org, and many (many!) discussions in the list archives on this topic. 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. ---
High Availability
I'm in the middle of designing the architecture for a high-availability, robust mail system for a major client. I've searched the qmail archives, and read everything I could find on clustering and HA. I'd like to run my architecture thoughts by you all, and see what you think. Software: qmail (with the big-todo, big-concurrency and oversized dns patches) vpopmail sqwebmail MySQL (for vpopmail auth) Solaris 7 or 8 Hardware: 4 Sun 220R's (2 for smtp/webmail, 2 for db) Fiberchannel connections from each of the 4 machines into an EMC Celara Other: Veritos File System and Veritos Cluster Manager I plan on putting /var/qmail (including the queue) and the vpopmail home dir (and all the virtual domains users Maildir) on the Veritos FS on the EMC, and using the Cluster Manager to allow it to be shared between the two boxes. As it is the same drive, and therefore the same inodes, is this safe? I plan on the qmail and vpopmail users and groups to have the same UID and GID on both boxes. A F5 BigIP will be in front of these four boxes, and will loadbalance any connections to webmail.* and mail.* (we will be handling a significant number of domains and users) to either of the two boxes. /var/lib/mysql will also be on the Veritos FS on the EMC using the Cluster Manager, so the database will be available to both boxes. The connections to the MySQL box will be routed through the Big/IP to do similar load balancing (with persistence) for database calls. Thoughts, comments, suggestions and constructive criticism is welcome. Thanks in advance, Dave
Resource Load with qmail
Hello! I need to know some of your experiences related to hardware requirements for high traffic qmail/vpopmail instalations. In a heavy loaded machine, with a lot of maildirs, wich will be the bottleneck? Disk i/o? CPU? Memory? Network troughput? If any of you are running high-load qmail servers please tell me the quantity of maildirs and the hardware used. Thanks in advance. Juan Pablo
Re: Forwarding user mail.
Rakhesh Sasidharan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Robin S. Socha wrote: > > > You mean "&rakhesh@fqdn"? And "fqdn" won't work, anyway. > > Well, I had just put the username "rakhesh" into .qmail-player. And no, I > hadn't put any "&" -- is that needed ? No. Robin is forgetting that if a .qmail delivery instruction begins with an alphanumeric, qmail-local will assume it's a forward (&) directive. It's good to put them there, but it's not critical if the address starts with an alphanumeric character. 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: Re: Forwarding user mail.
Rakhesh Sasidharan wrote: > > TO do that, I created a file .qmail-player in the aliases directory, > > and put the name "rakhesh@fqdn" in that (that's how I had got qmail to > > deliver mail for non-existant addresses like postmaster etc); but > > qmail still delivers mail to "player" and not "rakhesh". Robin S. Socha wrote: > You mean "&rakhesh@fqdn"? And "fqdn" won't work, anyway. The ampersand is optional if the address begins with a letter or number, as it does in this case. "man dot-qmail" Also, I doubt he meant "fqdn" literally, but since this list prefers to be literal (nothing wrong with that)... "fqdn" would work if he has it set up as a local domain. I have a local domain called "no_domain_given" that is used to catch addresses that don't have domains, since the bosses didn't want people using them. ---Kris Kelley
Re: Forwarding user mail.
Rakhesh Sasidharan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You got that right. Put a .qmail file in the user's homedir. > > What then would I do if (say) user "player" didn't have a home directory. If an account doesn't own their home directory (or doesn't have one), then qmail considers that account to not exist (barring an override with the qmail-users mechanism). It will then be handled by ~alias/.qmail-..., or bounced. 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: Forwarding user mail.
* Rakhesh Sasidharan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010419 15:24]: > On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Robin S. Socha wrote: > > > > TO do that, I created a file .qmail-player in the aliases directory, > > > and put the name "rakhesh@fqdn" in that (that's how I had got qmail to > > > deliver mail for non-existant addresses like postmaster etc); but > > > qmail still delivers mail to "player" and not "rakhesh". > > > > You mean "&rakhesh@fqdn"? And "fqdn" won't work, anyway. > > Well, I had just put the username "rakhesh" into .qmail-player. And no, I > hadn't put any "&" -- is that needed? No. I am an idiot. Peter's explanation is correct.
