On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, John W. Baxter wrote:
> On 1/19/06 11:21 AM, "Chris Knadle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 January 2006 13:55, Tony Finch wrote:
> >
> >> Alternatively, you could just not bother to maintain a copy of the
> >>
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, S.I wrote:
>
> how can i use permail+ratelimit and skip this rulle for custom mail addresses?
>
> deny
> ratelimit = 30 / 15m / per_mail / $authenticated_id
> message = Sender rate exceeds $sender_rate / $sender_rate_period.
If I understand you correctly, you want to a
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Giuliano Gavazzi wrote:
>
> I was going to remark that too, but is it going to cache negative results? I
> would not say so.
Perhaps you should read the documentation, because it does indeed cache
negative results.
> In other words, how to populate the cache?
Traffic from sp
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Kerstin Espey wrote:
>
> # Slow down fast senders
> warn
> ratelimit = 100 / 1h / per_rcpt / strict
> delay = ${eval: $sender_rate - $sender_rate_limit }s
>
> I can't get this working, because $sender_rate is not an integer but something
> like 5.9, which does not work
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Israel Cárdenas Romero wrote:
> I have a problem calling Perl from Exim.
>
> When a use Perl embedded in Exim, it seems to change the timestamp format
> in "Received:" lines to host locale ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). When it occurs, many
> servers (Exchange) reject my messages as SPA
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Matt Sealey wrote:
>
> Does anyone have a summary of such things or a good knowledge of what
> might need configuration file changes or a different behaviour?
exim-4.60/README.UPDATING
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Tomasz Nowak wrote:
> Did exim developers change sth in exim 4.60
> with Sender header? I don't see it in
> http://www.exim.org/ftp/ChangeLogs/ChangeLog-4.60
> but looks like has shown up.
That only gives the changes since 4.54 so perhaps you want to look at an
earlier change
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Tomasz Nowak wrote:
>
> It is added by 4.60. Is there any secret version between 4.54 and 4.60
> that I don't know about? ;)
No.
The only thing that might affect you is if you resynchronized your
configuration with configure.default, which now uses control=submission
where ap
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Israel Cárdenas Romero wrote:
> I'm running Exim from a "exim4" Debian package, in a Debian Sarge box.
> It starts from a "/etc/init.d/exim4" script, that uses:
>
> start-stop-daemon --start --pidfile /var/run/exim4/exim.pid \
> --exec $DAEMON -- -bd -q${QFLAGS}${QUEUE
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Rajaie wrote:
> anybody knows why I receive this error:
> Berkeley DB error: fatal region error detected; run recovery
You upgraded Berkeley DB. Remove all the files in the db subdirectory of
your Exim spool.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dota
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Luca Bertoncello wrote:
>
> What is the problem?
Try running exim in debugging mode to see what it is doing in more detail.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Luca Bertoncello wrote:
>
> How I do it? I didn't know that I can have a debugging mode...
Use the -d command line option. Have a look at the spec for more details.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Luca Bertoncello wrote:
>
> But it doesn't say me WHY it failed...
I think the why would have appeared a bit before the output you posted. I
think I agree with John that the script is probably producing output.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dota
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Marten Lehmann wrote:
>
> Is it possible to configure exim that a user can send emails to external
> addresses, but not to any local users, although they are listed in the
> aliases?
Yes. Put this in your not_smtp ACL
deny
senders = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Mike Cardwell wrote:
>
> I *could* leave LDAP on, but it seems like a waste of resources to be
> constantly querying the AD, unless I can get this one last thing working...
I think you should leave LDAP on. It's unsurprising that things break when
your user database isn't avai
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Burhan Khalid wrote:
>
> It this something in exim, or that the client is just resending the
> same email with the wrong address?
The latter.
> Any hints on solving this problem of looping?
Ignore it or firewall off the client IP address.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Gary Palmer wrote:
>
> I have a "custom" lookup implimented in perl which is used to set the
> return_path variable on the outbound transports. I am wondering what is the
> best way to force the message to be deferred if the lookup encounters a
> problem? Returning a forced f
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Fauzan Azhary wrote:
> This is simple question, but I think it needed more effort to do. Can Exim
> deployed as SMTP and in-MTA simultaneously in one server ? What I have to do
> and what I have to set with its configuration to match this requirement ?
I guess you mean as an o
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>
> I note with interest that sesame's spam-labelling
> leaves the original Subject: line in place,
> adding a new one later in the headers - and that
> Thunderbird displays the later one.
I believe that whatever spam labelling you are seeing isn't being do
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
>
> acl_check_mail:
>
> deny
> message = sender does not match auth data
> ! senders = ${lookup mysql {select address from smtp_auth where
> username='${quote_mysql:$authenticated_id}'}}
That works if you have fairly uniform addresses, or a well-populat
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, g wrote:
>
> That is CNAMES and Zones can have a slash in their value, while a
> slash is not allowed in a domain name.
Your terminology is mixed up. Domain names can have any characters in
them. Hostnames (which resolve to A or records) and mail domains
(which resolve to
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>
> - Don't do it in the rcpt acl, you'll be repeating it during
> multi-recipient messages.
Exim caches ACL test results so this isn't a problem.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Philip Hazel wrote:
>
> The DNS specifications allow any character other than a dot in
> components of domain names.
Actually, dots are allowed too (!). The protocol-level representation of
DNS labels is a counted string so even nul characters are permitted (!!).
There's a synt
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Marc Sherman wrote:
>
> I thought your approach was to use sender rewriting in submission mode?
> Isn't that why you implemented it? Or do you only use it in certain
> situations?
We do that too. The logic is that we use the anti-forgery check to slap
people who are playing s
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, alexis wrote:
>
> - Forwards can be only configured to send to local domains
> My users can set up forwards but the destination of the forwarded
> email can be only on example.com
That's something you should probably configure in your system for
configuring forwarding. If your
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, alexis wrote:
>
> actually, i forgot to mention this, im configuring the forwards on a
> mysql table.
In that case the best place to implement this check is in the code that
adds stuff to the database.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${
That's because a message may have more than one recipient, so there is no
single appropriate value for $local_part or $domain for ACLs that deal
with the message as a whole (i.e. anything except the RCPT ACL).
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, "R. Sánchez" wrote:
>
> I've tried to telnet from the outside, but I don't even get a response
> from port 25 with telnet. From the inside telnet works ok without
> encryption.
Sounds like a problem with your firewall to me.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, W B Hacker wrote:
>
> Check the long history behind 587, including draft-hutzler-spamops-00.
That's a very new draft and still somewhat controversial - though I expect
most people here would agree with it. Port 587 is specified in RFC 2476
which is quite clear that the protocol
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Stian Jordet wrote:
>
> So I was thinking; if I only check mails with a return path _not_ from a
> local_domain I should be safe. But this doesn't really seem possible?
> Since there's not much I can check for in the notsmtp acl?
The sender_domains check is permitted in acl_not
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Craig Whitmore wrote:
> Has anyone written anything which will do CallerID with exim? (even external
> program)
There is experimental support for SPF, but the checks it performs are not
compatible with many legitimate uses of SMTP, and the Caller-ID variant is
even worse.
Ton
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Support wrote:
> Can someone helpme to run exim as demon?
> exim $DAEMON -bd) -q$QUEUE
Remove the )
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, John Oxley wrote:
> Is there any reason why I shouldn't use dns block lists in the
> acl_smtp_connect?
You might want people to be able to contact postmaster in case of an
incorrect blacklisting.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, Adrian wrote:
>
> is it possible to have multiple targets for a single mail address?
Yes.
http://www.exim.org/exim-html-4.60/doc/html/spec.html/ch22.html#SECTitenonfilred
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, "R. Sánchez" wrote:
> I don't think so, because I've triple checked that and because mail gets
> through with no tls. Maybe some firewall rules on that box but not on
> the router. How can I be sure?
Look at your firewall logs.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Renaud Allard wrote:
> Well, quite surprising is this:
2006-02-10 12:53:37 1F7XmJ-000564-TM H=(mail.llorien.org)
[2001:4830:1700:8::2]:41886 I=[2001:630:200:8080:20e:cff:fe09:a58a]:25
F=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rejected after DATA:
'>' missing at end of address:
failing address in
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Craig Whitmore wrote:
>
> Is is safe to have a shared /var/spool/exim4/db (say have it on NFS) so I can
> share the callout and ratelimit db's etc on multiple machines
Not really - you're relying on NFS locking, which is only safe if you are
careful.
Note that this may hurt y
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
>
> I've written notes on good autoreply habits in the past - in the
> archives somewhere - for example...
> http://www.exim.org/pipermail/exim-users/Week-of-Mon-20011210/033121.html
See also ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3834.txt
Tony.
--
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Philip Hazel wrote:
>
> Another problem is that the functions you have used (login_cap,
> login_getpwclass, setclassresources) all appear to be BSD-specific. They
> don't exist in Linux or Solaris. They exist in FreeBSD - I don't know if
> they exist in OpenBSD or NetBSD.
It a
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In mailertable (sendmail) I can write
> > .old-company.com = smtp:%1.new-company.com
> >
> > In the CGP routing table I can write:
> > *.old-company.com = *.new-company.com
> >
> > How do I achieve the
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, huang mingyou wrote:
> In my computer,I use mutt and fetchmail get and manage e-mail. And
> now,I need send mail from our mail server,not from my locale
> computer,but I don't want use another MUA. so I need configure the
> exim4 server that in my locale server as a client
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Victor Sudakov wrote:
>
> fido:
> transport = ifmail
> driver = manualroute
> route_list = \
> \N^(.*)\.f149\.n5005\.z2\.fidonet\.org $1.f149.n5005.z2.fidonet.org ; \
> \N^(.*)\.f49\.n5005\.z2\.fidonet\.org $1.f49.n5005.z2.fidonet.org ; \
> \N^.*\.fidonet\.org f1
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Galuschka Christoph wrote:
>
> Does anybody know why an Outlook-Client would write eMail-
> addresses this way?
Microsoft email software (in particular Outlook and Exchange) is not based
on Internet Standards, but rather has had support for Internet Standards
added on afterwar
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Brent Clark wrote:
>
> What I was hoping to achieve is that the messge as well as the rcpt to address
> will appear.
> e.g. REJECTED ATTACHMENT (bmp) (rcpt is: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Try $recipients - note that there may be more than one recipient for a
message.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Another note, changing file extension for mail transfer is easy (rename
> *.exe to *.ex_). File Id field (=file magic number) is harder to change
> (because you need to change it back at receiving side for the file to be
> usable), so probably you s
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Phil Pennock wrote:
>
> I'd be more inclined to hack Cyrus to have a new option, letting an
> unauthenticated user use the rcpt+folder delivery to any sub-folder of
> rcpt's INBOX _IF_ that folder is on rcpt's subscription list. Even
> better would be to allow those knowledgea
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Phil Pennock wrote:
>On 2006-02-24 at 11:41 +0000, Tony Finch wrote:
>>
>> We do unauthenticated delivery to Cyrus over LMTP and have unofficial
>> support for +subaddresses, which get delivered to the user's inbox
>> unless they have writte
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Phil Pennock wrote:
>
> Earlier today I updated the cmu.edu cyrus-imapd CVS check-out I have and
> I'm not seeing support; do you have this support as a patch to Cyrus, or
> to another Sieve implementation? Any details available online?
We're still on Cyrus 2.1 owing to our v
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Viktor Vislobokov wrote:
>
> There is a small list of spamers domains in attachment.
> Perhaps, some people may find it useful.
Probably not, since it includes blanket bans on whole countries.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${s
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Pete Naylor wrote:
>
> Perhaps we're the only site handling local delivery this way :-/
No, we're doing it too. I was waiting for Philip to have a look at your
message...
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Fred Viles wrote:
>
> I think you want to use an acl_cN variable. According to TFM the
> acl_mN variables are reset by the MAIL command, which means they
> can't be used transmit information from the RCPT ACL to a DATA-time
> ACL.
Your reasoning is wrong. There's no MAIL comm
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006, Clive McDowell wrote:
>
> we have a problem with mail.app and also kmail. Our site only advertises
> AUTH for IP addresses outside our domain for the reasons explained in the
> Exim book. For some reason mail.app and kmail will only authenticate
> correctly if AUTH is advertised
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Chris Meadors wrote:
>
> Is there a variable available in the RCPT ACL that has exactly what is
> contained in the "TO:" argument with case preserved?
> Otherwise I guess I could convert the $return_path to lowercase before
> signing the address on the way out. But I'd like to
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, David Saez Padros wrote:
> are the main configuration options tls_certificate and tls_privatekey
> expanded just when they are need so it will be possible to use different
> certificates depending on $interface_address and $interface_port ?
Yes.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Thad Bryson wrote:
>
> 2006-03-09 13:28:36 1FHPrg-0005IS-3C => /dev/null ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> R=central_filter T=**bypassed**
>
> I am tbryson, and I did not get the email from kbass, even though it did
> show up in the system. It was not in my Inbox. Wha
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, nlinley wrote:
>
> gcc -DBIND_8_COMPAT -O2 -I/usr/include/openssl -o dktest dktest.o -L.
> -ldomainkeys -lcrypto `cat dns.lib`
> /libdomainkeys.a(dns_txt.o)(.text+0x41): In function `dns_text':
> : undefined reference to `__res_query'
> /libdomainkeys.a(dns_txt.o)(.text+0xb9):
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Thad Bryson wrote:
> I figured that didn't look right, but how do I fix it?
That depends on your central_filter router configuration.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Steven B wrote:
>
> I dropped most of the SORBS lists and have the following still in place:
>
> sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org
Safe.
> opm.blitzed.org
Included in the XBL.
> list.dsbl.org
> smtp.dnsbl.sorbs.net
> relays.ordb.org
> dnsbl.njabl.org
I'd trust some components of some o
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Greg Ward wrote:
>
> Hmmm: perusing the Exim manual is bringing back old memories. Maybe
> this can all be done with the "pipe" transport.
I'd suggest configuring Exim on the crippled hosts to deliver BSMTP into a
pipe which POSTs to the appropriate CGI on the web server. The
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Greg Ward wrote:
>
> Trouble is, the central support server (host of the mythical CGI) is
> almost certainly running sendmail. Not sure how much of a political
> battle it would be to install a non-sucking MTA. Is BSMTP a purely Exim
> concept, or do other MTAs handle it?
I
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Phil Pennock wrote:
>
> Is there a way to find out which macros are defined at run-time? The
> very fact that TLS is available should have meant that SUPPORT_TLS was
> defined, surely? I've checked the OS's package build system and it's
> definitely defining SUPPORT_TLS=yes i
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Marco wrote:
>
> Now I have change my external socket daemon for check user quota from file
> socket (/var/run/exim_sockd.sock) to "port socket (that listen on 127.0.0.1
> port 9221)
> How to change in my router for use new socket?
${readsocket only works with Unix domain sock
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
>
> No matter what, I get this:
> cc -o exim_dbmbuild
> /usr/local/lib/libsqlite3.so: undefined reference to `pthread_create'
The exim build is missing a -pthread argument in its CFLAGS. I suggest
filing a bug with the port maintainer.
Tony.
--
<[EMA
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Chris Lightfoot wrote:
>
> I think it might be because libc_r overrides fcntl and forces O_NONBLOCK
> on -- see lib/libc_r/uthread/uthread_fcntl.c -- but I'm not certain.
Yes, that sounds plausible, but it shouldn't expose that to the
application if the app didn't request non-
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Phil Pennock wrote:
>
> Local DNS cache
> /var/log being a different filesystem from /var/spool/exim/ (not just
> for the hints).
> Set split_spool_directory.
no_message_logs
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Olivier Bonvalet wrote:
> I was thinking it was needed only for ext2/ext3. For XFS and JFS too ? And
> what about ReiserFS ?
