qmail Digest 1 Jul 1999 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 688
Topics (messages 27291 through 27366):
Problem: smtproutes entry obviously ignored ?
27291 by: Peter Haworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27292 by: Achim Gosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27294 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Kuersch)
incoming message size quota
27293 by: Janos Farkas
<Janos.Farkas-nouce/priv-#[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivery problems
27295 by: "Lars G. T. Joergensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DNS error
27296 by: "Jacob (Mettavihari)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27299 by: "Soffen, Matthew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Howto
27297 by: "Jacob (Mettavihari)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27298 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27352 by: "Jacob (Mettavihari)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Resending delivered mail
27300 by: Victor Tavares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27311 by: Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27319 by: Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
New qmail list et al
27301 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27302 by: Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27303 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27304 by: Tomasz Papszun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27305 by: Stefan Paletta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27306 by: Albert Hopkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27316 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27317 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27318 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27321 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27324 by: Dirk Harms-Merbitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27327 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27329 by: Albert Hopkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27336 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27338 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27339 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
27349 by: "Julian L.C. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27353 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27354 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27355 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27357 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27360 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Quick & dirty way to filter attachment
27307 by: Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27308 by: Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27310 by: "Jay D. Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27350 by: "Noel Mistula" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
alias problem (no mailbox here by that..)
27309 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27314 by: Jose Luis Painceira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27320 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27322 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27323 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
repost: alias problem (no mailbox here by that..)
27312 by: Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27313 by: "Petr Novotny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27315 by: Jose Luis Painceira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27325 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Wing)
27328 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27330 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27331 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27332 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Wing)
qmail doubts
27326 by: "F�bio Eiki Doy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27335 by: "Fred Lindberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Smtpd problem - host not found / "yes" in email
27333 by: Anders V�nnman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27340 by: Varga Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27344 by: "Fred Lindberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27346 by: Anders V�nnman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail-pop3d with mailbox
27334 by: Sergio Strampelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Matchup & fd5
27337 by: Tillman Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27345 by: "Fred Lindberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27347 by: Tillman Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
web-based admin, esp. vistual domains?
27341 by: "Robin Bowes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27343 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
27348 by: "Robin Bowes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27351 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
can pine read other maildir folders or only the "inbox" maildir?
27342 by: Varga Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
maildir format delivery problems?
27356 by: "David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27358 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27359 by: "David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27363 by: Scott Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Archiving contents of messages
27361 by: Gavin Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27362 by: Jason Haar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail stops working
27364 by: Doug Lumpkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Secondary MX Delivery Problems (Returns)
27365 by: Sergei Kolobov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Relaying problem
27366 by: "Tarkan Hocaoglu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Juergen Kuersch wrote: > Hi there, > > on our firewall, I have a smtproutes file like this: > > <---snip> > # Mail to Rog1 must be directed to ROG1 > rog1.rog.rwth-aachen:rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de Shouldn't that be rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de:rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de ^^^ ? -- Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] "If sendmail does [Return-Receipt-To], it is just plain wrong (and that really wouldn't be a surprise, would it?)" -- Thomas Neumann
Title: AW: Problem: smtproutes entry obviously ignored ?> Juergen Kuersch wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > on our firewall, I have a smtproutes file like this:
> >
> > <---snip>
> > # Mail to Rog1 must be directed to ROG1
> > rog1.rog.rwth-aachen:rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de
>
> Shouldn't that be
> rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de:rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de
> ^^^
> ?yes, that should be
rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de !!!
achim
Definitely !!!! Thanks a lot to the people who pointed out the error ! Grumble ;-) ... GRTX Juergen Kuersch > Juergen Kuersch wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > on our firewall, I have a smtproutes file like this: > > > > <---snip> > > # Mail to Rog1 must be directed to ROG1 > > rog1.rog.rwth-aachen:rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de > > Shouldn't that be > rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de:rog1.rog.rwth-aachen.de > ^^^ > ? > > -- > Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] > "If sendmail does [Return-Receipt-To], it is just plain wrong > (and that really wouldn't be a surprise, would it?)" > -- Thomas Neumann > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Juergen Kuersch, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems, RWTH Aachen, Germany PGP public key (0x830E1B55) available at public key servers
On 1999-06-30 at 10:56:27, Varga Robert wrote: > 1. How do I set the maximal incoming message size? And if is possible, > then the maximal outgoing message size? man qmail-smtpd; set the /var/qmail/control/databytes file to the message size you are prepared to handle (i.e. 256000). This is a global value, irrespective of "direction", if your clients connect through smtpd also, you can find a way to set the DATABYTES environment variable to a different value (via tcpserver, or tcpd) for the "client" network. Local clients using qmail-queue/qmail-inject/mailsubj/sendmail/etc are exempt from this limitation. > 2. What happens when the user's hard system quota is passed over with the > incoming message? Does the message bounce, or goes to temporary, or the > user gets it? I ask this with normal users not virtual users. The message will stay in the queue as a file of the qmailq user, which probably doesn't have such a strict quota as normal users. If the user doesn't clean up before the message expires in the queue, it will be bounced. You can override this by using a special delivery program which checks for the quota before delivering to the user. -- Janos - Don't worry, my address is real. I'm just bored of spam.
