I just thought that I would add that it also seems to me that qmail always
uses DNS. I always had problems with sending mail slow (all entries in host
file for internal network, sendmail worked fine), but then I put in a
reverse DNS zone for my internal network on the DNS server and BAM, man was
We have been getting some e-mails sent from a virus some people have. I am
trying to block them out using the badmailfrom file, but it doesn't seem to
be working the way I need it to. The e-mail has a:
From: Hahaha [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the header, so I put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the badmailfrom
.
Thanks!
- Original Message -
From: Chris Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Q [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: blocking from-addresses (badmailfrom)
From: Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can MX record be CNAME?
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 08:32:58 -0400
q question [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was appalled when [Charles] said please don't post BIND zonefiles
to Dan's lists. That is a blanket directive
Charles,
1) What are the erroneous assumptions of the Prodygy relay test utility?
2) How is it so clear that the machine didn't relay mail?
From: Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SPAM Patches recomendations.
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 09:52:51 -0600
Eduardo
This would have been easier if you'd used real names. However...
Charles,
Why did you tell Peter this would have been easier if he had used real
names? I found it very clear and frankly I prefer a.b.c and 1.2.3.4 to
reading full domain names and ip numbers when the shorthand can convey the
This would have been easier if you'd used real names. However...
Charles,
Why did you tell Peter this would have been easier if he had used real
names? I found it very clear and frankly I prefer a.b.c and 1.2.3.4 to
reading full domain names and ip numbers when the shorthand can convey the
From: Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SPAM Patches recomendations.
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 09:06:00 -0600
q question [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) What are the erroneous assumptions of the Prodygy relay test utility?
It assumes that because the RCPT
to translate correctly into generic a.b.c
notation.
From: James Raftery [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can MX record be CNAME?
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 16:45:27 +0100
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 10:14:38AM -0500, q question wrote:
Why did you tell Peter this would have been easier
I appreciate your pointing this out.
From: Chris Garrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: q question [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SPAM Patches recomendations.
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 11:24:49 -0500
From: q question [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 10:30:52 -0500
What should convince you to ignore those tests is that they are providing a
diagnosis (Relay attempt succeeded) which is patently false (it isn't a
successful relay unless the mail makes it to the final destination, and
they
aren't even actually sending the mail, just testing the RCPT TO:
.
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:41:33 -0700
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 10:30:52AM -0500, q question wrote:
SNIP
2) How is it so clear that the machine didn't relay mail?
-these types of questions come up every week on this mailing list
-qmail has _never_ relayed mail unless the administrator
Nope, mail.swishmail.com cannot be a CNAME if you want to point your MX
record at it. It's forbidden.
And please don't post BIND zonefiles to Dan's lists -- they're meaningless
to
anyone who doesn't do BINDthink. Instead, tell us what's happening
(mail.foo.net is an MX record which points to
Which is pointless. You can't receive mail without advertising the domain
in
the DNS, so trying to hide the information here achieves precisely nothing.
That's not true. I've dealt with plenty of internal corporate email
situations that are not exposed to the internet email. Not all email
From: Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can MX record be CNAME?
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 14:10:23 -0600
q question [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And please don't post BIND zonefiles to Dan's lists -- [...]
Instead, tell us [the contents of the DNS records
I appreciate your pointing this out.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Levine)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is qmail best reserved for mailing list server purposes
only?
Date: 30 Apr 2001 19:15:38 -0400
One last note on this thread. While rereading the FAQ, I came
]
Subject: Re: Which IMAP do you prefer with qmail?
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 16:47:29 -0400
* q question [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010429 16:38]:
Your parents must hate you.
I'm curious, not to really try to create a survey, but of those of you
on
this list using qmail with IMAP, which IMAP are you
Hi John,
I hope you don't unsubscribe from this email list. You are not alone in
spending days printing and reading and feeling lost. I'm really dreading my
installs.
Actually, I know sendmail really well. I saved one company from spending
$100,000 on a software package to solve a Unix/PC
Yes, it is a great idea!
From: Tim Legant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: POP3 Login
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:24:37 -0500
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:02:24AM -0700, Rick Updegrove wrote:
P.S. Should we all just just add the response to this FAQ our
signatures?
What a
Àsô,
¤µ¦~¯uªº¤£¦n¹L,§Ú¤w¸g´«¤FNÓ¤u§@..
§@«á¤½¥q¤S˳¬¤F...³o¤@®a¤½¥qÆZ¦nª±ªº..
§A¦n¦n¬Ý¬Ý..§Ṳ́]¥i¥H¶}¤@¶¡..
«ö¤U±ªº³s
µ²-
©P¬ü¶³...
p.s. ¬P´Á¤» Friday's ¨£±!!
I'm curious, not to really try to create a survey, but of those of you on
this list using qmail with IMAP, which IMAP are you using?
Thanks in advance!
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
One of the reasons I was interested in qmail was the security aspect of it.
I've been impressed that noone has won the reward that is available from Dan
Bernstein. This is probably the most negative comment I have seen about
qmail while surfing for info:
Hi Russ, John, and Jason,
I appreciate your taking the time to respond to my question about the ORBS
opinion. I felt I should check it out before installing qmail and
unexpectedly becoming an infamous generator of denial of service attacks!
Russ, I appreciated hearing some of the background
One last note on this thread. While rereading the FAQ, I came across this
which indicates qmail has brakes to keep from generating denial of service
attacks.
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/efficiency.html
Does qmail back off from dead hosts?
Answer: Yes. qmail has three backoff features:
Each
Hi Brett,
I had no intention of correcting or offending you or anyone. If you'll note,
I said a simple FYI. I did notice the difference in the article in which
the list. was left off. I was just describing the the method that worked
for me yesterday so that no one would feel that they needed
I agree that it is difficult to figure out the domain configurations. My
favorite documentation on that at the moment is at:
http://x42.com/qmail/cookbook/domains/
Mark wrote:
How can I configure qmail to accept mail for mail.domaina.com and
mail.domainb.com?
Nothing in the FAQ could be
26 matches
Mail list logo
