like this attribute stores password to
Courier.
Complementing the info Gordon just sent. Having two different attributes
with passwords don't have to be a big problem. You just have to manage
to update both attributes at the same time. Not optimal but feasible.
Rodrigo S
nding to half the addresses. Is this
correct?
Thanks for your help and attention,
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for free - -and be ente
Trev wrote:
Rodrigo Severo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A client (Courier in this case) SHOULD treat a 552 error after a RCPT TO
command as 452. But the text says SHOULD and not MUST.
I think it would be desirable for Courier to implement the RFC's
suggestion, and trea
Trev wrote:
Rodrigo Severo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm getting a
[552]
error on the 21st recipient and beyond, not a 4xx.
"552 after RCPT TO" is a special case: it is actually a 4yz temporary
error response, even though it starts with a 5! (It wa
Trev wrote:
Rodrigo Severo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem I'm trying to solve is that one domain to which I got to
send several messages recently changed their settings and now have an
upper limit of 20 RCPTs per message.
I don't think you should need to
Trev wrote:
Is this not what you are experiencing?
Just to clarify, I am getting:
552 elnbsbsrv44: your message counts in one session of 59 exceeds maximum
setting 20
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better
nged their settings and now have an
upper limit of 20 RCPTs per message. But only this domain has it so I
don't want to change this setting to 20 globally in courier.
Thanks for your attention,
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is Sponsore
to automatically identify problematic directories but some
manual intervention might do the trick. Any directory besides first
level could trigger your intervention for example.
And obviously don't forget to post your script and results.
I wish you good luck, as you probably will nee
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
Well, there is obviously a third and much more concrete option: the
one Sam effectively provided in Courier 20050626. My first impression
after a quick look at it is that this solution is uneffective but I
can't elaborate more on it now as I need more time to b
Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
b) try to detect the specific situation when this problem occurs with
simple non-obstrusive code and use a more convoluted strategy to choose
MXs only then;
That apparently implies saving host status information.
Storing host status only
Scott Morizot wrote:
On 24 Jun 2005 at 12:48, Rodrigo Severo wrote:
I agree completely. It isn't bind randomness strategy per si that
creates the distortion. Nor is Courier's MX choosing strategy either.
It's the *interaction* of bind randomness strategy and Courier MX
ch
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
To use the example you provided later:
Let's see this example:
10 brsmtp02.br.abnamro.com
10 brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com
15 naxpf001.abnamro.com
15 naxpf002.abnamro.com
15 naxpf003.abnamro.com
15 naxpf011.abnamro.com
15 naxpf012.abnamro.c
Randall Shaw wrote:
My question is... Should I be alarmed?
Hard to say.
Is esmtpd doing something bad that
causes all these?
I don't think so.
Is it because esmtpd denies them relay, but they still
spew forth data and esmtpd goes "WTF?!"...
I bet so. I have a lot of these situations h
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
Let's see this example:
10 brsmtp02.br.abnamro.com
10 brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com
15 naxpf001.abnamro.com
15 naxpf002.abnamro.com
15 naxpf003.abnamro.com
15 naxpf011.abnamro.com
15 naxpf012.abnamro.com
15 naxpf013.abnamro.com
30 plum03ap.abnamr
Scott Morizot wrote:
On 24 Jun 2005 at 8:30, Rodrigo Severo wrote:
As far as I can understand this would result in much less than
reasonable load balancing for MX records.
I still couldn't get a comment from Sam on this matter but I really
think that Courier's current strat
but I really
think that Courier's current strategy for MX choosing isn't very
reasonable as it relies on the randomness of the list provided by bind.
It's fast but rather uneffective.
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is spo
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
Does anybody knows of any suitable solution for this issue besides
bind? I want by all means not to go back using bind if at all possible.
Fortunately or unfortunately, bind is the only battle-tested DNS
server in existence.
I have just
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
The DNS server already returns DNS records in random order.
I believe that by "random order" you mean a different random order
for each query. If this is the case I would like to ask to which DNS
servers do
Arno wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 23 June 2005 11:31, Rodrigo Severo wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
The DNS server already returns DNS records in random order.