Hi I'm trying to implement Paul Greggs "Single-UID based POP3 box". I now have my POP3 up and running the problem is now the delivery. I get "Sorry, no mailbox here by that name" when trying to send e-mail to the adress [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here are som files: ---- rc ------- exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \ qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail ---- virtualdomains pixelwaves.com:pixelwaves-com ---- asigns =pixelwave-com-mpetersen:popuser:888:888:/var/qmail/popboxes/pixelwaves-com/mpetersen::: . /Lars Student at Department of Computer Science University of Copenhagen http://www.diku.dk/students/larsj/
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Soffen, Matthew wrote: I found what you said in /var/named.local. this file was taking local host to be the NS. I have done a few corrections, and would much appriciate to have advice. to see if what I have done is OK. dig any metta.lk @tradenetsl.lk dig any metta.lk @metta.lk or nslookup (I have never used it) still very much a beginner at this. Thanks for your help. Jacob > Here is the DNS error: > > # nslookup dhamma.metta.lk > Server: localhost > Address: 127.0.0.1 > > Non-authoritative answer: > Name: metta.lk > Address: 204.143.107.46 > Aliases: dhamma.metta.lk > > # nslookup 204.143.107.46 > Server: localhost > Address: 127.0.0.1 > > *** localhost can't find 204.143.107.46: Non-existent host/domain > > This means the reverse DNS is not set. You may not have any means to do > this either (some ISP's want full control over the reverse DNS). So if > you contact your ISP, they may be able to update (O.K., create) your > entry. My ISP have been very helpful and they also learn in the process. We all are just young people learning around here. Jacob.
Now I can't even find the host nslookup dhamma.metta.lk in DNS. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacob (Mettavihari) [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 7:21 AM > To: Soffen, Matthew > Cc: Robbie Walker; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: DNS error > > > > On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Soffen, Matthew wrote: > > I found what you said in /var/named.local. > this file was taking local host to be the NS. > > I have done a few corrections, > and would much appriciate to have advice. > to see if what I have done is OK. > > dig any metta.lk @tradenetsl.lk > dig any metta.lk @metta.lk > or nslookup (I have never used it) > still very much a beginner at this. > > Thanks for your help. > > Jacob > > > > Here is the DNS error: > > > > # nslookup dhamma.metta.lk > > Server: localhost > > Address: 127.0.0.1 > > > > Non-authoritative answer: > > Name: metta.lk > > Address: 204.143.107.46 > > Aliases: dhamma.metta.lk > > > > # nslookup 204.143.107.46 > > Server: localhost > > Address: 127.0.0.1 > > > > *** localhost can't find 204.143.107.46: Non-existent host/domain > > > > This means the reverse DNS is not set. You may not have any means > to do > > this either (some ISP's want full control over the reverse DNS). So > if > > you contact your ISP, they may be able to update (O.K., create) your > > entry. > > My ISP have been very helpful and they also learn in the process. > We all are just young people learning around here. > Jacob. > > > >
Hi all, I have got qmail installed and am beginning to understand a bit of what is happening, I have followed a good Howto which at the end tells me to kill sendmail and make soft links pointing to qmail. Well, I never installed sendmail (dont like killing)<smile> and I now have a problem with "where I start-up qmail". (Autoexec.bat)<more smile> Could someone kindly point me to instructions on the "minimum" I require to install, to run a small mailserver, that give Windoze 95 pop accounts perhaps around 500 pop accounts. I have set up the Windoze ppp dialup connections and can brouse my server. Jacob
"Jacob (Mettavihari)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Could someone kindly point me to instructions on >the "minimum" I require to install, >to run a small mailserver, that give Windoze 95 pop accounts >perhaps around 500 pop accounts. The Installation section of "Life with qmail" is now complete. The subsection on startup files covers what you need. It assumes you have ucpspi-tcp and daemontools installed, too (both are trivial to install). See: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#install-ucspi http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#install-daemontools Unfortunately, the link to the startup section currently points to the last subsection of the startup section (I used the same target), so until tonight, the best way to get there is to follow the #install-daemontools link and page down. -Dave
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Dave Sill wrote: > "Jacob (Mettavihari)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Installation section of "Life with qmail" is now complete. The > subsection on startup files covers what you need. It assumes you have > ucpspi-tcp and daemontools installed, too (both are trivial to > install). > > See: > > http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#install-ucspi > http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#install-daemontools > > Unfortunately, the link to the startup section currently points to the > last subsection of the startup section (I used the same target), so > until tonight, the best way to get there is to follow the > #install-daemontools link and page down. Thanks, I shall download it todays, I have installed the program ucspi-tcp and I have installed the line from FAQ 5.1 in the ined.conf tcpserver -u 501 -g 500 0 smtp /car/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd & Is ined.conf the system startup file ? How do I test if this has been propperly installed When I do a ps -ax I do not get qmail-smtpd pid. Jacob
I've searched the archives but couldn't find a quick answer to the following question: How do you resend mail that has been successfully delivered to a Maildir? What happened was that someone was receiving mail on our server, delivered into a Maildir and picked up with qmail-pop3d. However, they recently changed email addresses and want the current email address to be forwarded to the new one. That's no problem - an &[EMAIL PROTECTED] entry in the .qmail will do it. However, this person still has email sitting in the Maildir. How do I resend these emails so that they get redirected by the .qmail? Thanks in advance. --vt
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 09:42:04AM -0400, Victor Tavares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've searched the archives but couldn't find a quick answer to the > following question: > > How do you resend mail that has been successfully delivered to a Maildir? Some mail readers (such as mutt) have tag and bounce features that make it relatively easy to resend messages to other people while preserving almost all of the header information. You could also probably use a foreach loop in csh to use each file in the maildir directory as input to qmail-inject with a specified recipient.
