Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Peter van Dijk]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 06:01:15PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> Below, you say that you think the big concurrency patch is useless but in
> your testing:
> 
> http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/software/qmail/deliveries/,
> 
> your lowest evaluation was for 150 remote connections and qmail's default
> maximum without the patch is 120. So you would still need the big
> concurrency patch even for your lowest setting and hence, I don't think you
> meant to say it's useless. By all means correct me if I'm wrong. I usually
> don't know what I'm talking about.

You don't need the patch to do 150. qmail can do 254 or 255 without
the patch.

Greetz, Peter.

Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Peter van Dijk]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I can't
> find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

sendmail doesn't have concurrency-limiting. With sendmail, there's
usually a daemon that triggers a one-concurrency queue-run. Also,
every message injected thru SMTP (or locally, for that matter) gets
one chance.

This 'one chance' strategy is disabled when the system load is above a
configured maximum. In that case *everything* gets queued.

Somebody else pointed out that sendmail starts one delivery process
per remote host. This is not my observation, but I can be wrong.

It comes down to: sendmail stops delivering when the load reaches a
configured maximum. No other concurrencylimits are in place.

Greetz, Peter.

Re: CAN'T Send to lists!

[Tim Legant]

On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 05:54:20AM +0200, Marco Calistri wrote:
> On 25-Apr-2001 Tim Legant wrote:
> > 1. Do you want your email address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
>  
> Yes that's my "official INTERNET address"
> 
> > 2. Can you receive mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
>  
> Yes I can if I avoid to touch my qmail/fetchmail config. files ;)
> 
> > 3. Do the SMTP servers at tin.it forward your mail to you? Or do you use
> >POP to retrieve it (with getmail or fetchmail or even your client?)
> 
> I'm using fetchmail that poll tin.it via POP3,then fetchmail passes
> mail to qmail (now via tcp port 25 SMTP)
> 
> > 4. Is your network really in the ampr.org domain?
> 
> That network is not reachable directly from INTERNET but
> only via AMPRNET by gateways and ip/ip encap mechanism
> for the amateur radio network.
> (permissions are not granted in ITALY to use amprnet address on INTERNET)
> 
> I have 2 regular domain registerd on ucsd.edu:
> ik5bcu.ampr.org and sys2.ik5bcu.ampr.org.
> 
> > 5. Do you actually have the following, individual machines on your network?
> > 
> >a. ik5bcu.ampr.org
> >b. linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org
>  
> Yes,on "b" I have qmail and fetchmail and this is not
> a FQDN, while "a" is LAN connected.

Ok. Let's start simple and work our way up. First, let's get your
"official Internet address" working. I know that you have a LAN; I
believe you mentioned before that your private IP addresses are in the
192.168.2.xxx block. For now, we're going to ignore them.

You say machine (b), above, has qmail. I assume that machine (b) is
connected to the Internet and that machine (a) is connected to machine
(b) through your local network.

One of the problems we have to solve is that your mail comes to 'tin.it'
but that is not your home domain. When you retrieve mail using fetchmail
and feed that mail into qmail-smtpd, you complicate things for yourself.

I recommend the following:

1. For now, do NOT run qmail-smtpd. If you are using DJB's daemontools
   (supervise, etc) to run qmail-smtpd, type the following as root:

cd /service/qmail-smtpd
rm /service/qmail-smtpd
svc -dx . ./log

   NOTE: I don't know what you called your 'qmail-smtpd' link in /service.
 Use that name instead of 'qmail-smtpd' if it's different.

2. Use Charles Cazabon's getmail program

http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/getmail-2.0/getmail.html

   instead of fetchmail. getmail won't let you send your mail to an SMTP
   server like qmail-smtpd. It will deliver it directly into your mailbox.
   In your situation, that's the simplest and it's what you want.

3. In the /var/qmail/control/ directory you should have this file:

me

   For now, delete all the rest. You don't need them yet or maybe at
   all.

4. In your /var/qmail/control/me file you should have this line:

linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org

   After you remove all the files but 'me', type the following as root:

svc -t /service/qmail-send

Now, a ps waux | grep qmail should show you something like this:

root 217  0.0  0.4   Mon01PM   0:00.26 supervise qmail-send
qmaill   230  0.0  0.4   Mon01PM   0:02.03 /usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail
qmails  1043  0.0  0.7   Mon03PM   0:07.97 qmail-send
root1045  0.0  0.5   Mon03PM   0:01.71 qmail-lspawn ./Maildir/
qmailr  1046  0.0  0.6   Mon03PM   0:00.16 qmail-rspawn
qmailq  1047  0.0  0.6   Mon03PM   0:01.30 qmail-clean

At this point, qmail will not /accept/ any mail from the outside world but
it is capable of /sending/ your mail to the outside world. You should be
using getmail to retrieve all of your tin.it mail and deliver it
directly to your mailbox with no qmail involved.
-
Now you need to configure your system and your local email client (XFMail, if I recall
correctly) so that you can send mail using qmail-inject and still have
the 'From:' header look like you want.

1. In your '.profile', the same one where you set the QMAILMFTFILE, set
   the following variables:

export QMAILSUSER=ik5bcu
export QMAILSHOST=tin.it

2. In XFMail, you should be able to set your From address. Set it to
   whatever you like, something like:

Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   Note that this From: header and the QMAILSUSER and QMAILSHOST
   variables that we set in client step 1 refer to completely 
   different things. This one is the address people will reply to. The
   one in the QMAILSxxx variables is called the "envelope sender". When
   qmail sends mail to other SMTP servers, it tells them that the mail
   is being sent by $QMAILSUSER@$QMAILSHOST. You don't really care, as
   long as it's valid.

3. Finally, configure XFMail to use /var/qmail/bin/sendmail to send your
   mail, rather than SMTP. This will end up calling qmail-inject which
   will use the list of mailing lists in $QMAILMFTFILE to create the
   Mail-Followup-To: header.


Once this is successfully running and you can join all the lists you
want and you can post to all the lists, we can talk about other
questions, such as allowing all the machines on y

Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[richard]

On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, James Stevens wrote:

> You are correct ;) Sendmail can only sustain one exsistance of it's 
> delivery object meaning it can't multithread like the newer MTA's soo 
> when sendmail runs a large q say 10k messages all those messages go into 
> q and get piped out through one thread instance of sendmail whereas qmail 
> simply fires up 500 threads and crunches through the q message by message 
> until it's done. You can also reconfigure qmail to allow up to 1k 

What actually happens with sendmail is that you have one sendmail process
running all of the time. every queue-scan period (-qX[dhms])it runs the
messages in the queue. During this is sorts the messages by destination
MTA. It will then start a delivery process per destination MTA (if there
is machine load left over) which delivers all of the messages for that
MTA. if there is more machine load left over it will start additional
delivery processes. Each sendmail process 'locks' the message it is trying
to deliver to prevent duplicate sends; when a message is delivered to a
remote MTA it is delivered to all recipients at that MTA.

RjL
==
You know that. I know that. But when  ||  Austin, Texas
you talk to a monkey you have to  ||  Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
grunt and wave your arms  -ck ||

Re: timeout downloading mail while connecting to the server using dial-up

[Christian DRESSEND]

Tim Legant writes:

> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:21:47PM +0300, Christian Dressend wrote:
>> the problem isn't when sending email (smtp) but when receiving (pop3). 
>> 
>> Qmail-pop3 runs supervised and starts with the following command located in
>> /service/qmailpop/run: 
>> 
>> tcpserver -l0 -D -v -h -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup main.asco.ro
>> /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
> 
> You're trying to look up the client's name from its IP address. Are all
> your clients names resolvable through in-addr.arpa? If not, they'll
> delay. The key is the tcpserver arguments, not whether the client is
> accessing SMTP or POP3. 
> 
> This is, as Charles commented, the #1 FAQ :) 
> 
> Tim

The problem is not whn looking for the server or for the messages, but 
during download. It stops responding in the middle of messages in case of 
large messages >100kbyte using dial-up, when the connection speed is low 
(MODEM) so the downloads last longer. 


Christian 

Re: svscan on linux

[Peter Cavender]

> The only other thing I see is
> 
> process = get_part(NULL, '\n');
> 
> which I think means that if you put the SV line at the end of inittab
> without a newline, the process field is not read properly (trying to
> read past EOF?).
> 
> Mate
> 

I have been bitten by this once before, I do not remember where.  So now
my paranoid Unix thinking is to put a LF or three at the end of every
(config) file.

How long will it take untill ALL the ancient unix tools have been
rewritten with complete "painfully correct" robustness by the likes of
DJB?

I, for one, have been intrigued by a suggestion to replace init completely
with a shell script (sash?) that invokes svscan to keep certain things
running...but I have not had the time to tinker with it.

--Pete

Re: CAN'T Send to lists!

[Marco Calistri]

On 25-Apr-2001 Tim Legant wrote:

> We'll get there. Please read through my questions below and answer them
> as best you can. Once we have this information we can probably get you
> configured to use Mail-Followup-To: (through qmail-inject) and
> successfully posting to all your lists.
> 
> [snip DUL test from crynwr...]
> 
> Ok. Marco, you're trying to set up and test too many things all at once
> and confusing their relationships with one another. For now, forget
> about the DUL and RSS tests completely and let's just start at the
> beginning.
 
Yes,that's true while my knoledge on this field is very limited.

> Before we can set you up properly, we need to know a few things.
> 
> 1. Do you want your email address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
 
Yes that's my "official INTERNET address"

> 2. Can you receive mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
 
Yes I can if I avoid to touch my qmail/fetchmail config. files ;)

>I checked the DNS and one of the servers (dnsca.tin.it) lists 3 MX
>records but another server (dns.tin.it) doesn't have any MX records
>(nor does it have an A record for tin.it, although dnsca.tin.it does!).
>This is kind of a mess. You might want to send the [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
>note.
 
Probably my ISP uses several aliases as mail.tin.it or mail.clubnet.tin.it...
I guess I have not the needed tech-basis to teach DNS problems to my ISP.

> 3. Do the SMTP servers at tin.it forward your mail to you? Or do you use
>POP to retrieve it (with getmail or fetchmail or even your client?)

I'm using fetchmail that poll tin.it via POP3,then fetchmail passes
mail to qmail (now via tcp port 25 SMTP)

> 4. Is your network really in the ampr.org domain?

That network is not reachable directly from INTERNET but
only via AMPRNET by gateways and ip/ip encap mechanism
for the amateur radio network.
(permissions are not granted in ITALY to use amprnet address on INTERNET)

I have 2 regular domain registerd on ucsd.edu:
ik5bcu.ampr.org and sys2.ik5bcu.ampr.org.

> 5. Do you actually have the following, individual machines on your network?
> 
>a. ik5bcu.ampr.org
>b. linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org
 
Yes,on "b" I have qmail and fetchmail and this is not
a FQDN, while "a" is LAN connected.

> Please respond to the list, so others more expert than I can continue
> helping.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tim

Thanks to you Tim but I hope the list will tolerates my arguments.

Regards,Marco.

