Re: Problems while downloading E-Mails with Outlook-Express
On Fri, Sep 10, 1999 at 09:43:29AM +0300, Anand Buddhdev wrote: > . > . > . > . > . > some text > This is a known and confirmed bug in various versions of outlook. To make things worse, the bug only bites if the last packet contains just dots. To make a sure way to cause trouble for LookOut ehr.. Outlook users, end your mail with 1501 single dots on single lines, as above. Solution? MS more or less refuses to acknowledge this bug. I would advise users to dump Outlook and use something with fewer bugs made by a company that reacts to bugreports. :) -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Patches revisited
On Fri, Sep 10, 1999 at 12:33:28PM -0700, Lyndon Griffin wrote: > From the presentation of information perspective, the site is not all that > good. > imagine that you and Dan Bernstein and countless others want it to be > an even more powerful force. One simple question. Have you *seen*, as in 'with your own eyes', the pages Dan Bernstein has made? It all boils down to the question of form versus function. *Anything* about qmail chooses function. The tiniest detail like your SMTP-greeting has a well chosen function. (Do NOT tell who you are and what version. It might give people too much info..) A fancy box, nice manual and slick webpages will not add *function*, just form. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Problems while downloading E-Mails with Outlook-Express
On Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 07:38:12PM +0200, Cyril Bitterich wrote: > weiss, was gemeint ist, aber keiner kann's so richtig griffig > formulieren= > .. > Vielleicht sollte ich's mal mit "learning by doing" versuchen??? > > I would like to know why Outlook could take this for a problem. Might it > be that the Problem derives form two IP-Pakets that divided the message > in one ending with a dot and one starting with a dot? The exact description of the problem is: when one packet ends with a dot, and the next fragment starts with a dot, outlook stops reading input as mail, and returns to command mode. The next word isn't part of normal popserver/popclient communications, and outlook aborts with an error. > The curious thing with the whole thing is that the above text is in > message nr. 29 and not nr 30 as you could think from the error message. It (incorrectly) assumes message 29 is done, and starts waiting for message 30, when it thinks an error occurred. > And it seems that this Problem does not occur when using an ethernet > connection but does when using a dial-up line. You have differente MTU's for dial-in and ethernet (576 and 1500) > I know that this is not an outlook-probs list. But maybe you can help me > in some way. There are no solutions. You can forcefeed all incoming mail through a filter which removes double dots. That will destroy some attachments. You can tell people to use another mailer (all outlook express versions suffer from this problem). You can't download the source and fix it yourself. If people insist on using outlook they will have no choice but to accept this kind of thing happening once in a while. You can sue MICROS~1. I'm sorry if this sounds final, but you, from your side, cannot work around a bug which makes your clients mailprogram stop listening. About the only workaround is for to forward the message to the client's account using pine, mutt or the like, and hope the extra headers will shift the double dot away from the boundary of two packets. But that's a manual workaround. If you have 17000 clients (like I do) it's a lot of extra work. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 09:25:26AM +1200, Jason Haar wrote: > - but there's NOTHING to do Calendars. That just hasn't come up. There's an open specification for a calendar file format, vCal, which is used by Netscape^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HIplanet for their calendar-thingy. For *nix-clients there's iCal, gnomecal and korganizer, and probably more. All that is needed is for somebody to implement some protocol to share 'open', common calenders, and a secure way to store private calenders. I think the authors of the above three will pick up on this in *no* time. I've been thinking about this for a couple of days. Perhaps I will cook up a draft vcal:// spec, and make it a RFC, if that hasn't been done allready. You can simulate something like it with a cronjob, a shared file and some scripting magic. Have a look at above three and their docs. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Outlook Groupware Functions
On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 02:54:58AM +0200, Ruben van der Leij wrote: > vcal:// spec, and make it a RFC, if that hasn't been done allready. Which it turns out to be. -[ICAL] specifies a core specification of objects, data types, properties and property parameters; -[ITIP] specifies an interoperability protocol for scheduling between different implementations; -[IMIP] specifies a messaging-based protocol binding for [ITIP]. Searching on URL below will point you to the right drafts. http://search.ietf.org:80/search/cgi-bin/BrokerQuery.pl.cgi?broker=internet-drafts&query=calendar&caseflag=on&wordflag=off&errorflag=0&maxlineflag=50&maxresultflag=1000&descflag=on&sort=by-NML&verbose=on&maxobjflag=25 Netscape is working towards these standards, they say. M$ will probably ignore them 'till they cannot ignore the standard without losing many customers. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: Main server = qmail, destination = ms exchange
On Sun, Sep 19, 1999 at 07:43:29PM +0200, Olivier M. wrote: > Sending the mail outside isn't a problem (relaying for an IP class). > But how can I tell the qmail server that the NT box is currently > online and waiting for an smtp feed ? I guess I need a kind of trigger > that will start a maildirsmtp command. Is it the right way ? You have a choice of two mechanisms. The first is the ETRN-command. This is only supported on Exchange 5.5 SP1 and later. For older servers you can use a custom trigger, but I'm uncertain about how and what. Start with searching support.microsoft.com for 'Exchange ETRN'. This will point you to the right documents for the Exchange-side of the story.. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: http://pobox.com/~djb/ezmlm.html
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 08:55:46AM +0600, Ilya L. Shadrin wrote: > I _constantly_ got "Network error: connection reset by peer" when I trying > to get [ruben@pc-ruben ~]$ wget http://pobox.com/~djb/ --08:13:36-- http://pobox.com:80/%7Edjb/ => ndex.html.2' Connecting to pobox.com:80... connected! HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 302 Moved Temporarily Location: ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/ [following] --08:13:36-- ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu:21/www/ => .listing' Connecting to koobera.math.uic.edu:21... connected! Logging in as anonymous ... Logged in! ==> TYPE I ... done. ==> CWD www ... done. ==> PORT ... done.==> LIST ... done. 0K -> 08:13:39 (7.57 KB/s) - .listing' saved [4972] It looks like everything works fine. Do you have a ftp-client handy? Try that. If that still gives problems, try passive mode ftp. See the manual from your ftp-client for instructions. Note that MICROS~1's ftp.exe is braindead for not being able to do passive mode. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: ETRN
On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 12:15:03PM +0200, Dimitri SZAJMAN wrote: > that with commands like 'tr', 'cut', 'sed' and so on. But I am looking for > the real ETRN as described in the RFC. Not without names that resolve. You say ETRN myhostname, but the server thinks you want to spool waiting mail for myhostname. It looks up myhostname's IP, and starts delivering. If you have a dynamic IP, that won't work because there's no way to let the mailserver's DNS know your IP without the usual hours to days delay of DNS updates. ETRN is for fixed IP's. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: isocor the fastest?
On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 05:32:20PM -0400, Victor Tavares wrote: > Anything we can learn for future versions of qmail? Yup. Start saving for multiple 655Mbit lines and a couple of 1 GHZ Athlon's. Apart from that, there's nothing special about being the fastest. Being fastest *on a given hardware-platform* is the challenge, and qmail does a fine job. And being secure is a nice feature too. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: When will qmail back off to the next MX?
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 11:09:08PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote: > Because it's reasonable to expect that other MX records will work for > 1+2, but not for 3. If the lowest priority MX record is screwed up, > why aren't the others as well? If one MX has a screwed up binary, it is likely that other MX's have a corrupted binary too? I fail to see the reasoning behind that. By the way, the *lowest* prefence is used first. If the host is down, the higher MX's are tried. -- Ruben -- Eat more memory!
Re: "info" mailing list/responder with attachments?
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 07:11:21PM +0100, Paul A. Cheshire wrote: > Is this possible with qmail and/or ezmlm? [send files on demand] Nope. And neither should it be. The way to go is procmail or another MDA. On the procmailex-manpage there's a working example which you can cut and paste and adapt to your own needs. -- Ruben Vulcans worship peace above all. -- McCoy, "Return to Tomorrow", stardate 4768.3
