Re: [OT] Re: VIRUS ALERT
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:10:10PM -0400, Jason Kawaja wrote: > "Alan R." wrote: > > > > Jessica, > > > > You are sending email with virus. Please use some anti-virus program. > > > > Alan R. > > > > there is no jessica, investigate the past messages...they originate from > various previous posters Wrong. Look at the headers of the messages. This "emanuel" has plagued the qmail list before. I've seen some of my own posts re-posted back then. From what I've seen, the virus re-sends everything the victim has recieved, with the .exe attached to them. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail, qmail-command and procmail
On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 07:57:37PM +, Subba Rao wrote: > Hello, > > I have started qmail with the following option in /var/qmail/rc: > > exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \ > qmail-start '|dot-forward .forward |preline procmail' splogger qmail > > Here I am explicitly using procmail as my MDA. My .qmail has one entry which is, > "./Maildir/" You're wrong. You're NOT using procmail as your MDA. You're using procmail as the system's MDA. From the moment you created a .qmail, you've overriden the system default. The default delivery mode only works when users don't specify their own. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Very slow qmail response
On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Markus Stumpf wrote: > And "-l 0" is also nonsense. No, it's not > This should be "-l localhostname" this is > a NAME, not a number. Says who? > > See > http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/tcpserver.html You should have seen it yourself. From that URL: * -l localname: Do not look up the local host name in DNS; use localname * for the environment variable $TCPLOCALHOST. A common choice for localname * is 0. To avoid loops, you must use this option for servers on TCP port * 53. --- RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: smtp delay with -H and -R
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 07:26:32PM -0500, Russell P. Sutherland wrote: > I've experienced a situtation that is wierd... [snip] > > Any ideas as to what the delay is caused by DNS, probably > and/or how to eliminate it? from 'man tcpserver': --- -llocalname Do not look up the local host name; use localname for TCPLOCALHOST. --- So... try adding -l0 to the tcpserver flags RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail+ldap
On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 01:48:32AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 01:59:48PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > if someone had any expirience with qmail and openldap > > please send me email. > > How often again? In capital letters: > > READ HTTP://WWW.LIFEWITHQMAIL.ORG/LDAP/ *grin* The requested URL /LDAP/ was not found on this server. Better create an Alias to /ldap/ called /LDAP/, just in case :) RC P.S. - Shouting is no solution for clueless people. Flaming them is much more fun :) -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Symbolic link to datemail?
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:54:20AM -0800, Matt Simonsen wrote: > Unfortunately, there is no MUA since qmail-inject is being called from > various scripts. Here's the output you requested, Charles. > > > [root@wrapguy bin]# ls -l | grep qmail-inject > lrwxrwxrwx1 root qmail 8 Mar 26 10:48 qmail-inject -> > datemail > -rwxr-xr-x1 root qmail 34748 Mar 19 10:44 qmail-inject.orig > > > And the problem again... > > [root@wrapguy bin]# ./datemail > sendmail: illegal option -- a > sendmail: usage: sendmail [ -t ] [ -fsender ] [ -Fname ] [ -bp ] [ -bs ] [ > arg ... ] Strange... Try running this by hand: "/var/qmail/bin/predate /var/qmail/bin/sendmail" What do you get? The same error? The above line is what datemail does. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Symbolic link to datemail?
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 01:00:15PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Matt Simonsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, this seems funny. Datemail here is a 67-byte Bourne shell script: > Actually... I'm running a pristine qmail 1.03 on this machine... datemail is a 126 byte bash script, using /var/qmail/bin/sendmail instead of /usr/bin/sendmail. Considering the size, I'd say his script is exactly the same. RC > > 1) What are the contents of your datemail? It's got to be more than here. A comment: "# WARNING: This file was auto-generated. Do not edit!" :-) > > 2) How much do you want to bet that /usr/sbin/sendmail on your system > is not the qmail sendmail wrapper, but a real sendmail binary? That's > almost certainly the problem here, and would account for the sendmail > error messages you're seeing. If this is the problem, you need to remove > the sendmail binary (or rename it) and replace it with a link to > /var/qmail/bin/sendmail . That might be it... But then again, if his script is the original one (like mine, apperently created by "make setup"...) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: pop3d needs SUID root?
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: tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup FQDN \ /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \ /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d & or... (inetd) pop3 stream tcp nowait root/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup qmail-popup hostname.domain /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: NAKEDWIFE.EXE Virus - Filter available
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 04:49:55PM +0200, Peter Peltonen wrote: > mick wrote: > > > When I opened the scripts they had the windows ^m character at the end of > > each line. I was getting the same error until I removed them. > > When I open the file in pico or vim, I don't see those characters. > > With what program do I find and remove the characters? Vim. Try entering ":set ff=unix", and then press shift+Z twice. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: checkpassowrd and FreeBSD
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 06:05:03PM -0500, Peter Branch wrote: > I'm receiving the following error when I am trying to make the FreeBSD port > of checkpassword. Inside /usr/local/checkpassword, I issue the make > command. Any idea? > Yeap > "/usr/share/mk/bsd.port.mk", line 2: Could not find /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk > make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue /usr/share/mk/bsd.port.mk is including /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk in line 2, and can't find it. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Have some more respect and understanding for somebody new on the NET
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:24:47PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:15:09PM +0100, Rembrandt Lensink wrote: > > > > RNL<.Q_Q.> > > I really think it's time to report this guy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] now. > There is one issue - I don't know his IP address. Only djb can find > that in the archive, or does anybody know a trick for getting Received > headers out of an ezmlm archive? > It's in his mails headers. @19:45:51, 15 Feb 2001 it was 195.121.130.64 (looks like a dialup. Especially because of the hostname :-) ) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Have some more respect and understanding for somebody new on the NET
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:15:09PM +0100, Rembrandt Lensink wrote: > > RNL<.Q_Q.> Only when you start respecting the rest of us, and learn how to write e-mails. 1) No HTML. Or at least, include both text and HTML versions 2) Wrap your lines around 72 chars 3) The body of an e-mail is meant to be used for the message. The subject, is for the subject. 4) E-mailing unrequested gibberish to anyone or any list is NOT A GOOD THING (TM) 5) In an international environment (such as this list), use a common language to everyone (like english) RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Mail forwarding with .qmail-???
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 08:12:59PM -0500, Mathieu Martin wrote: > Hi, > > I have a few users who want their mail to be delivered locally and to be > > forwarded somewhere else at the same time. > ie: User [EMAIL PROTECTED] wants to be able to connect to our pop server and > fetch his mail, and he also wants his mail to be forwarded to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > As soon as I create the file ".qmail-x" containing "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]", his > > mail is forwarded but is no longer delivered locally. Is there a simple > way to work around this? > man dot-qmail Hint: .qmail files can handle more than one delivery method, one per line RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Importing Emails into ezmlm-idx
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 12:39:03PM -0500, Peter Cavender wrote: > >* Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010213 16:29]: > > > Jeremy Suo-Anttila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > anyone know how i can import 350 email addy's from a text file > >into ezmlm ? > > > > > > `man ezmlm-sub`. > > > >Dear Sirs: > > > >I just tried the command above and it didn't add any subscribers at ALL! It > >just printed out a bunch of USELESS words at me AND DIDN"T ADD ANYTHING TO > >MY LIST!!! > > > Ummm, I think those worthless words were the INSTRUCTIONS to do what > you wanted. Ert... Peter was joking. I think. :-) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Fw: (Reply ) To Dan Egli (Copy because of system error yesterday)
On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 09:51:11PM +0100, Rembrandt Lensink wrote: > Today again 2 visites from "snowhite" > A get a few thousand every day. so what? It's a "smart" virus. Search the google for W32/Hybris and check it's "abilities" RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: WARNING: Worm (?) sending from root@microsoft.com to *@anon.lcs.mit.ed
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 05:51:40PM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote: > Anyone else seeing thousands of messages filling up your queue, apparently > from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to addresses such as: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Yeap, I've seen that one, but didn't pay much attention to it... I thought it was some wise-ass customer fooling around. Appearently... it isn't. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: bind qmail-smtp to one IP-adress
On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 12:28:54PM +, Greg Cope wrote: > tcpserver [ opts ] host port prog > > Port being an IP address (or 0 for all) to bind to. Ert? Almost there. "Host being the address blablabla" is more accurate. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Maildir versus malibox
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 12:20:05AM +0100, Robin S. Socha wrote: > * Piotr Kasztelowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Pine, as I think, is most popular software in Unix for mail > > reading/writing. > > Pine is a rotten bunch of crap. > > find pine4.21 -type f | xargs egrep '(sprintf|strcpy|strcat)' | wc -l > 4299 Yes, pine is crappy, and pine is bloatware. Also, pine is not as featureful as mutt. (even though one might argue that pine supports nntp). But... You can't ignore the fact that pine _is_ probably the most popular MUA. It's cursor driven interface is perfect for dumb^H^H^H^Hend users. Who cares if it doesn't support maildirs, or if it lacks some features, or even if it uses by default the crappiest text editor I've ever seen? It's easy to use. Just like Windows :) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: mailing list
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 04:09:19PM -0500, James R. Clark II wrote: > I have been having trouble when trying to send out emails to mailing lists > in qmail. The local users get teh email fine but the mailing list gets the > error I show below. I have all of the permissions correct (as you can see > below) and I have recompiled qmail several times. Did you actually change anything between compiles, or do you believe compilers do their stuff randomly every time they're run? > Please email me at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with any suggestions! Nope, if you want the list for help, use it. > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 16680 uid 1005 > Jan 17 13:11:54 leat qmail: 979755114.892269 starting delivery 94: msg > 361545 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Jan 17 13:11:54 leat qmail: 979755114.892562 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 > Jan 17 13:11:54 leat qmail: 979755114.964965 delivery 94: deferral: > ezmlm-send:_fatal:_temporary_qmail-queue_error:_qq_trouble_in_home_directory > _(#4.3.0)/ > Jan 17 13:11:54 leat qmail: 979755114.965300 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > I'd say your mlist alias is pointing to a non-existant dir, or a dir with wrong perms. Check ~alias/.qmail-mlist, or users/assign (depending on how you configured things) to check out which dir it's trying to use, and then make sure the dir exists and has the right perms. I'm no ezmlm wizard by any means, but another option is ezmlm's own dir, which may have wrong perms or ownership. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Mail server madness (with regards to domain names)
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 03:47:34PM -0500, Peter Schuller wrote: > > What might cause this? I even changed "scode" back from being a CNAME to > being an A record in the DNS configuration, in case that was the cause. Try creating an MX for scode.infidyne.com. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail smtp daemon takes long to display banner
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 06:00:21PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 01:31:16PM -, Gon?alo Gomes wrote: > > my installed qmail server takes long to display its banner, i dont know why, > > i've followed lifewithqmail step by step > > and cant figure out what is the problem! > > You didn't gave sufficient information, but I could guess the problem. > Disable ident lookups, man tcpserver gives you the options. Careful reading > of this manpage is important, there are at least two other opions whioch can > speed up things. Disabling host resolution also helps quite a lot. Just RTFM before asking. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: looking for mua
