* Ulrich Zehl 2013.08.07 08:29:
> Are you saying that rejects depend on SIZE= being sent during the RCPT TO
> stage (i.e., messages that announce their size correctly are rejected
> during the SMTP transaction, while those without size inidcation are
> passed)?
Yes.
signature.asc
Description:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 09:20:13PM +0200, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
> Now everything in between seems to create SMTPD rejections in some cases
> _or_ queue the mail and let it hit the quota in other cases. That's my
> whole point...
I'm sorry, I don't get your point.
Are you saying that quota-status
Thomas Leuxner skrev den 2013-08-06 18:25:
* Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 18:15:
Now the real problem along the road is the submitting server. If
that server does not
indicate the message size during handshake the pre-queue rejection
simply can not work.
quota_grace was meant to solve that. You
* /dev/rob0 2013.08.06 20:49:
> Personally, I'd much rather allow the last overquota mail, even in
> cases where the user goes far over the quota. Apparently Thomas
> intends to have a solid, inflexible quota.
The point I'm trying to make is mail being queued by Postfix because it has no
mean
On 2013-08-06 2:49 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
Another way, in Postfix, is to wait for end-of-DATA. Regardless of
SIZE being given, at that point, the actual size is known.
Of course as Thomas would probably point out, such a rejection is
unsafe, because ANY overquota recipient would cause rejection f
Am 06.08.2013 20:27, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
> On 6.8.2013, at 20.57, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
>
>> * Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 19:42:
>>
>>> The idea behind quota_grace is that the last mail would be allowed to take
>>> the user somewhat over quota (e.g. up to 109% quota usage). On the next
>>> ma
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 09:27:20PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 6.8.2013, at 20.57, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
> > * Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 19:42:
> >
> >> The idea behind quota_grace is that the last mail would be
> >> allowed to take the user somewhat over quota (e.g. up to 109%
> >> quota
am 06.08.13 15:10 schrieb Luigi Rosa :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Knuth said the following on 06/08/2013 12:11:
Unless I'm wrong, the latest one for Dovecot 2.2:
http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/2.2/dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.1.tar.gz
Thanx, Axel. But the question was
On 6.8.2013, at 20.57, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
> * Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 19:42:
>
>> The idea behind quota_grace is that the last mail would be allowed to take
>> the user somewhat over quota (e.g. up to 109% quota usage). On the next mail
>> delivery user is already over quota, so the size
* Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 19:42:
> The idea behind quota_grace is that the last mail would be allowed to take
> the user somewhat over quota (e.g. up to 109% quota usage). On the next mail
> delivery user is already over quota, so the size of the mail is irrelevant
> because a mail of any siz
On 6.8.2013, at 19.25, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
> * Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 18:15:
>
>>> Now the real problem along the road is the submitting server. If that
>>> server does not indicate the message size during handshake the pre-queue
>>> rejection simply can not work.
>>
>> quota_grace was
On 08/06/2013 06:31 PM Răzvan Sandu wrote:
> …
> Implementing filesystem quotas is not an option because a. presently,
> all virtual users share same UID/GID on the server and b. administrative
> reasons (the "full quota" situation may occur unexpectedly and this is
> not tolerable in corporate
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 07:38:59PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> The NFS workarounds code is doing some ugly stuff. I thought it would have,
> but looking at the code it doesn't seem so. But still easier to debug if you
> first see if the problem is with the NFS workarounds or the lib-index code
Hello,
Would you please help me solve the following case?
My (CentOS) server runs dovecot and allows both POP3 and IMAP service.
Users are virtual users (no home directories), with messages stored in
Maildir directories under /var/spool/mail/vhosts/example.com/username
Some of them use mobil
* Timo Sirainen 2013.08.06 18:15:
> > Now the real problem along the road is the submitting server. If that
> > server does not indicate the message size during handshake the pre-queue
> > rejection simply can not work.
>
> quota_grace was meant to solve that. You'll allow the user to become
On 6.8.2013, at 18.49, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
> Now the real problem along the road is the submitting server. If that server
> does not indicate the message size during handshake the pre-queue rejection
> simply can not work.
quota_grace was meant to solve that. You'll allow the user to become
On 6.8.2013, at 18.58, Simon Fraser wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 16:45 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Weird, I was sure that would have worked. Well, maybe rawlogs would
>> show something interesting. I should probably add a proper option for
>> them, but attached a patch to enable for
On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 16:45 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> >
> > Weird, I was sure that would have worked. Well, maybe rawlogs would
> show something interesting. I should probably add a proper option for
> them, but attached a patch to enable for now. Be sure to
> mkdir /tmp/dsync-rawlogs with en
* Ulrich Zehl 2013.08.01 16:39:
> If you store your mailbox and alias information in the same data source
> (LDAP, SQL, ...), you should be able to do the same.
Thanks. I did address this using a restriction class which works fine for my
scenario and allows selective quota checking.
/etc/postf
On 6.8.2013, at 16.42, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 6.8.2013, at 15.59, Simon Fraser wrote:
>
>>> Try disabling replicator plugin from only one side, so there's not
>>> possibility of two dsyncs running at the same time. That should be
>>> prevented already by locking though.
>>
>> I disabled t
On 6.8.2013, at 15.59, Simon Fraser wrote:
>> Try disabling replicator plugin from only one side, so there's not
>> possibility of two dsyncs running at the same time. That should be prevented
>> already by locking though.
>
> I disabled the replication on node b, restarted both, and connected
On 6.8.2013, at 16.11, Bo Lynch wrote:
> dovecot: Aug 06 09:08:48 Error: auth(default): ldap(blynch,69.21.103.133):
> No password in reply
LDAP isn't returning a "password" field. Probably because the dn doesn't have
access to that field. Either give it access, or switch to auth_bind=yes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013, John Williams wrote:
dovecot-lda -c config-file -d user < mailfile
Aha! Piping a message to the process was the step I was not aware of.
does offlineimap provides logs to get to know what mails are newly
arriving to
On Tue, August 6, 2013 9:04 am, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 6 Aug 2013, Bo Lynch wrote:
>
passdb pam {
}
passdb ldap {
args = /etc/dovecot-ldap.pass
}
>
>> Is it possible to have 2 auth methods? Meaning if user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013, John Williams wrote:
Please forgive me if these are silly questions. I am a normal user, not
a system administrator. I am using Dovecot as a kind of IMAP caching
proxy, i.e. reading IMAP mail via Gnus + Dovecot + Offlineimap.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Knuth said the following on 06/08/2013 12:11:
>> Unless I'm wrong, the latest one for Dovecot 2.2:
>>
>> http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/2.2/dovecot-2.2-pigeonhole-0.4.1.tar.gz
>
> Thanx, Axel. But the question was: Is that the right one? ;)
W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013, Bo Lynch wrote:
passdb pam {
}
passdb ldap {
args = /etc/dovecot-ldap.pass
}
Is it possible to have 2 auth methods? Meaning if user and passwd does not
match in pam then go with ldap?
as far as I know, if PAM returns
On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 14:30 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Here's another idea:
>
Thank you for still looking into this
> Try disabling replicator plugin from only one side, so there's not
> possibility of two dsyncs running at the same time. That should be prevented
> already by locking thoug
On Tue, August 6, 2013 2:41 am, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2013, Bo Lynch wrote:
>
>> Having some issues with ldap logins. I am using Centos
>> 5,dovecot-1.0.13-1.el5.rfx and openldap-servers-2.3.43-25.el5_8.1
>> Trying to get this to w
On 6.8.2013, at 14.30, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Here's another idea:
>
> Try disabling replicator plugin from only one side, so there's not
> possibility of two dsyncs running at the same time. That should be prevented
> already by locking though.
>
> The servers have different hostnames, right
On 1.8.2013, at 17.02, Simon Fraser wrote:
>>> Connect with a mail client, and delete the message - without delayed
>>> expunge. So, for example, mutt (press 'd' then '$' to sync the mailbox),
>>> or Evolution set to immediately delete.
>>
>> Can you reproduce this by disabling automatic replica
On 6.8.2013, at 13.28, Frank Elsner wrote:
> what is the meaning of the "<" sign in config files as in
>
> ssl_key = ^
> |
> ?
Read the value from the specified file. Works for all settings.
Hallo experts,
what is the meaning of the "<" sign in config files as in
ssl_key =
am 06.08.13 11:35 schrieb Axel Luttgens :
Le 6 août 2013 à 00:19, Jim Knuth a écrit :
am 05.08.13 22:03 schrieb Timo Sirainen:
http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.5.tar.gz
http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.5.tar.gz.sig
[...]
thank you. Which Pigeonhole (Sieve) must I us
Le 6 août 2013 à 00:19, Jim Knuth a écrit :
> am 05.08.13 22:03 schrieb Timo Sirainen:
>
>> http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.5.tar.gz
>> http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.5.tar.gz.sig
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> thank you. Which Pigeonhole (Sieve) must I use?
Hello Jim,
Unless I'
Hello,
For what it's worth, still experiencing these symptoms with 2.2.5.
Thanks,
Simon.
On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 15:02 +0100, Simon Fraser wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 15:09 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 11:28 +0100, Simon Fraser wrote:
> >
> > > I am running dovecot 2.
Hello,
[...]
In higher dovecot versions INBOX seems to be a kind of protected
foldername. dovecot is not offering this folder in folderlist. If i
rename it, the folder is available again.
[...]
Is there an explaination for this behaviour?
The case-insensitive mailbox name INBOX is a speci
37 matches
Mail list logo