Re: Forwarding user mail.
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Robin S. Socha wrote: > > TO do that, I created a file .qmail-player in the aliases directory, > > and put the name "rakhesh@fqdn" in that (that's how I had got qmail to > > deliver mail for non-existant addresses like postmaster etc); but > > qmail still delivers mail to "player" and not "rakhesh". > > You mean "&rakhesh@fqdn"? And "fqdn" won't work, anyway. Well, I had just put the username "rakhesh" into .qmail-player. And no, I hadn't put any "&" -- is that needed ? I have a file file .qmail-test which has "rakhesh ratish" (on separate lines) in it, and all mails to test get forwarded to both these users. Thanks, __ Rakhesh Sasidharan rakhesh at cse.iitd.ac.in
Re: Forwarding user mail.
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote: > You got that right. Put a .qmail file in the user's homedir. What then would I do if (say) user "player" didn't have a home directory. Something like the "www" etc user names. (I had read in the FAQ that changing the ownership of www to any user makes all mails for www go to that user; and thats why I had tried a similar thing in my case.) __ Rakhesh Sasidharan rakhesh at cse.iitd.ac.in
Re: alias with maildir
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I have just set up Qmail to use Maildir. It is working fine sending to an >existing user. The problem is it cannot send to the alias mailbox such as >~alias/.qmail-postmaster. I think I'm missing something. I've already >touched and chmod 644 ~alias/.qmail-postmaster. >It still returns this error: "deferral: >Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)". >I have tried creating ~alias/.qmail-postmaster as a directory but qmail >couldn't recognize it as a mail recipient. > >I would very much appreciate any assistance. Thanks! You sound a little confused. .qmail files give delivery directions. They're *always* files. They can direct delivery to a mailbox--which can be either a file (mbox) or directory (maildir). If you want to deliver to a maildir, specify the name of the maildir in the .qmail file, e.g.: ./postmaster/ and create the maildir using maildirmake: /var/qmail/bin/maildirmake ./postmaster and make it be owned by the right user: chown -R alias ~alias/postmaster -Dave
Re: problem with pop3d and nfs
Carsten Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > qmail delivers the mails in the Maildir -dirs without problems, > but when i fetch mail through pop-3 the pop3d doesn´t find the mails. This is in the archive, probably a hundred times or more. Search the mailing list archive and you will find the answer. Hint: "time". 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: Forwarding user mail.
* Rakhesh Sasidharan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010419 15:04]: > TO do that, I created a file .qmail-player in the aliases directory, > and put the name "rakhesh@fqdn" in that (that's how I had got qmail to > deliver mail for non-existant addresses like postmaster etc); but > qmail still delivers mail to "player" and not "rakhesh". You mean "&rakhesh@fqdn"? And "fqdn" won't work, anyway.
Re: Forwarding user mail.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:39:40AM +0530, Rakhesh Sasidharan wrote: > Is there any thing I am doing wrong ? Or does aliases only work for > non-existant accounts ? You got that right. Put a .qmail file in the user's homedir. Greetz, Peter.
Forwarding user mail.
Hi, I have a user "player" on my machine. Now, I want it that all mail sent to "player" be forwarded to another user "rakhesh". TO do that, I created a file .qmail-player in the aliases directory, and put the name "rakhesh@fqdn" in that (that's how I had got qmail to deliver mail for non-existant addresses like postmaster etc); but qmail still delivers mail to "player" and not "rakhesh". Is there any thing I am doing wrong ? Or does aliases only work for non-existant accounts ? I even changed ownership of .qmail-player to rakhesh; but still no use. Thanks, __ Rakhesh Sasidharan rakhesh at cse.iitd.ac.in
Doh! does qmail still have my messages?
