orbs and
the rbl that doesn't exist...
I have been researching MTAs for a little while trying to figure out what
I want to use instead of sendmail. I was looking for maildir delivery,
ease of configuration, support for virtual hosting, and virtual accounts.
Exim does all of that for me
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:18:41PM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote:
I guess my thoughts are:
1) Let me know what sendmail can do to help
2) If you want to switch, check to see if you've got anything tricky
in your rules - you *WILL* loose functionality with any other MTA
(turing
Nick Jennings wrote:
It seems that you've had little experience with anything but sendmail,
so you're opinion may be rather biased.
I have used sendmail, exim, postfix and qmail and I think that exim and
postfix are very good, high performance yet easily configurable and
maintainable
All other issues aside ... some might find the qmail license
to be quite onerous.
--
Jean-Paul Stewart
Senior Systems Administrator
CarbonMedia, Inc.
114 East 25th Street, Eighth Floor
New York, NY 10010
Phone: 212.253.7180
Fax: 212.253.8467
http://www.carbonmedia.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
is very good at all four of your criteria.
it's also very easy to migrate to postfix from sendmail - it's designed to
be mostly backwards compatible - e.g. you can use the same aliases,
transports, virtuser etc files.
the formats of those files are either the same, or backwards compatible
- e.g
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 07:27:52PM -0700, Duane Powers wrote:
Fantastic advice, thanks.
one thing i forgot to mention:
if there's any mail left in the sendmail queue after the conversion,
then postfix won't know about it and won't be able to deliver it.
before you uninstall sendmail, shut
DP Hey all,
DP I've been using sendmail 8.11 for the last couple of years, and while
DP not real easy to configure, it has fit my purposes well. I was using
DP the rbl to cut down on unwanted spam for my users, but with the
DP departure of the rbl, I'm finding my server passing more spam to my
DP
What do you mean departure of the rbl? blackhole.mail-abuse.org still
works?
I have been researching MTAs for a little while trying to figure out what
I want to use instead of sendmail. I was looking for maildir delivery,
ease of configuration, support for virtual hosting, and virtual accounts
that doesn't exist...
I have been researching MTAs for a little while trying to figure out what
I want to use instead of sendmail. I was looking for maildir delivery,
ease of configuration, support for virtual hosting, and virtual accounts.
Exim does all of that for me quite well. Qmail does too but I hate
orbs and
the rbl that doesn't exist...
I have been researching MTAs for a little while trying to figure out what
I want to use instead of sendmail. I was looking for maildir delivery,
ease of configuration, support for virtual hosting, and virtual accounts.
Exim does all of that for me
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:18:41PM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote:
I guess my thoughts are:
1) Let me know what sendmail can do to help
2) If you want to switch, check to see if you've got anything tricky
in your rules - you *WILL* loose functionality with any other MTA
(turing
Nick Jennings wrote:
It seems that you've had little experience with anything but sendmail,
so you're opinion may be rather biased.
I have used sendmail, exim, postfix and qmail and I think that exim and
postfix are very good, high performance yet easily configurable and
maintainable mail
All other issues aside ... some might find the qmail license
to be quite onerous.
--
Jean-Paul Stewart
Senior Systems Administrator
CarbonMedia, Inc.
114 East 25th Street, Eighth Floor
New York, NY 10010
Phone: 212.253.7180
Fax: 212.253.8467
http://www.carbonmedia.com/
good at all four of your criteria.
it's also very easy to migrate to postfix from sendmail - it's designed to
be mostly backwards compatible - e.g. you can use the same aliases,
transports, virtuser etc files.
the formats of those files are either the same, or backwards compatible
- e.g
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 07:27:52PM -0700, Duane Powers wrote:
Fantastic advice, thanks.
one thing i forgot to mention:
if there's any mail left in the sendmail queue after the conversion,
then postfix won't know about it and won't be able to deliver it.
before you uninstall sendmail, shut
hello
on day of Fri, 22 Jun 2001 08:45:48 +0200, the message from Craig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
Ahoy there maties
Was wondering if there is a set of sendmail config files similar to
RedHats
sendmail-cf.rpm in Debian, which I can use with m4 to general my config
here everything
Hi
all.
Anybody knows how do
I can configure sendmailon SMPT AUTH with SASL ?
I've compiled both
first SASL libraries andafter sendmail with APPENDEF macro with de options
SASL actives and sendmail.mc with avalaible mechanismsPLAIN and LOGIN.
Now, my great dubt
is what is the sintax
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Craig wrote:
Ahoy there maties
Was wondering if there is a set of sendmail config files similar to RedHats
sendmail-cf.rpm in Debian, which I can use with m4 to general my config
files.
Yes they are part of the sendmail package. They reside in:
/usr/share
Hi debian dudes
What is sendmail-wide for ?
Thanks
Craig
attachment: winmail.dat
hello
on day of Fri, 22 Jun 2001 08:45:48 +0200, the message from Craig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
Ahoy there maties
Was wondering if there is a set of sendmail config files similar to
RedHats
sendmail-cf.rpm in Debian, which I can use with m4 to general my config
here everything (and more
Hi
all.
Anybody knows how do
I can configure sendmailon SMPT AUTH with SASL ?
I've compiled both
first SASL libraries andafter sendmail with APPENDEF macro with de options
SASL actives and sendmail.mc with avalaible mechanismsPLAIN and LOGIN.
Now, my great dubt
is what is the sintax
I'm trying to get ssmtp working by using stunnel and sendmail. I've put
an entry in inetd.conf like:
ssmtp stream tcp nowait root.root /usr/sbin/stunnel -d 465 -r 25
-v 1
so stunnel will just forward a port the sendmail daemon. sendmail on
its own works. I've added
I'm trying to get ssmtp working by using stunnel and sendmail. I've put
an entry in inetd.conf like:
ssmtp stream tcp nowait root.root /usr/sbin/stunnel -d
465 -r 25 -v 1
so stunnel will just forward a port the sendmail daemon. sendmail on
its own works. I've added
Hi,
First, a bit of background:
I have a Debian 2.2 box running Sendmail 8.11.3+8.12.0.Beta7-3
There are a bit under 400 domains that this box accepts mail for and it's
using virtusertable to map addresses in these 400 domains to addresses in
another domain (that isn't hosted on the box)
So
Craig Sanders wrote:
i see qmail's incompatibility with other MTAs as a huge trap - and the
same kind of trap as proprietary mailers, or proprietary software in
generalonce you convert to it, you're basically stuck there because
it's going to be an enormous pain to convert to anything
and a good documentation. I am considering
switching to qmail or postfix (I don't know which one yet) and I would
love to know more.
i've used pretty nearly every freely available unix MTA over the last 8
or 9 years. smail for a few years, then sendmail for a few more years,
then some experimentation
with `sendmail compatible' when you can have the `REAL
thing'?
Because Postfix is simpler, therefore easier to audit and trust. It
runs less stuff as root. It isn't a fight to make it run chrooted
(and even does so as default in Debian) and generally is trivial to make
it do stupid mta tricks
/queue. 8.12 is faster than 8.9.3 ever was (much faster
than 8.10/11), and has a hell of lot more function
that's not saying a lot.
Long: Sendmail was basically in `maintenance' mode for several years,
and a few of its competitors (who didn't have legacy concerns) were able
to leapfrog
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 09:42:01AM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote:
Sendmail *is* the kitchen sink of MTAs [...]
if sendmail is the kitchen-sink then postfix is the dish-washer. an
hour of drudgery with your hands in filthy water versus push-button
automation.
:-)
craig
--
craig sanders [EMAIL
to licensing issues and backward compatibility with
sendmail. What I would like to know is your opinion on how postfix performs
on the following points:
- Ease of configuration. I don't want to read a whole book to find out how I
can enable relay for a range of IP. The fact that it is sendmail compatible
Folks,
Subject: Re: sendmail is slow for mass mail
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 00:31:27 -0400
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Ease of configuration. I don't want to read a whole book to find out how I
can enable relay for a range of IP. The fact that it is sendmail compatible
scares me on that one
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
- Ease of configuration. I don't want to read a whole book to find out how I
can enable relay for a range of IP. The fact that it is sendmail compatible
scares me on that one.
Postfix's configuration files and syntax are entirely different than
domain, postfix/smtp use
ONLY ONE smtp connection for sending message.(like a sendmail, exim..)
BUT qmail use newly qmail-smtp each message.
And, as I recall, postfix has less file accesses than qmail. (And a LOT
less than sendmail.)
I love postfix: it's been a pleasure to fiddle
and a good documentation. I am considering
switching to qmail or postfix (I don't know which one yet) and I would
love to know more.
i've used pretty nearly every freely available unix MTA over the last 8
or 9 years. smail for a few years, then sendmail for a few more years,
then some experimentation
So, what happened to sendmail? How did it earn it's fall from grace? When
I got into it, sendmail was it. I've never looked closely at the mail
system since.
---=ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US=---
___/`YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 07:11:06AM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
So, what happened to sendmail? How did it earn it's fall from grace?
When I got into it, sendmail was it. I've never looked closely at the
mail system since.
* it's slow.
* it doesn't scale well.
if you've ever seen sendmail
with `sendmail compatible' when you can have the `REAL
thing'?
Because Postfix is simpler, therefore easier to audit and trust. It
runs less stuff as root. It isn't a fight to make it run chrooted
(and even does so as default in Debian) and generally is trivial to make
it do stupid mta tricks
/queue. 8.12 is faster than 8.9.3 ever was (much faster
than 8.10/11), and has a hell of lot more function
that's not saying a lot.
Long: Sendmail was basically in `maintenance' mode for several years,
and a few of its competitors (who didn't have legacy concerns) were able
to leapfrog
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 09:42:01AM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote:
Sendmail *is* the kitchen sink of MTAs [...]
if sendmail is the kitchen-sink then postfix is the dish-washer. an
hour of drudgery with your hands in filthy water versus push-button
automation.
:-)
craig
--
craig sanders [EMAIL
qmail because I have too much invested in sendmail
: at this point, and I dislike the DJB's licensing terms.
postfix addresses both issues.
firstly, unlike qmail, it is a true open source / free software program.
anyone can modify it and redistribute their modified version if they
wish. the license
to licensing issues and backward compatibility with
sendmail. What I would like to know is your opinion on how postfix performs
on the following points:
- Ease of configuration. I don't want to read a whole book to find out how I
can enable relay for a range of IP. The fact that it is sendmail compatible
Folks,
Subject: Re: sendmail is slow for mass mail
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 00:31:27 -0400
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Ease of configuration. I don't want to read a whole book to find out how I
can enable relay for a range of IP. The fact that it is sendmail compatible
scares me
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Haim Dimermanas wrote:
- Ease of configuration. I don't want to read a whole book to find out how I
can enable relay for a range of IP. The fact that it is sendmail compatible
scares me on that one.
Postfix's configuration files and syntax are entirely different than
domain, postfix/smtp use
ONLY ONE smtp connection for sending message.(like a sendmail, exim..)
BUT qmail use newly qmail-smtp each message.
And, as I recall, postfix has less file accesses than qmail. (And a LOT
less than sendmail.)
I love postfix: it's been a pleasure to fiddle
because I have too much invested in sendmail
: at this point, and I dislike the DJB's licensing terms.
postfix addresses both issues.
firstly, unlike qmail, it is a true open source / free software program.
anyone can modify it and redistribute their modified version if they
wish. the license
My problem: The emails are being sent out at an UNBELIEVABLY SLOW rate.
There must be a better way!
The answer? qmail :)
Dan Bernstein originally wrote a package designed purely to deal with huge
mailing lists.. and people loved it..
It's popularity grew.. and gradually more features crept
Someone else is getting help for this here, so hopefully I'm asking on an
acceptable list..If not, I'll have to go to the sendmail list (Ack! Scary!)
Lots of SNIP's in this message, because there's no reason to give 34
examples of the same thing :)
Text from the console is enclosed in "-
I've just been researching the same problem myself, and came accross a program called SMTPfeed. Don't know anything more about it, except for a mailer comparison page which claimed that it was one of the better high volume mail thingies. Supposedly plugs into sendmail somehow, so you won't have
I have a sendmail installation using sendmail_8.11.3+8.12.0.Beta5-4_i386.deb
+ SASL on a linux 2.4.3-pre4 i686.
I am attempting to process very high volume mailingslists (10-100K
multiples) on this server.
My problem: The emails are being sent out at an UNBELIEVABLY SLOW rate.
First, during
My problem: The emails are being sent out at an UNBELIEVABLY SLOW rate.
There must be a better way!
The answer? qmail :)
Dan Bernstein originally wrote a package designed purely to deal with huge
mailing lists.. and people loved it..
It's popularity grew.. and gradually more features crept
Someone else is getting help for this here, so hopefully I'm asking on an
acceptable list..If not, I'll have to go to the sendmail list (Ack! Scary!)
Lots of SNIP's in this message, because there's no reason to give 34
examples of the same thing :)
Text from the console is enclosed in ---'s
All
JPS,
Here's a few things to try...
1) Try multiple queues... that will help greately. Also sort your queues
by host (to insure that your sendmail doesn't keep reconnecting to AOL
for example)
2) Move BIND to a dedecated server, unless you've got an obscene ammount
of RAM. Don't make
I've just been researching the same problem myself, and came accross a program called SMTPfeed. Don't know anything more about it, except for a mailer comparison page which claimed that it was one of the better high volume mail thingies. Supposedly plugs into sendmail somehow, so you won't have
Regards
G.Brits
Linux Systems Engineer
Technology Concepts
Tel +27 11 803 2169
Fax +27 11 803 2189
-Original Message-
From: G.Brits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 02 March 2001 10:49
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: re:exim and sendmail-like virtusertable
What you do is the following
i want to set up exim with virtualhosts and virtual passwd and alias
files.
so far anything works perfectly with a patched gnu-pop3d version.
but i'm missing a solution for the special token in sendmails
virtusertable which
allows all unassigned email-adresses to be sent to another domain
(e.g.:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Peter Lieven wrote:
to create a rewriting rule like it is possible in sendmails
virtusertable.
what about something like say
new_address = ${lookup{$local_part} partial-lsearch {/some/file}
{$value}}@${domain}
replace local_part with original_local_part,
i want to set up exim with virtualhosts and virtual passwd and alias
files.
so far anything works perfectly with a patched gnu-pop3d version.
but i'm missing a solution for the special token in sendmails
virtusertable which
allows all unassigned email-adresses to be sent to another domain
(e.g.:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Peter Lieven wrote:
to create a rewriting rule like it is possible in sendmails
virtusertable.
what about something like say
new_address = ${lookup{$local_part} partial-lsearch {/some/file}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
replace local_part with original_local_part, partial_lsearch
Hi,
I installed sendmail on debian, with using linuxconf to set everything
up for virtual pop account, I am able to send mail to my server and the
message goes into the correct spool in /var/spool/vmail/ DOMAIN/ USER/.
This all works fine, but I am not able to log into my system with the
username
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 02:23:07PM +0100, Roger Abrahamsson wrote:
Anyone here know how to 'force' sendmail to bind to one specific ip on a
machine? I've just moved it, and it works fine but for one thing, it
stubbornly wants to use the primary ip/interface when sending messages
out. It's
Anyone here know how to 'force' sendmail to bind to one specific ip on a
machine? I've just moved it, and it works fine but for one thing, it
stubbornly wants to use the primary ip/interface when sending messages
out. It's causing problems with a few customers firewalls...
Regards
Roger A
,ForwardFileInGroupWritableDirPath,GroupWritableAliasFile,GroupWritableForwardFileSafe,GroupWritableIncludeFileSafe,IncludeFileInGroupWritableDirPath,MapInUnsafeDirPath
and, as said, don't blame sendmail if anything goes wrong because of
the group writeable directories)
--
[-]
``And there are plenty of other innovative pieces
Rod,
Looking at your transcript there (which for my MUA was missing all its
linefeeds), it appears that the mail server is trying to send mail to the
wrong place. The MX record for directv.com says 'mail.directv.com' -- I
tried a manual SMTP session with that server and it said '[EMAIL
is a transcript if
anyone has time to look at it.
Thanks for all the suggestions before.
Rod
-Original Message-
From: R. W. Rodolico [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 2:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: sendmail or bind problems
I am running
crond likes full pathnames is my first thought. Thats likely why it works
from the command line and not crond.
Tom
Any ideas why the following won't actually send email when run from cron:
#!/usr/bin/perl
#
open(SENDMAIL,"|sendmail $recipient");
print SENDMAIL "From: WVFD EMS D
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000, Security wrote:
crond likes full pathnames is my first thought. Thats likely why it works
from the command line and not crond.
Tom
Any ideas why the following won't actually send email when run from cron:
#!/usr/bin/perl
#
open(SENDMAIL,"|sendmail $reci
Any ideas why the following won't actually send email when run from cron:
#!/usr/bin/perl
#
open(SENDMAIL,|sendmail $recipient);
print SENDMAIL From: WVFD EMS Dispatch [EMAIL PROTECTED]\n;
print SENDMAIL To: WVFD EMT $recipient\n;
print SENDMAIL Subject: Possible EMS call\n;
print SENDMAIL \n
crond likes full pathnames is my first thought. Thats likely why it works
from the command line and not crond.
Tom
Any ideas why the following won't actually send email when run from cron:
#!/usr/bin/perl
#
open(SENDMAIL,|sendmail $recipient);
print SENDMAIL From: WVFD EMS Dispatch [EMAIL
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000, Security wrote:
crond likes full pathnames is my first thought. Thats likely why it works
from the command line and not crond.
Tom
Any ideas why the following won't actually send email when run from cron:
#!/usr/bin/perl
#
open(SENDMAIL,|sendmail $recipient
I see that mailq has 12 queued messages. I think they were
created when sendmail stopped owing to the load in the system
going too high (that's another story!). I now have a number of
zombie sendmail processes that I can't kill and wondered:
a) Can zombied sendmail processes in effect "
I see that mailq has 12 queued messages. I think they were
created when sendmail stopped owing to the load in the system
going too high (that's another story!). I now have a number of
zombie sendmail processes that I can't kill and wondered:
a) Can zombied sendmail processes in effect hold
We have a Debian potato system running as a mail server. now when we put
this new system online following problem came...
sending mail with eudora from workstation takes a looong time. Is there
something obvious simple solution which I should already done.?
Pasi S.
answer, taking into account info you gave
Best regards
Jersey
--
From: debian seuranta[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 12:46 PM
To: debian-isp@lists.debian.org
Subject:sendmail or pop3d problem
We have a Debian potato system running as a mail server
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, debian seuranta wrote:
We have a Debian potato system running as a mail server. now when we put
this new system online following problem came...
sending mail with eudora from workstation takes a looong time. Is there
something obvious simple solution which I should
Is there anyone expert in sendmail who can help me sort
something out?
sendmail -bv
/map access [EMAIL PROTECTED]
shows me that he's marked REJECT
but sendmail accepts mail from him.
I can run sendmail -bt and show people all or parts of sendmail.cf
sendmail.mc and access if someone would
Is there anyone expert in sendmail who can help me sort
something out?
sendmail -bv
/map access [EMAIL PROTECTED]
shows me that he's marked REJECT
but sendmail accepts mail from him.
I can run sendmail -bt and show people all or parts of sendmail.cf
sendmail.mc and access if someone would
I've got one box running sendmail to support some legacy configs.
Several clients connect to this server but travel through a PIX
firewall to get there. It seems that the PIX gets pissy about
allowing ident requests from the sendmail server abck to the client.
I'm trying to determine whether
Hello ,
Every day I gote a messsage from my sendmail,
such as :
gethostbyaddr(192.168.230.1) failed: 1
I dont want to write a IN records for all of mine interfaces.
Could anyone have an advice for me ? How tell sendmail to
listen only certain interface?
Best regards,
Ant
301 - 378 of 378 matches
Mail list logo