It also changes the way Exim scans the spool in a queue run, which can
help performance even on filesystems that handle large directories
gracefully.
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Dionte Wilson wrote:
>
> Does Exim implement the CHUNKING and BINARYMIME Smtp service extensions?
No.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Dionte Wilson wrote:
>
> I was wondering if Exim can be configured to use LDAP for recipient
> lookups?
Yes. You can configure Exim to do arbitrary LDAP lookups as part of it
address routing. See
http://www.exim.org/exim-html-4.60/doc/html/spec.html/ch09.html#SECTldap
Tony.
-
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Dionte Wilson wrote:
> Is there an interface to place a message on an Exim queue for delivery, other
> than writing an SMTP client or using the "sendmail" program?
No.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Gururajan Ramachandran wrote:
> How do you handle emails sent to non existing email addresses at your
> site.
require verify = recipient
> How do you handle sending error back without ending up sending error
> back to bulk emailers and so on?
SMTP-time rejections are turned
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Tim Jackson wrote:
>
> This works fine, but I'd like to get the unique IP addresses listed in this
> file into a local_interfaces option.
What for? The point of the multiple personality setup is to avoid having
to tell Exim what to listen on.
In any case, it's better to do th
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Tim Jackson wrote:
>
> > What for? The point of the multiple personality setup is to avoid having
> > to tell Exim what to listen on.
>
> Surely it's to allow it to have multiple personalities on different
> interfaces?
Well, yes, but also to do so without having all the detai
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, David Saez Padros wrote:
>
> looks like some problem trying to resolve the hostname cioce.com
> causes the whole acl check to defer with a 451 Temporary local problem
> I suposed that the +ignore_unknown option will also make any lookup
> defer to ignore the list item and proce
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Markus Braun wrote:
>
> -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 784152 2005-05-27 10:10 exim4
>
> But it worked last week. And one day later, it didnt work.
Did someone do chmod -R 777 / on your system?!
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Steffen Heil wrote:
>
> I would like to do the following:
>
> warn host = a.b.c.d
>set authenticed = test
>
> So that remote hosts can be authenticated directly.
What I use in this situation is the SASL EXTERNAL mechanism. This is
designed for lifting some lower-level
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Frank S. Bernhardt wrote:
> 2006-03-31 18:51:07 1FPTOV-0001gr-5g unable to set gid=50 or uid=201
> (euid=500):
> local delivery to bcsi1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> transport=local_delivery
You didn't install Exim with setuid root.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, David Saez Padros wrote:
>
> Just a note to say that lately it's very common to see answers to
> questions just saying 'do not do that' or 'why do you want to do that'
> instead of answering the real question,
That's because it's a common experience to find that when someone is
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
>
> 2. Publish an SPF record. It won't help against the clueless mail admins but
> it won't hurt and it will tell the clueful ones that the spam is not sent by
> you.
It will hurt: you will no longer be able to email a significant proportion
of the users
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
> OK - here's what I want to do. I want to forward a copy of selected email to
> another email address, but only if the email address that I want to forward to
> is a valid working email address. So - I need to do a callout and check if the
> email address is
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, W B Hacker wrote:
>
> > require verify = recipient/callout
>
> Well - yes, if on the same server
No, callouts work across servers. We use this on the MXs in Cambridge to
verify addresses in departments such as the Computer Lab that run their
own email servers. It also work
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> But - some of my customers are asking to get a copy of the spam I'm
> bouncing/black holing. So what I want to do is if I detect spam then I
> want to forward a copy of it to another email address, but only if I can
> do a forward callout and verify the ad
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Chris Thompson wrote:
> W B Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But TWX and Telex are no longer a factor, and X.400 not far
> > behind - outside of a few specialty organizations.
>
> Indeed, I was interested to see that RFC 4450 ("Getting Rid of the
> Cruft: Report from an E
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Dean Brooks wrote:
>
> 2006-04-04 11:42:25 Exim configuration error in line 590 of
> /usr/local/exim/config: error in ACL: ACL error: negation is not allowed with
> "acl"
This is a bug in the implementation of the new add_header feature - some
of the tables are not in alphabe
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Marc Haber wrote:
>
> May I ask for the patch?
http://www.exim.org/mail-archives/exim-cvs/2006-April/msg8.html
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Dermot Paikkos wrote:
>
> So my aliases router returns an address without the server part
> (fine) and then sends it off to the primary MX to resolve.
>
> What I had hoped for was for it to return joe and use $home (or
> similar) for the maildrop.
The usual setup is to do the m
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Marc Haber wrote:
>
> Too bad that pipermail insists on mangling patches.
patch -l did the right thing for me :-)
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Phil Pennock wrote:
> >
> > -lutil should be correct.
>
> Folks, please tell me whether this should be a permanent fix or not.
Yes, that should be present. I don't know why it worked on sesame
without. Perhaps another dependent library
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Manuel Molina Cuberos wrote:
>
> Maybe this can be a stupid question :) , but I don't know how to limit the
> number of incoming messages my mail servers can accept per connection.
The spec says:
14.10 Resource control
smtp_accept_max_per_connection messages per connection
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Manuel Molina Cuberos wrote:
>
> Thanks! Are there an equivalent option in exim 3 ?
Dunno. We haven't supported Exim 3 for years, so this kind of question is
left as an exercise for the user.
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, Daniel Webb wrote:
>
> 2006-04-06 18:48:45 1FRLeI-0006Wx-9T SMTP timeout while connected to
> gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com [64.233.185.114] after end of data (1593 bytes
> written): Connection timed out
>
> How can I track this down?
The problem is at the gmail end so you'll have
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Casey Allen Shobe wrote:
>
> b.www hosts websites for several clients. Among these is one who sends out a
> mailing to a couple thousand people every day, using a commercial PHP-based
> mailing list management program (*sigh*) called 1-2-all
> (http://www.activecampaign.com/12a
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Casey Allen Shobe wrote:
> On Friday 07 April 2006 10:34, Tony Finch wrote:
> > You probably want to set your queue_only_load to be quite low, to stop
> > exim trying immediate deliveries when the machine is busy.
>
> I will try that later, I'd fo
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, Olivier Bonvalet wrote:
>
> I would like all mails to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" go to one mailbox,
> and all mails to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" to another (so I can't use
> "catch all").
Why not use local_part_prefix?
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
>
> OT here, but surely it must be possible to control your networking
> software's use of RTP (UDP) packet size as desired for VoIP,
> separately from the values used by TCP?
The problem is probably that a large TCP MTU causes undesirable jitter on
the R
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Doug Jolley wrote:
>
> So, anyway, I'm now left with the situation where
> it works when I do it by hand but it doesn't work
> with Outlook. If anyone has any ideas why that
> might be, I'd love to hear them. Thanks for your
> indulgence.
Make sure you are using the latest s
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Adam Funk wrote:
>
> I would like exim to be able to authenticate to outbound.mailhop.org
> without storing the unencrypted password on disk. Is this possible?
Where else can it get the password from?
Tony.
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ $
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Philip Hazel wrote:
> I have been asked for evidence of when local part suffixes were first
> used for sorting messages into different folders (for a patent issue).
Here's an example from the Andrew Messaging System in 1992. The Cyrus
+suffix addressing was inherited directly
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Doug Jolley wrote:
>
> When I run Exim locally in testing mode (-bh), my login password
> authentication works just fine. However, when I attempt to do it across
> the network (port 587), it doesn't work. I also notice that when I come
> in across the network my server prompt
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Marten Lehmann wrote:
>
> The only thing I can image for the condition to fail is that $local_part
> and $domain don't have the expected values. Are they set correctly
> during the ACLs?
Only RCPT ACLs. In other situations there is either no current recipient
address (e.g. MAI
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Catherine Morrisroe wrote:
>
> I was thinking of simply denying such mails based on recipient
> verification, but I'm not sure what the condition should look like for
> this.. if anyone had any ideas they would be greatly appreciated.
require verify = recipient
or if you are
1 - 100 of 1019 matches
Mail list logo