Howdy folks, Here's the deal I installed vpopmail about halfway yesterday, just enough to break mail delivery. vpopmail took over diligence.com as a virtual domain with no users, and started bouncing messages... Does anyone know a way to get those bounced messages back here? I've got local delivery working again, which is half a blessing, but my concern is the email sent to us between the time I broke it and now. Are they floating in a local queue somewhere? Are they sitting on the various sender's mail servers waiting to come in? Are they simply gone, in which case I should probably email everyone I can think of and ask them to send anything they sent from yesterday afternoon onward? Advice, counseling, flames, notes in the form of "Jer, you're an idiot" are welcome... I hope they will just automagically find their way back here...but I have a suspicion that this hope is in vain. Jer The Humble Sysdamin
problem with pop3d and nfs
hi all!
i´ve running qmail and pop3d for a few month´s without problems...
now i´ve mounted the /home -dir over nfs instead on a local disk
qmail delivers the mails in the Maildir -dirs without problems,
but when i fetch mail through pop-3 the pop3d doesn´t find the mails.
the mailclients say "no new mail" but in Maildir/new i have lots of new
mail!?!?!?!?
what´s the problem??
ciao carsten
my tcp-server start/stop script: (but this shouldn´t be the problem)
#
#!/bin/sh
case "$1" in
'start')
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -H -lenterprise.intertrend.de -c
400 -u 506 -g 104 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 10.0.0.10 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -R -H 10.0.0.10 110
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup pop-2.lg.intertrend.de /bin/checkpassword
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d &
;;
'stop')
killall /usr/local/bin/tcpserver
;;
*)
echo "Usage: $0 { start | stop }"
;;
esac
exit 0
###
RE: Deliveries not going to 'webmaster' address.
> I've used qmail for a long time now, and this is the first > time I can remember that anything has gone seriously wrong. [...] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] address. The file has two addresses in > it, correctly formatted. Sometime in the last 4 weeks mail stopped > being delivered to both addresses. OK, I found it, sorry for my hasty post to the list. The 'webmaster' address got appended to the /var/qmail/users/assign file without my knowledge. I removed it and all is well. -- / C. R. (Charles) Oldham | NCA-CASI \ / Director of Technology | Arizona State University \ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] | V:480-965-8703 F:480-965-9423 \
Deliveries not going to 'webmaster' address.
Greetings, I've used qmail for a long time now, and this is the first time I can remember that anything has gone seriously wrong. Debian GNU/Linux Potato, qmail 1.03 built and installed from the Debian qmail-src package. In my /var/qmail/alias directory I have a .qmail file called .qmail-webmaster. It is supposed to correspond to our [EMAIL PROTECTED] address. The file has two addresses in it, correctly formatted. Sometime in the last 4 weeks mail stopped being delivered to both addresses. This is a Bad Thing, because while I am on the list, it's only to monitor what comes through. I'm the only person that is getting messages for this address, the person who is supposed to respond is not. Here's what I know: 1. All addresses, which are all local, BTW, can receive mail normally. 2. An identical alias file with a different name in the /var/qmail/alias directory works fine. 3. There is no 'webmaster' user at all on the system (thus ruling out the possibility of an errant .qmail file existing in a home directory). 4. There is nothing specific to the webmaster user in my .qmail file. 5. There are no files in the qmail queue directory structure. (e.g. there are no outstanding messages in the queue that are 'stuck' for some reason). 6. If I remove the .qmail-webmaster file altogether, mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not bounce. It still comes to me. 7. Bouncing mail works fine. I can send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it bounces. 8. Stopping and restarting all qmail components does not fix the problem. I don't know where this 'webmaster' user/address is coming from. This has got to be something stupid and simple. The syslog is no help--it just shows one delivery to me. How else can I figure out what is shipping this mail to me and ignoring the webmaster alias file? Here's headers if it helps. Received: via dmail-4.1(9) for cro; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:50:33 -0700 (MST) Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 12956 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2001 17:50:33 - Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 12953 invoked by uid 0); 19 Apr 2001 17:50:33 - Received: from kirk.nca.asu.edu (HELO kirk) (129.219.88.141) by quark.nca.asu.edu with SMTP; 19 Apr 2001 17:50:33 - From: "C. R. Oldham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: test Thanks in advance! -- / C. R. (Charles) Oldham | NCA-CASI \ / Director of Technology | Arizona State University \ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] | V:480-965-8703 F:480-965-9423 \
RE: qmailadmin compile question ---> basically From
Do the following: (I don't know if its the best choice, but worked for me) Create/edit the file ~vpopmail/etc/inc_deps and put this: -I- -I/usr/vpopmail/include The same with ~vpopmail/etc/lib_deps: -L/usr/vpopmail/lib -lvpopmail -L/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql -lmysqlclient Issue these commands: ./configure --enable-cgibindir=YOUR_HTTPD_CGI_BIN_FULL_PATH --enable-vpopuse r=YOUR_VPOPMAILUSER --enable-autoresponder-bin=FULL_PATH_TO_AUTORESPONDER -- enable-vpopmaildir=THE_ABSOLUTE_PATH_TO_VPOPMAILUSER_HOME_DIR make clean make su make install-strip Cheers, Wagner. > -Original Message- > From: Essy Ren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Quinta-feira, 19 de Abril de 2001 02:09 > To: qmail > Subject: qmailadmin compile question ---> basically From > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > i've tried install qmailadmin-0.42 > and configure with > ./configure --enable-vpopmaildir --enable-htmldir > --enable-cgibindir --enabl > e-autoresponder-bin --enable-ezmlmdir > i've already install vpopmail > > when i run the make command it's appears like this : > root@/home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42>make > make all-recursive > make[1]: Entering directory `/home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42' > make[2]: Entering directory `/home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42' > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c qmailadmin.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c alias.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c autorespond.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c forward.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c mailinglist.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c sysadmin.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c user.c > In file included from user.c:32: > vpopmail_config.h:145: warning: `PACKAGE' redefined > config.h:97: warning: this is the location of the previous definition > vpopmail_config.h:148: warning: `VERSION' redefined > config.h:100: warning: this is the location of the previous definition > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c util.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c auth.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c template.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c command.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c show.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c cgi.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c limits.c > gcc -I. -g -O2 -c dotqmail.c > gcc -g -O2 -o qmailadmin qmailadmin.o alias.o autorespond.o forward.o > mailinglist.o sysadmin.o user.o util.o auth.o template.o command.o show.o > cgi.o limits.o dotqmail.o -lnsl -lm -lcrypt > qmailadmin.o: In function `main': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/qmailadmin.c:122: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/qmailadmin.c:125: undefined reference to > `vget_assign' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/qmailadmin.c:164: undefined reference to > `vget_assign' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/qmailadmin.c:194: undefined reference to > `vget_assign' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/qmailadmin.c:210: undefined reference to > `vauth_user' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/qmailadmin.c:229: undefined reference to > `vget_assign' > alias.o: In function `show_redirect_lines': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:295: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:301: undefined reference to `slen' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:303: undefined reference to `scopy' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:304: undefined reference to `scat' > alias.o: In function `doredirect': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:326: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:333: undefined reference to `slen' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:335: undefined reference to `scopy' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:336: undefined reference to `scat' > alias.o: In function `moddotqmailnow': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:404: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:409: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > alias.o: In function `adddotqmailnow': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:476: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:501: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > alias.o: In function `delredirectnow': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:582: undefined reference to > `vauth_getpw' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:587: undefined reference to `slen' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:589: undefined reference to `scopy' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/alias.c:590: undefined reference to `scat' > autorespond.o: In function `delautorespondnow': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/autorespond.c:236: undefined reference to > `vdelfiles' > mailinglist.o: In function `delmailinglistnow': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/mailinglist.c:277: undefined reference > to `slen' > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/mailinglist.c:287: undefined reference to > `vdelfiles' > mailinglist.o: In function `showlistusers': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/mailinglist.c:439: undefined reference to > `lowerit' > mailinglist.o: In function `showlistmod': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/mailinglist.c:484: undefined reference to > `lowerit' > mailinglist.o: In function `addlistusernow': > /home/essy/qmailadmin-0.42/mailinglist.c:539: undefined reference to > `lowerit' > mailinglist.o: In function
Re: Doh! does qmail still have my messages?
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:57:52AM -0600, Jerry Lynde wrote: > Howdy folks, > > Here's the deal > > I installed vpopmail about halfway yesterday, just enough to break mail > delivery. > vpopmail took over diligence.com as a virtual domain with no users, and > started bouncing > messages... Does anyone know a way to get those bounced messages back here? Nope. They bounced. The original senders are (or should be[1]) aware that their messages did not get through, and will resend them (or call the person they emailed, and complain, ;) ). > I hope they will just automagically find their way back here...but I have a > suspicion that > this hope is in vain. [SNIP] See above -- this hope is in vain, but perhaps not as bad as you think. > > Jer > The Humble Sysdamin > [1] That is, if their sending SMTP server is not a broken piece of junk that refuses bounces, or some other such silliness. -- Greg White Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy
Re: Doh! does qmail still have my messages?
Jerry Lynde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I installed vpopmail about halfway yesterday, just enough to break mail > delivery. Oops. > vpopmail took over diligence.com as a virtual domain with no users, and > started bouncing > messages... Does anyone know a way to get those bounced messages back here? If vpopmail (which I understand is called in the manner of qmail-command) actually bounced them, they're gone. The only way to get them back is phone the people who sent them originally and get them to send it again. > Are they floating in a local queue somewhere? Are they sitting on the > various sender's mail servers waiting to come in? No, they would still exist if they had been deferred, but not if they were bounced. > Are they simply gone, in which case I should probably email everyone I can > think of and ask them to send anything they sent from yesterday afternoon > onward? Yes. 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. ---
Doh! does qmail still have my messages?
Howdy folks, Here's the deal I installed vpopmail about halfway yesterday, just enough to break mail delivery. vpopmail took over diligence.com as a virtual domain with no users, and started bouncing messages... Does anyone know a way to get those bounced messages back here? I've got local delivery working again, which is half a blessing, but my concern is the email sent to us between the time I broke it and now. Are they floating in a local queue somewhere? Are they sitting on the various sender's mail servers waiting to come in? Are they simply gone, in which case I should probably email everyone I can think of and ask them to send anything they sent from yesterday afternoon onward? Advice, counseling, flames, notes in the form of "Jer, you're an idiot" are welcome... I hope they will just automagically find their way back here...but I have a suspicion that this hope is in vain. Jer The Humble Sysdamin
Re: Queue Building
Mehul Choksi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks a lot for the reply. You're welcome. However, in future, could you set your email client up to use standard quoting conventions? The way you quoted my message made it extremely difficult to read and determine which parts you had added. I've fixed the quoting for this reply. > > Do you mean send identical copies of one message to a million users, or send > > one million unique emails, each to one user? The difference is enormous. > It depends, normally in batches of 100,000 to 300,000 identical mails > prepared by an application to be sent to subscribers. Currently we use a > pool of sendmail servers (ordinary PIII 500 with 128MB RAM and IDE). We are > planning to migrate to QMAIL eventually if we find better performance. 100,000 recipients each for 10 unique emails a day is trivial to do with qmail. However, your testing didn't actually test this. You sent thousands of unique messages to one or more recipients each, which is a completely different (and more difficult) queue load. Change your testing methods, and you'll see the difference. > > You may be running into a queue disk bandwidth limitation. What sort of > > hardware are you using? Is the queue on a disk by itself? Is that disk a > > 15kRPM SCSI disk, sitting on its own U160 controller? Is that filesystem > > mounted noatime? What filesystem are you using? What OS? > > > > How are you logging? What does the system load reach while running your > > injection? Have you read the section on large servers at www.qmail.org? > > Is /var/log on a separate disk? > The server we are using is a very ordinary machine with PIII 500, 128MB > and an IDE on Red Hat Linux 6.0 with upgraded kernel. Logging is done > exactly the same way mentioned in the HOWTO. I'm not familiar with the HOWTO you speak of. Does it use splogger to send the logs through syslog? If that's the case, syslog could be eating 90% of your CPU and 90% of your queue disk bandwidth, if the /var/log is on the same filesystem as /var/qmail/queue. You didn't answer any of these questions; we can't help you if you refuse to answer them. Basically, you want to ensure you're logging through multilog, not splogger, and sending the logs to a separate disk than the queue is on, for maximum performance. > We will distribute the load of SMTP using the LVS. The same test we ran on > sendmail with the very similar machine was acceptable - sendmail didn't > build up a huge queue - it processed all the mails. However, It was rather > slow in accepting the message though. But sendmail can be configured to try delivering the mail before queuing it; this is unreliable and can result in lost mail. We know nothing of your sendmail configuration (and probably don't want to know). 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: change envelope from line
+ Gustav-Martin Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: |
RE: Queue Building
Thanks a lot for the reply. The clarifications to your queries are embedded - Mehul Choksi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The purpose is to introduce qmail as an SMTP server in outbound email > distribution system - just to send a million mails daily to subscribed > users. Do you mean send identical copies of one message to a million users, or send one million unique emails, each to one user? The difference is enormous. -> It depends, normally in batches of 100,000 to 300,000 identical mails prepared by an application to be sent to subscribers. Currently we use a pool of sendmail servers (ordinary PIII 500 with 128MB RAM and IDE). We are planning to migrate to QMAIL eventually if we find better performance. * We tested the performance of the qmail by sending a few thousands mails to > non-existent email-ids and to bounce back to another mail server. Strangely > enough, qmail just built up a huge queue, without even preprocessing. qmail doesn't start new deliveries if there are messages waiting to be preprocessed (in todo). If todo grows large, linear directory scan times can slow the system down significantly; Russell Nelson's big-todo patch might help here. Others have used various schemes, such as injecting X at a time, pausing a minute or two in between injections to allow qmail to catch up with the todo contents, or trying first delivery with qmail-remote and only queuing the mail if that delivery fails, saving queue disk bandwidth. * I will give big-todo a try and see if there is any improvement. * > Once the application stopped pumping to the Qmail server, it started > processing and clearing queue, which took very long. You may be running into a queue disk bandwidth limitation. What sort of hardware are you using? Is the queue on a disk by itself? Is that disk a 15kRPM SCSI disk, sitting on its own U160 controller? Is that filesystem mounted noatime? What filesystem are you using? What OS? How are you logging? What does the system load reach while running your injection? Have you read the section on large servers at www.qmail.org? Is /var/log on a separate disk? --> The server we are using is a very ordinary machine with PIII 500, 128MB and an IDE on Red Hat Linux 6.0 with upgraded kernel. Logging is done exactly the same way mentioned in the HOWTO. We will distribute the load of SMTP using the LVS. The same test we ran on sendmail with the very similar machine was acceptable - sendmail didn't build up a huge queue - it processed all the mails. However, It was rather slow in accepting the message though. > Is it a normal behavior (since all the email addresses were non-existent) or > are we missing something somewhere? Concurrency is set to 120 for local and > remote. It's not trivial, but a million unique mails a day can be handled by qmail if you set it up properly. We just need _way_ more information than you've provided to start guessing at what your limiting factor(s) is. --> Anyways, Thank you very much again for your time. I greatly appreciate your suggestions. Regards, Mehul. 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: Queue Building
Mehul Choksi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The purpose is to introduce qmail as an SMTP server in outbound email > distribution system just to send a million mails daily to subscribed > users. Do you mean send identical copies of one message to a million users, or send one million unique emails, each to one user? The difference is enormous. > We tested the performance of the qmail by sending a few thousands mails to > non-existent email-ids and to bounce back to another mail server. Strangely > enough, qmail just built up a huge queue, without even preprocessing. qmail doesn't start new deliveries if there are messages waiting to be preprocessed (in todo). If todo grows large, linear directory scan times can slow the system down significantly; Russell Nelson's big-todo patch might help here. Others have used various schemes, such as injecting X at a time, pausing a minute or two in between injections to allow qmail to catch up with the todo contents, or trying first delivery with qmail-remote and only queuing the mail if that delivery fails, saving queue disk bandwidth. > Once the application stopped pumping to the Qmail server, it started > processing and clearing queue, which took very long. You may be running into a queue disk bandwidth limitation. What sort of hardware are you using? Is the queue on a disk by itself? Is that disk a 15kRPM SCSI disk, sitting on its own U160 controller? Is that filesystem mounted noatime? What filesystem are you using? What OS? How are you logging? What does the system load reach while running your injection? Have you read the section on large servers at www.qmail.org? Is /var/log on a separate disk? > Is it a normal behavior (since all the email addresses were non-existent) or > are we missing something somewhere? Concurrency is set to 120 for local and > remote. It's not trivial, but a million unique mails a day can be handled by qmail if you set it up properly. We just need _way_ more information than you've provided to start guessing at what your limiting factor(s) is. 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. ---
Queue Building
We have set up the qmail server using Adam McKenna’s Qmail-HOWTO V2 and it is working fine in normal condition. The purpose is to introduce qmail as an SMTP server in outbound email distribution system – just to send a million mails daily to subscribed users. We tested the performance of the qmail by sending a few thousands mails to non-existent email-ids and to bounce back to another mail server. Strangely enough, qmail just built up a huge queue, without even preprocessing. Once the application stopped pumping to the Qmail server, it started processing and clearing queue, which took very long. Is it a normal behavior (since all the email addresses were non-existent) or are we missing something somewhere? Concurrency is set to 120 for local and remote. Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Mehul.
Re: Sending Problem
Kevin Phipps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Usualy the error reads: > 1) Connected_to_206.132.105.32_but_connection_died. > _Possible_duplicate!_(#4.4.2) > 2) 209.228.4.201 > _failed_after_I_sent_the_message./Remote_host_said:_451_timeout_ Somewhat normal, if you have a lousy network connection, or the SMTP servers you are connecting to are overloaded and poorly managed. > Most of my errors are basically that 'but connection died'. It appears to > usually happen to a few users, so I don't really know if it's their client > or not. If you mean the users which are injecting into your queue via SMTP (using your server as a smarthost), it's irrelevant; these errors show up when qmail has trouble delivering mail to another SMTP server, not when it is accepting mail via SMTP. > There is a specific server that no messages will get to. It's up.com and > azcon.net. up.com's primary MX appears willing to accept mail for up.com; perhaps your IPs are in ORBS/RSS/RBL, and they use that? I didn't check azcon.net, but thanks for using real domain names. 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. ---
Sending Problem
Qmail Support: Problem comes when Qmail takes Q'd mail and tries sending it. Whets very strange, is most messages go out, but few do not get out. I have people in the company come up and complain that a message didn't go through properly. I check the maillog file, and sure enough, there is some sort of error. Usualy the error reads: 1) Connected_to_206.132.105.32_but_connection_died. _Possible_duplicate!_(#4.4.2) 2) 209.228.4.201 _failed_after_I_sent_the_message./Remote_host_said:_451_timeout_ Most of my errors are basically that 'but connection died'. It appears to usually happen to a few users, so I don't really know if it's their client or not. I get that very rarely, but it seems other users get it more then others. I don't know if there is something I can try or check out. There is a specific server that no messages will get to. It's up.com and azcon.net. A employee here continuously gets the e-mail back. Now, I check the logs, I get that connection died error every time it tries sending it out. I have actually did a dig mx on the server and then connected via telnet to the server port 25 and connected fine. So there is no real problem with the network connection. Any suggestions? Anything at all? I'm pretty desperate now because a lot of important documents and e-mails are not getting out reliably :( Thanks .-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-. . . . Kevin Phipps . . Chicago Heights Steel. . [EMAIL PROTECTED]. . (708) 756-5626 . . . .-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-..-'`'-.
DNS and local delivery
Hi ALL, I'm tring deliver messages localy thru qmail (smtp) and I have no DNS services configured at this time. It's not working and I read somewhere that qmail need DNS. My question is, even if for local domains ? Can you please send me indications with more detail about how create the mail boxes ? I am using Maildir and I have about 100 users. My problem is that my Linux box is a new server, I have no users configured in this, and users have mail boxes with four diferent ISPs. I am tring to take this services into my department. I Know that some products let me create users mailboxes in an html page, I just don't know if it can be done with qmail. I woud be glad if you send me something about it (lwq is on my desk, and i have read that a lot but it is not enough...) Thanks in advance Aleixo Fernandes
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
Hi there, I've just got qmail and vpopmail installed and I'm seeing strange things. I've the following : - real user, real host (/etc/passwd) : [EMAIL PROTECTED] - virtual user and virtual domain : [EMAIL PROTECTED] The /var/qmail/control/locals has the following localhost localhost.localdomain sol.oficina.es The /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts has the following localhost localhost.localdomain oficina.es The /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains has the following oficina.es:oficina.es I can send and receive mails to and from both the real and virtual user but I always get a reply from the MAILER DAEMON saying that Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) And the mail actually got delivered! Any clue anyone? Thanks, James
qmail Digest 19 Apr 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1339
qmail Digest 19 Apr 2001 10:00:00 - Issue 1339
Topics (messages 60886 through 60934):
Re: Where is tai64nfrac
60886 by: Russ Allbery
delivered-to headers
60887 by: Martin Kos
60891 by: Peter van Dijk
60893 by: Martin Kos
Feedback about RBLs
60888 by: Iñigo Martínez Lasala
60917 by: David Talkington
60921 by: Markus Stumpf
Spanish Language support and FreeBSD package for IsoQlog
60889 by: Ismail YENIGUL
Re: Cant sent to hotmail or yahoo
60890 by: Benjamin Lee
change envelope from line
60892 by: Gustav-Martin Olsen
60894 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
60896 by: Gustav-Martin Olsen
60899 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
60934 by: Gustav-Martin Olsen
Re: delivered-to headers [problem solved]
60895 by: Martin Kos
Re: Need store and forward
60897 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: qmail-remote_crashed
60898 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: Does the current ucspi-tcp support hostnames in tcp.smtp?
60900 by: Scott Gifford
Import Mail List Members
60901 by: Devin Rader
60902 by: Charles Cazabon
how to block based on To: name ?
60903 by: 95m3.snmptools.org
60905 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
[Announce] oMail-webmail 0.97 is out!
60904 by: Olivier M.
/var/qmail/control ?
60906 by: Marco Calistri
60930 by: Rizwan
60931 by: Rizwan
stop 'identing'
60907 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
60909 by: Mehul Choksi
60911 by: Charles Cazabon
60913 by: Henning Brauer
60915 by: Mehul Choksi
Re: pop3d, fixcrio, tcpserver
60908 by: Markus Stumpf
60918 by: Michael Werneke
60919 by: Markus Stumpf
60920 by: Peter van Dijk
60922 by: Markus Stumpf
Mailing List
60910 by: Marcus Ouimet
Re: Cant sent to yahoo or hotmail
60912 by: Markus Stumpf
qmail+vpopmail
60914 by: Katzenmeyer, Eli
60916 by: Robin S. Socha
i just cant get it to work
60923 by: Jason Davidson
60924 by: Charles Warwick
60925 by: David Young
qmail with ldap
60926 by: Patrick Wayne Tan
60927 by: David Talkington
60928 by: David Young
60933 by: Henning Brauer
qmailadmin compile question ---> basically From <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
60929 by: Essy Ren
The Golden Monkey Has Arrived!!
60932 by: cashflowzs2001z.home.com
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]
--
Jost Krieger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 04:17:47PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> For instance at:
>> http://sunsite.dk/qmail/tai64nfrac
>> or
>> http://qmail.sst.com.br/tai64nfrac
> AFAIK, (this version) of tai64nfrac is broken, because
>printf("%lu.%lu ", seconds, nanoseconds);
> suppresses leading zeroes in the fractional part.
There is (finally) a fixed version of my C implementation of tai64nfrac on
.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: change envelope from line
change in [EMAIL PROTECTED]). When qmail send the mail via qmail-inject -f $SENDER, i see the original email address with hostname.domain in the log file, but qmail rejected this, because only the domain is in dns configured. When i want use the variables QMAILNAME, QMAILUSER, MAILUSER or MAILHOST the are empty. So, how can i manipulate the $SENDER (envelope from) variable with the new email address? Or is there are better idea? best regards Gustav -- GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet. http://www.gmx.net
Re: qmail with ldap
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:53:46AM +0800, Patrick Wayne Tan wrote: > Hi! > > I couldn't find this in the FAQs. Is it possible to implement qmail with > ldap? Is there a site where I could learn how. Thanks! Yes, there's qmail-ldap. Learn about it at http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ldap/ Greetings Henning -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg http://www.bsws.de | Germany