Here's something I keep handy for such occasions: #!/bin/sh # # bulk_forward.sh, Dave Kitabjian, 6/3/99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # Forwards an entire directory of email to somewhere else using Qmail. # if [ $# -ne 2 ] then echo "Usage: $0 <source_directory> <desination_address>" exit 1 fi error=0 for message in `ls $1` do qmail-inject $2 < $1/$message if [ $? -eq 0 ] then echo "Done: $message: "`grep '^From:' $1/$message | head -1` else echo "ERROR: $message: "`grep '^From:' $1/$message | head -1` error=1 fi done if [ $error -eq 1 ] then exit 2 else exit 0 fi ########################################################### On Wednesday, June 30, 1999 11:41 AM, Bruno Wolff III [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 09:42:04AM -0400, > Victor Tavares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've searched the archives but couldn't find a quick answer to the > > following question: > > > > How do you resend mail that has been successfully delivered to a Maildir? > > Some mail readers (such as mutt) have tag and bounce features that make it > relatively easy to resend messages to other people while preserving almost > all of the header information. > > You could also probably use a foreach loop in csh to use each file in > the maildir directory as input to qmail-inject with a specified recipient.
I pump all my qmail list mail files to a special folder and am adept at using find utilities to find if previous people have commented on the issue I am concerned with. I have decided to start a new qmail mailing list using EZMLM. Here are the rules. Postings should be related to the following subject areas. QMail QMail security QMail on a system that has a firewall Memphis RPM Summer RPM Tarball documentation UCSI tcp server TCP wrappers POP Mail POP Mail Security QMail side effect speculations and questions RPM side effect speculations and questions User group/club formation Beginner questions anything that the sender thinks/feels/surmises/postulates/hopes is qmail related What is particularly on-topic is anything related to the senders efforts to use qmail effectively on their unique, strange, and broken environment that may have some effect on qmail and it's derivatives. Cross-posting to other lists is allowed with the following caveats: the cross-posting should be relevant to the other lists, and any responses should have cross-posting removed from those other lists unless the response is still relevant. In other words, the new list will be very tolerant of cross-postings, i.e., the more the merrier, but participants should actively attempt to prune according to the wishes of the other list communities. What is forbidden on my new list. Any mailing containing the following: "Your an idiot" "That is off-topic" "That is way off-topic" "Take it elsewhere" "RTFM" "Your posting is against the rules of this list" or other such messages. Subscribers will be on the honor system to follow the rules and will be asked to leave by me if they do not. I am considering calling it: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd appreciate any suggestions. Alex Miller
I'm not sure I understand the "raison d'etre" of the new list. That is, how is the new list substantially different from this one? Dave On Wednesday, June 30, 1999 10:01 AM, Alex Miller [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > I pump all my qmail list mail files to a special folder and am adept at > using find utilities to find if previous people have commented on the issue > I am concerned with. > > I have decided to start a new qmail mailing list using EZMLM. > > Here are the rules. > > Postings should be related to the following subject areas. > > QMail > QMail security > QMail on a system that has a firewall > Memphis RPM > Summer RPM > Tarball documentation > UCSI tcp server > TCP wrappers > POP Mail > POP Mail Security > QMail side effect speculations and questions > RPM side effect speculations and questions > User group/club formation > Beginner questions > anything that the sender thinks/feels/surmises/postulates/hopes is qmail > related > What is particularly on-topic is anything related to the senders efforts to > use qmail effectively on their unique, strange, and broken environment that > may have some effect on qmail and it's derivatives. > > Cross-posting to other lists is allowed with the following caveats: the > cross-posting should be relevant to the other lists, and any responses > should have cross-posting removed from those other lists unless the response > is still relevant. In other words, the new list will be very tolerant of > cross-postings, i.e., the more the merrier, but participants should actively > attempt to prune according to the wishes of the other list communities. > > What is forbidden on my new list. > > Any mailing containing the following: > "Your an idiot" > "That is off-topic" > "That is way off-topic" > "Take it elsewhere" > "RTFM" > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > or other such messages. > > Subscribers will be on the honor system to follow the rules and will be > asked to leave by me if they do not. > > I am considering calling it: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I'd appreciate any suggestions. > > Alex Miller >
One difference: On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: "Your an idiot" "That is off-topic" "That is way off-topic" "Take it elsewhere" "RTFM" "Your posting is against the rules of this list" On my list it will not be permissible to send an email that says those or similar such things. Any subscriber who does so would be asked to leave by me. Alex Miller > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Kitabjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 10:39 AM > To: 'Alex Miller' > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: New qmail list et al > > > > I'm not sure I understand the "raison d'etre" of the new list. > That is, how is the new list substantially different from this one? > > Dave > > On Wednesday, June 30, 1999 10:01 AM, Alex Miller > [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > I pump all my qmail list mail files to a special folder and am adept at > > using find utilities to find if previous people have commented > on the issue > > I am concerned with. > > > > I have decided to start a new qmail mailing list using EZMLM. > > > > Here are the rules. > > > > Postings should be related to the following subject areas. > > > > QMail > > QMail security > > QMail on a system that has a firewall > > Memphis RPM > > Summer RPM > > Tarball documentation > > UCSI tcp server > > TCP wrappers > > POP Mail > > POP Mail Security > > QMail side effect speculations and questions > > RPM side effect speculations and questions > > User group/club formation > > Beginner questions > > anything that the sender thinks/feels/surmises/postulates/hopes is qmail > > related > > What is particularly on-topic is anything related to the > senders efforts to > > use qmail effectively on their unique, strange, and broken > environment that > > may have some effect on qmail and it's derivatives. > > > > Cross-posting to other lists is allowed with the following caveats: the > > cross-posting should be relevant to the other lists, and any responses > > should have cross-posting removed from those other lists unless > the response > > is still relevant. In other words, the new list will be very tolerant of > > cross-postings, i.e., the more the merrier, but participants > should actively > > attempt to prune according to the wishes of the other list communities. > > > > What is forbidden on my new list. > > > > Any mailing containing the following: > > "Your an idiot" > > "That is off-topic" > > "That is way off-topic" > > "Take it elsewhere" > > "RTFM" > > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > > > or other such messages. > > > > Subscribers will be on the honor system to follow the rules and will be > > asked to leave by me if they do not. > > > > I am considering calling it: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I'd appreciate any suggestions. > > > > Alex Miller > > >
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 at 10:50:01 -0400, Alex Miller wrote: > One difference: > > On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: > "Your an idiot" > "That is off-topic" > "That is way off-topic" > "Take it elsewhere" > "RTFM" > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > On my list it will not be permissible to send an email that says those or > similar such things. Any subscriber who does so would be asked to leave by > me. Hmm, I prefer having the source of information in one place (one mailing list), not diffused into different lists... :-( Even if this one list is sometimes a little off-topic. Just my humble opinion. -- Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/ | ones and zeros.
Alex Miller wrote/schrieb/scribsit: > On my list it will not be permissible to send an email that says those or > similar such things. Any subscriber who does so would be asked to leave by > me. No thanks. (no offense intended) Stefan btw, has anyone been to LinuxTag? Maex? Lars?
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Alex Miller wrote: > One difference: > > On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: > "Your an idiot" > "That is off-topic" > "That is way off-topic" > "Take it elsewhere" > "RTFM" > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > For the majority of posting on this list, however, I think that we do not see this. It does not appear to be as big as a problem as I've seen on other lists. I think a more practical solution would be to have this rule apply to the current mailing list. I would like to avoid "forking" the list. The reasons are simple. 1. Those only subscribed to one list risk missing ideas/solutions/etc presented in another. 2. Those subscribed to both lists risk receiving redundant information. If it's not splitting up a mailing list into different subjects to lower traffic or provide more specialized topics then it is generally a bad idea. -- Albert Hopkins Sr. Systems Specialist Dynacare, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well sure, applying the new proposed rules to this list would make my list redundant. But, currently, it IS permissible on this list to post messages that say things like "your an idiot" or "this is off topic", "this has nothing to do with qmail". I don't know who is the list owner or if the list owner is even remotely interested in making rules that make it impermissable for users to ridicule other subscribers or berate them for having too broad an interpretation of topicality. Of course I would gladly welcome an interest from the current list owner to do this as it would improve the list. I do know that as a list owner I would not permit such postings and would be happy to recieve the broadly interpreted emails relating to qmail enencumbered. I feel that part of what I am missing from the list is the unsaid, the emails which have been self-censored for fear of being made to feel stupid, or rudely off-topic. I wish to liberate those folks. As for forking, yes, it's a problem but not an insoluble one. Whenever someone posts something on qmail crypto that is off-topic, I can chime in and suggest that they bring it on over to my list for anyone who is interested. In the spirit of open-sourceness, my intention is to exercise my freedom to start something new which I think is better. In that same spirit of open-sourceness I would be very very happy if the current list broadened it's narrow definition of on-topicness and excluded those who would wish to be the enforcers of topicality or otherwise ridicule others. They can do as they please on qmail crypto As a subscriber, I would cross-post to both lists, excluding things that are off-topic on the qmail crypto list which employs a very narrow interpretation. For me, it would be no problem to keep them separate. I use virtual mail for filtering. I subscribe to many different mailing lists, each of which I use a different email address. So I filter based on what email address is sent to, thus filtering by mailing list. Alex Miller > -----Original Message----- > From: Albert Hopkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 11:10 AM > To: Alex Miller > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Qmail@List. Cr. Yp. To > Subject: RE: New qmail list et al > > > On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Alex Miller wrote: > > > One difference: > > > > On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: > > "Your an idiot" > > "That is off-topic" > > "That is way off-topic" > > "Take it elsewhere" > > "RTFM" > > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > > > For the majority of posting on this list, however, I think that we do not > see this. It does not appear to be as big as a problem as I've seen on > other lists. > > I think a more practical solution would be to have this rule apply to the > current mailing list. I would like to avoid "forking" the list. The > reasons are simple. > > 1. Those only subscribed to one list risk missing ideas/solutions/etc > presented in another. > > 2. Those subscribed to both lists risk receiving redundant information. > > If it's not splitting up a mailing list into different subjects to lower > traffic or provide more specialized topics then it is generally a bad > idea. > > -- > Albert Hopkins > Sr. Systems Specialist > Dynacare, Inc > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:50:01AM -0400, Alex Miller wrote: > One difference: > > On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: > "Your an idiot" > "That is off-topic" > "That is way off-topic" > "Take it elsewhere" > "RTFM" > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > On my list it will not be permissible to send an email that says those or > similar such things. Any subscriber who does so would be asked to leave by > me. I think it would be much more effective if you just kept idiots from joining the list in the first place. --Adam
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Alex Miller wrote: > Well sure, > > applying the new proposed rules to this list would > make my list redundant. > > But, currently, it IS permissible on this list to > post messages that say things like "your an idiot" > or "this is off topic", "this has nothing to do with > qmail". > > I don't know who is the list owner or if the list > owner is even remotely interested in making rules that > make it impermissable for users to ridicule other > subscribers or berate them for having too broad > an interpretation of topicality. You obviously are new here. The list owner probably wouldn't be welcome on your list! If you want a politically correct qmail list, I'm sure noone here will try to discourage you - I just don't know how valuable it'd be without Dan and many of the others. And since this whole thread is off topic, this is the last I'm gonna say on it. Vince. -- ========================================================================== Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null # include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2 Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com ==========================================================================
"Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >But, currently, it IS permissible on this list to >post messages that say things like "your an idiot" >or "this is off topic", "this has nothing to do with >qmail". That's shocking. >I don't know who is the list owner DJB >or if the list >owner is even remotely interested in making rules that >make it impermissable for users to ridicule other >subscribers or berate them for having too broad >an interpretation of topicality. I seriously doubt it. The list has functioned very well for years without babysitting. I see no need to start doing it now. >Of course I would gladly welcome an interest from >the current list owner to do this as it would improve >the list. In your opinion, perhaps. I prefer the current arrangement, where people are free to say whatever they want. >I feel that part of what I am missing from the list >is the unsaid, the emails which have been self-censored >for fear of being made to feel stupid, or rudely off-topic. >I wish to liberate those folks. Oh, the tyranny of self control! >In the spirit of open-sourceness, my intention is to exercise >my freedom to start something new which I think is better. In >that same spirit of open-sourceness I would be very very happy >if the current list broadened it's narrow definition of on-topicness No. This is the qmail list, and discussion should stick to qmail. If it strays, people shouldn't be offended by requests to take it elsewhere. >and excluded those who would wish to be the enforcers of topicality >or otherwise ridicule others. They can do as they please on qmail >crypto Right. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the open, anything-goes-including- ridicule-and-self-appointed-topicality-cops list, and yours can be the more restricted nice-only list. -Dave
How do you identify an idiot during the signup process? Dirk On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:29:39PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:50:01AM -0400, Alex Miller wrote: > > One difference: > > > > On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: > > "Your an idiot" > > "That is off-topic" > > "That is way off-topic" > > "Take it elsewhere" > > "RTFM" > > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > > > On my list it will not be permissible to send an email that says those or > > similar such things. Any subscriber who does so would be asked to leave by > > me. > > I think it would be much more effective if you just kept idiots from joining > the list in the first place. > > --Adam
You can't, but after a few posts you can be reasonably sure. :) --Adam On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:00:05AM -0700, Dirk Harms-Merbitz wrote: > > How do you identify an idiot during the signup process? > > Dirk > > > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:29:39PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:50:01AM -0400, Alex Miller wrote: > > > One difference: > > > > > > On this list it is permissable to send an email that says: > > > "Your an idiot" > > > "That is off-topic" > > > "That is way off-topic" > > > "Take it elsewhere" > > > "RTFM" > > > "Your posting is against the rules of this list" > > > > > > On my list it will not be permissible to send an email that says those or > > > similar such things. Any subscriber who does so would be asked to leave by > > > me. > > > > I think it would be much more effective if you just kept idiots from joining > > the list in the first place. > > > > --Adam
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Dirk Harms-Merbitz wrote: > > How do you identify an idiot during the signup process? > > Dirk Me too! -- Albert Hopkins Sr. Systems Specialist Dynacare, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 12:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: New qmail list et al > > > "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >But, currently, it IS permissible on this list to > >post messages that say things like "your an idiot" > >or "this is off topic", "this has nothing to do with > >qmail". > > That's shocking. > > >I don't know who is the list owner > > DJB > > >or if the list > >owner is even remotely interested in making rules that > >make it impermissable for users to ridicule other > >subscribers or berate them for having too broad > >an interpretation of topicality. > > I seriously doubt it. The list has functioned very well for years > without babysitting. I see no need to start doing it now. > > >Of course I would gladly welcome an interest from > >the current list owner to do this as it would improve > >the list. > > In your opinion, perhaps. I prefer the current arrangement, where > people are free to say whatever they want. So, if what you are saying is true, then the posters who make claims that some email is "off-topic" are exercising their freedom of expression to say that but simultaneously are mistaken or saying falshoods, since people are "free to say whatever they want". So, I guess it's like every baboon is free to do whatever it wants and every baboon is free to pummel another for exercising that freedom? > >I feel that part of what I am missing from the list > >is the unsaid, the emails which have been self-censored > >for fear of being made to feel stupid, or rudely off-topic. > >I wish to liberate those folks. > > Oh, the tyranny of self control! Wether it's tyrannical or not, I don't really care. I like the qmail crypto list tryanny and all. But I am also interested in the supposed "off-topic" subjects and wish to provide a resource. If there are self-censored emails out there that haven't been posted to the qmail crypto list, fine, I'm providing a place to put them. > >In the spirit of open-sourceness, my intention is to exercise > >my freedom to start something new which I think is better. In > >that same spirit of open-sourceness I would be very very happy > >if the current list broadened it's narrow definition of on-topicness > > No. This is the qmail list, and discussion should stick to qmail. If > it strays, people shouldn't be offended by requests to take it > elsewhere. Fine, this is the qmail list, and discussion should stick to qmail. Great. No problem. So if they want to stray, they can go to my list too. > > >and excluded those who would wish to be the enforcers of topicality > >or otherwise ridicule others. They can do as they please on qmail > >crypto > > Right. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the open, anything-goes-including- > ridicule-and-self-appointed-topicality-cops list, and yours can be the > more restricted nice-only list. > > -Dave > Well, wether it's more restricted or less restricted, it would be different. Alex P.S. Thanks for all the help you give on this list. The information you've provided on this list has been most helpful, even if it isn't addressing a stated problem of my own. Many problems I've encountered were solved simply by finding an email with a similar problem and reading your response to it! No posting required on my part.
"Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> In your opinion, perhaps. I prefer the current arrangement, where >> people are free to say whatever they want. > >So, if what you are saying is true, then the posters who make >claims that some email is "off-topic" are exercising their >freedom of expression to say that but simultaneously are mistaken >or saying falshoods, since people are "free to say whatever they >want". Just because one has the freedom to do X doesn't mean one *should* do X. The topic of this list is qmail. There's nothing stopping anyone from posting a message about toenail clippers, but such a message would be off topic for the list, and would likely not be received well. That's OK, though. They don't want us talking about qmail on the toenail-clippers list, either. >So, I guess it's like every baboon is free to do whatever it wants >and every baboon is free to pummel another for exercising that freedom? Except we're not baboons, we presumably joined this list to talk about qmail--not simply to exercise our freedoms, and "pummelling" consists of sending a harshly worded e-mail message. >Thanks for all the help you give on this list. Glad to help. Maybe I'll see you on the toenail-clippers list sometime. :-) -Dave
"Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But, currently, it IS permissible on this list to post messages that > say things like "your an idiot" or "this is off topic", "this has > nothing to do with qmail". Here's just $.02, since I think I was the latest one to say "You're an idiot" on this list. If you consult the qmail archives, you will find occasional posts by me going back about two years. Some of those questions were so breathtakingly idiotic that nobody bothered to reply at all. Yes, if someone had pointed out that I was an idiot I would have felt rather hurt. Hopefully, I am a less idiotic qmail user today. In general, idiocy is not necessarily a terminal, nor a permanent, condition. Sadly, there is such a thing as idiocy. Posting a question, ignoring several answers, and then complaining that nobody is helping, is just plain idiotic. If the fellow in question objects to being characterized as an idiot, he has at least two choices. One is to shove off; another is to behave less idiotically. Other choices include a series of posts indicating that Qmail (or its documentation) sucks, or interjecting remarks like "I'll simply privately curse djb (et all) and wait...", or complaining that people trying to help are just "[spouting] a bunch of baseless crap" etc.. Oh, that's right! The idiot in question also did all of those things. Len. -- Spool and process your email with maildircmd. <http://www.pobox.com/~lbudney/linux/software/maildircmd.html>
At 01:05 PM 6/30/99 -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: >You can't, but after a few posts you can be reasonably sure. :) That's not true. I am a complete and utter moron, in every sense of the word and I have been a part of this list for more than half a year :) Regards, Julian L.C. Brown Bratch Innovation Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Julian L.C. Brown Greetz.Com // DomainOnHold.Com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---- http://www.domainonhold.com :: Register your own domain name and park it for free!
> The topic of this list is qmail. There's nothing stopping anyone from > posting a message about toenail clippers, but such a message would be > off topic for the list, and would likely not be received well. That's > OK, though. They don't want us talking about qmail on the > toenail-clippers list, either. Talking about toenail-clippers would be off-topic on my list too, but on my list each sender is on his/her honor to remain on-topic. The difference lies in something a topic like getting Mutt to work with Maildirs. Well, if the sender never even HEARD of Maildir's before installing the qmail tarball, and read on the list the Mutt was preconfigured to use Maildirs, but had never used Mutt before and asked how, that would be very much ON-Topic on my list. I would contend that it is also on-topic on the qmail crypto list, however it's relative topicality isn't the the major issue. If the sender honestly believes that it is on-topic, then on my list, it is permissible. However on my list, responding to that email saying that it is off-topic would be expressly forbidden. No enforcement of topicality would be allowed on my list. The only thing keeping toenail discussions off the list is the senders sense of honor. > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 2:41 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: New qmail list et al > > > "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> In your opinion, perhaps. I prefer the current arrangement, where > >> people are free to say whatever they want. > > > >So, if what you are saying is true, then the posters who make > >claims that some email is "off-topic" are exercising their > >freedom of expression to say that but simultaneously are mistaken > >or saying falshoods, since people are "free to say whatever they > >want". > > Just because one has the freedom to do X doesn't mean one *should* do > X. > > The topic of this list is qmail. There's nothing stopping anyone from > posting a message about toenail clippers, but such a message would be > off topic for the list, and would likely not be received well. That's > OK, though. They don't want us talking about qmail on the > toenail-clippers list, either. > > >So, I guess it's like every baboon is free to do whatever it wants > >and every baboon is free to pummel another for exercising that freedom? > > Except we're not baboons, we presumably joined this list to talk > about qmail--not simply to exercise our freedoms, and "pummelling" > consists of sending a harshly worded e-mail message. > > >Thanks for all the help you give on this list. > > Glad to help. Maybe I'll see you on the toenail-clippers list > sometime. :-) > > -Dave >
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 2:47 PM > To: Alex Miller > Cc: Qmail@List. Cr. Yp. To > Subject: Re: New qmail list et al > > > "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > But, currently, it IS permissible on this list to post messages that > > say things like "your an idiot" or "this is off topic", "this has > > nothing to do with qmail". > > Here's just $.02, since I think I was the latest one to say "You're an > idiot" on this list. > > If you consult the qmail archives, you will find occasional posts by > me going back about two years. Some of those questions were so > breathtakingly idiotic that nobody bothered to reply at all. Yes, if > someone had pointed out that I was an idiot I would have felt rather > hurt. Hopefully, I am a less idiotic qmail user today. In general, > idiocy is not necessarily a terminal, nor a permanent, condition. > > Sadly, there is such a thing as idiocy. Posting a question, ignoring > several answers, and then complaining that nobody is helping, is just > plain idiotic. If the fellow in question objects to being > characterized as an idiot, he has at least two choices. One is to > shove off; another is to behave less idiotically. In any test the subjects fall into 4 groups. Those who correctly test positive Those who mistakenly test positive Those who correctly test negative Those who mistakenly test negative My concern is that I want to see the dialogue that transpires between those who are mistakenly called idiots or off-topic posters and those who might have clues to the problems that need solving installing, using, and understanding qmail. My serious objection in the case you mentioned was not the fact that the word "idiot" was used even if for supposed cause but that it was used to squelch any further discussion in a subject of great interest to me, the behavior of qmail in a firewall environment and what can happen to someone who is offering qmail services to the public and is the target of nefarious folk. I could care less about idiocy. I wish every idiot who had a problem posed a question. I can answer some of them, and perhaps I can learn something from the answers. So, the idiots can post to my list if they want. Then this list will be sans idiots with questions and my list will be full of idiots with questions. But on my list there will be no rule enforcement allowed. > Other choices include a series of posts indicating that Qmail (or its > documentation) sucks, or interjecting remarks like "I'll simply > privately curse djb (et all) and wait...", or complaining that people > trying to help are just "[spouting] a bunch of baseless crap" > etc.. Oh, that's right! The idiot in question also did all of those > things. > > Len. > > -- > Spool and process your email with maildircmd. > <http://www.pobox.com/~lbudney/linux/software/maildircmd.html> >
From: Alex Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is getting ridiculous, but... : My serious objection in the case you mentioned was not the fact that : the word "idiot" was used even if for supposed cause but that it was : used to squelch any further discussion in a subject of great interest : to me, the behavior of qmail in a firewall environment and what can : happen to someone who is offering qmail services to the public and : is the target of nefarious folk. Nobody was called an idiot for their choice of topic. Nobody was called an idiot in order to end a conversation. The reason someone got called an idiot is that he was acting like an idiot. Furthermore, if people were interested in discussing 'the behavior of qmail in a "firewall environment"', I think that a discussion probably would have started by now. The problem is, there are really no MTA-specific issues with running a mail server behind a firewall. That makes it a firewall discussion, not a qmail discussion. : But on my list there will be no rule enforcement allowed. Can you please just go make your list and leave us alone? --Adam
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Adam D. McKenna wrote: > Nobody was called an idiot for their choice of topic. Nobody was called > an idiot in order to end a conversation. The reason someone got called > an idiot is that he was acting like an idiot. Call me an idiot... I don't care. I appreciate all the help you or anyone else can provide. I really appreciate the responses from DJB. However, I'm not going to stop asking (stupid) questions. > Furthermore, if people were interested in discussing 'the behavior of > qmail in a "firewall environment"', I think that a discussion probably > would have started by now. The problem is, there are really no > MTA-specific issues with running a mail server behind a firewall. That > makes it a firewall discussion, not a qmail discussion. I am interested in talking about qmail in a firewall environment. I'ved asked.. and received... about stripping headers... but it appears it amounts to setting up money laundering business front. I mean, if something is too complicated or error prone -- it becomes a nuisance or a headache. I'm not saying the solution doesn't work, but it does appear outright to be non-eloquent no matter how ingenious. Hey, I have a machine to whack with DJBware now and I'll get around to setting up the laundering front sooner or later. I'll even apply the 30 or 40 other hacks to the mail system... eventually. > : But on my list there will be no rule enforcement allowed. > Can you please just go make your list and leave us alone? Why? Why are you so hostile? Anyway, my question... as to remain on topic... is: (Q) Does qmail look up new information when mail is deferred? If not, why the hell not? Look at the source you say? I answer I'm not a programmer. You say then I am not in a position to be installing qmail or any other mta in the first place -- but, alas, who are you to say this when, in fact, I am put in just this exact position. So you say become a programmer. I say, please just stay on topic and address the question, if you can. So, please stay on topic... don't attack me, address the question if you can, if not, please don't insult (me or anyone else). Now, the reason I ask this is I have experienced something along the lines of (days are approximations, don't insult!): day 0: offsite changes their network (mx?) day 1: they send me an email, I receive it, I reply. day 3: they send mail saying that their mail has been down, please resend. day 4: I resend. day 6 or 7: They say that haven't received mail, I resend. day 8: my day 1 message gets returned to me as undeliverable, no 3 day warning. day 11: my day 3 mail gets returned to me as undeliverable, no 3 day warning. Meanwhile, my day 6/7 mail has gotten through. I can't explain why the retries that should have happened *after* day 6 didn't go through since all mail was going to the same "host" address (not direct IP address). I'm kind of annoyed that I haven't been given any notices of failures or inability to send mail through that should be going through until it's like 7 days later. Of course, I'm sure I'm just an idiot and I'm only imaging this but, just in case I am not, if anyone has any information on this or has had similar experiences, please /msg me privately as so that we won't annoy this list. Scott ps: Keep in mind: The opposing traffic has a yield and I have the right away-- but I treat them as if they're going to barrel right through the yield... and I am alive today because I have done so. If you don't understand how this applies, then ignore it or barrel ahead.
From: Scott D. Yelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Adam D. McKenna wrote: : > Nobody was called an idiot for their choice of topic. Nobody was called : > an idiot in order to end a conversation. The reason someone got called : > an idiot is that he was acting like an idiot. : : Call me an idiot... I don't care. I appreciate all the help you or : anyone else can provide. I really appreciate the responses from DJB. : However, I'm not going to stop asking (stupid) questions. OK. : > Furthermore, if people were interested in discussing 'the behavior of : > qmail in a "firewall environment"', I think that a discussion probably : > would have started by now. The problem is, there are really no : > MTA-specific issues with running a mail server behind a firewall. That : > makes it a firewall discussion, not a qmail discussion. : : I am interested in talking about qmail in a firewall environment. I'ved : asked.. and received... about stripping headers... but it appears it : amounts to setting up money laundering business front. I mean, if : something is too complicated or error prone -- it becomes a nuisance or : a headache. I'm not saying the solution doesn't work, but it does : appear outright to be non-eloquent no matter how ingenious. Hey, I have : a machine to whack with DJBware now and I'll get around to setting up : the laundering front sooner or later. I'll even apply the 30 or 40 : other hacks to the mail system... eventually. What's the question? : > : But on my list there will be no rule enforcement allowed. : > Can you please just go make your list and leave us alone? : : Why? Why are you so hostile? Because I don't care about his list. If he wants to advertise it so badly then he should put it in his .sig, then every (on topic) message he sends out would have it. : Anyway, my question... as to remain on topic... is: : : (Q) Does qmail look up new information when mail is deferred? If not, : why the hell not? Why would qmail cache information from bind? That's not the MTA's job and besides that, it _really_ doesn't sound like something Dan would do. : day 0: offsite changes their network (mx?) : day 1: they send me an email, I receive it, I reply. : day 3: they send mail saying that their mail has been down, please resend. : day 4: I resend. : day 6 or 7: They say that haven't received mail, I resend. : day 8: my day 1 message gets returned to me as undeliverable, no 3 day warning. : day 11: my day 3 mail gets returned to me as undeliverable, no 3 day warning. : : Meanwhile, my day 6/7 mail has gotten through. I can't explain why the : retries that should have happened *after* day 6 didn't go through since : all mail was going to the same "host" address (not direct IP address). : I'm kind of annoyed that I haven't been given any notices of failures : or inability to send mail through that should be going through until : it's like 7 days later. : : Of course, I'm sure I'm just an idiot and I'm only imaging this but, : just in case I am not, if anyone has any information on this or has had : similar experiences, please /msg me privately as so that we won't annoy : this list. If you could provide more information such as the text of the bounce messages (including headers), and your qmail logs showing delivery attempts, it would probably be helpful. --Adam
Well people, this looks interesting. How can I make this kind of thing transparently active throughout the entire mail server, no matter how many aliases and mailing lists and virtualdomains I throw in? Better yet, deliver a bounce message to the sender saying something like, "This kind of attachment is not welcome here. Go complain to the ACLU if you don't like it." Thanx, Noel Mistula wrote: > Hi, > > I have a _very_ small script on filtering mails with file attachment. > This will work only on single attachment. However, you can extend > this script to filter multiple attachments > > As I have said this is a quick and dirty way to filter attachments. > I'm not a good hack, you can write your own script much much > better than this. > > I wrote this because I've been searching the qmail archive and I couldn't > find a single _example_ script for this subject. This posting is directed > to qmail beginners like me. I hope this will be kept in the archive for > future reference. > > Thanks, > > Noel Mistula > > ========================================== > #!/bin/bash > # > # qmail -- checkattach > # Author: Noel G. Mistula > # Date: 28 June 1999 > # > # This is release under the GNU/GPL. > # This is a very crude program. Use at your own risk. > # This will delete incoming email with executable, > # video and other attachments. > # Just comment/uncomment/add whichever is required. > # > # I use this in a user's .qmail file > # by adding the line > # |/usr/local/bin/checkattach > # before the ./Maildir/ > # > # Save this script in /usr/local/bin as checkattach > # > > # Check for executable, application and other attachment. > ATTACHTYPE=`grep "Content-Description:" - | gawk {'print $3'} | cut -c 2-` > if [ $ATTACHTYPE != "" ]; then > case $ATTACHTYPE in > