On 5/30/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 15:08 -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
The other issue I see is that the cpan link indicates that
Apache::Qpsmtpd is no longer available...
Or maybe I'm missing something?
It's distributed with qpsmtpd ...
Oh
On 31-May-07, at 9:27 AM, Bill Jones wrote:
On 5/30/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 15:08 -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
The other issue I see is that the cpan link indicates that
Apache::Qpsmtpd is no longer available...
Or maybe I'm missing something?
It's
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:34 -0400, Matt Sergeant wrote:
On 31-May-07, at 9:27 AM, Bill Jones wrote:
On 5/30/07, Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 15:08 -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
The other issue I see is that the cpan link indicates that
Apache::Qpsmtpd
/Apache::Qpsmtpd.3pm.gz
Regards
Michael
--
It's an insane world, but i'm proud to be a part of it. -- Bill Hicks
is that the cpan link indicates that
Apache::Qpsmtpd is no longer available...
Or maybe I'm missing something?
--
WC (Bill) Jones -- http://youve-reached-the.endoftheinternet.org/
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindexsearch=0x2A46CF06fingerprint=on
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 15:08 -0400, Bill Jones wrote:
The other issue I see is that the cpan link indicates that
Apache::Qpsmtpd is no longer available...
Or maybe I'm missing something?
It's distributed with qpsmtpd ...
--
--gh
Regarding this wiki statement:
---
Apache::Qpsmtpd
Apache::Qpsmtpd embeds qpsmtpd in an Apache 2 server with mod_perl 2.
This method is used by apache.org to handle over 2 million messages
per day. Apache::Qpsmtp is currently included in the trunk. A setup
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Jones) writes:
Regarding this wiki statement:
---
Apache::Qpsmtpd
Apache::Qpsmtpd embeds qpsmtpd in an Apache 2 server with mod_perl 2.
This method is used by apache.org to handle over 2 million messages
per day. Apache
Joe Schaefer wrote:
It's also a bit dated. At its peak apache.org was pulling in
around 2.4 M messages per day, distributed between a primary/secondary
mx config. The primary typically carries at least twice the load of
the secondary, and is a dual 2.80GHz Xeon dell box equipped with
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : mardi 26 décembre 2006 18:15
À : qpsmtpd@perl.org
Objet : Re: Apache::Qpsmtpd on Sarge
Arnaud ASSAD writes:
This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential
On 2006-12-29 11:24:46 +0100, Arnaud ASSAD wrote:
-Message d'origine-
De : Guillaume Filion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As far as documentation goes, you can use
http://smarden.org/pape/Debian/ and
http://wiki.qpsmtpd.org/quick-install_howto
I've read that (and should admit
Is there a clean way to make Apache ::Qpsmtpd works on Debian/Sarge ?
It seems to me that Apache::Qpsmtpd needs a more recent version of mod_perl
Than what is installed.
Did I miss something ?
As a bonus question is there other simple (documented ;-) ) ways to install
Qpsmtpd
Arnaud ASSAD writes:
This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is
the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom
it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized
to read, print, retain, copy,
I'm trying to get Apache::Qpsmtpd going on a new server and I'm not getting much
success:
Apache 2.2
Mod_Perl 2.02
Perl v5.8.8
I'm using the configuration exactly as described in the POD:
Listen 0.0.0.0:25
Perl
use lib qw( /var/qmail/service/qpsmtpd/lib );
use Apache
My implementations sit on:
Apache 2.0.59
Mod_perl 2.0.1
Perl 5.8.8
With the config:
=
User smtpd
Group users
Listen 0.0.0.0:25
LoadModule perl_module lib/httpd/mod_perl.so
Perl
use lib qw( /home/smtpd/qpsmtpd/lib );
use Apache::Qpsmtpd;
/Perl
VirtualHost _default_:25
Peter Eisch wrote:
Mine are basically the 0.32 framework. I don't use the 'tls' plugin at this
point though.
Just to make clear - it's not specific to tls, but fails the same way
for any plugin. I earlier got the error trying to load any of the
logging plugins.
John
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:22:29 -0500
John Peacock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to make clear - it's not specific to tls, but fails the same way
for any plugin. I earlier got the error trying to load any of the
logging plugins.
You're using svn rev 671, 672 or 673? If yes: use 674 or set the
Hanno Hecker wrote:
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:22:29 -0500
John Peacock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to make clear - it's not specific to tls, but fails the same way
for any plugin. I earlier got the error trying to load any of the
logging plugins.
You're using svn rev 671, 672 or 673? If yes:
Hi All,
I'm searching for Apache::Qpsmtpd and have found very little information
about it. I've searched the wiki and it's barely mentioned. It's not
available on CSPAN as suggested by Matt Sergeant's O'Reilly article. I've
googled and haven't had much luck. Could someone please point me
Ok.. Now that I have everything working with apache and qpsmtpd I'm
wanting to throw tls into the mix as well. I've got the certs and keys
built, however, when I issue a STARTTLS command I get the following:
250-PIPELINING
250-8BITMIME
250 STARTTLS
STARTTLS
220 Go ahead with TLS
500 TLS
What client are you trying to use?
What's in the error log above and below that line? Have you tried to
bump up the logging level by uncommenting the debug constants after
the use IO::Socket::SSL line?
When I did that I found that the issue I was having (this was with
plain old
Ed McLain wrote:
and I get this in the apache error log:
TLS failed: Could not create SSL socket: at /home/smtpd/qpsmtpd//plugins/tls
line 98.
I had similar problems and got an error message in the main Apache
error_log of:
[Sat Oct 07 09:40:45 2006] [error] Could not create SSL
On Oct 6, 2006, at 15:39, Ed McLain wrote:
What client are you trying to use?
Straight telnet
How do you speak SSL then? :-) That's a little like programming
with cat /dev/sda1.
- ask
--
http://askask.com/ - http://develooper.com/
Just as a full test I ran swaks against it and here are the results:
=== Trying x.x.x.x:25...
=== Connected to x.x.x.x.
- 220 tmx1.testnet.com ESMTP qpsmtpd 0.32 ready; send us your mail,
but not your spam.
- EHLO tested
- 250-tmx1.testnet.com Hi [x.x.x.x] [x.x.x.x] -
250-PIPELINING
-
on the keys -
which is odd because the keys were owned by the smtpd user that
Apache::Qpsmtpd is running as, which also has read permissions to the
files. I had to also add group read permissions to get this to work.
Not sure why those permissions would be needed.
Regards
James Turnbull
--
James
On 5-Apr-06, at 8:15 PM, John Peacock wrote:
Matt Sergeant wrote:
It's all about the connection overhead of forking. Forkserver
forks for
every connection whereas Apache::Qpsmtpd doesn't. That's bound to be
more scalable. Look how much faster Apache is than stock NCSAhttpd.
I that's all
Peter Eisch wrote:
With forkserver, don't let the process exit after the socket is closed, put
the process into the queue for a future process which can dup2 the
accept()ed socket for its new i/o interface. Then add process stats so
after X sessions the process will be closed and reaped to
Peter Eisch wrote:
I was only describing what Apache:Qpsmtpd does for you out of the box.
You're free to re-invent the wheel at your leisure.
My inbound MX boxes are Cobalt RaQ3's (non-intel clones ~450MHz) with a
very much modified RedHat kernel and completely web managed. I don't
think I
Matt Sergeant wrote:
Most people who have ever tried to use Net::Server have come up short. I
have had real stability problems with it.
Better to look at the code in SpamAssassin's spamd.
Rewriting the child process code to run under such a framework should be
similar for both. I can
Hi Matt,
Matt Sergeant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2-Apr-06, at 8:23 PM, Robin Bowes wrote:
This sounds interesting. I've not considered Apache::Qpsmtpd before
- is there a HowTo anywhere describing how to set it up?
There's perldoc in the file (run perldoc lib/Apache/Qpsmtpd.pm from
On Monday 03 April 2006 21:08, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
I am not sure there's a significant performance difference between
driving qpsmtpd with forkserver or with apache.Also keep in mind
that if a lot of your mails make it to spamassassin or virus
scanning, then those processes will
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, Matt Sergeant wrote:
On 5-Apr-06, at 8:15 PM, John Peacock wrote:
I that's all it is, we can easily(?) change forkserver to prefork some
percentage of its max connections and dole them out as needed. I may try
to do
that anyways because the inbound machines I use won't
So there isn't really a consensus on if Apache::Qpsmtpd or forkserver
is faster. I'm willing to conduct some benchmarking before we start
migrating our system - what are people interested in seeing?
Disable any plugins that just do CPU bound things, they aren't going
to provide any value
On 3-Apr-06, at 4:08 PM, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
I am not sure there's a significant performance difference between
driving qpsmtpd with forkserver or with apache.
It's all about the connection overhead of forking. Forkserver forks
for every connection whereas Apache::Qpsmtpd doesn't
Matt Sergeant wrote:
It's all about the connection overhead of forking. Forkserver forks for
every connection whereas Apache::Qpsmtpd doesn't. That's bound to be
more scalable. Look how much faster Apache is than stock NCSAhttpd.
I that's all it is, we can easily(?) change forkserver
On 4/5/06 7:15 PM, John Peacock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt Sergeant wrote:
It's all about the connection overhead of forking. Forkserver forks for
every connection whereas Apache::Qpsmtpd doesn't. That's bound to be
more scalable. Look how much faster Apache is than stock NCSAhttpd.
I
So there isn't really a consensus on if Apache::Qpsmtpd or forkserver
is faster. I'm willing to conduct some benchmarking before we start
migrating our system - what are people interested in seeing?
-Max
On 4/3/06, Ask Bjørn Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:11 AM, John Wang
of
qpsmtpd deployment? If so, we should link them to the wiki under the
'Performance issues' section.
I haven't seen any benchmarks but there's some anecdotal information. Back
on 19 Sep 2004, Matt posted on the mod_perl list re Apache::Qpsmtpd (
http://www.issociate.de/board/index.php?t=msgth=79422rid=0
On 4/3/06 4:11 AM, John Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any other performance related information, anecdotal or otherwise?
I'll run metrics, raw or cooked. What's a good way to gather data?
peter
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, John Wang wrote:
I haven't seen any benchmarks but there's some anecdotal information. Back
on 19 Sep 2004, Matt posted on the mod_perl list re Apache::Qpsmtpd (
http://www.issociate.de/board/index.php?t=msgth=79422rid=0):
It's about 3 times faster than the qpsmtpd
On Apr 3, 2006, at 2:11 AM, John Wang wrote:
It's about 3 times faster than the qpsmtpd-forkserver that
ships with qpsmtpd.
Has anything significant changed with Apache::Qpsmtpd or forkserver
since
then? Was that test valid? According to Matt's 15 Sep 2005 O'Reilly
article,
qpsmtpd
On 4/2/06 1:13 AM, John Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, are there any known problems with Apache::Qpsmtpd aside from not
working with check_earlytalker. I've read that apache.org uses
Apache::Qpsmtpd so I assume it's reasonably stable. Is this true?
The post also indicates that Apache
On 2-Apr-06, at 1:13 AM, John Wang wrote:
Also, are there any known problems with Apache::Qpsmtpd aside from not
working with check_earlytalker. I've read that apache.org uses
Apache::Qpsmtpd so I assume it's reasonably stable. Is this true?
The post also indicates that Apache::Qpsmtpd
On 4/2/06, Matt Sergeant wrote:
On 2-Apr-06, at 1:13 AM, John Wang wrote:
what's the primary motivation to use Apache::Qpsmtpd
if it won't work with check_earlytalker.
a) it does work with check_earlytalker - if you find it doesn't
please file a bug report.
Thanks Matt. Can the Apache
Matt Sergeant wrote:
On 2-Apr-06, at 1:13 AM, John Wang wrote:
Also, are there any known problems with Apache::Qpsmtpd aside from not
working with check_earlytalker. I've read that apache.org uses
Apache::Qpsmtpd so I assume it's reasonably stable. Is this true?
The post also indicates
.
This sounds interesting. I've not considered Apache::Qpsmtpd before
- is
there a HowTo anywhere describing how to set it up?
There's perldoc in the file (run perldoc lib/Apache/Qpsmtpd.pm from
the tarball) that explains pretty much everything.
Matt.
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Matt Sergeant wrote:
b) it should be significantly faster since there is no fork overhead
with Apache.
It would be safer to benchmark than to trust speculation.
I'm attempting to get qpsmtpd 0.32 Apache::Qpsmtpd working with Apache
2.0.55, mod_perl 2.0.2, and Postfix 2.2.9. When I configure httpd.conf as
shown in the SYNOPSIS, Apache will start and qpsmtpd will listen on port 25,
however, when I attempt to send an email it gets rejected with an error 450
On 4/1/06, John Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm attempting to get qpsmtpd 0.32 Apache::Qpsmtpd working with Apache
2.0.55, mod_perl 2.0.2, and Postfix 2.2.9.
What am I missing? Is there a fix for this?
I got this working after finding the Peter Eisch's post:
http://www.nntp.perl.org
Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
On Feb 25, 2006, at 7:48 PM, Max Clark wrote:
What do you think?
I'm pretty sure doing the virus checking (and spamassassin if you use
that) easily trumps the load that qpsmtpd creates.
qpsmtpd might help by being more effective in rejecting mail quickly
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Robin Bowes wrote:
Have a look at my check_validrcptto_cdb plugin:
http://robinbowes.com/projects/check_validrcptto_cdb
If you can generate a list of valid users on your systems somehow then
this can seriously cut down on the amount of messages you accept for
further
.
You haven't told us anything about your traffic characteristics, though if you
can build up 40k messages in any realistic timeframe it must be pretty high.
Perhaps you should reconsider amavisd itself, rather than playing around with
Apache::Qpsmtpd to start with.
For instance, I am running both
On 2/25/06 5:50 PM, John Peacock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My understanding (and I will be corrected immediately if wrong) is that
Apache::Qpsmtpd merely replaces the tcpserver or forkerver part of the model,
i.e. the initial dispatch of the transaction. In other words, using
forkserver
Fred Moyer wrote:
2) Using 0.31 and Apache::Qpsmtpd and the modified auth_vpopmail_sql
plugin as shown above, all clients except MS Windows based clients can
authenticate. The behavior is similar using 0.28 under A::Q. From
debugging I have been able to determine the following variable
John Peacock wrote:
Fred Moyer wrote:
2) Using 0.31 and Apache::Qpsmtpd and the modified auth_vpopmail_sql
plugin as shown above, all clients except MS Windows based clients can
authenticate. The behavior is similar using 0.28 under A::Q. From
debugging I have been able to determine
Extracted from httpd-2.x's util_filter.h:
053 /** The filter should return at most one line of CRLF data.
054 * (If a potential line is too long or no CRLF is found, the
055 * filter may return partial data).
056 */
057 AP_MODE_GETLINE,
What that means is: at this
Would it be worth adding Apache::Qpsmtpd to the base distro?
http://www.sergeant.org/Apache-Qpsmtpd/
57 matches
Mail list logo