Re: svscan on linux

[Mate Wierdl]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 10:12:56PM -0500, Mate Wierdl wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:28:10PM -0500, David Talkington wrote:
> > I discovered something bizarre when I installed daemontools on Red Hat
> > 7.1 ... init didn't like the length of the process field for the
> > entry. (Watch the console during boot or init changes to see this). I
> 
> From init.c, in read_inittab(), there is
> 
>   if (process && strlen(process) > 127)
> strcpy(err, "process field too long");
> 
> This is of course undocumented---but at least there is no silent
> truncation. 
> 
> The process field Dan recommends has 132 characters in it...

In fact, it may be that  just my lynx that lengthens the process field
at http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/svscan.html.  

The only other thing I see is

process = get_part(NULL, '\n');

which I think means that if you put the SV line at the end of inittab
without a newline, the process field is not read properly (trying to
read past EOF?).

Mate

Re: svscan on linux

[Mate Wierdl]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:28:10PM -0500, David Talkington wrote:
> I discovered something bizarre when I installed daemontools on Red Hat
> 7.1 ... init didn't like the length of the process field for the
> entry. (Watch the console during boot or init changes to see this). I

>From init.c, in read_inittab(), there is

if (process && strlen(process) > 127)
strcpy(err, "process field too long");

This is of course undocumented---but at least there is no silent
truncation. 

The process field Dan recommends has 132 characters in it...

But the "console" stuff is not needed under Linux; just put

SV:123456:respawn:env - PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/bin svscan /service

in inittab. 

Mate

RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Steve Hagerman]

Sounds like every morning just about for me. ;-D

-Original Message-
From: James Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 8:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?


Laugh... No Stress is when you wake up screaming and realize it wasn't
the phone ringing with that irritating customer you hate so much.. Then
you realize as you wide the sweat of your forehead that your not even at
work!!

If anyone can agree with that say 'hell ya!'

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:18:57 PM, Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 12:11:46AM +, James Stevens wrote:
> > Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to
> > remember what that word actually means)

> Lack of caffeine?

> SCNR, but I can understand what you mean ... (see my .sig)
> Have a good night!

>   \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.

Qmail + C2security on OSF/Unix (Digital)

[Wiroon Ruangsang]

Hi all,

How I can use qmail on OSF/Unix (Digital) and C2security ?
I cann't authen password by checkpassword program.
Can you help me ? How to?

Thank you
SOC

Re: svscan on linux

[David Talkington]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Subba Rao wrote:

>
>I have followed the instructions on DJB's site to install and start svscan.
>
>On Linux and other SVR4-based systems with /etc/inittab, add SV:123456:respawn
>:env - PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/bin svscan /service >/dev/console 2>/dev/console to the end of /etc/inittab, and type kill -HUP 1.
>
>I am not seeing the svscan process running. Am I missing any step here?

Speculating, since you didn't provide much detail:

I discovered something bizarre when I installed daemontools on Red Hat
7.1 ... init didn't like the length of the process field for the
entry. (Watch the console during boot or init changes to see this). I
shortened it by dropping some unnecessary path information, and that
made it happy.  I'd never seen that before.

- -d

- -- 
David Talkington
http://www.spotnet.org

PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6

iQEVAwUBOud5r71ZYOtSwT+tAQGJNQgAvVXTN3tGS6G+5RnYeluvyGLqBvyE1RxF
rpyz4jEVDXqm5+PTs/xpDD0oyd3JFY9bAosdMk/ct5SDQOdjkk7vMPYhXbo1dsAy
z0BOhzwljV8BIhTeOIS8e5nKcgnydhSnwJLh0LgCvJ69x36l1emDkdVREdB7L9CC
aAIJYKruiby4R3Dvj/u670ZDecI+WGCdmk8UqhhEz5JLTVnF7C+8DgffMqhHQ6FP
g6gk7lGvjuPgSG5twg4KZWyH2D/7bTxloz4YCHVZcUSC/4kNTlxM2kbWCCR3hnfH
exPlQeLzWbnjqHd5NiAoydRq7HSPpZSHrBYfPJl/0YBc/tuO2UAPPQ==
=y0T+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

bounce messages

[Chris Hellberg]

I've checked in the archives and I've seen mention of this, and even a
solution, but the location of the solution isn't.

As in the life with qmail document, I'm told that qmail doesn't give
deffered delievery messages like Sendmail does, but I've heard from the
archives that there's a patch to turn it on. Does anyone have the diff
or a link to a patch that I can apply so I can get messages that tell me
my message can't be delivered at the moment, but will retry later, bla
bla bla?

Thanks in advance

Chris Hellberg

Re: svscan on linux

[Mark Delany]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:32:12PM +, Subba Rao wrote:
> 
> I have followed the instructions on DJB's site to install and start svscan.
> 
> On Linux and other SVR4-based systems with /etc/inittab, add SV:123456:respawn
> :env - PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/bin svscan /service  >/dev/console 2>/dev/console to the end of /etc/inittab, and type kill -HUP 1. 
> 
> I am not seeing the svscan process running. Am I missing any step here?

1.  Is the inittab entry all on one line? Show us.
2.  What was printed on the console after the kill?
3.  Does /service exist? Show us with ls.
4.  Is svscan installed ok and executable? Show us with ls.


Regards.

RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Brett]

Below, you say that you think the big concurrency patch is useless but in
your testing:

http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/software/qmail/deliveries/,

your lowest evaluation was for 150 remote connections and qmail's default
maximum without the patch is 120. So you would still need the big
concurrency patch even for your lowest setting and hence, I don't think you
meant to say it's useless. By all means correct me if I'm wrong. I usually
don't know what I'm talking about.


#
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I can't
> find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

Dunno about sendmail, but with the big concurrency patch maximum concurrency
for qmail can be as high as 2^16 (okay, you need a few descriptors, but
65500 should be possible).

And from the README to that patch:
> **CAUTION** if you do this one should realise that qmail-send might try to
> open 64K connections to the /same/ host because it doesn't maintain a
> per-domain concurrency.

And as I have posted about 60 minutes ago to this list, I have made the
observation that the big concurrency patch for qmail is pretty much useless.

\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: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Jeremy Suo-Anttila]

whats this sleep stuff and where can i get some ?


- Original Message - 
From: "James Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Markus Stumpf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?


Laugh... No Stress is when you wake up screaming and realize it wasn't 
the phone ringing with that irritating customer you hate so much.. Then 
you realize as you wide the sweat of your forehead that your not even at 
work!!

If anyone can agree with that say 'hell ya!'

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:18:57 PM, Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 12:11:46AM +, James Stevens wrote:
> > Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to
> > remember what that word actually means)

> Lack of caffeine?

> SCNR, but I can understand what you mean ... (see my .sig)
> Have a good night!

>   \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: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[James Stevens]

Laugh... No Stress is when you wake up screaming and realize it wasn't
the phone ringing with that irritating customer you hate so much.. Then
you realize as you wide the sweat of your forehead that your not even at
work!!

If anyone can agree with that say 'hell ya!'

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:18:57 PM, Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 12:11:46AM +, James Stevens wrote:
> > Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to
> > remember what that word actually means)

> Lack of caffeine?

> SCNR, but I can understand what you mean ... (see my .sig)
> Have a good night!

>   \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: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[James Stevens]

Laugh... No Stress is when you wake up screaming and realize it wasn't 
the phone ringing with that irritating customer you hate so much.. Then 
you realize as you wide the sweat of your forehead that your not even at 
work!!

If anyone can agree with that say 'hell ya!'

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:18:57 PM, Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 12:11:46AM +, James Stevens wrote:
> > Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to
> > remember what that word actually means)

> Lack of caffeine?

> SCNR, but I can understand what you mean ... (see my .sig)
> Have a good night!

>   \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: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[James Stevens]

Actually to be more accurate...

EZ Mailing List Manager -- using mySQL databases

And on each server there actually 6 qmail instances running called 
qmqp1. thru qmqp6. and EZMail in setup to mail to 
all QMQP servers in basically what equates to a round robin order. 5K here 5k 
there and so on till all the addresses are spolled out. There are other ways 
of doing it which include simply splitting a very large list into several 
smaller lists and sitting each smaller list on it's own server. The biggest 
problem with running 6 instances of qmail on one server is you have to set 
your descriptors up high enough and then no matter what you max is you have 
to get a calculator out and balance out all 6 instances or however many you 
install on it so that you can never exceed your max descriptors. Even then 
you still want to leave yourself a safety zone. So when I set mine up I 
basically recompiled linux to be able to handle 64k discriptors and then 
applied the big-todo patches and every other patch I could find and ones 
recomeneded to me here in the list and then set the max concurrency for each 
qmail (qmqp) service to 800 although obviously I could go allot higher than 
that without worry about linux.. However you will find the higher you go 
(anything above 800 or so) the more complaints you will get from ISP's like 
aol and earthlink.. They really hate it when you open up 2k+ connections to 
them emagine what the smaller ISP's will tell you. But at any rate it all 
works just fine.. If your planing on multiple server then setup a linux 
(standard configuration no editing or recompiling) install qmail and edit the 
concurrency up to 800 make sure you have already applied the patches 
required. You should have a system capable at that point of crankin out some 
serious mail. Now read the install files that came with qmail on the qmqp 
server.. Get it setup and running make sure you add the appropiate entries 
for it to start automatically then go download majordomo or EZMail (recommend 
Ezmail) a couple of guys that work with me say majordomo is easier to learn.. 
I find Ezmail much faster and more versatile so it's up to you.. If your new 
then try majordomo if your not new to this then get Ezmail as it will have 
the capabilities you want.

Anyways now I goto bed... For real this time.. 

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:35:39 PM, "Brett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding 
RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> James,

> Thanks for the info here. I have a couple more questions if you don't 
mind.

> What method are you using to cluster these six servers together? We're
> looking to set something very similar up as we're going to be sending out
> large quantities of mail to several different mailing lists (not spam). 
But
> we can't find any info regarding clustering and/or load balancing for 
mail
> servers. Also, have you gotten blocked from any servers with such high
> concurrencies? Thanks again. I appreciate any help.

> Brett.



> -Original Message-
> From: James Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 5:12 PM
> To: Henning Brauer; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?


> You are correct ;) Sendmail can only sustain one exsistance of it's
> delivery object meaning it can't multithread like the newer MTA's soo
> when sendmail runs a large q say 10k messages all those messages go into
> q and get piped out through one thread instance of sendmail whereas qmail
> simply fires up 500 threads and crunches through the q message by message
> until it's done. You can also reconfigure qmail to allow up to 1k
> concurrency and if you really want mailing power you can edit and
> recompile your system and qmail and go up as high as you want. I have
> mine set at 800 on 6 different servers and have never had a bootleneck...

> Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to
> remember what that word actually means)

> --JT

> >> Original Message <<

> On 4/25/01, 4:42:34 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> > > Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> > > understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I
> can't
> > > find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

> > 1 if I'm not totally mistaken...

> > --
> > Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
> > Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
> > http://www.bsws.de | Germany

> > Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
> > (Dennis Ritchie)

RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[James Stevens]

EZ Mailing List Manager -- using mySQL

It's on the qmail.org home page..

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:35:39 PM, "Brett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding
RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> James,

> Thanks for the info here. I have a couple more questions if you don't
mind.

> What method are you using to cluster these six servers together? We're
> looking to set something very similar up as we're going to be sending out
> large quantities of mail to several different mailing lists (not spam).
But
> we can't find any info regarding clustering and/or load balancing for
mail
> servers. Also, have you gotten blocked from any servers with such high
> concurrencies? Thanks again. I appreciate any help.

> Brett.



> -Original Message-
> From: James Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 5:12 PM
> To: Henning Brauer; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?


> You are correct ;) Sendmail can only sustain one exsistance of it's
> delivery object meaning it can't multithread like the newer MTA's soo
> when sendmail runs a large q say 10k messages all those messages go into
> q and get piped out through one thread instance of sendmail whereas qmail
> simply fires up 500 threads and crunches through the q message by message
> until it's done. You can also reconfigure qmail to allow up to 1k
> concurrency and if you really want mailing power you can edit and
> recompile your system and qmail and go up as high as you want. I have
> mine set at 800 on 6 different servers and have never had a bootleneck...

> Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to
> remember what that word actually means)

> --JT

> >> Original Message <<

> On 4/25/01, 4:42:34 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> > > Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> > > understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I
> can't
> > > find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

> > 1 if I'm not totally mistaken...

> > --
> > Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
> > Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
> > http://www.bsws.de | Germany

> > Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
> > (Dennis Ritchie)

svscan on linux

[Subba Rao]

I have followed the instructions on DJB's site to install and start svscan.

On Linux and other SVR4-based systems with /etc/inittab, add SV:123456:respawn
:env - PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/bin svscan /service /dev/console 2>/dev/console to the end of /etc/inittab, and type kill -HUP 1. 

I am not seeing the svscan process running. Am I missing any step here?

TIA.
-- 

Subba Rao
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.home.net/subba9/

GPG public key ID 27FC9217

Re: RFC 2821 and 2822

[James Stevens]

You can basically take the difference between the two and stick it up a 
nat's a** ... Or at least thats my observation.. Everything I have read 
so far goes with what ya say chris... But just for the fun of it why 
doesn't everyone here on the list get together and will write up our own 
standards (evil grin)

We'd just need a catchy name for it.. 

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 4:08:13 PM, "Chris Garrigues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: RFC 2821 and 
2822:


> > From:  Mike Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date:  Thu, 26 Apr 2001 01:49:24 +0300
> >
> > Matthew Patterson wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone
> > > confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be
> > > compliant with whatever standards may come out of RFCs 2821 and 2822?
> >
> > It could literally take years for RFCs to become standards, if they ever
> > do. You don't have to worry too soon, I think.

> 2821 and 2822 are clarifications of 821 and 822; they don't throw away 
the
> existing standards.  qmail should already be just as compatible as it was 
with
> the old standards.

> Chris

> --
> Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/
> virCIO  http://www.virCIO.Com
> 4314 Avenue C
> Austin, TX  78751-3709+1 512 374 0500

>   My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination.  For an
>   explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html

> Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
>   but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.

RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[James Stevens]

Yes, it's sad but true...

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 5:07:13 PM, "Brett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding 
RE: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> no way can it be 1. that would be ridiculous and yet...

> -Original Message-
> From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 4:43 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?


> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> > Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> > understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I 
can't
> > find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

> 1 if I'm not totally mistaken...

> --
> Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
> Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
> http://www.bsws.de | Germany

> Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
> (Dennis Ritchie)

Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[James Stevens]

You are correct ;) Sendmail can only sustain one exsistance of it's 
delivery object meaning it can't multithread like the newer MTA's soo 
when sendmail runs a large q say 10k messages all those messages go into 
q and get piped out through one thread instance of sendmail whereas qmail 
simply fires up 500 threads and crunches through the q message by message 
until it's done. You can also reconfigure qmail to allow up to 1k 
concurrency and if you really want mailing power you can edit and 
recompile your system and qmail and go up as high as you want. I have 
mine set at 800 on 6 different servers and have never had a bootleneck... 

Anyways theres my two cents .. Now I go home and sleep (trying to 
remember what that word actually means)

--JT

>> Original Message <<

On 4/25/01, 4:42:34 PM, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
regarding Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?:


> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> > Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> > understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I 
can't
> > find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

> 1 if I'm not totally mistaken...

> --
> Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
> Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
> http://www.bsws.de | Germany

> Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
> (Dennis Ritchie)

Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Markus Stumpf]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I can't
> find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

Dunno about sendmail, but with the big concurrency patch maximum concurrency
for qmail can be as high as 2^16 (okay, you need a few descriptors, but
65500 should be possible).

And from the README to that patch:
> **CAUTION** if you do this one should realise that qmail-send might try to
> open 64K connections to the /same/ host because it doesn't maintain a
> per-domain concurrency.

And as I have posted about 60 minutes ago to this list, I have made the
observation that the big concurrency patch for qmail is pretty much useless.

\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: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Brett]

no way can it be 1. that would be ridiculous and yet...

-Original Message-
From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 4:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?


On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I can't
> find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

1 if I'm not totally mistaken...

--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany

Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Henning Brauer]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:59:04PM -0700, Brett wrote:
> Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
> understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I can't
> find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

1 if I'm not totally mistaken...

-- 
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany

Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: The new RFC's.

[Henning Brauer]

On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:54:42AM +1000, Grant wrote:
> I admit I don't know anything about RFC's and the apparent
> "latest" versions for SMTP.
> 
> What will this mean for qmail. Are there any significant changes in the
> way it works?

Yes. You need to delete qmail and install Windows 2000 + Exchange 2000.

Aside from the original post claimed that the RFCs just clarified things and
left out obselete parts it is very unlikely that there will ever be an RFC
drawing all existant and very widely used implementationsuseless.

-- 
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany

Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: The new RFC's.

[Russ Allbery]

Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I admit I don't know anything about RFC's and the apparent "latest"
> versions for SMTP.

> What will this mean for qmail. Are there any significant changes in the
> way it works?

Both RFC 2821 and RFC 2822 were tasked with documenting existing practice
and cleaning up some historical warts, not with introducing new features
(new features were specifically stated to be out of scope).  As such,
there are no major changes from widespread practice in either, and they
are likely to have little effect on qmail.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 

Re: Maildirmake...

[Tim Legant]

On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 07:38:32AM +0900, Stuart Folo wrote:
>I am having trouble fixing a problem that has been brought to me.
>Maildirmake has been incorrectly run on a server that is using
>procmail to deliver to the users mail directory. Now that it has been
>run, we are getting the following errors now.
>
>There was a problem logging onto your mail server. Your Password was
>rejected. Account: '192.168.70.10', Server: '192.168.70.10', Protocol:
>POP3, Server Response: '-ERR this user has no $HOME/Maildir', Port:
>110, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 0x800CCC90, Error Number:
>0x800CCC92

Most likely the user doesn't own his/her maildir. People often create
the maildir as root and forget to change the owner to be the user. Check
the permissions also. Preferred permissions are 700.

Tim

Re: Ban These Exchange Server Users

[Brett Randall]

> "Csaba" == Csaba Bobak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I am sure that Brett (Brett Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) did not 
> mean anything wrong, he just wanted to express the dark side of banning 
> someone who is not responsible for this long-spoke spam.

Thankyou, Csaba.
-- 
"But what...is it good for?"

- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968,
commenting on the microchip

Re: RFC 2821 and 2822

[Chris Garrigues]

> From:  Mike Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date:  Thu, 26 Apr 2001 01:49:24 +0300
>
> Matthew Patterson wrote:
> > 
> > I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone
> > confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be
> > compliant with whatever standards may come out of RFCs 2821 and 2822?
> 
> It could literally take years for RFCs to become standards, if they ever
> do. You don't have to worry too soon, I think.

2821 and 2822 are clarifications of 821 and 822; they don't throw away the 
existing standards.  qmail should already be just as compatible as it was with 
the old standards.

Chris

-- 
Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/
virCIO  http://www.virCIO.Com
4314 Avenue C   
Austin, TX  78751-3709  +1 512 374 0500

  My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination.  For an
  explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html 

Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
  but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.



 PGP signature

Re: CAN'T Send to lists!

[Tim Legant]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 11:03:43PM +0200, Marco Calistri wrote:
> On 25-Apr-2001 Charles Cazabon wrote:
> > Try setting the environment variables QMAILUSER and QMAILHOST to what you
> > want
> > the envelope sender address to appear (for example, set QMAILHOST to "tin.it"
> > and QMAILUSER to "ik5bcu").
>  
> That's been one of my first attempts but I didn't like the from fields
> where(if I remember correctly) I can't see or set "Marco Calistri"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> but just the "raw" form :[EMAIL PROTECTED]

We'll get there. Please read through my questions below and answer them
as best you can. Once we have this information we can probably get you
configured to use Mail-Followup-To: (through qmail-inject) and
successfully posting to all your lists.

[snip DUL test from crynwr...]

Ok. Marco, you're trying to set up and test too many things all at once
and confusing their relationships with one another. For now, forget
about the DUL and RSS tests completely and let's just start at the
beginning.

Before we can set you up properly, we need to know a few things.

1. Do you want your email address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED]?

2. Can you receive mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED]?

   I checked the DNS and one of the servers (dnsca.tin.it) lists 3 MX
   records but another server (dns.tin.it) doesn't have any MX records
   (nor does it have an A record for tin.it, although dnsca.tin.it does!).
   This is kind of a mess. You might want to send the [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
   note.

3. Do the SMTP servers at tin.it forward your mail to you? Or do you use
   POP to retrieve it (with getmail or fetchmail or even your client?)

4. Is your network really in the ampr.org domain?

5. Do you actually have the following, individual machines on your network?

   a. ik5bcu.ampr.org
   b. linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org

Please respond to the list, so others more expert than I can continue
helping.

Thanks,

Tim

Re: Strange behavior in outgoing mail

[Nick Popoff]

>Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Except that it's actually a lowercase letter L.

Actually, it is a one. :)

>Are you using tcpserver for qmail-smtpd?  If so, show us your rules file. 
>You may be setting the RELAYCLIENT environment variable to "1" or "l" 
>accidentally, for the IP address(es) you're testing from at least.

Ahhh!!!  That's it. Thanks. I was troubleshooting relay earlier, and like an 
idiot forgot that I'd changed RELAYCLIENT.  I'd thought of that variable as 
a flag, and had no idea it was used to build relayed outgoing addresses.

Much appreciated.  Thanks for the tip about qmail-showctl as well...





_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

Re: daemontools won't compile

[David Talkington]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Mike Jackson wrote:

>Hi,
> Box is Mandrake 8.0 final, kernel 2.4.3-20mdk. I get the following
>error when trying to compile daemontools. It also happened to me on a
>Redhat 7.1 box. I think it's something gcc version 2.96 2731
>related. Somebody please help me patch this file so it will compile.

Mr. Jackson - this apparently affects Linux 2.4.x kernels.  The fix
(also applicable to a similar error when compiling the clockspeed
package) is to change  on line 2 of the problem file to
.

Hope this helps. -d


- -- 
David Talkington
http://www.spotnet.org

PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6

iQEVAwUBOudWQ71ZYOtSwT+tAQFYUwgAgNlkV17/iP2v6H6EQO/FGkRC4/hsM1xv
U+j33OoWTzyDQZhpmrg2LGOVCP+SYZqTZIgIezTVYnCm92TfZ6G1T8AZYdEVZM1X
l4NQLB/ABa6QTA//V5StYyGyQ+ZilM2nOkhFdTDQwsePEghOEup2BjGybrldv9th
nkdez7E5CHJV9zuF5yigGlzLxpdomLrpRhNPusS8oEHAv7CESFp7GTXTquSz/V/K
IEF9Fmvn0revreiDN45kXNK8M2flOG6xFxtpVE+fRfwATVfglfO+G5F6LfPdxL9o
y4EWSC40QMBRE7VAvF7d/qoqzH9nX3cLqtIWmB5TDRIrNuwWw60P3w==
=JmOb
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

The new RFC's.

[Grant]

I admit I don't know anything about RFC's and the apparent
"latest" versions for SMTP.

What will this mean for qmail. Are there any significant changes in the
way it works?

Thanks.

max concurrency for qmail is 500, what's it for sendmail?

[Brett]

Does anybody know the maximum concurrency for sendmail? From what I
understand, with the big concurrency patch, it's 500 for qmail but I can't
find any data on sendmail. Thanks in advance.

Re: RFC 2821 and 2822

[Mike Jackson]

Matthew Patterson wrote:
> 
> I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone
> confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be
> compliant with whatever standards may come out of RFCs 2821 and 2822?

It could literally take years for RFCs to become standards, if they ever
do. You don't have to worry too soon, I think.

> I'm sure that there will be some schmuck member of management will hear
> about these and come to me pulling their hair out, wondering how we will
> ever survive moving to these new processes, and will end up suggesting
> moving to Exchange 2000 because 'Microsoft always follows standards'.

Microsoft is the standard deviation from the norm. err the standards
deviator from seattle. well, you get the point.

mike

ANN: qmail delivery speed comparison graphs available

[Markus Stumpf]

We run a 9+ subscribers newsletter type mailing list on a dedicated
server. I have taken this opportunity to gather information on delivery
behaviour/speed using different concurrencyremote settings (150, 250 and 500)
and graph the results.

The result of the comparison is rather astonishing (for me ;-) as there
is not really a big difference.
The "main" work at concurrencyremote=500 was finished after about 1250
seconds, at concurrencyremote=150 it was finished after about 1450
seconds; concurrencyremote=250 is in between at about 1350 seconds.

The number of finished successful deliveries/second is nearly the same
for all three data sets (about 75-80 deliveries/second).
However the number of failures/deferrals per second was lower in the
150 data set than in the 250 and much lower than in the 500.
Also the maximum and median delivery times were smaller for the 150 set.
(as the list is ezmlm maintained by far the most "failures" are deferrals).

*MY* conclusion from that comparisons is that the power of the
qmail-bigconcurrency patch is probably commonly overestimated
and the patch is kinda useless.

PLEASE NOTE: the data sets are collected from delivery cycles of three
  successive weeks (the newsletter is a weekly one). Although it's
  delivered the same weekday (Friday) and around the same time (early
  afternoon GMT+2) the load on the remote (i.e. receiving) mail servers
  has a large impact on the data. This is even more true as 90% of
  the messages are sent to only 300 unique IP addresses (some of which
  are surely hidden behind load balancers).
  Thus minor tendencies are to be handled with care and the data sets
  may not be really representative.

I have set up a WebPage at

http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/software/qmail/deliveries/

which contains a bit more explanations and a lot (about 20) of lessened
images (full size by clicking on the small images). Although the images
in the page are lessened the whole page has about 300 KB, so it may take
a while to load completely.

All the graphs were made with the help of the qmail logfile, perl, awk,
grep and gnuplot ;-)

Thanks to Peter van Dijk for his comments and thoughts while previewing
the weekly results.

I'd be very interested in your opinions/comments.

\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: Oracle eMail Server

[Tim Legant]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:41:21PM +, Federico Edelman Anaya wrote:
> Anybody install the Oracle eMail Server + Qmail?
> I'dont know how install with support of Qmail ... :(
> 
> Sendmail configuration:
> Mlocal, P=/email01/oracle/OraHome1/bin/ofcuto, F=rlSsDCFMPpmn,  S=10,
> R=20, A=ofcuto - /email01/oracle/OraHome1 emailsvr -f unx.cfg - $g $a $b
> $f $x ( $u )
> 
> # short circuit local delivery so forwarded email works
> R$+.ofcmail < @ $=w . > $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail
> Server passoff
> R$+.OFCMAIL < @ $=w . > $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail
> Server passoff
> 
> # handle locally delivered names
> R$+.ofcmail $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail Server
> passoff
> R$+.OFCMAIL $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail Server
> passoff##
> 
> # Last line of sendmail.cf
> Mofcmail,   P=/email01/oracle/OraHome1/bin/ofcuto, F=rlSsDCFMPpmn,
> S=10, R=20, A=ofcuto - /email01/oracle/OraHome1 emailsvr -f unx.cfg
> - $g $a $b $f $x ( $u )

You should try resending this. Your modem appears to have thrown up.

Oh... wait. That's the sendmail config...

Nevermind.

Re: scripts run as user...?

[Tim Legant]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:26:38PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Bill Luckett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > When a program/script is run from a user's .qmail file, what user does
> > somescript run as? User qmail or samsmith
> 
> samsmith.  I was going to say RTFM, but it doesn't seem to actually be
> explicitly stated in the man page for qmail-command or dot-qmail.

It's actually in the man page for qmail-lspawn, which runs qmail-local
as a particular user.

Tim

Re: RSS LIST

[Tim Legant]

On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:09:05AM +0800, hongtao wrote:
> >R = read
> >T = the
> >F = f*cking
> >M = manual
> 
> i wonder where is this file?

This is just shorthand, an abbreviation, for the documentation in
general. In this case, you will want to carefully read the man page for
tcprules:

$ man tcprules

Tim

Maildirmake...

[Stuart Folo]

Title: Message




Hello,
I am having trouble 
fixing a problem that has been brought to me. Maildirmake has been incorrectly 
run on a server that is using procmail to deliver to the users mail directory. 
Now that it has been run, we are getting the following errors 
now.
 
There was a problem logging onto your mail server. 
Your Password was rejected. Account: '192.168.70.10', Server: '192.168.70.10', 
Protocol: POP3, Server Response: '-ERR this user has no $HOME/Maildir', Port: 
110, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 0x800CCC90, Error Number: 
0x800CCC92
 
Please give me any 
suggestions thanks.
 
Stuart 
Folo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: qmail as Back up MX box

[Tim Legant]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 04:40:23PM -0500, mick wrote:
> It resolves to an IP:
>  [root@ns2 log]# ping bogus.mtco.net
> PING bogus.mtco.net (24.17.22.210): 56 octets data
> 
> An IP that is not going to respond To simulate a primary MX going
> down. Which is the point of a backup MX server. If the primary were
> responding and running smpt it wouldn't matter :)

The error message is quite clear. The DNS cache it is consulting is
claiming that there is no higher priority MX. Once your DNS is in order,
qmail will secondary just fine.

An off-the-wall possibility: Have you flushed the cache that qmail
consults since you added the bogus MX? If not, then all it has cached is
the secondary's MX.

Tim

daemontools won't compile

[Mike Jackson]

Hi,
 Box is Mandrake 8.0 final, kernel 2.4.3-20mdk. I get the following
error when trying to compile daemontools. It also happened to me on a
Redhat 7.1 box. I think it's something gcc version 2.96 2731
related. Somebody please help me patch this file so it will compile.

This is the error I am receiving:

./compile tai64nlocal.c
tai64nlocal.c: In function `main':
tai64nlocal.c:58: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without
a cast
tai64nlocal.c:59: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
tai64nlocal.c:61: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
tai64nlocal.c:63: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
tai64nlocal.c:65: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
tai64nlocal.c:67: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
tai64nlocal.c:69: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
make: *** [tai64nlocal.o] Error 1

Here are lines 59-69 from tai64nlocal.c
---
out(num,fmt_ulong(num,(unsigned long) (1900 + t->tm_year)));
out("-",1);
out(num,fmt_uint0(num,(unsigned int) (1 + t->tm_mon),2));
out("-",1);
out(num,fmt_uint0(num,(unsigned int) t->tm_mday,2));
out(" ",1);
out(num,fmt_uint0(num,(unsigned int) t->tm_hour,2));
out(":",1);
out(num,fmt_uint0(num,(unsigned int) t->tm_min,2));
out(":",1);
out(num,fmt_uint0(num,(unsigned int) t->tm_sec,2));


Thanks,
Mike

Re: Strange behavior in outgoing mail

[Charles Cazabon]

Nick Popoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Whenever outgoing mail is sent (relayed) through qmail, the number 1 is 
> appended to the end of the recipient domain name at some point during the 
> delivery, which of course causes it to bounce.
> 
> I can telnet in to myserver.com:25 and give "rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" 
> and a few moments later a bounce message will go to the sender address 
> saying that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" does not exist.  That "1" at the end 
> there is NOT a typo.

Except that it's actually a lowercase letter L.

Are you using tcpserver for qmail-smtpd?  If so, show us your rules file.  You
may be setting the RELAYCLIENT environment variable to "1" or "l"
accidentally, for the IP address(es) you're testing from at least.

By the way, including the output of qmail-showctl in problem reports is
usually a good idea.

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: FW: timeout downloading mail while connecting to the server using dial-up

[Tim Legant]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:21:47PM +0300, Christian Dressend wrote:
> the problem isn't when sending email (smtp) but when receiving (pop3).
> 
> Qmail-pop3 runs supervised and starts with the following command located in
> /service/qmailpop/run:
> 
> tcpserver -l0 -D -v -h -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup main.asco.ro
> /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir

You're trying to look up the client's name from its IP address. Are all
your clients names resolvable through in-addr.arpa? If not, they'll
delay. The key is the tcpserver arguments, not whether the client is
accessing SMTP or POP3.

This is, as Charles commented, the #1 FAQ :)

Tim

RE: qmail as Back up MX box

[Willy De la Court]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 23:40, mick [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> It resolves to an IP:
>  [root@ns2 log]# ping bogus.mtco.net
> PING bogus.mtco.net (24.17.22.210): 56 octets data

Here is a paste of the results i get
> set type=mx
> mtco.net
Server:  stargate.speedy.home
Address:  192.168.1.253

Non-authoritative answer:
mtco.netpreference = 30, mail exchanger = ns2.mtco.com
mtco.netpreference = 20, mail exchanger = bogus.mtco.com

Authoritative answers can be found from:
mtco.netnameserver = ns2.mtco.com
mtco.netnameserver = ns.mtco.com
ns2.mtco.cominternet address = 207.179.200.10
ns.mtco.com internet address = 207.179.200.2
> server 207.179.200.10
Default Server:  ns2.mtco.com
Address:  207.179.200.10

> set type=a
> bogus.mtco.com
Server:  ns2.mtco.com
Address:  207.179.200.10

*** ns2.mtco.com can't find bogus.mtco.com: Non-existent host/domain

so it seems there is a problem with your dns
i can't seem to resolve the bogus.mtco.com
hmm just noticed your pinging to bogus.mtco.net and not to
bogus.mtco.com as in the mx record


> An IP that is not going to respond To simulate a primary MX
> going down. Which is the point of a backup MX server. If the
> primary were responding and running smpt it wouldn't matter :)
> 
> 
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Willy De la Court wrote:
> 
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > 
> > On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 22:30, mick [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > wrote:
> > > There is a bogus MX record setup for testing:
> > > ;
> > > ;MX Records for mtco.net
> > > ;
> > > mtco.net.   IN  MX  20  bogus.mtco.com.
> > > mtco.net.   IN  MX  30  ns2.mtco.com.
> > > 
> > > It points to a non-responsive IP address to simulate the
> > > primary server going down.
> > > 
> > 
> > that looks good but bogus.mtco.com does not resolve to an ip that
> > maybe 
> > the problem the dns resolving of qmail probably disregards this
> > hostname.
> > try to add an a record so that bogus.mtco.com resolves to an ip
> > of a machine 
> > that does run smtp
> > 
> > Willy De la Court
> > Quint NV
> > http://www.quint.be/projects
> > 
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> > Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use
> >   
> > 
> > iQA/AwUBOuctcP4IaGw3x6aJEQI9QQCcCs0WbflKbwO/Fky9POMYXn7ZC94AoNU4
> > ZjArn/Qew1wCgjeQEWzEnq6n
> > =2eBP
> > -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> > 
> > 
> 
> *
> Mick Dobra
> Systems Administrator
> MTCO Communications
> 1-800-859-6826
*

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use 

iQA/AwUBOudBTf4IaGw3x6aJEQIfzQCdEgKGvXdtM74vx5G/VhYUSqLaUWgAoKN8
bss2+jeaYTY/2ncmdLH0rk3b
=/zTs
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: RFC 2821 and 2822

[Matthew Patterson]

I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone 
confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be 
compliant with whatever standards may come out of RFCs 2821 and 2822? 
I'm sure that there will be some schmuck member of management will hear 
about these and come to me pulling their hair out, wondering how we will 
ever survive moving to these new processes, and will end up suggesting 
moving to Exchange 2000 because 'Microsoft always follows standards'. 
I'm fairly certain that we have nothing to worry about, but I want to be 
sure.

MHP

Strange behavior in outgoing mail

[Nick Popoff]

Greetings.

I just did an install of qmail 1.03 following the instructions from Life 
With Qmail using all his recommended defaults, not using any patches or 
additional modules.  I'm seeing a really strange problem that I'm sure must 
have a simple cause, but can't figure it out...

Whenever outgoing mail is sent (relayed) through qmail, the number 1 is 
appended to the end of the recipient domain name at some point during the 
delivery, which of course causes it to bounce.

I can telnet in to myserver.com:25 and give "rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" 
and a few moments later a bounce message will go to the sender address 
saying that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" does not exist.  That "1" at the end 
there is NOT a typo.  If I examine the logs of the transaction, I see this:

 starting delivery 1: msg  to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]

So at some point betweent the client handing off the message to my Qmail 
install (or me typing it in myself) and when Qmail goes to deliver it, a "1" 
is tacked on.

Note however that it sends bounces fine... the sender address is not garbled 
and the sender gets a bounce informing it of the invalid domain.

Any help would be much appreciated.  If more information would help, let me 
know and I'll dig it up.  Thanks.

-Nick
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

RE: qmail as Back up MX box

[mick]

It resolves to an IP:
 [root@ns2 log]# ping bogus.mtco.net
PING bogus.mtco.net (24.17.22.210): 56 octets data

An IP that is not going to respond To simulate a primary MX going
down. Which is the point of a backup MX server. If the primary were
responding and running smpt it wouldn't matter :)


On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Willy De la Court wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 22:30, mick [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> wrote:
> > There is a bogus MX record setup for testing:
> > ;
> > ;MX Records for mtco.net
> > ;
> > mtco.net.   IN  MX  20  bogus.mtco.com.
> > mtco.net.   IN  MX  30  ns2.mtco.com.
> > 
> > It points to a non-responsive IP address to simulate the primary
> > server going down.
> > 
> 
> that looks good but bogus.mtco.com does not resolve to an ip that
> maybe 
> the problem the dns resolving of qmail probably disregards this
> hostname.
> try to add an a record so that bogus.mtco.com resolves to an ip of a
> machine 
> that does run smtp
> 
> Willy De la Court
> Quint NV
> http://www.quint.be/projects
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use 
> 
> iQA/AwUBOuctcP4IaGw3x6aJEQI9QQCcCs0WbflKbwO/Fky9POMYXn7ZC94AoNU4
> ZjArn/Qew1wCgjeQEWzEnq6n
> =2eBP
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> 

*
Mick Dobra
Systems Administrator
MTCO Communications
1-800-859-6826
*

Re: qmail as Back up MX box

[mick]

Great! I guess you haven't read my response. 

It is the second [30] MX. the first is [20]. And I even sent the clip from
the SOA. 

Thats why I'm asking what else would need to be done.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Jurjen Oskam wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:43:13PM -0500, mick wrote:
> 
> > I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
>   [...]  
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 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)
> 
> I'd guess that message is very clear. The best-preference (*lowest* number!
> think of it as a distance.) mail exchanger isn't configured to accept mail
> for that domain.
> 
> -- 
>   Jurjen Oskam * http://www.stupendous.org/ for PGP key * Q265230
>   pro-life bombing bush hacker attack USA president 2600 decss assassinate
> nuclear strike terrorism gun control eta military disrupt economy encryption
>10:33pm  up 3 days,  2:19,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
> 
> 

*
Mick Dobra
Systems Administrator
MTCO Communications
1-800-859-6826
*

Re: CAN'T Send to lists!

[Marco Calistri]

On 25-Apr-2001 Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>> > I can't speak to the other hosts you mentioned, but vger is run with some
>> > very interesting policies for accepting mail,
> [...]
>> my problems start if I use MUA through qmail-sendmail option
>> messages FROM fields appear as sent from unknown domain so vger
>> reject them(this is right because my qmail domain is not FQDN).
>> I have to use MUA through qmail-SMTP if I want my messages be accepted.
> 
> Try setting the environment variables QMAILUSER and QMAILHOST to what you
> want
> the envelope sender address to appear (for example, set QMAILHOST to "tin.it"
> and QMAILUSER to "ik5bcu").
 
That's been one of my first attempts but I didn't like the from fields
where(if I remember correctly) I can't see or set "Marco Calistri"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> but just the "raw" form :[EMAIL PROTECTED]

I received a report from DUL that I'am not able to fully understand:

#--begin of report
Testing your DUL block.  See http://www.crynwr.com/spam/ for more info.
Please note that this test will not tell you if your server is open for
relaying.  Instead, it tests to see if your server blocks email from IP
addresses listed in various blocking lists; in this case, the DUL list.

Here's how the conversation looked from dul.crynwr.com.
Note that some sites don't apply the DUL block to postmaster, so
I use your envelope sender as the To: address.

I connected to 213.45.255.51 and here's the conversation I had:

220 linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org ESMTP
helo dul.crynwr.com
250 linux.ik5bcu.ampr.org
mail from:<>
250 ok
rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Terminating conversation
#--end of report

>> LOGS say mail is accepted but I never seen it on mailing-lists.
> 
> They silently drop anything they want to filter out of the l-k lists.
 
Thank you Charles,Marco

> 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: qmail as Back up MX box

[Willy De la Court]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 22:30, mick [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> There is a bogus MX record setup for testing:
> ;
> ;MX Records for mtco.net
> ;
> mtco.net.   IN  MX  20  bogus.mtco.com.
> mtco.net.   IN  MX  30  ns2.mtco.com.
> 
> It points to a non-responsive IP address to simulate the primary
> server going down.
> 

that looks good but bogus.mtco.com does not resolve to an ip that
maybe 
the problem the dns resolving of qmail probably disregards this
hostname.
try to add an a record so that bogus.mtco.com resolves to an ip of a
machine 
that does run smtp

Willy De la Court
Quint NV
http://www.quint.be/projects

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use 

iQA/AwUBOuctcP4IaGw3x6aJEQI9QQCcCs0WbflKbwO/Fky9POMYXn7ZC94AoNU4
ZjArn/Qew1wCgjeQEWzEnq6n
=2eBP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

RFC 2821 and 2822

[Scott Gifford]

Hadn't seen this mentioned here, and thought it might be of general
interest.

RFCs 2821 and 2822 were published today, obsoleting the venerable RFCs
821 and 822, covering SMTP and the Internet Message Format,
respectively.

They're available from the usual places, including:

http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2821.txt
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2822.txt

No big changes; from what I've read so far (I've read half of 2821),
they just do things like remove cruft (SEND, SOML, and friends),
deprecate things that haven't been used in the real world for years
(source-routing of email addresses), and clarify minor ambiguities.

-ScottG.

Re: qmail as Back up MX box

[Jurjen Oskam]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:43:13PM -0500, mick wrote:

> I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
[...]  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 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)

I'd guess that message is very clear. The best-preference (*lowest* number!
think of it as a distance.) mail exchanger isn't configured to accept mail
for that domain.

-- 
  Jurjen Oskam * http://www.stupendous.org/ for PGP key * Q265230
  pro-life bombing bush hacker attack USA president 2600 decss assassinate
nuclear strike terrorism gun control eta military disrupt economy encryption
   10:33pm  up 3 days,  2:19,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

Re: qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux

[hongtao]

below is the message, i meet the trouble:

> if no mysql support, ezmlm maillist work well, but if with
> mysql support, the maillist can not work well.
> 
> all the ezmlm commands can be excuted at command manner,
> such as  # ezmlm-list dir/list, i can get all subscribers,
> 
> but when i send mails such as confirm to subscribe, all the ezmlm commands
> seem not be excuted, because i see the db, no subscribers added at all.
> in mysql log, i get below message:
> 
> 
> "10329 11:45:18  Aborted connection 1127 to db: 'ezmlm' user: 'ezmlm' host:
> `localhost'
> (Couldn't uncompress communication packet)."
> 



>uh.. i dont have close experience w/ ezmlm.. its installed.. i never tryed
>any thing from it though.. but everything else is working fine...
>
>be more specific
>- Original Message -
>From: "hongtao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 5:47 PM
>Subject: qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux
>
>
>> Dear All:
>>
>> who have the experience with qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux?
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> hongtao
>>
>>

RE: qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux

[hongtao]

Dear Wagner:

i can not understand Poruguese, if you have english version,
which will be very helpful.

below is the message, i meet the trouble:

> if no mysql support, ezmlm maillist work well, but if with
> mysql support, the maillist can not work well.
> 
> all the ezmlm commands can be excuted at command manner,
> such as  shell: ezmlm-list dir/list, i can get all subscribers,
> 
> but when i send mails such as confirm to subscribe, all the ezmlm commands
> seem not be excuted, because i see the db, no subscribers added at all.
> in mysql log, i get below message:
> 
> 
> "10329 11:45:18  Aborted connection 1127 to db: 'ezmlm' user: 'ezmlm' host:
> `localhost'
> (Couldn't uncompress communication packet)."
> 
> 
> This looks like a problem with mysql, does not it?
> 
> Mate
> 


>Hongtao,
>
>I currently use qmail, ezmlm, vpopmail and mySQL (and other mail tools also)
>running on a FreeBSD box and they work pretty good together. If you are able
>to read Portuguese, I can send you a step-by-step tutorial to install and
>setup all these packs from scratch.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Wagner.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: hongtao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Ter?a-feira, 24 de Abril de 2001 18:48
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux
>>
>>
>> Dear All:
>>
>> who have the experience with qmail + ezmlm + mysql + linux?
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> hongtao
>>
>>

rfc2822

[Charles Cazabon]

Greetings,

RFC2821 and RFC2822, the long-awaited updates to 821 and 822, have been
released.  In reading through them, there are various clarifications and
declarations of obsolescence which support DJB's ideas (such as clearly
forbidding bare LFs in message content).

However, the 5-digit year (mentioned at http://cr.yp.to/y2k.html) is also
marked obsolete.  I can't see any obvious problems that using a 5-digit year
would have caused; does anyone know why it has been removed?

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: qmail as Back up MX box

[Henning Brauer]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:43:13PM -0500, mick wrote:
> Hello, 
> I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
> I have all the domains I want to accept mail for in control/rcpthosts.
> I don't have anything in locals or virtualdomans.
[...]
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 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)
> What am I doing wrong?

you backup shouldn't be listed with best preference, it should have the
second (or third, or fourth, ...) preference. You qmail box will then queue
the messages and deliver them to the best preference host.

-- 
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany

Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: qmail as Back up MX box

[mick]

There is a bogus MX record setup for testing:
;
;MX Records for mtco.net
;
mtco.net.   IN  MX  20  bogus.mtco.com.
mtco.net.   IN  MX  30  ns2.mtco.com.

It points to a non-responsive IP address to simulate the primary server
going down.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Charles Cazabon wrote:

> mick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
> > I have all the domains I want to accept mail for in control/rcpthosts.
> [...]
> > 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)
> > 
> > What am I doing wrong?
> 
> If you want your qmail server to act as a backup MX for a domain, there has to
> be another MX record of higher priority (lower distance number) published in
> the DNS.
> 
> i.e. if you want mail.foo.net to act as a backup MX for example.org, and there
> is an MX record for example.org with distance 10 pointing to mail.foo.net ,
> there has to be another MX record for example.org, with a distance of _less_
> than 10, pointing to another mail server.  This is so mail.foo.net knows where
> to send the mail next.
> 
> You can also use smtproutes, but that's another story.
> 
> 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.
> ---
> 
> 

*
Mick Dobra
Systems Administrator
MTCO Communications
1-800-859-6826
*

Re: Re: RSS LIST

[hongtao]

thank you for your help.
althouth you read the RTFM in an underground way.

>Now that is seriously clueless.
>
>
>> >R = read
>> >T = the
>> >F = f*cking
>> >M = manual
>> 
>> i wonder where is this file?
>> 
>> >
>
>
>John Chapman
>CNI Consulting
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>www.cniconsulting.com
>817-774-0369

Re: scripts run as user...?

[Charles Cazabon]

Bill Luckett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When a program/script is run from a user's .qmail file, what user does
> somescript run as? User qmail or samsmith

samsmith.  I was going to say RTFM, but it doesn't seem to actually be
explicitly stated in the man page for qmail-command or dot-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.
---

RSS LIST

[hongtao]

>R = read
>T = the
>F = f*cking
>M = manual

i wonder where is this file?

>
>- Original Message -
>From: "hongtao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Johan Almqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:29 PM
>Subject: Re: Re: RSS LIST
>
>
>> Dear Johan:
>>
>> thank you very much! i have changed the /etc/tcp.smtp as you told me.
>>
>> what is RTFM?
>>
>> can you help me to test if 202.106.184.99 is open relay also?
>>
>> hongtao
>>
>> >* hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010425 01:34]:
>> >> *** /etc/tcp.smtp
>> >> :deny,RELAYCLIENT=""   #if no this line, all ip will be allowed to
>relay
>> >> 202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>> >
>> >This is wrong. Should be:
>> >202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>> >:allow
>> >
>> >Note that the allow at the end doens't set RELAYCLIENT, thus those
>> >machines can only send to the hosts in control/rcpthosts
>> >
>> >> *** /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
>> >> nie-go.com
>> >> staff.nie-go.com
>> >> hongtao.com
>> >
>> >Where is the RTFM for this?
>> >
>> >-Johan
>> >--
>> >Johan Almqvist
>> >http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
>> >-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> >Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
>> >Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
>> >
>> >iD8DBQE65ov/EVwMevfaF0sRAnxeAJ9QhaXK/OE0ElWCt6xKyNerBWrYkgCcCIEM
>> >cFlekhCFH2++MFFiztJyaZk=
>> >=hfmX
>> >-END PGP SIGNATURE-
>>
>>

Re: Server Logs Please Help

[Dan Phoenix]

this belongs in supervise runs files not in startup.




--
Dan

+--+ 
|  BRAVENET WEB SERVICES   |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|  screen;cd /usr/src;make buildworld;cd ~ |
| cp MYKERNEL /sys/i386/conf;cd /usr/src   |
|make buildkernel KERNCONF=MYKERNEL|
|make installkernel KERNCONF=MYKERNEL;make installworld|
+__+

On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Christopher Tarricone wrote:

> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:20:07 -0400
> From: Christopher Tarricone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: QMAIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, VPOPMail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Server Logs Please Help
> 
> I have included an excerpt of my start-up script. My server starts but does
> not write anything to the log. The /var/log/qmail directory owned by
> qmaill:nofiles with r/w permissions. Has anyone encountered this before?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> 
> # Qmail Startup
> 
> 
> # Source function library.
> . /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions
> 
> HOSTNAME=`hostname`
> 
> 
> # See how we were called.
> case "$1" in
>   start)
> 
> echo -n "Starting: "
> env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
> qmail-start ./Maildir/ /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
> | /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/qmail &
> 
> echo -n "qmail "
> 
> env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
> tcpserver -H -R -c100 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \
> $HOSTNAME \
> /var/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir >
> /var/log/qmail/smtp.log &
> echo -n "pop "
> # 
> # This is commented out on purpose deamontools 0.80 does not
> # require you to specify the location of the tcp.smtp file
> # it is defined at compile time
> #tcpserver -H -R -x /var/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp -c100 -u503 -g501 0 smtp
> \
> 
> env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
> tcpserver -H -R -c100 -u503 -g501 0 smtp \
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > /dev/null &
> echo "smtp"
> 

Server Logs Please Help

[Christopher Tarricone]

I have included an excerpt of my start-up script. My server starts but does
not write anything to the log. The /var/log/qmail directory owned by
qmaill:nofiles with r/w permissions. Has anyone encountered this before?







#!/bin/sh

# Qmail Startup


# Source function library.
. /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions

HOSTNAME=`hostname`


# See how we were called.
case "$1" in
  start)

echo -n "Starting: "
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
qmail-start ./Maildir/ /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
| /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/qmail &

echo -n "qmail "

env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -c100 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \
$HOSTNAME \
/var/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir >
/var/log/qmail/smtp.log &
echo -n "pop "
# 
# This is commented out on purpose deamontools 0.80 does not
# require you to specify the location of the tcp.smtp file
# it is defined at compile time
#tcpserver -H -R -x /var/vpopmail/etc/tcp.smtp -c100 -u503 -g501 0 smtp
\

env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -c100 -u503 -g501 0 smtp \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > /dev/null &
echo "smtp"

Re: qmail as Back up MX box

[Charles Cazabon]

mick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
> I have all the domains I want to accept mail for in control/rcpthosts.
[...]
> 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)
> 
> What am I doing wrong?

If you want your qmail server to act as a backup MX for a domain, there has to
be another MX record of higher priority (lower distance number) published in
the DNS.

i.e. if you want mail.foo.net to act as a backup MX for example.org, and there
is an MX record for example.org with distance 10 pointing to mail.foo.net ,
there has to be another MX record for example.org, with a distance of _less_
than 10, pointing to another mail server.  This is so mail.foo.net knows where
to send the mail next.

You can also use smtproutes, but that's another story.

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: qmail as Back up MX box

[Willy De la Court]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 21:43, mick [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> 
> Hello, 
> I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
> I have all the domains I want to accept mail for in
> control/rcpthosts. I don't have anything in locals or
> virtualdomans.
> It should by default queue the messages for one week right?
> This is what I get instead:
> 
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
> addresses.
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry. 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)  
> 
READ the above message carefully and check your dns

Willy De la Court
Quint Nv
http://www.quint.be/projects/

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use 

iQA/AwUBOucgj/4IaGw3x6aJEQK1mACg+M5tkVRQne9hwYkSh87ldyTHVJQAnigX
gyn88dYC7VO36lMYSRt/jVaY
=hytC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

scripts run as user...?

[Bill Luckett]

When a program/script is run from a user's .qmail file, for instance

user samsmith's .qmail file:

| somescript
./Maildir

what user does somescript run as? User qmail or samsmith




***
Bill Luckett
Director of Information Systems
Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society
1625 Eastover Dr.
Jackson, MS 39211

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph : 601-984-3559
Fax: 601-984-3506
***

qmail as Back up MX box

[mick]

Hello, 
I have a system that I want to run qmail as a backup MX server.
I have all the domains I want to accept mail for in control/rcpthosts.
I don't have anything in locals or virtualdomans.
It should by default queue the messages for one week right?
This is what I get instead:

I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry. 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)

What am I doing wrong?

*
Mick Dobra
Systems Administrator
MTCO Communications
1-800-859-6826
*

Re: Re: RSS LIST

[alexus]

R = read
T = the
F = f*cking
M = manual

- Original Message -
From: "hongtao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Johan Almqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: Re: RSS LIST


> Dear Johan:
>
> thank you very much! i have changed the /etc/tcp.smtp as you told me.
>
> what is RTFM?
>
> can you help me to test if 202.106.184.99 is open relay also?
>
> hongtao
>
> >* hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010425 01:34]:
> >> *** /etc/tcp.smtp
> >> :deny,RELAYCLIENT=""   #if no this line, all ip will be allowed to
relay
> >> 202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
> >
> >This is wrong. Should be:
> >202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
> >:allow
> >
> >Note that the allow at the end doens't set RELAYCLIENT, thus those
> >machines can only send to the hosts in control/rcpthosts
> >
> >> *** /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
> >> nie-go.com
> >> staff.nie-go.com
> >> hongtao.com
> >
> >Where is the RTFM for this?
> >
> >-Johan
> >--
> >Johan Almqvist
> >http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
> >-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> >Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
> >Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
> >
> >iD8DBQE65ov/EVwMevfaF0sRAnxeAJ9QhaXK/OE0ElWCt6xKyNerBWrYkgCcCIEM
> >cFlekhCFH2++MFFiztJyaZk=
> >=hfmX
> >-END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>

Re: Re: RSS LIST

[hongtao]

Dear Johan:

thank you very much! i have changed the /etc/tcp.smtp as you told me.

what is RTFM?

can you help me to test if 202.106.184.99 is open relay also? 

hongtao

>* hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010425 01:34]:
>> *** /etc/tcp.smtp
>> :deny,RELAYCLIENT=""   #if no this line, all ip will be allowed to relay
>> 202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>
>This is wrong. Should be:
>202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>:allow
>
>Note that the allow at the end doens't set RELAYCLIENT, thus those
>machines can only send to the hosts in control/rcpthosts
>
>> *** /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts
>> nie-go.com
>> staff.nie-go.com
>> hongtao.com
>
>Where is the RTFM for this?
>
>-Johan
>-- 
>Johan Almqvist
>http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
>
>iD8DBQE65ov/EVwMevfaF0sRAnxeAJ9QhaXK/OE0ElWCt6xKyNerBWrYkgCcCIEM
>cFlekhCFH2++MFFiztJyaZk=
>=hfmX
>-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: badheaders patch from flame.org

[Charles Cazabon]

MIS - Ben Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Please include all information in the body of your message; don't split it
between the Subject: header and the body.

re:  flame.org qmail patches

> Anyone had *any* experience with this patch??

I took a look at them after someone mentioned them on another mailing list;
the author appears to not understand how qmail works, how modularity is a
benefit, or indeed how Internet mail (and spam in particular) works.  The
patches appear to provide little benefit, and break the reliability of qmail.
I would avoid them.

What are you trying to accomplish?  Perhaps there's another, more qmail-ish
way to do it.

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: Oracle eMail Server

[Mark Delany]

> Mlocal, P=/email01/oracle/OraHome1/bin/ofcuto, F=rlSsDCFMPpmn,  S=10,
> R=20, A=ofcuto - /email01/oracle/OraHome1 emailsvr -f unx.cfg - $g $a $b

You need to find out what all the F= flags do, what ruleset 10 and 20 do the
the envelope addresses, find out what $a, $b and $c are and then make a .qmail
that invokes: /email01/oracle/OraHome1 emailsvr -f unx.cfg -

Alternatively, if you're lucky, Oracle will provide documentation on
how to inject a mail into their system so you can totally ignore the
sendmail implementation of the interface and just use their docs to
start afresh.


Regards.

badheaders patch from flame.org

[MIS - Ben Murphy]

Hi All,

Anyone had *any* experience with this patch??
I am having problems with the regex used to limit the number of messages.

Regards,

Ben Murphy,
Technical Director,
murphx Innovative Solutions

tel:+44 (0) 870 757 1650
fax:+44 (0) 870 757 1651
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This e-mail is confidential and may contain legally privileged information.
If you are not named above as an addressee it may be unlawful for you to
read,
copy, distribute, disclose or otherwise use the information contained within
this e-mail.
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author,
and may not represent those of murphx Innovative Solutions.

Oracle eMail Server

[Federico Edelman Anaya]

Anybody install the Oracle eMail Server + Qmail?
I'dont know how install with support of Qmail ... :(

Sendmail configuration:
Mlocal, P=/email01/oracle/OraHome1/bin/ofcuto, F=rlSsDCFMPpmn,  S=10,
R=20, A=ofcuto - /email01/oracle/OraHome1 emailsvr -f unx.cfg - $g $a $b
$f $x ( $u )

# short circuit local delivery so forwarded email works
R$+.ofcmail < @ $=w . > $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail
Server passoff
R$+.OFCMAIL < @ $=w . > $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail
Server passoff

# handle locally delivered names
R$+.ofcmail $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail Server
passoff
R$+.OFCMAIL $#ofcmail $: $1 Oracle eMail Server
passoff##

# Last line of sendmail.cf
Mofcmail,   P=/email01/oracle/OraHome1/bin/ofcuto, F=rlSsDCFMPpmn,
S=10, R=20, A=ofcuto - /email01/oracle/OraHome1 emailsvr -f unx.cfg
- $g $a $b $f $x ( $u )

How can I translate this configuration to qmail configuarion?

Re: how to _delay_ failed authentication

[Scott Gifford]

"Kittiwat Manosuthi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Anybody know how to delay failed authentication attempts to prevent
> brute force pwd cracking on POP3 server using qmail & vpopmail?

You might be able to do this via PAM, if you have a checkpassword that
supports PAM (available from www.qmail.org):

http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/~pjb1008/project/pam_delay/pam_delay/pam_delay.html

-ScottG.

Re: /var/qmail/control and queue question

[Peter Farmer]

On 09:25:11 - 25/04/01, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Kris Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > When a new domain is added to /var/qmail/control/locals and
> > /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts, is it possible to flush the queue in such a
> > way that any mail bound for that domain (before it became a local domain)
> > will be delivered locally?  After updating the control files and then
> > HUPping and ALARMing qmail, the system is still trying to deliver the
> > messages remotely.
> 
> No; as you've seen, the decision as to whether a message is to be delivered
> locally or remotely is made when the message is queued, not when a delivery
> takes place.
> 
> > Playing with /var/qmail/control/smtproutes didn't help either.
> 
> Hmmm.  Even with something like "domain:127.0.0.1"?
> 

And if the server was the best preference MX, then qmail would delivery the mail 
remotely to itself, at which point the message would be delivered locally.


Peter Farmer
Senior Internet Systems Engineer
blueyonder - http://www.blueyonder.co.uk/

FW: timeout downloading mail while connecting to the server using dial-up

[Christian Dressend]

the problem isn't when sending email (smtp) but when receiving (pop3).

Qmail-pop3 runs supervised and starts with the following command located in
/service/qmailpop/run:

tcpserver -l0 -D -v -h -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup main.asco.ro
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir

qmail-smtp starts in the same way (supervised):
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -l 0 -D -v -h -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u
"$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 |
multilog var/log/smtpd



-Original Message-
From: Charles Cazabon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 24 aprilie 2001 23:33
To: Qmail
Subject: Re: timeout downloading mail while connecting to the server
using dial-up


Christian Dressend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...] I can connect to the qmail server using the
> internal lan without any problems, but when I am using the dial-up to
> connect to the server I am getting a timeout error after starting download
> messages. Outlook is reporting a 60 sec timeout error and doesn't resume
the
> connection.
> I'm using qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3 with tcpserver with the ususal
> tcpserver switches (-l0, -R etc.)

Could be one of numerous problems with Outlook, could be reverse (and
possibly
forward) DNS lookups.  You didn't tell us exactly how you're invoking
qmail-smtpd.

Check the FAQs and the archives.  Chances are this is actually the #1 FAQ on
this list.

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: /var/qmail/control and queue question

[Charles Cazabon]

Kris Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When a new domain is added to /var/qmail/control/locals and
> /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts, is it possible to flush the queue in such a
> way that any mail bound for that domain (before it became a local domain)
> will be delivered locally?  After updating the control files and then
> HUPping and ALARMing qmail, the system is still trying to deliver the
> messages remotely.

No; as you've seen, the decision as to whether a message is to be delivered
locally or remotely is made when the message is queued, not when a delivery
takes place.

> Playing with /var/qmail/control/smtproutes didn't help either.

Hmmm.  Even with something like "domain:127.0.0.1"?

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: Sqwebmail

[Tim Hunter]

www.inter7.com/sqwebmail

-Original Message-
From: Pablo Buenaventura [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 5:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Sqwebmail


Hi All,

I am newbie with qmail.

I would like to know how to use sqwebmail in a simple
manner and where I can get information about it?

Many thanks,

Pablo

___
Do You Yahoo!?
Envía mensajes instantáneos y recibe alertas de correo con
Yahoo! Messenger - http://messenger.yahoo.es

Re: /var/qmail/control and queue question

[Kris Kelley]

I wrote:
> > > Playing with /var/qmail/control/smtproutes didn't help either.

Charles Cazabon wrote
> > Hmmm.  Even with something like "domain:127.0.0.1"?

That's pretty much what I did, only I used a name (localhost) instead of a
number (127.0.0.1).  qmail still tried to deliver the messages to the old
IP address.

Peter Farmer wrote:
> And if the server was the best preference MX, then qmail would delivery
the mail remotely to itself, at
> which point the message would be delivered locally.

/var/qmail/control/smtproutes is supposed to override the looking up of MX
records, correct?  In any case, I have no control over the DNS records of
this domain (don't worry, my reasons for wanting to capture these messages
are kosher).

These messages finally bounced the last time I tried to flush the queue, so
they're gone now.  Thanks for the help just the same.

---Kris Kelley

Re: how to _delay_ failed authentication

[Markus Stumpf]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:36:28PM +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote:
> oh yes it is in control of at least the process it calls directly
> (qmail-popup) which terminates nonzero on auth error

Yeah, it exits nonzero at auth error and it exists nonzero in any other
case.
See my post (to qmail list) some days ago. qmail-popup ALWAYS exits with
   _exit(1);

> tcpserver lacks the feature of connection rate limiting which exactly
> would be the application in our case. i also thought about defining a
> scheme like openssh does (max simultaneous connections, "soft"
> threshold for sessions, percentage of connections to drop) combined with
> some advanced tarpitting per ip address (like "accept n connections per
> minute from each ip address and back off with delay d and increase that
> delay each connection attempt, and perhaps multiply it with the
> exitcode of the process called).
> does this make sense?

That's what I'd liked to accomplish with the server/client framework
I wrote about. IMHO on a well administered system this is not error
prone - at least not more than having a LDAP or MySQL server for
authentication. The benefit however is that it can also be used in
clustered environments and you won't need code changes to djb software.

Putting all the load on tcpserver itself is IMHO a bad idea:
- it would need massive code changes in tcpserver
- it would slow down tcpserver itself
- depending on implementation tcpserver would need a lot more memory
- you'd have to have different versions of tcpserver (with/without rating)
- on new versions of tcpserver you'd have to port/make patches again
- lack of clustering support (POP-Toasters, SMTP-arrays)

If the client really could not connect to the server you can have a failsafe
method for this that either accepts like for "ok" or denies like for "fail".

DJB's strategy is always to have small, high specialised programs for
special tasks. I like this idea, it's in the spirit of Unix and I think
one should stick to it.

\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.

/var/qmail/control and queue question

[Kris Kelley]

When a new domain is added to /var/qmail/control/locals and
/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts, is it possible to flush the queue in such a
way that any mail bound for that domain (before it became a local domain)
will be delivered locally?  After updating the control files and then
HUPping and ALARMing qmail, the system is still trying to deliver the
messages remotely.  Playing with /var/qmail/control/smtproutes didn't help
either.

---Kris Kelley

Re: qmail-inject error checking

[Charles Cazabon]

Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:05:34AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> > thing you might try, though, is to see if you get better results with
> > new-inject (it's in one of djb's other packages; serialmail possibly?).
> 
> No, it's in mess822.

Indeed; thanks for the correct, Henning.

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: qmail-inject error checking

[Henning Brauer]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:05:34AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> thing you might try, though, is to see if you get better results with
> new-inject (it's in one of djb's other packages; serialmail possibly?).  From

No, it's in mess822.

-- 
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
http://www.bsws.de | Germany

Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)

Re: Return-Path is root - why ?

[Karsten W. Rohrbach]

Lukasz Felsztukier([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.25 12:19:08 +:
> Hi there!
> I send emails thru PHP script on my machine - These mails all have
> Return-Path in form: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Of course I use a 'From:' header, so it doesn't show up in users' MUA,
> but I was just curious does it make any security threat like that...
look into the annotated docs at www.php.net for the php.ini file. there
is a variable that sets the originator address. you might consider
setting
sendmail_path=/var/qmail/bin/sendmail
to get the correct wrapper running.
/k

> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Lukasz Felsztukier
> 
>   : :   d i g i t a l  O n e  : :  interactive media house
>   : :   http://www.digitalone.pl
>   : :   Al. Kosciuszki 1, 90-418 Lodz, Poland
>   : :   tel./fax  [+48 42] 632.89.74

-- 
> A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE  DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46

Re: qmail-inject error checking

[Charles Cazabon]

Roger Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Is there any way to turn of the header error checking of
> qmail-inject?

Not that I know of; ensuring headers are valid is one of the main reasons for
qmail-inject to exist.  It puts together a valid message and queues it.  One
thing you might try, though, is to see if you get better results with
new-inject (it's in one of djb's other packages; serialmail possibly?).  From
reading the list archives, it seems that it might be better suited when
dealing with messages created by random broken clients.

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: RSS LIST

[Charles Cazabon]

hongtao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> *** /etc/tcp.smtp
> :deny,RELAYCLIENT=""   #if no this line, all ip will be allowed to relay
> 202.106.184.99:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""

As Johan noted, this is incorrect.  You're misunderstanding how tcpserver
controls access to your SMTP service; you can't have a default rule of
":deny", because that means that other machines won't be able to connect to
the service at all -- and therefore can't send you email.

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: Fwd: Just a little question

[Charles Cazabon]

Travis Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> made a correction to my last email in way of a <

Someone else already gave you the answer.  To be a little more explicit,
tcpserver is not the command you're looking for.

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: CAN'T Send to lists!

[Charles Cazabon]

Marco Calistri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > I can't speak to the other hosts you mentioned, but vger is run with some
> > very interesting policies for accepting mail,
[...]
> my problems start if I use MUA through qmail-sendmail option
> messages FROM fields appear as sent from unknown domain so vger
> reject them(this is right because my qmail domain is not FQDN).
> I have to use MUA through qmail-SMTP if I want my messages be accepted.

Try setting the environment variables QMAILUSER and QMAILHOST to what you want
the envelope sender address to appear (for example, set QMAILHOST to "tin.it"
and QMAILUSER to "ik5bcu").

> LOGS say mail is accepted but I never seen it on mailing-lists.

They silently drop anything they want to filter out of the l-k lists.

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.
---

qmail-inject error checking

[Roger Walker]

I am using qmail for a special project for a major ISP (600,000
mailboxes and growing). The ISP's Intermail system is forwarding all mail
for a major domain (which will disappear soon) to a qmail box. The qmail
box invokes a Perl script to rewrite the recipient address and fire the
message back to Intermail for delivery. It also fires a message back to
the originator, via the Intermail host(s), with a reminder to update their
addressbooks with the new domain. (Works okay, except that the hardware
needs to be upgraded to keep up with the volume.)

The problem is that the ISP does not want to lose mail due to
improperly written originator addresses, which is what happens now.
qmail-inject seems to read all of the headers, and fails if, for example,
double quotes don't match up, no matter which header contains the fault.
Intermail doesn't care, I'm told, so it won't bomb on them - and that's
what the client wants. When qmail-inject fails, so does the Perl script,
and the message dies right there with it.

Is there any way to turn of the header error checking of
qmail-inject? Thanks.

-- 
Roger Walker 
Voice/Fax 1-780-440-2685 
"HIS Pain; YOUR Gain"

Re: how to _delay_ failed authentication

[Karsten W. Rohrbach]

Markus Stumpf([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.04.25 14:38:38 +:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:12:31AM +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote:
> > maybe add it to tcpserver?
> 
> tcpserver ist not in control of checkpassword and has no knowledge
> of corrrect/incorrect user:password pairs.
oh yes it is in control of at least the process it calls directly
(qmail-popup) which terminates nonzero on auth error

> 
> The solution I would like most (and which would be rather flexible and
> also working with clusters) would be to have a fast http server (maybe
> based on djb's publicfile).
> This server would have a configurable sized hash table (similar to
> dnscache) and a strategy for expiring entries.
> 
> There would be two clients/APIs:
> - one would send "ip:fail" or "ip:ok"
>   and the server would either increment or delete an internal counter
> - the other would send "ip:query" and the server would return
>   "allow" or "deny".
> These two clients could be placed withing the calling queue after
> tcpserver and checkpassword.
tcpserver lacks the feature of connection rate limiting which exactly
would be the application in our case. i also thought about defining a
scheme like openssh does (max simultaneous connections, "soft"
threshold for sessions, percentage of connections to drop) combined with
some advanced tarpitting per ip address (like "accept n connections per
minute from each ip address and back off with delay d and increase that
delay each connection attempt, and perhaps multiply it with the
exitcode of the process called).
does this make sense?

> 
> Within this framework one could write other clients/servers that would
> e.g. allow for controlling the number of smtp connects per IP per time
> interval:
> - have a client that sends
>   "ip:connect" to the server and the server returns "ok" or "fail".
>   - if the answer the "ok" give over to the next program in queue
>   - if the answer is "fail" act similar to rblsmtpd and send a 4xx
> to every SMTP protocol request from the sender.
client server is too errorprone and too mighty for this. we are talking
about pop3 here, not smtp, primarily. the functionality you ar talking
about in checkpassword is there afaik with a version that supports ldap.
i would prefer hashing the ip and timestamp directly to disk.

> 
> I've been working on the last server/client with a friend. We have some
> code but it's not finished yet.
> 
>   \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.
> 

-- 
> "Dort wo andere Moral besitzen hat sie ein Loch." -- Erich Kaestner
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE  DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46

Re: how to _delay_ failed authentication

[Markus Stumpf]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:12:31AM +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote:
> maybe add it to tcpserver?

tcpserver ist not in control of checkpassword and has no knowledge
of corrrect/incorrect user:password pairs.

The solution I would like most (and which would be rather flexible and
also working with clusters) would be to have a fast http server (maybe
based on djb's publicfile).
This server would have a configurable sized hash table (similar to
dnscache) and a strategy for expiring entries.

There would be two clients/APIs:
- one would send "ip:fail" or "ip:ok"
  and the server would either increment or delete an internal counter
- the other would send "ip:query" and the server would return
  "allow" or "deny".
These two clients could be placed withing the calling queue after
tcpserver and checkpassword.

Within this framework one could write other clients/servers that would
e.g. allow for controlling the number of smtp connects per IP per time
interval:
- have a client that sends
  "ip:connect" to the server and the server returns "ok" or "fail".
  - if the answer the "ok" give over to the next program in queue
  - if the answer is "fail" act similar to rblsmtpd and send a 4xx
to every SMTP protocol request from the sender.

I've been working on the last server/client with a friend. We have some
code but it's not finished yet.

\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.

Using formailer script with qmail and vpopmail

[Christian Metzen]

 Hello!
 
 I installed the system completly new, before that i used qmail with vpopmail and the 
formmail.cgi workled fine, so that the forms ar sent via mail to my adress. But now 
after insatlling new it just won´t work. the cgi works fine, but there is no email, 
and i don´t know what happens. The cgi works without problems but nowhere on the 
system i can find the generated email, anyone has a suggestion for this?
 
--
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards

Christian Metzen
--
mediades.de | Wolfskaulstr. 37
Medien | D-56072 Koblenz
Dienstleitungen | eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://mediades.de/  

Re: Ban These Exchange Server Users

[Felix von Leitner]

Thus spake Robert Mudryk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> If you noticed, all the Virii Reject Messages are from Exchange
> Servers...  QMAIL anti-Virus Scanning like qmail-scanner  says [This
> message was _not_ sent to the originator, as they appear to be a
> mailing-list or other automated Email message]

I'm all for it.
People who run Exchange should be systematically banned from
communicating with the clueful part of the Internet.

Felix

Re: OT: Vulnerable MUAs ...

[Felix von Leitner]

begin Frank wrote 644

> > |grep -iE 'microsoft|eudora' |wc -l
> >1757
> I wonder if it would change some MUA's behaviour or the selection
> criteria of some IT managers if some big lists/list providers would
> start to block mail from certain MUAs for self defense.

> For sure it would bring the lawyers in quickly.

And on what grounds would they act in your opinion?

Felix

ezmlm questions

[Fadli Syarid]

hi all
i want to reject *@yahoogroups in my mailinglist (i use ezmlm).
what should i do..?

thanks before


PS. I am sorry if my english bad cause not my native :)

Return-Path is root - why ?

[Lukasz Felsztukier]

Hi there!
I send emails thru PHP script on my machine - These mails all have
Return-Path in form: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Of course I use a 'From:' header, so it doesn't show up in users' MUA,
but I was just curious does it make any security threat like that...

Cheers,
-- 
Lukasz Felsztukier

  : :   d i g i t a l  O n e  : :  interactive media house
  : :   http://www.digitalone.pl
  : :   Al. Kosciuszki 1, 90-418 Lodz, Poland
  : :   tel./fax  [+48 42] 632.89.74

per-recipient VERP with other MTAs

[Balazs Nagy]

Hi,

I use a PERL script to send out a daily newsletter. Here's the send
fragment:

if (!defined $dry) {

$ENV{"QMAILUSER"} = $mailuser;
$ENV{"QMAILHOST"} = $mailhost;
$ENV{"QMAILINJECT"} = "r";

foreach $email (@subscribers) {
open MAIL, "|/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject $email";
print MAIL "From: $mailfrom\n";
print MAIL "To: $email\n";
print MAIL "Subject: $header\n\n";
print MAIL $letter;
close MAIL;
}
print $letter;
}

As you can see, it's a very easy method which does only the crucial steps.
Of course I catch -default@, but some of the bounced
messages says they got the mail from -@ instead of
-=@.

In addition there's a mail server which refuses my newsletter just because
the envelope sender's address has a dash in it.

Anyone have such experience?
---jul