I believe that by "random order" you mean a different random order for
each query. If this is the case I would l
Randall Shaw wrote:
I wanted to give thanks to Sam Varshavchik for starting and building upon
his courier-mta package all these years. His work and dedication stands far
and above the worthless junk out there. I seriously believe we will always
use courier as our email server software for linux
MX choosing by
Courier?
Thanks again for your continued patience and support,
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
Hi,
I trying to find the code related to MX randomizing in Couriers source.
I looked in sendsmtp (inside esmtpclient.c) but as far as I understood
it walks mxlist FIFO way.
My next idea was that maybe mxlist would be created in a random order
but as far as I understood up to now, having loo
t can be a really good option. Could you please
tell me where to look for the MX choosing strategy in the code?
I think I will take a look at it myself too.
Thanks for your info,
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover
y RFC 2821.
Anyway I believe that the inclusion of the (called by myself) main RFC
2821 strategy as an optional MX choosing strategy in Courier could be
beneficial to some people (not only to me) but here I leave this for
final consideration in the capable hands of Sam as this discussion has
Malcolm Weir wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Rodrigo Severo
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 1:03 PM
And, contrary to the implication, it would be a BAD idea to include
logic that selects lower priority ("secondary") MXs for the
subsequent
attempts unless
David Gomillion wrote:
What you're suggesting here makes some sense, but you have to think
about it from a bigger-picture perspective. Basically, you're trying to
change stateless SMTP handling based upon MX records into a stateful
system that remembers broken MXes and acts on that knowledge.
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
If there are multiple primary MXs set, Courier should already pick
one at random with each delivery attempt.
Sam, are you saying that two consecutive delivery attempts by Courier
will try to deliver the message to two different MXs, no matter
Malcolm Weir wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Sam Varshavchik
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 12:11 PM
So, until modern technology advances to such a point, the
only logical
thing to do is attempt to deliver E-mail repeatedly, and follow the
preferred logic for making each deliv
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
Gordon Messmer wrote:
If I understand the smtp client's execution model, that doesn't
happen now. A timeout after the session has started is treated as a
temporary failure, and the message is deferred. The client will
only try addi
Ben Kennedy wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote at 9:02 am (-0400) on 21 6 2005:
So, until modern technology advances to such a point, the only logical thing
to do is attempt to deliver E-mail repeatedly, and follow the preferred
logic for making each delivery attempt: pick a primary MX at random
Gordon Messmer wrote:
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
scorsese rodrigo # telnet brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com 25
Trying 200.208.15.131...
...
mail from: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and here the connection hangs.
OK, so to summarize: You are seeing Courier connect to an MX and
begin a conversation,
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
If there are equal priority MXes each attempt should go to a random
MX.
As I already said, if this is the current behaviour of Courier
that's good. What I am suggesting here is that, i
Joe Laffey wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
scorsese rodrigo # telnet brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com 25
Trying 200.208.15.131...
Connected to brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 Welcome
ehlo scorsese.fabricadeidei
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
If there are equal priority MXes each attempt should go to a random MX.
As I already said, if this is the current behaviour of Courier that's
good. What I am suggesting here is that, if all top priority MXs
ourier. I like it. This is the main reason I'm
taking my time at 1 am writing this. I just want to help make Courier
better.
Now it's time to sleep. See you tomorrow.
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy L
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
1. Courier gets some 4xx error. There are other MXs available but as
far as I can Courier tries the same MX several times if not all the
time so message delivery is unnecessarily delayed or delivery even
fails. Wouldn't it be better to try
EMAIL PROTECTED]>,status:
d
eferred
What delivery failures are users getting?
None.
Any custom configuration on your end?
None I remember.
If there is any further info that helps clarify my issue please let me
know so I will provide it.
Rodrigo Severo
---
little strange too in how it organizes folders. Im
not sure if the folder structure should be:
+ Inbox
|- Sent
I think this is the right one.
Rodrigo Severo
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration S
Ben Kennedy wrote:
Rodrigo Severo wrote at 7:12 pm (-0300) on 20 6 2005:
Why should Courier contact a secondary MX if it was perfectly able to
reach the primary?
Two possible reasons that came to my mind right now are: a 4xx error and
a "Connection time out" => "d
Jay Lee wrote:
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
Ben Kennedy wrote:
Maybe on a 4xx it would make sense. I can't see how it would with a
5xx,
though. If you have 2 MXs and they don't agree on who is a valid user
(for example), you have bigger problems.
My fault. You are right. There
option. Is the "Sent" folder created? I don't think thunderbird
creates it automatically nor does Courier.
Sorry for the silly suggestion but it's important to cover the basics ;)
Is this a server problem?
I don't think so.
Rodrigo Severo
---
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
Sam Varshavchik says:
If Courier cannot contact the primary MX it will automatically
contact the secondary MX.
Is there any reason for Courier only try to contact a secondary MX if
it can't contact the primary at all?
Why should Co
ion time out". Wouldn't it be good to try a second MX
here?
Rodrigo Severo
-
Internet security is just like sex, everybody says: "I'm doing it."
-
Rod
ance this being implemented?
TIA,
Rodrigo Severo
-
People who bite the hand that feeds them
usually lick the boot that kicks them.
-----
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
[EMAIL
ich complained about this issue in the last 9 months in
this list as I did a month or so ago. How many more have you not noticed?
Thanks for your attention,
Rodrigo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 13
configure.
I believe that having the runtime openssl library installed and not
wanting openssl support in courier is a much more frequent situation
than you are assuming.
I leave this suggestion for your consideration,
Rodrigo Severo
--
--------
Rodr
Sam?
Rodrigo Severo
--
----
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
CE
the devel also which isn't true.
How can I tell courier not to bother looking for openssl?
TIA,
Rodrigo Severo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Bras
ugh them.
What I don't understand is why courier seems to be so slow
in processing the messages. I mean, going off the queue and
only delivering 400-600 messages per hour would seem quite
slow to me...?
How have you got to this number: 400-600 messages per hour deliv
is field. Courier
shouldn't fail to send a sql query because you haven't a DEFAULT_DOMAIN
defined in your configure file.
I'm glad your configuration is working,
Rodrigo
--
------------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 135
drigo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
CEP: 70.07
prc filter the first time mail passes
maildroprc. The second time it actually goes to final destination.
As I'm using maildroprc, only local domains get their messages scanned.
This is the best I could come up with.
Please post your findings,
Rodrigo
--
-----------
Rodrigo Severo wrote:
Since I-don't-know-which-version of openldap, it doesn't accept LDAP
version 2 connection anymore in the default installation.
Here is a piece of man slapd.conf related to this question:
allow (...) bind_v2 allows acceptance of LDAPv2 bind
reques
version 2 connections.
Rodrigo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
CEP:
und, that when i, for example, change the tablename to a
non-existing one, i get the same error. -> So i think its the standard
message for those kind of "get-nothing-back-from-database" errors ;-)
Yeah, the connection seems fine
So for me, it looks like that it is no database or c
eached the
something_silly_done_during_these_long_tests_is_blocking_final_success
stage.
Rodrigo Severo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
CEP:
n it? May be to a compile time configurable limit...
Rodrigo
--
----
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
CEP: 70.070-904
---
""Bürkle wrote:
-
B) with my current "MYSQL_SELECT_CLAUSE" activated, a incoming mail produces
in the mysql.log:
15 Connect [EMAIL PROTECTED] on
15 Init DB mailuser
You see, theres no query... but WHY..??
--
# MYSQL_SELECT_CLAUSE SELECT CONCAT(id, "@
$(local_part)') \
AND (passwd.ativo = 'sim') \
AND (dominio_virtual.ativo = 'sim') \
AND (alias_dominio.ativo = 'sim')
Luck,
Rodrigo Severo
--
vated over Courier 0.42.2 and it's working fine.
Rodrigo Severo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
David Gomillion wrote:
"You are the worst user. Goodbye..."
Yeah, we should make all computer networks like Survivor, so we can vote
off the dead weight.
This looks like administrative paradise to me...
Rodrigo
---
This SF.net email is s
Mitch (WebCob) wrote:
I know there have been a lot of changes / enhancements to this code - like
the addition of service and so on...
Has anyone figured out a way to allow "bob" to log on ONLY to "bob's IP".
Would be a nice security feature to prevent bob from using someone else's
server IP - and
David Gomillion wrote:
It's not elegant, but...
You could create 2 accounts per user, one under each domain. Have them
have the same $HOME or Maildir. I had this setup once before, although
the logic escapes me why I did.
I have a set of scripts that create my users for userdb, and I just
added
Bowie Bailey wrote:
From: Rodrigo Severo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is almost what I need but I believe that if one of my users
tried to login to check emails as [EMAIL PROTECTED] it would fail,
wouldn't it? I believe that only [EMAIL PROTECTED] would work.
Is there a way to impl
First of all, thanks for your attention.
Bowie Bailey wrote:
From: Rodrigo Severo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I need is a domain alias for an already existent virtual
domain. Something like Courier accepting messages for domain
EXAMPLE.COM as if they were for TEST.COM. Also all users of
XAMPLE.COM.
I read http://www.courier-mta.org/makealiases.html but I am not seing
how to implement this functionality. Am I missing something obvious?
Rodrigo Severo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadr
drigo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasília/DF - Brasil
CEP: 70.070-904
---
This SF.net ema
w can I do that with authldap? I am new to ldap which probably is the
reason I can't figure how to do it but the point is: I can't see how to
create a similar functionality with ldap. Suggestions?
Rodrigo Severo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fábri
ones so you can't know the original
filenames automatically.
The -u option solves the problem of repeated filenames and allows
automatic filename discovery.
Rodrigo Severo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(6
reformime -xPREFIX -u".
The -u flag will include an 8 hexa digits counter between PREFIX and the
original filename.
Does anybody cares to test it?
BTW: if PREFIX is a directory, please end it with '/'. As far as I
understand, this observation applies to reformime with or without t
a
third instance would be written to "name-2.ext", and so on.
As the -xPREFIX is all about automatic processing (-x is the interactive
mode which doesn't suffer from the duplicate name plague) I believe such
a solution would make harder to get the original filename automatically.
And
where possible". I am
trying to make up a way that will make possible to extract the
attachments even if more than one have the same name. The prefix given
for -x won't change this situation for now.
Rodrigo Severo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fáb
ng through any number of
relays - or better yet, through relays identifying themselves as a
particular sub/domain (whether accurate or not).
You certainly could right a filter to do it and use it as a global
filter (see courierfilter for that) but I believe there probably is an
easier way.
Rodr
n I
patched Outlook with the last fixes from Microsoft, it started to choke
with some kind of internal error. It still didn't show the error message
I sent but at least the client knew that his email wasn't sent.
Rodrigo Severo
--
eady suspected that the cause of my problem resides in the symbol
table issue described in that paragraph. My problem was that even
suspecting that, it wasn't easy to find a solution...
Thanks again for your attention,
Rodrigo Severo
--
--------
R
r/lib/courier/var/tmp/105595/D475797'.
Message body before.
Message body after.
Receive line:
'/usr/lib/courier/var/tmp/105595/1055950580.1887.fellini.fabricadeideias.com.br'.
Message control before.
Message control after.
Receive line: ''.
---------
opinion.
What I am trying to do is include this option (fixing "@") in the main
Courier code. If you ask me, I think your code should get merged instead
of mine, it includes an extra feature in Courier that seems really
usefull and messes with one single file only but I also prefer that
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
James Baker believes the problem is that Courier keeps some kind of
map of the message (MIME parts, headers, etc) in memory and so any
rewrite might break this map.
Mr. Sam, could you please enlighten us?
This is correct. The message is parsed as
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
I am sending a patch to make Courier accept alternative ATs in email
addresses during login (besides @). It is heavily based in a previous
patch by Josh Heizman.
Basically I enclosed the extra code in #ifdef #endif directives so
people that don't
Bill Michell wrote:
Rodrigo Severo writes:
I tried to rewrite a message using a modified version of the
perlfilter to see what would happen and, surprise! It worked. But Mr.
Sam told me that it was just good luck. I'm not sure why.
This almost certainly has something to do with support eithe
y it, include a
#define ALTERNATIVE_AT "characters_to_be_accepted"
in 'auth.h'.
I've only tested authuserdb and authmysql but as the code is basically
the same, I decided to patch authldap.c and authpgsql.c also.
Rodrigo Severo
--
---------
solve the problem. Any
comments Mr. Sam?
Rodrigo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
B
p you.
sally2:/usr/src/courier-0.39.1/courier/filters/perlfilter# perl -w
I suggest you to get a newer version of courier just to be sure. I am
using 0.42.2 for testing and it's working fine.
Rodrigo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone:
is is the expected behaviour, I might get
amavisd-new working with courier scanning all messages soon.
TIA,
Rodrigo Severo
--
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala
isting archives aren't
used to the 'working fine' business.
TIA,
Rodrigo Severo
--
------------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fone: +55(61)321 1357
Fax: +55(61)223 1712
SCS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301
Brasíl
Lars Holmström wrote:
Some of my users got "513 Relaying denied.:" listed in maillog.
They all use OE6. SOme of them sit on the same subnet and som eon
another subnet as the courier 0.42.2
They all have an entry in /etc/courier/smtpaccess/default
allow,RELAYCLIENT
Example:
172.24.1.176 al
Jerry Amundson wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Download: http://www.courier-mta.org/download.php
Changes:
* Fix a file descriptor leak in the "courierldapaliasd restart" command.
* Addition of an experimental protocol to the IMAP server. More on
that in the next announcement.
A cliffhanger -
to change the error code (to 553?) and
2. include the offending email address in the error message.
Is that it?
I bet other people, besides myself, would like to have your patch.
Please post it.
Rodrigo
--
--------
Rodrigo Severo
Fábrica de Idéias
Fo
; files);
2. In the example of the /alias option, I think it would be more
informative to use two completely different domains like EXAMPLE.COM and
DOMAIN.COM instead of DOMAIN.COM and MAIL.DOMAIN.COM as people might
think that the alias option just works for sub-domains which seems not
to be the c
Mark Constable wrote:
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:08 pm, Rodrigo Severo wrote:
>>
I don't know how to setup an alias virtual domain. For example:
FABRICADEIDEIAS.COM and FABRICADEIDEIAS.COM.BR having the same users
with the same passwords and all.
Just add your users into mysql as [EMAI
s and all.
Tips, links, ideas are welcome,
Rodrigo Severo
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ValueWeb:
Dedicated Hosting for just $79/mo with 500 GB of bandwidth!
No other company gives more support or power for your dedicated server
ossible
maintenance headaches hidden in the future.
In need of advice,
Rodrigo Severo
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ValueWeb:
Dedicated Hosting for just $79/mo with 500 GB of bandwidth!
No other company gives more support or power for y
d-new) being called by Courier. Possible through maildrop,
is there a better option? Amavis would call ClamAV and SpamAssassin.
What do you think about it?
Thanks for your attention,
Rodrigo Severo
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Val
Eduardo Roldan wrote:
On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 12:00, Rodrigo Severo wrote:
I want to install Amavis with my still-in-test courier setup. I looked
in the three Amavis versions available right now: amavis, amavisd and
amavisd-new and none seems to have buildin support for Courier.
AmavisNG?
I just
working "Courier + Amavisd-new" setup working. I also don't want to
reinvent the wheel.
Is there someone that has already done it?
Is there any kind of advice available?
Mr. Sam, is there some documentation about Courier
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Rodrigo Severo writes:
>
>> Courier gives me the following error:
>>
>> 2003-02-05 18:40:24.358048500 mail.info 18:40:24 courieresmtp:
>>
id=000671DA.3E4176B8.783B,from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,addr=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
qmail listening.
As I said, both IPs are on the same machine.
What am I doing wrong? Any suggestions?
Thanks (a lot) in advance for your attention, as always,
Rodrigo Severo
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Ed
Hi,
I know this is a total beginner question but I have searched a bit and
still can't find Courier's "main" log. I am looking for info like
delivery tries, sucess and failures. Where can I find it?
I'm sorry if my question is really as stupid as it see
ry `/usr/src/courier-0.41.0/bdbobj'
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
I am using gcc 2.95.3, openssl 0.9.7, expect 5.38 and tcl 8.4.1. Does
anybody have an ideia what can I do to fix this problem? Am I doing
something wrong?
Thanks in advance for your a
99 matches
Mail list logo