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 07:54:51PM +0100, Olivier M. wrote: > On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 07:47:46PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 07:28:15PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Is there any good MUA out there that supports Maildir format? I want to > > > get ride of pine because only has mbox. > > > > The three greatest: mutt, mutt and mutt. I should also mention mutt. From > > these I'd use mutt ;-)) > > Hey, I think you forgot to speak about mutt! That's incredible... :) And I use another MUA that supports maildirs very well. It even uses the new/cur/tmp dirs as it should, instead of relying on "Status" headers. It's called "mutt" ;-) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: hrm....pop3d
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 12:11:57AM -0500, Kurth Bemis wrote: > having a bit of a problem with qmail-poop3d. when i start it fro mmy init script i >get this funky error in the log file. > > Jan 12 06:54:30 noname pop3d: 979300470.784986 tcpserver: fatal: unable to figure >out port number for pop-3 > Jan 12 06:54:31 noname qmail: 979300471.799484 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 > > any have any idea what could be causing this? Yeap. "man 5 services". > when i telnet to the box/ip on port 110 i get no connection. Of course. tcpserver or whichever wrapper you're using isn't bound to any port. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Bogus popularity claims for Sendmail
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 12:02:52AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: > D. J. Bernstein writes: > > > > Sendmail dropped below 50% of the Internet's SMTP servers---including > > idle workstations---last year; qmail has climbed past 10%. I suspect > > that qmail now handles more Internet mail deliveries than Sendmail does, > > although I don't know a good way to measure this. > > But that sample would be weighted towards personal email, and away > from workplace email. That makes it much less random. > > I could also get you the log files for two ISPs that send daily mail > to all of their customers. But that weights the sample towards > people interested in that kind of mail. And also, gathering server stats from this list would be biased. I also work in an ISP, a large one (500k+ customers). I could also send you a bunch of logfiles, both from residential customers, corporate customers, and even the offices. But, considering most traffic is probably internal, it would all be qmail talking to qmail. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Dot in email adress
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:03:44PM -0800, Boz Crowther wrote: > I'd say you'd have better luck getting people to stop giving newbies snotty > answers on mailing lists designed to help them. Yeap. Those mailing lists suck. Fortunately, this is the _qmail discussion list_, not a list to help newbies, so we don't fall in that category. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: FIX! (was: qmail-1.03-qmtpc-mailroutes.patch)
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 01:00:49AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 02:40:39AM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote: > > Hi! > > > > There patch I released earlier wasn't quite as careful about memory > > allocation (or rather, failures of memory allocation) as the rest of Dan's > > code. I have released a new version, available from > > > > http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/ > > > > I'm still very eager to hear your comments. I'll stick with the mailroutes > > design for now, though :-> > > One comment: if smtproutes is compatible with mailroutes, why not use > smtproutes instead of mailroutes? Because the name is too confining... It implies smtp. mail is more generic :) But I still prefer having smtp and qmtp separately (keeping the good tradition of the multiple qmail conf files) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: control/mailroutes (was: QMTP autoreply tester)
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 01:56:47AM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote: > On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 01:59:18PM -0700, Andy Bradford wrote: > > Not to be picky, but why not call the file qmtproutes instead of > > mailroutes? :-) > > Because it contains both SMTP and QMTP routes. I figured that would be a > better idea, and so did other people. Hmmm... OK, disregard my previous mail. Personally, I'd rather have one file for SMTP, and another for QMTP. Does anyone else here agree with me? RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail-1.03-qmtpc-mailroutes.patch
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 07:08:17PM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote: > Hi! > > I made a few modifications to Russell's patch. You can now specify routes > for QMTP just as you can for SMTP. Ths filename is changed to > control/mailroutes and the format changed a tad, but the old file will > still work if moved. I was about to write a mail asking for qmtproutes, so great! But... Do you mean your solution ignores control/smtproutes? Or can you have both smtproutes for SMTP _and_ mailroutes for QMTP? RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: sendmail to qmail queue transfer
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 10:38:37PM -, Mike Kirk wrote: > Dear All > > I have two mailq's, the primary is running sendmail v8 the secondary is > running qmail 1.03. > I have just finished configuring a replacement for the new primary which > will also be running qmail 1.03. > Where I need advice is how best to make the swap and how best to flush the > queue on the old box into the new. Easy. Set the qmail box as the default smtproute (Smart Relay) of the sendmail server. Then flush the queue. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: [o/t] MUA war prelude (was: email client recommendations?)
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 07:04:13PM +, Marc Knoop wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I was wondering if some of you could recommend a good, reliable email > client that runs under X (Gnome) and supports IMAP to maildirs (qmail, of > course!). > A gui client would be nice, but is not necessary. > > What do you guys/gals use?!? > Well... This is not the "everything-related-to-email" list. But, and because I kind of miss a holy war (sue me :) )... For text, I'd recommend mutt, mutt, and perhaps mutt (did I forget to mention mutt?) On the gooey side, Evolution seems to be a step in the right direction, but it's not ready for day-to-day usage, yet. (still in its pre-releases, although functional) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Looking for way to delete all mail sent to a non-existent mailbox
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 09:57:34AM -0800, David Geller wrote:
> We're getting junk mail for a particular, non-existent mailbox. To add
> insult to injury, the sender of the spam, no surprise, isn't legitimate - so
> automated messages to them telling them of the non-existent account,
> themselves, bounce.
>
> What's the best way to simply have *all* mail for a particular mailbox go to
> /dev/null? I created a .qmail-{mailbox} file and simply left it blank -
> hoping that would do it. Is that an appropriate, effective measure?
Nope, blank means default delivery. Put a single # (hash) into that
.qmail-mailbox file.
RC
--
+---
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
| Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459
PGP signature
Re: daemon mode VS tcpserver
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 10:31:57AM +0100, Linux wrote: > Hi all. > > I have a heavly hit mail server with qmail. > It's better to use qmail in DAEMON MODE or using TCPSERVER ? Search the archives, this question has been asked before. But, anyway, qmail-smtpd is NOT daemonizable. It needs a tcp wrapper, whichever it may be. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail with snmp
On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 07:31:37PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote: > > Prashant sent the message to the list, so it would not have been > caught by your RBL filter. Not all implementations of RBL-filtering are based on TCP connections, you know? In my case, all incoming messages go through a filter which looks at headers. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail with snmp
On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 06:11:52PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: > Am Samstag, 2. Dezember 2000 06:33 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > >which anti virtus works best with qmail > > How many seconds do you spent on qmail.org ? ;-)) > The available packages are listed there. Hmmm... I never got the original message, and I've just realized why: $ host -t mx zeenext.com zeenext.com mail is handled (pri=10) by mail.zeenext.com $ host mail.zeenext.com mail.zeenext.com has address 203.197.173.3 $ host 3.173.197.203.relays.mail-abuse.org 3.173.197.203.relays.mail-abuse.org has address 127.0.0.2 Looks like you've got bigger things to worry about than virii. Search for "selective relay" in qmail.org. RC > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > Prashant Desai > > -- > > Henning Brauer | BS Web Services > Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg > www.bsws.de| Germany -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Flaming newbie's makes no sense
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 02:10:33AM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: > Am Freitag, 1. Dezember 2000 00:42 schrieb Malcolm Silberman: > > > Because, that means more people spread the word, more corporations, more > > installs, more cock-up's, more success stories, more work for the > > experts, more input from the field, release 1.04. That's the foundation > > of the open source movement. > > Newbies didn't do their homework, didn't read documentation, without any unix > knowledge and didn't think of who may answer don't make qmail any better. > And also, this isn't about open source. This is about IT, about newbies, and where this bussiness and life of ours are heading to. Even if it was open source... Do you truly believe that whining, documentophobic newbies can contribute anything at all? RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 09:27:57PM +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote: > Thus spake Dave Sill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might > > warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than > > punishment. E.g., instead of: > > This is a question that I have asked numerous times and I never got a > good response for it: > > Why would you want to help rude newbies? You wouldn't. But, unfortunately, someone ends up doing so, leading to a continuous wrong-doing trend. > > Don't get me wrong: helping newbies is essential for the survival of the > knowledge. But if I have the choice, I will not help people who are so > dumb that they will probably get killed the next day because they > thought pissing on overland power lines is a bright idea. > Ease down, Felix. Don't look at it as a matter of dumbness. It's more of an inadequacy issue. Keep reading; > And that includes people who > > a. are too dumb to state their question properly > (this includes bad grammar, bad spelling, bad quoting and obnoxious > signatures) Please... The internet wasn't built for english speakers, nor by english speakers. But, as we all know, english (or english-ish approaches) is a common language for all of us. My own english is far from perfect, and I very often find myself twisting my brain trying to figure out what a supplier or business partner is trying to tell me in a meeting. As long as we're not talking about l33t dud3z, nor native speakers, that shouldn't be a problem. (at least not a major one) > b. are too dumb to state their question in the proper forum That's not dumbness. That's rudeness or inadequacy. By inadequate, I'm talking about those guys who've never seen a unix shell until two days ago, have no clue whatsoever of what C is, expect the docs to _talk_ them step by step into procedures, or, the most common case, expect someone to give them an out-of-the-box solution for free. What frightens me is that more and more of these seem to be in charge of someone's mail, webspace, databases, whatever. They sould never, ever, be allowed to touch a damn root prompt, unless the machine is nowhere near a network. THAT's how people should learn. Unfortunately, a large group of new "sysadmins" are teaching themselves through experience in production environments and, what's worse, they're using either pre-built packages, or scripts someone else gave them (either because they were polite, or because they whined for a week and someone got tired and gave them a solution). This usually leads to a situation where things do work, but the "ladmin" has no clue on "why", "how", and "what to do if it fails". Also, more and more of these ladmins seem to be unaware of the fact that Linux isn't the only non-Windows OS. They don't know what Unix is. They have no idea of how to configure things without the nifty GTK or curses interface; and ultimately, editing source or slightly changing a script is a nightmarish idea. But what truly pisses me off is the fact that they expect a qmail (example) list to solve their problems with bash scripting, kernel options, DNS. And they don't seem to realize this is NOT the proper place to do so, and refuse to read the docs where answers to most issues are clear. But then again, if they have no Unix backgound or knowledge at all, how will a simple answer like "Change the uid of that directory to that of the user running the daemon" help? > c. are not friendly (i.e. demand answer instead of being polite) Oh, well... Why doesn't everyone just ignore those? > d. whine when someone points their mistakes out to them Hey, Felix... They're the Unix Gurus in there. They convinced everyone else NT was no good, and should be replaced. How dare WE tell them they're wrong? > > If he doesn't want to change his ways, then he is welcome to examine the > inside of my spacious killfile. Noone is obligated to help idiots. In > particular, I am not. Noone is. But the base fact is: They should never come this far without basic IT and Unix skills. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Frustrated, please help.
> Your configs look rather fine now. No, it doesn't. mail.wonder.com isn't referred to in locals (or anywhere else, for that matter), and virtualdomains has a completely incorrect content. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Frustrated, please help.
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 11:22:02PM -, Louis Mushandu wrote: > I was using ./Maildir/ but I have now changed to Mailbox in desperation. That has nothing to do with it. > My locals files is populated with mail.wonder.com, Is it? > :: > locals > :: > mail.mongrel.com > mongrel.com Doesn't seem to be. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: How insall qmail relay server in an DMZ
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 08:53:32PM -0700, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Jose AP Celestino on Wed, 22 Nov 2000 01:38:39 GMT: > > > Have you tried rtfm. There's plenty of stuff on this. > > Why don't you RTFM on your MUA so you don't send out duplicate emails > to the mailing list... sheesh. Triplicate. Eeek! Fix that damn MUA! RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Starting qmail: problem with svscan
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 07:13:54PM +, Joao Costa wrote: > > > Does anyone know how to solve this problem? What is svscan suppose > > > to do? How can I get the parameters of svscan (read svscan's > > > instructions)? > > > > There are a set of man pages for daemontools on qmail.org. > > > > svscan takes one parameter, the service directory. > > Should the service directory have any file? My service directory has > none. svscan runs one supervise for each dir present in the services dir. And supervise does need the run script. See http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/supervise.html for instructions RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: SMTP on a port other than 25
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 03:14:43PM -0500, Rob Hines Jr. wrote: [ a lot of irrelevant stuff ] Which part of "not writing 0, writing number of port _and_ smtp" didn't you understand? Let me translate: It sounds like he wrote "tcpserver -v -H -R -whateveroptions 25 smtp $QMAIL/qmail-smtpd" Can you see the error NOW? RC P.S. - Here's the mail snippet once again. Try to locate yourself. > > > without to write in command this '0' writting only nummber of port > > > and 'smtp' > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: SMTP on a port other than 25
That's not the issue. According to the original mail, he wrote "tcpserver 25 smtp" > without to write in command this '0' writting only nummber of port > and 'smtp' That 25 is supposed to be the IP address where tcpserver is supposed to bind itself to. I _know_ you can write whatever you want in the port option, as long as it matches something in /etc/services, or is an integer. But "host" is supposed to be a host, or 0 (for "all interfaces"). 25 shouldn't work. RC On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 12:27:21PM -0500, Rob Hines Jr. wrote: > Just go into /etc/services and make a name alias if you feel more comfortable > with that. tcpserver actually looks up 'smtp' in the services file to find out > the port number. right now, I am using smtp-ghost in my second tcpserver init, > and I set up smtp-ghost in the services file to look at my alternate port. In > any case, tcpserver doesn't care if you put smtp, or 25 in that spot. > > Works just fine for me. > > Rob > > Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: > > > > > > > a propos tcpserver with smtp - on Solaris, where zero '0' before > > > smtp word has been written the program not works. So we uses it > > > without to write in command this '0' writting only nummber of port > > > and 'smtp' > > > > > > > Errr... and it works??? Those args are supposed to be "IP address" and > > "port". 0 stands for "all interfaces", and "smtp" stands for 25. > > If you're writing "25 smtp"... It's NOT supposed to be bound to any > > interface (is there any kind of int in solaris responding as 25?) > > > > RC > > > > -- > > +--- > > | Ricardo Cerqueira > > | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 > > | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica > > | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal > > | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 > > > > > >Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature > > -- > Rob Hines Jr. > System Administrator > > Phone: (317)469-4535 > Fax: (317)469-4508 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > URL: http://www.joboptions.com > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: SMTP on a port other than 25
> > a propos tcpserver with smtp - on Solaris, where zero '0' before > smtp word has been written the program not works. So we uses it > without to write in command this '0' writting only nummber of port > and 'smtp' > Errr... and it works??? Those args are supposed to be "IP address" and "port". 0 stands for "all interfaces", and "smtp" stands for 25. If you're writing "25 smtp"... It's NOT supposed to be bound to any interface (is there any kind of int in solaris responding as 25?) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: AUTOMAILDIRMAKE
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 01:05:26PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: > "suresh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >any knows what is automaildirmake > > No, but but I'm sure if you keep asking about it, someone will. It's a feature of qmail-ldap. I haven't seen it anywhere else. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Help with qmail and ezmlm
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 12:51:43PM -, Pedro Pires wrote: > Hello > > I'm using ezmlm. Good. Then try the list for ezmlm: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I have a list of people in a list. > > I use ezmlm-send to send the message in the following way > > # ezmlm-send ~/list < "mail.file" > > I've checked the queue and the emails of the users that the message is > suposed to go are ok. > > But after the email is sent by qmail the email that apears in the "To:" > label isn't correct. > > It apears like this "pedro.pires?[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and it should apear > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > Anyone have experienced this? > > Thanks > Pedro Pires > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Long Local Delivery Delays
Try disabling host resolution in tcpserver (by adding the -H option). That's what usually stalls smtp deliveries with tcpserver. RC On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 04:39:11PM -0500, Jamin A. Brown wrote: > Hello, > > We have just completed migrating a sendmail installation for roughly 15000 > users to qmail. After doing so, we are experiencing longish delays on the > delivery of incoming messages. > > We currently have qmail-smtpd starting from tcpserver using: > > #!/bin/sh > QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild` > NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild` > exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 \ > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 512 -v -pR -x /usr/local/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \ > -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp \ > /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd -b -r \ > "relays.mail-abuse.org:Open relay problem - see > <http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?%IP%>" \ > -r dialups.mail-abuse.org \ > -r rbl.maps.vix.com \ > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > > And logging using: > > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t s250 > /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd > > > I have increased our conncurrencylocal and concurrencyremote to 50 each. > The qmail-send log we have seems to indicate that we aren't coming close > to this limit: > > @40003a105ba216072edc status: local 1/50 remote 3/50 > @40003a105ba21626288c end msg 695835 > @40003a105ba2196aff04 new msg 695707 > @40003a105ba21a78f464 info msg 695707: bytes 8004 from <> qp 18635 uid > 59 > @40003a105ba21dda6ee4 starting delivery 18024: msg 695707 to remote > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > @40003a105ba21ddd7454 status: local 1/50 remote 4/50 > > > Our architecture is setup as: > > mx0.gwi.net - Incoming server, BDS/OS, Dual PIII 550, 256 MB RAM. This > server writes incoming mail to a NetApp NFS server. Unfortunately also > running qmail-pop3d right now for some of our customers. Will be disabling > this ASAP. > pop0.gwi.net - POP server. (Same hardware). Just running qmail-pop3d and > reading from the NetApp. > > The delay seems to occur from when mx0 accepts the message to when mx0 > writes it to the user's Maildir. My guess would be that the queue is not > being processed fast enough. > > We are NOT yet using the big-todo patch at this time. > > We are seeing delays of up to a couple hours on messages, so any > assistance or pointers in the right direction would be appreciated. > > If you would be so kind as to CC any responses to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (to > get to me directly rather than through the qmail server) it would be > appreciated. > > > ----- > Jamin A. Brown Systems Operations Department > [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Great Works Internet * 207.286.8686 x142 > RSA PGP Key: http://www.gwi.net/~jamin/pgp/jamin.asc > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: qmail xinetd RH7
On Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 08:24:16PM -0200, Roberto Samarone Araujo (RSA) wrote: > > What is better , running qmail from xinetd or like a daemon ? It is valid also to >qmail-pop > qmail-smtpd is not "daemonizable". You have to use a tcpwrapper, whichever it may be. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: open-smtp woes
On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 01:48:55PM -0500, Robin S. Socha wrote: > echo ``$TCPREMOTEIP''':allow,RELAYCLIENT=\"\"" >> $TCPDIR/smtp.filter.newer Open 2 backticks, close with 3 quotes, 2 escaped double-quotes and yet another double-quote? how about: echo "$TCPREMOTEIP:allow,RELAYCLIENT=\"\"" >> $TCPDIR/smtp.filter.newer RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Yahoo delivery failure - short test and proposal
On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 12:34:24AM +1100, Brett Randall wrote: > On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > How about giving them numbers? > > See? :) This is the kind of unexpected response which is good to > gather up before we talk to Yahoo... By the way, I'm not against > Yahoo, I just think their sysadmins need a good kick up the rear and > maybe even a good kick out... Me neither. But whatever is going on in there, I hope they're aware of it. If not... well... We could give them a wake up call... Values like these: bash# egrep "128.11.69.53|128.11.22.91|216.136.129.15|128.11.68.59|216.115.107.17|128.11.22.89|216.136.129.16|216.136.129.17|128.11.69.54|216.136.129.18|128.11.69.55|128.11.22.90" /servers/mail2/logs/qmail/* | egrep "connection_died|temporarily_unavailable" | wc -l 2213 bash# egrep "128.11.69.53|128.11.22.91|216.136.129.15|128.11.68.59|216.115.107.17|128.11.22.89|216.136.129.16|216.136.129.17|128.11.69.54|216.136.129.18|128.11.69.55|128.11.22.90" /servers/mail2/logs/qmail/* | grep "accepted_message" | wc -l 429 are NOT good. This shows a 19.38% delivery success rate. (OK, I probably have multiple failures per message. But still, it's a 5 connections to 1 delivery rate.) How are we supposed to explain this to our customers? "Blame Yahoo!"? RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Yahoo delivery failure - short test and proposal
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 11:28:53PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote: > On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Count me in. I'm seeing the same problem. > > Well, I'm not really after an army of followers, but I would more like > to see people taking some degree of initiative, giving the list > information on what the problem would be, e-mail addresses of people > we can talk to at Yahoo, whether or not this is a good idea, and other > information which I haven't thought of yet :) A petition isn't going > to be anything...we actually need to talk to Yahoo, but I haven't the > foggiest about how to get in contact with the right department > there... How about giving them numbers? bash# /servers/mail2/bin/qmail-qread | grep "remote.*yahoo" | wc -l 873 bash# egrep "128.11.69.53|128.11.22.91|216.136.129.15|128.11.68.59|216.115.107.17|128.11.22.89|216.136.129.16|216.136.129.17|128.11.69.54|216.136.129.18|128.11.69.55|128.11.22.90" /servers/mail2/logs/qmail/* | egrep "connection_died|temporarily_unavailable" | wc -l 2170 I'd say 2170 failed deliveries in 17 hours (the aproximate timespan covered by my logs) is bad enough. 873 messages in queue is not nice, either. And this is one of 7 relays, all of which have this kind of values. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Per user RBL or RSS
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 05:01:21PM -0400, Robert J. Adams wrote: > Hello all, > > Anyone know if it's possible to do per user RBL/RSS spam checks? I.e.. > something out of .qmail maybe? Search for rblchk. It's a cute little perl script which you can use with procmail or maildrop. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: unsubscribe qmail
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 03:39:43PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hmm. Maybe I'm confused. How do people think the envelope sender > value is determined in the first instant? Eg, how does Eudora go from > a mail in a window to "Mail From: " in SMTP? Or how does qmail-inject > for that matter? > qmail-inject uses environment variables for From (not From:). Depending on your MUA, it can use different ones. For example, most text-mode MUAs running in the same machine as qmail-inject (my case) use $USER or $LOGNAME. And the default envelope sender equals "From". For those who do not use qmail-inject directly (Like those using remote SMTP with Eudora, to use your example), the "From" is generated by the MUA. So yes, those cases are "hopeless". "From:" will almost certainly be the base for "From" > The answer is that it's mostly derived from a parse of the various > headers in the original mail when it's injected into the MTA. In > many cases the most likely header that will be used to derive the > envelope sender will be the From: header. So to suggest that the > unparsed From: header is a better place to look for the sender > seems a bit silly to me because in many cases the envelope sender is > simply a parsed version of the From: header. Not really. You can have very odd "From:" lines (with 8bit chars, spaces), but From is (or should always be) a plain old user@domain string. It's easier to parse, and probably less prone to error. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Flushing Queue
On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 08:15:25AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > MaD dUCK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > how does it get these??? i mean, once remote/13/145994 is removed, how can > > qmail know of it's existence? does it keep track in memory then? > > Okay, I guess that you cannot really flush the queue. Here is what I did to > remove all messages and get a working qmail queue: > # svc -d /service/qmail-send /service/qmail-smtp > # cd /var/qmail > # mv queue queue.bad > # cd /usr/local/src/qmail-1.03 > # make setup check > # svc -u /service/qmail-send /service/qmail-smtp That works, but is not necessary. Try using queue-fix from qmail.org. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Flushing Queue
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 03:27:51PM -0400, MaD dUCK wrote: > thus spake Ricardo Cerqueira (on Sat, 21 Oct 2000 08:15:21PM +0100): > > P.S. - I've realized my original message looked like a reply to the > > "rm'ing" part of yours. Sorry about that. I was talking about moving them. > > AFAIK, removing them is safe, unless you have the misfortune of moving > > something which is being processed at that exact moment. > > but since i moved them outside the /var/qmail/queue directory, in the scope of > the qmail dir, it is as if i had removed them. Yes, but what's the purpose of moving them if you don't intend to re-queue them later? :-) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Flushing Queue
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 02:52:52PM -0400, MaD dUCK wrote: > > Sure it will. And, as a bonus, it'll fill your log files of nasty queue > > consistency errors, and possibly mess up your future queueing. > > i haven't noticed that yet. where else does qmail keep queue info other than > in the files??? It doesn't, AFAIK. The filenames themselves match the inode of mess/. And the mtime of info/ is used to measure the queue-lifetime of the message. Moving the files would blow up the queue (or at least mess it up a little) RC P.S. - I've realized my original message looked like a reply to the "rm'ing" part of yours. Sorry about that. I was talking about moving them. AFAIK, removing them is safe, unless you have the misfortune of moving something which is being processed at that exact moment. -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Flushing Queue
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 01:47:27PM -0400, MaD dUCK wrote: > > What the *hell* are you trying to accomplish? > > flush the queue. i must admit though that while my mv command was supposed to > enable backups, it won't work like that since the three files associated with > a message have the same name. but rm'ing all files in the subdirectories given > will flush the queue. Sure it will. And, as a bonus, it'll fill your log files of nasty queue consistency errors, and possibly mess up your future queueing. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Local delivery in 2 SMTP hops
On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 08:19:17PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello there, > > I would like our mail to be firstly delivered > to my organisation's DMZ (through a regular > primary MX record), and then to make it > route to our internal network (private > IP addresses). > > I think a "smtproute" that overrides the > DNS configuration might do it, but I'm > not sure. Yes, that's just what you want. > > Is this the proper way of doing it? I can't think of any other. Just keep in mind you still have to add the domains to the "rcpthosts" file (but not in "locals"). And the inner machine will also need the same "rcpthosts", plus "locals" or "virtualdomains", depending on how you set it up. On the optimization side, you have 2 choices: - Either route all mail to the inner host, and let it handle everything (not a _bad_ idea, but...) - Specify a route each and every domain you want forwarded in "smtproutes". It possibly takes some load off the inner host, and is easier to change if you ever want to split the processing of different domains' mail through different mailservers. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Running Multiple Copies of Qmail on the same server...
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 05:18:30PM -0700, James Stevens wrote: > Can someone point me to a web page that has some explanation of setting up > concurrent running qmails on the same machine and what edits I need to make > to avoid conflicks.. Just compile them using different dirs, and install them into those same different dirs. Also, be careful when launching qmail-smtpd. With tcpserver, the "IP" parameter can NOT be 0 (every interface, which is the most common setting). Each tcpserver must be bound to it's own network interface, (assuming you're always using the same port). RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Mailman -> qmail
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 08:18:09PM -0400, Phil Barnett wrote: > On 18 Sep 2000, at 15:31, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: [snip] > > It didn't make any difference. Which file controls relaying > permissions? > Aha. It looks like you're not allowing relaying from anywhere at all. Take a look at http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#relaying to set up that part of qmail. Hint: It's not in any of the controls files. You'll have to do it using tcp wrappers. RC P.S. That relaying info is in a document named "Life with qmail". Very good reading for qmail newbies. Also, try http://qmail.faqts.com -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Mailman -> qmail
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 10:53:33AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Mailman shows their outbound letter as a bounce, but I can't > >imagine all those users putting a bad email address in. My guess > >is that qmail is refusing to relay for Mailman. > > Why guess? What Do The Logs Say? (tm) > > >Is this a relaying problem? > > No. > Could be, Dave. I had the same problem a few months ago, due to relaying problems. (qmail wasn't relaying to localhost. Don't ask, I never bothered to check what mailman was trying to do, but that solved the problem) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: Mailman -> qmail
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 08:07:25AM -0400, Phil Barnett wrote: > > Well, thanks to some great help from this list, I got the alias thing > straightened out, and I'll be writing up some additional > documentation for the Mailman README.QMAIL document. > > I thought I was out of the woods on this whole thing, since I can go > to my Mailman web page and subscribe, I get the confirmation > letter and I can look at the results via the web site which shows me > that the whole process worked. > > BUT. (oh, yeah, there is always a BUT)... > > People who do not host their mail on my system never recieve the > confirmation letter, and as such can never join the list. > > Mailman shows their outbound letter as a bounce, but I can't > imagine all those users putting a bad email address in. My guess > is that qmail is refusing to relay for Mailman. > > Is this a relaying problem? If so, what do I change in qmail to allow > these mails to go out? > > Are you allowing relay from 127.0.0.1? RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: List activity
On Sat, Sep 16, 2000 at 02:34:31PM -0700, Eric Cox wrote: > > > Mike Hodson wrote: > > > > Hey, im just wondering, is the qmail list activity oddly slow, or is my new email >setup blocking 90% of all incoming messages? > > Without any numbers, how would you expect us to know? Actually, he can find out quite easily. The Return-Path header line contains a number that can be used as a "message counter". It's sequential, so... RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: How can I test this?
On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 10:54:39PM -0400, Phil Barnett wrote: > > I have been trying to get Mailman to work with qmail for a couple of > weeks now and I can't seem to make the final connection. I > researched the archives and I have dutifully read this list for over > 1000 messages. The docs on dot-qmail would probably have been enough for this :-) But that's OK. > > Mailman is able to send messages just fine. My problem is that I > can't seem to reply back to Mailman via qmail. > > qmail understands that I have created a virtual domain, because it > is only complaining that the mailbox doesn't exist. > > As far as I can tell by reading the docs, once the virtual directory is > in place, the mechanisms that qmail uses to redirect mail to other > processes are the .qmail-?? files in the virtual directory. > What to you mean by "virtual directory"? The dot-qmail files are placed in the directory owned by the user you refer to in the "virtualdomains" file, or inside the ~alias directory. Keep reading, I'll give you an example later. > I created the virtual directory (which is alongside a bunch of virtual > directories that are working just fine to deliver regular mail), put the > .qmail files there for qmail to find and redirect mail to a process. > > To the rcpthosts file, I added: > matrixlist.com > > To the virtualdomains file, I added: > matrixlist.com:matrixlist-com > OK, so here you point to a "matrixlist" user, or to a ~alias/.qmail-matrixlist-com- > But, when I send mail to those .qmail- files in the virtual directory, > like .qmail-test-request for example, I get this: > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) > Now, for the examples: Assuming you keep that "virtualdomains" line, you have 2 choices: 1) Set up a bunch of ~alias/.qmail-matrixlist-com- files. In this case, [EMAIL PROTECTED] would look for a file named .qmail-matrixlist-com-test-request in ~alias. 2) Create a "matrixlist" user in the system. Inside that user's home, place the .qmail-com- files. For the previous example, it would be a file named .qmail-com-test-request in ~matrixlist. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: su to alias on RH
On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 04:36:39PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Mate Wierdl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I do not understand this comment at all. Under RH 5.2, after doing > > > su - alias > > > the output of whoami was `alias'. Now it is still root. Why do I > > need a valid shell to be able to do this? > > I don't know if Red Hat is weird, but under most operating systems if you > su to a user, you get that user's shell. If you set the shell to > /bin/true, it will then immediately exit, leaving you back as root again. AFAIK, RH always had the proper behaviour with su (ie, running that user's shell). I still have a couple of live RH 5.2 boxen, and they both respect that. (wether the shell is in /etc/shells or not). RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: domain..
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 03:19:06PM +0200, Melanie Desaive wrote: [snip] > you do this by editing /var/qmail/control/defaulthost or > /var/qmail/control/defaultdomain. These files > contains the default domain suffix. I do not really know > the difference in the meaning of these two files, but it should be > enough to edit one. Perhaps someone knows the difference and can > tell me. man 8 qmail-inject. But, the short version, defaultdomain gets appended to an address with a dotless hostname, and defaulthost gets appended to a hostless address. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 11:10:42AM +0200, wolfgang zeikat wrote: > Also sprach David Dyer-Bennet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04.09.2000: > > >If a spammer sent that message with an envelope recipient of > >[EMAIL PROTECTED], it would be accepted because newmediaone.net is in > >rcpthosts. > > does that mean: the message is accepted *and* the mails to the Cc: header > recipients (which are not in rcpthosts) are *also* delivered? that was the > original question. > > >If the spammer sent a second envelope recipient of [EMAIL PROTECTED], > >and aol.com is NOT in your rcpthosts, he'd get an error on that > >recipient (unless RELAYCLIENT had been set through tcpserver when this > >connection was accepted). > > does a Cc: header create a second envenlope recipient? (so far i thought > it doesnt) It does. And so does Bcc: Each recipient, even those who don't appear anywhere in the header, get their own envelope. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: how to get off the mailing list?
Kris... It has been said before... Look at your headers. Mine have this on them: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ^ which means I am subscribed as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", and will have to unsubscribe using that particular mail address. And I mean use it as the Envelope sender, not just the To: header line. Look at your Return-Path header line, check out which mail address you're subscribed with, and use that one. RC On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 06:14:21AM -0500, Kris Keele wrote: > If you are able to get off the damn thing let me know. I have tried > multiiple times to get off and it has confirmed that I was removed, but > the mails just keep on coming. > > Kris > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: * in /var/qmail/info/9
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 01:03:11PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 10:38:31AM -, John Conover wrote: > > > > What does the '*' mean in ls -alR /var/qmail/info/9: > > > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 root root0 Aug 9 17:26 * > > drwx-- 2 qmails qmail1024 Sep 5 00:42 ./ > > drwx-- 25 qmails qmail1024 Mar 20 21:21 ../ > > > > I was just browsing, and found it. What's it do? > > Trust me, it's not something qmail put there. Especially because it's owned by root:root. qmail doesn't run under those perms. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: ORBS doesn't like me :(
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 05:51:11PM +0200, Johan Almqvist wrote: > On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 04:42:45PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:37:32AM -0400, Andy Meuse wrote: > > > Hmmm. I removed my rcpthosts file. > > Put it back. Without an rcpthosts file, you are an open relay. > An empty rcpthosts != no rcpthosts at all. empty means "i don't take mail for any domain". No files mean "i don't limit any domain". And rcpthosts does not assume me if empty. man 8 qmail-smtpd for more info. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: ORBS doesn't like me :(
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:37:32AM -0400, Andy Meuse wrote: > Hmmm. I removed my rcpthosts file. > There's your answer. You opened you relay to all domains when you did that. RC > > On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:26:55AM -0400, Andy Meuse wrote: > > > I just recieved an email from ORBS branding my mail server > > and open relay I > > > looked in my tcp.smtp and I think I know why. > > > > > > 172.16.3.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > 4.17.165.0.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > 207.244.122.53.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > :allow > > > > > > I would imagine it's that allow on the last line right? > > > > No, that just tells tcpserver whether to accept or reject the > > connection completely. What does /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts say? > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: Shouldn't rcpthosts be empty to ward off spam?
Wrong. qmail looks at the envelope recipient, not at the headers. Besides... Having an empty rcpthosts would block mail allright... Even your own local mail. RC On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 03:57:45PM -0600, Peter Janett wrote: > I apologize of this is in the docs somewhere, but I didn't see it. > > If I understand what rcpthosts does, I would think that this file should be > empty. My understanding is that if the "To:" address contains a domain name > listed in rcpthosts, then it will relay that email. So, a spammer can send > a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and to a bunch of > spam victums in the cc and bcc fields. > > If that's correct, and I'm using POP before SMTP, should I have an empty > rcpthosts file? > > Thanks, > > Peter Janett > > New Media One Web Services > > WEB HOSTING FOR WEB DEVELOPERS > > -> Sun, IRIX, NT, Linux <- > PHP, MySQL, Perl, Cold Fusion, > MS SQL, ASP, SSI, SSL > http://www.newmediaone.net > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (303)828-9882 > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: smtproutes examples ?
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 08:05:43AM +0200, mailing wrote: > Hello, > >Could someone possibly send a few control/smtproutes examples, I haven't been >able to find much info in the docs. > man 8 qmail-remote > Is it possible to forward all mail for adomain.com to mailserver.domain.com using >this ? > Yes, it is. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: Slooooooooowwww attachment upload
It's a MUA problem. Mails with attachments are still normal ascii mails. It completely indifferent to the MTA (unless that MTA looks at the body. Do you have some kind of filter, virus scanner, etc?) RC On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 10:23:36AM -0700, Daniel Ceregatti wrote: > Howdy, > > I've sent this problem to the list once before and never got any responses that >helped, so I'm trying again. > > Whenever I send an email (To my Linux server running qmail-ldap) with an attachment, >no matter how small, it gets to a certain point, and simply hangs. Here's the kicker >though: When I use Linux Netscape as the client, this happens. When I use any Mac >based email client, it's still abnormally slow, but it doesn't hang. Eventually it >goes. I've determined that it's not a network problem, as I can download mail with >attachments with no problems. I can also upload files via scp at a normal 10Mbps >network rate. > > This is the command line used to start the smtp server: > > /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u 401 -g 417 0 smtp >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd > > Anyone have any insights? Thanks in advance. > > -- > > Daniel Ceregatti > > Systems and Technology Manager > Kick Media Corporation > (310)280-5421 > (310)280-5440 Fax > > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: failure notice
Oh, how nice. Is this happenning to anyone else who's posting here? Mr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s mailserver appears to think the recipient of a message is it's To: address, and not the envelope recipient. So it returns mailing list messages to the mailing list. Sigh. Read the headers and enjoy. RC On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 02:50:26PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at muncher.math.uic.edu. > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > ezmlm-send: fatal: this message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line >(#5.4.6) > > --- Below this line is a copy of the message. > > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Received: (qmail 13941 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2000 14:50:26 - > Received: from unknown (HELO lisa.amira.es) (212.95.198.178) > by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 28 Aug 2000 14:50:26 - > Received: (qmail 4054 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2000 14:49:58 - > Received: from unknown (HELO amira.es) (10.1.1.2) > by ns.accede.net with SMTP; 28 Aug 2000 14:49:58 - > Received: from maggie ([10.1.1.2]) > by amira.es (Lotus Domino Version 5.0.2c (Esp.)) > with SMTP id 282816503024:1093 ; > Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:50:30 +0200 > From: Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: (qmail 4029 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2000 14:47:09 - > Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (131.193.178.181) > by ns.accede.net with SMTP; 28 Aug 2000 14:47:09 - > Received: (qmail 4597 invoked by uid 1002); 28 Aug 2000 14:44:29 - > Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm > Precedence: bulk > Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: (qmail 15167 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2000 14:44:28 - > Received: from onyx.ip.pt (HELO smtp.isp.novis.pt) (194.79.69.54) > by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 28 Aug 2000 14:44:28 - > Received: (qmail 9531 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2000 14:43:34 - > Received: from unknown (HELO arachnid.ip.pt) ([194.79.69.53]) (envelope-sender ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) > by onyx.ip.pt (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 28 Aug 2000 14:43:34 - > Received: (qmail 2710 invoked by uid 501); 28 Aug 2000 14:43:36 - > Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:43:36 +0100 > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i > In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from >[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:25:56PM +0100 > Subject: Re: User's data transfer > Mime-Version: 1.0 > X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on NOTES/AMIRA(Version 5.0.2c (Esp.)|8 febrero >del > 2000) at 28/08/2000 16.50.30, > Serialize by Router on NOTES/AMIRA(Version 5.0.2c (Esp.)|8 febrero del 2000) at > 28/08/2000 16.50.31, > Serialize complete at 28/08/2000 16.50.31 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="27640576" > > This is a multipart message in MIME format > > --27640576 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:25:56PM +0100, Daniel Conlon wrote: > > Our hosting service like many others imposes a monthly data= > transfer allowance. The data transfer through http is fairly= > easy to calculate from apache log files. How can I calculate the= > data transfer through both incoming smtp and outgoing pop for= > each of my users? > > SMTP: > > the logs are something like: > > info msg AA: bytes from qp 25392= > uid > 502 > starting delivery 5: msg AA to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Through the delivery number (AA) you can match this kind of= > lines. The > first one tells you the size (), the second one will give you= > the local > user. > > POP3: AFAIK... no luck. > > RC > > > -- > +--- > | Ricardo Cerqueira > | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28= > DE 03 42 > | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede T=E9cnica > | P=E7. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7=BA E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal > | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 > > > --27640576 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7 bit > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="att.0&quo
Re: User's data transfer
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:25:56PM +0100, Daniel Conlon wrote: > Our hosting service like many others imposes a monthly data transfer allowance. The >data transfer through http is fairly easy to calculate from apache log files. How can >I calculate the data transfer through both incoming smtp and outgoing pop for each of >my users? SMTP: the logs are something like: info msg AA: bytes from qp 25392 uid 502 starting delivery 5: msg AA to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Through the delivery number (AA) you can match this kind of lines. The first one tells you the size (), the second one will give you the local user. POP3: AFAIK... no luck. RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: where LDAP server
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 09:11:05AM +0800, David wrote: > Hello,everyone. > > anybody can tell me where to find LDAP server which can > worked with qmail. AFAIK, any LDAP server will do. Also, qmail+LDAP is discussed in another mailing list: send an empty e-mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to join it. And look at http://www.nrg4u.com/ while you're at it. RC > Thanks. > > > David > 08-28-2000 > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: correlating smtpd logs with qmail logs
AFAIK, you can't. smtpd only produces the IP addresses/hostnames, and it's own pid. The IP addresses are passed to qmail-send through environment, I think, but they're not logged. (it wouldn't be that useful for cross-references, anyway) RC On Fri, Aug 25, 2000 at 11:20:49PM -0500, Ben Beuchler wrote: > Anyone know of a reliable way to correlate a particular smtpd log entry > with the message it delivered? On a busy server the time stamps are too > close together to figure it out that way... > > Gracias, > Ben > > -- > Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101 > Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: pop3d security
pop3 is a clear-text protocol. That implies anyone with a sniffer can log the entire pop3 conversation, including passwords. That's also valid for IMAP. Encrypted protocols should always be preferred when talking to (or through) an untrusted network (such as the internet). Unfortunately, that's not always possible. (due to client incompatibility, user stupidity, etc) RC On Fri, Aug 25, 2000 at 01:47:14PM -0400, Rick Glunt wrote: > In the qmail FAQ it metions "Security note: pop3d should only b > used in a secure network...". Doe sthis mean it is not fit for a > server on the Internet? I see it recommended in several places but > never see anthing else abou tit being insecure. > Rick Glunt > IT Manager > Lumax Industries, Inc. -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 010 - Fax: +351 21 011 PGP signature
Re: [Fwd: Changing mail deliver program to MAILDROP]
Read the man page for qmail-start. The first argument it takes is the default delivery mode. You want something like 'qmail-start "|preline maildrop" etc,etc,etc' RC On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 04:04:35PM -0200, Daniel Augusto Fernandes wrote: > > Anyone?? > > > Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > GCSNethttp://www.gcsnet.com.br/ > > Se você não encontra > o sentido das coisas > é porque este não > se encontra, se cria. >Antoine Saint-Exupéry > Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:08:44 -0200 > From: Daniel Augusto Fernandes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Changing mail deliver program to MAILDROP > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) > > > Could you help me on how to change my qmail start scripts to use > maildrop as the deliver program? > > > Daniel Augusto Fernandes (DAF tm) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > GCSNethttp://www.gcsnet.com.br/ > > Se você não encontra > o sentido das coisas > é porque este não > se encontra, se cria. >Antoine Saint-Exupéry > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 PGP signature
Re: Unable to connect to SMTP
There are 2 main reasons: 1 - Not having their users using open relays outside and getting them into trouble 2 - By forning all SMTP trafic to move through their own servers, they can have some numbers on mail trafic to show in director board meetings. RC On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 05:51:07PM -0700, Ihnen, David wrote: > Do you have any idea what the reasoning/legality for that is? > > If my personal mail.com mail transmittals stopped working, I would be pretty > upset at being denied access to a legitimate service! They shouldn't be > able to restrict me to having their mail server process all my e-mail! > > David > > > -----Original Message- > > From: Ricardo Cerqueira [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 5:52 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Unable to connect to SMTP > > > > > > Can that person connect to any other SMTP servers from AT&T? > > Many ISPs block all outgoing SMTP connections except those > > coming from > > their own servers. > > > > RC > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 06:21:15PM -0600, Stephen Bosch wrote: > > > > > > I have just added a new user who uses an AT&T dialup account that is > > > typically assigned an address in the 12.72. range. I have > > added this range > > > to my tcprules file. > > > > > > Below is the exact content of tcprules: > > > > > > 209.115.249.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > 12.72.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > 192.168.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > :allow > > > > > > For some reason, however, this person can't connect - not > > even with telnet > > > to port 25 (it tells her that her connection failed). She can telnet > > > normally, however. > > > > > > What else should I be looking for? /etc/hosts.deny and > > /etc/hosts.allow do > > > not contain any addresses, either. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Stephen > > > > > > > > > > -- > > +--- > > | Ricardo Cerqueira > > | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 > > DB 28 DE 03 42 > > | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica > > | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal > > | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 PGP signature
Re: Unable to connect to SMTP
Can that person connect to any other SMTP servers from AT&T? Many ISPs block all outgoing SMTP connections except those coming from their own servers. RC On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 06:21:15PM -0600, Stephen Bosch wrote: > > I have just added a new user who uses an AT&T dialup account that is > typically assigned an address in the 12.72. range. I have added this range > to my tcprules file. > > Below is the exact content of tcprules: > > 209.115.249.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 12.72.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 192.168.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > :allow > > For some reason, however, this person can't connect - not even with telnet > to port 25 (it tells her that her connection failed). She can telnet > normally, however. > > What else should I be looking for? /etc/hosts.deny and /etc/hosts.allow do > not contain any addresses, either. > > Thanks, > > Stephen > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 PGP signature
Re: why they reject my mail
It seems to be a problem with your MTA. From the headers of your mail: Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 23709 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2000 09:55:19 - Received: from pa34.legnica.ppp.tpnet.pl (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Your host is identifying itself as localhost.localdomain. RC On Sun, Aug 20, 2000 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Alexander Jernejcic wrote: > hi, > some MTA's check the ip of the sending MTA against the name with a reverse lookup. >IMHO you should send your mails via the MTA of > you ISP. just put the following line into ~/qmail/control/smtproutes > :mailserver.your.isp > and qmail will happily send all mails to the mailserver of your isp. this one should >be known worldwide. > > hope that helps > :) alexander > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 10:30 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: why they reject my mail > > > > > > Hi > > Sometimes when I send mail to different people a few messages > > are coming back to me as not sent. The reason is I guess everytime > > the same (although the qmail's messages differ a little bit). > > And these qmail's notes are like these two: > > Connected to xxx.xx.xx.xx but sender was rejected. Remote host said: > > 501 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... Sender domain must exist. > > Connected to xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx but sender was rejected. Remote host said: > > 553 5.4.3 Policy analysis reports DNS error with your source domain. > > I do not understand this. Most of my messages is posted without any > > problems. Always I edit mail in mutt and I use option "edit headers" > > to be able to send e-mails to for example this list. I do not have > > my own domain name because I connect to internet via modem and rather > > seldom. So how is it possible that some hosts know my real FQDN > > (although I edit headers of my all messages) and why they reject > > my e-mails? And others do not do it - why? And maybe some of you > > know what can I do to fix this problem with domain name. > > Thank you for help, > > qba > > > > > -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 PGP signature
Re: obtaining TCPREMOTEIP during delivery
Have you tried rblsmtpd? It works as a filter between tcpserver and qmail-smtpd, and checks against blacklists on the TCP/IP connection, not the mail itself. RC On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 09:18:06PM -0500, Ben Beuchler wrote: > It appears that $TCPREMOTEIP is only available to qmail-smtpd. It is no > longer in the environment during final message delivery. I would like > to be able to use rblcheck and maildrop to allow opt-in > ORBS/RBL/DUL/RSS/etc. and would prefer to obtain the necessary info > directly from qmail rather than trying to parse the correct IP out of > the message header. > > Any thoughts? > > Ben > > -- > Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101 > Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 PGP signature
Re: WEIRD BEHAVIOR WITH MY QMAILd!!
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 02:29:20AM +0100, Artur D'assumpção wrote: [snipped a bunch of badly indented lines] > If I send , LOCALY, a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or even >[EMAIL PROTECTED], it will > work with no problems!! > In the other way, if ill do the same thing remotly only >[EMAIL PROTECTED] will work!! Everything > else , [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] will give >this error. > > >194.210.xx.xx_does_not_like_recipient./Remote_host_said:_553_sorry,_that_domain_isn't_in_my > > _list_of_allowed_rcpthosts_(#5.7.1)/Giving_up_on_194.210.xx.xx./ > OK, that's common. Are you sure [EMAIL PROTECTED] won't work? It should. vhost should fail, but galileu _should_ work. It IS in the rcpthosts file. And, because it's in control/locals, it should be taken as a local address. > And I have this, > > [root@sarrazola control]# cat defaultdomain > example.com > [root@sarrazola control]# cat locals > localhost > galileu.example.com > example.com > galileu > [root@sarrazola control]# cat me > galileu.example.com > [root@sarrazola control]# cat rcpthosts > localhost > galileu > galileu.example.com > example.com > [root@sarrazola control]# > > > Has you can see I can't resolve the problem... And I dont >understand it... RTFM would be nice. man 5 qmail-control, in particular, is very useful to find out what each and every one of this file is supposed to do. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: local-test sends to internet
Urgh... an old lesson I should have learned... Don't try to solve problems when sleepy. Sorry. Using defaultdomain instead of defaulthost will solve the local delivery problem, but will mess up with the "masquerading" of outgoing mails. I can't think of anything that'll get both things functional. Any clues, anyone? RC On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 01:01:02AM +0100, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 06:55:13PM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > > > Try this from the qmail source directory: > > > > # ./config-fast satellite.local.lan > > > > and see if that fixes it. > > > > It won't. I've just realized what's going on... it's his "defaulthost". It gets >appended to any address without a domain by qmail-inject. Including the one he's >testing with. Since his default "domainless" addresses match a remote domain, it'll >deliver remotely. > On the other hand... "defaultdomain" isn't appended to "domainless" addresses, just >to dotless hosts. So... Harry, try renaming your defaulthost file to "defaultdomain". >That should do it. > > RC > > > Vince. > > > > > > On 26 Jul 2000, Harry Putnam wrote: > > > > > Harry Putnam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > [New user alert] > > > > > > > machine) which is connected via DSL to local ISP. My main internet > > > > mailbox is with the commercial news service newsguy.com. > > > > > > > > The laptops name is satellite.local.lan. At the end of the qmail > > > > build a message was displayed: > > > > > > > > Your hostname is satellite.local.lan. > > > > hard error > > > > Sorry, I couldn't find your host's canonical name in DNS. > > > > You will have to set up control/me yourself. > > > > > > > > So `/var/qmail/control/me' says: satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > > > > > Past experience indicates that if I want my From address to reflect > > > > the newsguy.com address, I need to Masquerade that domain > > > > (newsguy.com). > > > > > > > > Qmail FAQ indicates that is done by placing a `default' file in > > > > /var/qmail/control/default containing: > > > > newsguy.com > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > My problem: > > > > Going through the various tests I find the local-local test doesn't > > > > insert a message in my inbox ~/Mailbox ( a symlink to /var/mail/$USER) > > > > directly as expected but instead sends the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > That is: > > > > `echo to: reader | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject' > > > > > > > > Does not insert a message directly to ~/Mailbox but instead sends it > > > > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > So if the DSL link isn't up then local delivery fails. > > > > What do I need to do to correct this? > > > > > > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > > qmail-local (local delivery in general) trusts control/locals as a > > > > list of local domains. > > > > > > > > "echo satellite.local.lan >> control/locals" should do the trick. > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > Harry Putnam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 01:44:46PM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote: > > > > > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > cat /var/qmail/control/defaulthost: > > > > > newsguy.com > > > > > > > > > > cat /var/qmail/contol/me: > > > > > satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > > > cat /var/qmail/control/locals > > > > > satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > > > When I call (as root) `echo to: reader | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > > > > I see: > > > > > > > > > >209.155.56.71_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_NAA24636_Message_accepted_for_delivery/ > > > > > Jul 25 13:36:05 satellite qmail: 964557365.160189 status: local > > > > > 0/10 remote 0/20 Still sending to remote host. > > > > > > >
Re: local-test sends to internet
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 06:55:13PM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > Try this from the qmail source directory: > > # ./config-fast satellite.local.lan > > and see if that fixes it. > It won't. I've just realized what's going on... it's his "defaulthost". It gets appended to any address without a domain by qmail-inject. Including the one he's testing with. Since his default "domainless" addresses match a remote domain, it'll deliver remotely. On the other hand... "defaultdomain" isn't appended to "domainless" addresses, just to dotless hosts. So... Harry, try renaming your defaulthost file to "defaultdomain". That should do it. RC > Vince. > > > On 26 Jul 2000, Harry Putnam wrote: > > > Harry Putnam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > [New user alert] > > > > > machine) which is connected via DSL to local ISP. My main internet > > > mailbox is with the commercial news service newsguy.com. > > > > > > The laptops name is satellite.local.lan. At the end of the qmail > > > build a message was displayed: > > > > > > Your hostname is satellite.local.lan. > > > hard error > > > Sorry, I couldn't find your host's canonical name in DNS. > > > You will have to set up control/me yourself. > > > > > > So `/var/qmail/control/me' says: satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > > Past experience indicates that if I want my From address to reflect > > > the newsguy.com address, I need to Masquerade that domain > > > (newsguy.com). > > > > > > Qmail FAQ indicates that is done by placing a `default' file in > > > /var/qmail/control/default containing: > > > newsguy.com > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > My problem: > > > Going through the various tests I find the local-local test doesn't > > > insert a message in my inbox ~/Mailbox ( a symlink to /var/mail/$USER) > > > directly as expected but instead sends the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > That is: > > > `echo to: reader | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject' > > > > > > Does not insert a message directly to ~/Mailbox but instead sends it > > > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > So if the DSL link isn't up then local delivery fails. > > > What do I need to do to correct this? > > > > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > qmail-local (local delivery in general) trusts control/locals as a > > > list of local domains. > > > > > > "echo satellite.local.lan >> control/locals" should do the trick. > > > > [...] > > > > Harry Putnam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 01:44:46PM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote: > > > > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > cat /var/qmail/control/defaulthost: > > > > newsguy.com > > > > > > > > cat /var/qmail/contol/me: > > > > satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > cat /var/qmail/control/locals > > > > satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > When I call (as root) `echo to: reader | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > > > > I see: > > > > > > > >209.155.56.71_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_NAA24636_Message_accepted_for_delivery/ > > > > Jul 25 13:36:05 satellite qmail: 964557365.160189 status: local > > > > 0/10 remote 0/20 Still sending to remote host. > > > > > > > > As I said... locals is trusted for local domains. If you're sending > > > to "newsguy.com" and that is a local domain, put it into > > > control/locals. > > > > > > Maybe I'm missing something here. I tried to make it as clear as I > > could as to the local setup. Reiterated here for clarity: > > > > Local machine LAPTOP (satellite.local.lan)(on home network) > > Connected to desktop by ethernet and IP masquerade access to > > internet. > > > > Local machine DESKTOP (reader.local.lan) (on home network) > > connected by ethernet to LAPTOP. Connected by ethernet-DSL on a separate > > NIC to ISP provider (networkone.net) (NOT on local network) > > > > Main mailbox is on the COMMERCIAL provider newsguy.com (NOT on local network) > > > > Running the
Re: local-test sends to internet
On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 01:44:46PM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote: > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 05:10:13AM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote: > > > > > > [New user alert] > > > Running FreeBSD 4.0 > > > Just installed qmail-1.03 from the FreeBSD ports collection. > > > > > > My setup is a home user machine, laptop running FreeBSD that accesses > > > the internet by IP masquerade of desktop machine (also home user > > > machine) which is connected via DSL to local ISP. My main internet > > > mailbox is with the commercial news service newsguy.com. > > > > > > The laptops name is satellite.local.lan. At the end of the qmail > > > build a message was displayed: > > > > > > Your hostname is satellite.local.lan. > > > hard error > > > Sorry, I couldn't find your host's canonical name in DNS. > > > You will have to set up control/me yourself. > > > > > > So `/var/qmail/control/me' says: satellite.local.lan > > > > > > > > > Past experience indicates that if I want my From address to reflect > > > the newsguy.com address, I need to Masquerade that domain > > > (newsguy.com). > > > > > > Qmail FAQ indicates that is done by placing a `default' file in > > > /var/qmail/control/default containing: > > > newsguy.com > > > > > > This works for sending mail via the internet and my `From' address > > > comes out right. > > > > > > Currently the only files in /var/qmail/control are the two mentioned > > > above: `default' and `me' > > > > > > My problem: > > > Going through the various tests I find the local-local test doesn't > > > insert a message in my inbox ~/Mailbox ( a symlink to /var/mail/$USER) > > > directly as expected but instead sends the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > qmail-local (local delivery in general) trusts control/locals as a list of local >domains. > > > > "echo satellite.local.lan >> control/locals" should do the trick. > > Still not working here. > > cat /var/qmail/control/defaulthost: > newsguy.com > > cat /var/qmail/contol/me: > satellite.local.lan > > cat /var/qmail/control/locals > satellite.local.lan > > When I call (as root) `echo to: reader | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject > I see: > Jul 25 13:35:58 satellite qmail: 964557358.900609 new msg 66 > Jul 25 13:35:58 satellite qmail: 964557358.902731 info msg 66: bytes > 207 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 471 uid 0 > Jul 25 13:35:58 satellite qmail: 964557358.911375 starting delivery 3: > msg 66 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Jul 25 13:35:58 satellite qmail: 964557358.912673 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20 > Jul 25 13:36:05 satellite qmail: 964557365.151312 delivery 3: success: > >209.155.56.71_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_NAA24636_Message_accepted_for_delivery/ > Jul 25 13:36:05 satellite qmail: 964557365.160189 status: local 0/10 > remote 0/20 > > Still sending to remote host. As I said... locals is trusted for local domains. If you're sending to "newsguy.com" and that is a local domain, put it into control/locals. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: local-test sends to internet
On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 05:10:13AM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote: > > [New user alert] > Running FreeBSD 4.0 > Just installed qmail-1.03 from the FreeBSD ports collection. > > My setup is a home user machine, laptop running FreeBSD that accesses > the internet by IP masquerade of desktop machine (also home user > machine) which is connected via DSL to local ISP. My main internet > mailbox is with the commercial news service newsguy.com. > > The laptops name is satellite.local.lan. At the end of the qmail > build a message was displayed: > > Your hostname is satellite.local.lan. > hard error > Sorry, I couldn't find your host's canonical name in DNS. > You will have to set up control/me yourself. > > So `/var/qmail/control/me' says: satellite.local.lan > > > Past experience indicates that if I want my From address to reflect > the newsguy.com address, I need to Masquerade that domain > (newsguy.com). > > Qmail FAQ indicates that is done by placing a `default' file in > /var/qmail/control/default containing: > newsguy.com > > This works for sending mail via the internet and my `From' address > comes out right. > > Currently the only files in /var/qmail/control are the two mentioned > above: `default' and `me' > > My problem: > Going through the various tests I find the local-local test doesn't > insert a message in my inbox ~/Mailbox ( a symlink to /var/mail/$USER) > directly as expected but instead sends the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] qmail-local (local delivery in general) trusts control/locals as a list of local domains. "echo satellite.local.lan >> control/locals" should do the trick. > > That is: > `echo to: reader | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject' > > Does not insert a message directly to ~/Mailbox but instead sends it > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > So if the DSL link isn't up then local delivery fails. > What do I need to do to correct this? -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 04:45:31AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 12:12:32PM +0100, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: > > >> and now, it refuses the query :-) > > > I hate replying to myself, but it still works. Must have been a > > momentary failure. > > I've mailed them and made the same arguments that I was making here. I > still find the ORBS approach a lot more blatant about helping spammers, > given that they offer a neat file download (most spammers have no clue as > to how to do a zone transfer), but I don't think either of them should be > offering the data in that form. > Agreed... I also mailed them just before I sent my previous mail to this list. Most spammers may be clueless, but not all. And those lists should be kept "hidden", by any means possible. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 12:12:32PM +0100, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote: > > and now, it refuses the query :-) > I hate replying to myself, but it still works. Must have been a momentary failure. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 10:54:38PM +1200, Chris, the Young One wrote: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 03:47:03AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > ! Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ! > Wrong. You can perform zone transfers on MAPS' nameservers :-) That'll > ! > give you the entire list. > ! > ! Without signing the document? > > Yes. DJB has posted on [EMAIL PROTECTED] a side-channel means of > getting it, by exploiting BIND features (which don't include AXFR, > despite Ricardo's use of the words ``zone transfers''). > Chris... It's been blocked somewhere since I wrote that mail: then --- $ dig @NS-EXT.VIX.COM axfr relays.mail-abuse.org ; <<>> DiG 8.2 <<>> @NS-EXT.VIX.COM axfr relays.mail-abuse.org ; (1 server found) $ORIGIN relays.mail-abuse.org. @ 1D IN SOA @ iverson.mail-abuse.org. ( 964432803 ; serial 10M ; refresh 5M ; retry 1W ; expiry 30M ) ; minimum [etc...] XX.88.XXX.130 5M IN A 127.0.0.2 5M IN TXT "Open relay problem - see http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?130.XXX.88.XX>" XXX.240.XXX.130 5M IN A 127.0.0.2 5M IN TXT "Open relay problem - see http://www.mail-abuse.org/cgi-bin/nph-rss?130.XXX.240.XXX>" [etc, etc, etc...] --- (The XXX were placed by me) and now, it refuses the query :-) RC PS: I guess the mail I was writing to them isn't necessary anymore :) -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 03:47:03AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ricardo Cerqueira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Wrong. You can perform zone transfers on MAPS' nameservers :-) That'll > > give you the entire list. > > Without signing the document? > > That sounds like a bug, since they say on the web page that they didn't > intend to allow that without someone signing. Have you mentioned that to > them? > > (More to the point, though, can you get the RSS? That would be closer to > what ORBS is doing; getting the RBL gives you a bunch of networks and a > bunch of sites that aren't open relays and isn't nearly as directly > useful.) > I can get the RSS, but can't get the RBL. :-) About warning them... not yet. I just found out yesterday. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
> > You cannot do more than check a single IP address and get a yes or no > response without having a signed agreement with the RBL team. At the > moment, I don't believe they even allow you to download their whole list > at all since they're reworking the agreement. Wrong. You can perform zone transfers on MAPS' nameservers :-) That'll give you the entire list. Appearantly, they never read DJB's docs on DNS. ;-) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: qmail: cannot mail to root
On Sun, Jul 23, 2000 at 12:21:52AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm probably not the first one to stumble over this 'problem'. I've > recently installed Q-Mail (yesterday), and found 1 problem rather 'annoying'. I It's qmail :-) not Q-Mail, nor Qmail. > can't send any mail to root. Anyone else works fine, but not root. The qmail > daemon tells me (in /var/log/messages) > You can't do it now, and you probably never will while using qmail. It refuses to deliver to root. That's mentioned in the documentation, somewhere. Set up a .qmail-root in ~alias, and deliver it to some other user. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: Can qmail-pop3d run without the qmail smtp server?
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 03:56:46PM -0700, Stephen Bolinger wrote: > Is is possible to run the qmail-popup and qmail-pop3d applications without the > qmail smtp server? Can the pop server be run as a daemon rather than from > inetd or tcpserver? Yes, and no. But... Keep in mind qmail-pop3d only works with maildirs. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: qmail: 964126783.245290 delivery 15092: failure: Sorry,_no_mailbo x_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 09:53:38AM +1000, Baden Hughes wrote: > > I've looked elsewhere, there's no info on it in the FAQ: > > - moved a user home directory from one partition to another, ensuring > symlinks are updated etc > - confirm user still exists on system > - confirm permissions are still set appropriately for all directories > - persistent error message : qmail: 964126783.245290 delivery 15092: > failure: Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1) > > Has qmail lost it's list of user homedirs ? How do I put a still existing > user back into qmail's list of known recipients. Have you tried changing the home in the passwd file? :) (just a thought) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: qmail died again... 3x in 3 weeks
> > Have you thought about migrating to the latest version of > daemontools and it's startup idiom? More importantly, > using cyclog? That would be kind of difficult with the _latest_ version. :) Try multilog :) RC -- +------- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166700 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: urgent help required : qmail-send/qmail-lspawn (fwd)
On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 07:50:41AM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >thanks got the point > > but the thing is that , i am not at all using maildirmake to create > Maildir for every user , instead i have specified /Maildir/ in > /var/qmail/control/defaultdelievery file and also in /var/qmail/rc script > script, so when the user is getting his first mail ,"Maildir" gets > created automatically what i mean by automatically is i didt have to create > Maildir for every users with maildirmake Same thing. Once it's created, don't touch it's perms. > > so please explain in a bit more detail what could be the problems > The qmail-popup is running under the wrong permissions. Run it under UID 0. (root) RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166730/00 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: urgent help required : qmail-send/qmail-lspawn (fwd)
On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 07:18:29AM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > the other problem with pop3d is if i will change default 644 file > permissions for mail files in /HOME/Maildir/new/mailfiles to chmod 755 > then pop3d will able to download mails from mail server but unable to > delete those mails once it gets downloaded from users Maildir, > > so please help me , what should be the default file permissions for > 1> /home > 2> /home/Maildir > 3> /home/Maildir/new > 4> /home/Maildir/tmp > 5> /home/Maildir/cur > 700 would be just fine. But stick with the perms given by maildirmake. Instead of messing with those, run qmail-popup under root permissions. You can NOT give read/write permissions to anyone but the owner. If you do, qmail will refuse to deliver. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166730/00 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
Re: tcprules, rcpthost, ip address problem
On Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 05:00:11PM +0200, Giuliano Cocchi wrote: > Yes, i receive mail from outside for my local and virtual domain, > and only the listed networks can use my server to send mail to outside. Something's wrong then... That final :deny rule should reject any outside TCP connection to your port 25. Which means no mail. The last rule should be :allow (or nothing at all, which implies :allow) RC > > On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, you wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 04:36:22PM +0200, Giuliano Cocchi wrote: > > > Intruducing > > > 192.168.0.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > (and each other network managed by your server) > > > :deny > > > > Are you sure? It shouldn't! Are you getting any mail from the outside at all? > > > > RC > > > > > it's works correctly !! > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, ertan payci wrote: > > > > Im afraid, i had a wrong view of the system. > > > > Well i must admit that my idea was not very accurate. It was a very easy > > > > way to > > > > make sure that it (somehow) works. But Adam McKenna ist absolutely > > > > right. > > > > Actually it ist not the right way. > > > > > > > > So i reproduced your configuration but had no problems. > > > > If your problem still exists, i can send you pieces of my local > > > > configuration files. > > > > > > > > Regards. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Giuliano Cocchi wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Yes, deleting rcphosts the relay works correcly. But this pose the problem to > > > > > deny the relay to unwanted people. > > > > > Through the tcp.smtpd i can really manage the relay? > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Jul 2000, ertan payci wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me see if i got it right: you have users using your mailbox as > > > > > > mailhost,and want > > > > > > them to be able to use your mailhost as relay. Right ? > > > > > > IMHO you should just delete rcpthosts and manage your relaying stuff > > > > > > through > > > > > > your tcp.smtp.cdb stuff. Your tcp.smtp looks correct, so give it a > > > > > > trial. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > Ertan > > > > > > > > > > > > Barry Dwyer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've got qmail running properly on a system with a DMZ-firewall setup. > > > > > > > All the local clients are behind the firewall, addressed as 192.168.0.n. > > > > > > > The firewall (a debian box) and the mail server are connected to our > > > > > > > ADSL router and both have class-C addresses. The clients all have hosts > > > > > > > files referencing the mail server. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My tcp.smtp file has proper settings to allow the local clients to work > > > > > > > as RELAYCLIENTS: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > > > > > 192.168.0.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" > > > > > > > :allow > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (I've recompiled it just to be sure and, yes, the reference in the qmail > > > > > > > startup script points to the proper file '-x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb') > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I create a rcpthosts file with just the local domain in it (that's > > > > > > > all I want), then every local client that tries to send mail out to the > > > > > > > 'net gets a qmail error message saying the destination domain is not in > > > > > > > the list of receipt hosts (or something to that effect). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is the problem that qmail, running on a mail server, with it's class-C > > > > > > > address, doesn't like the "192" block addresses in tcp.smtp? I've set up > > > > > > > qmail servers before as multihomed systems with a class-C card *and* and > > > > > > > internal one. Must I do that here? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > Barry Dwyer > > > > -- > > +--- > > | Ricardo Cerqueira > > | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 > > | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica > > | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal > > | Tel: +351 21 3166730/00 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701 -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 21 3166730/00 (24h/dia) - Fax: +351 21 3166701
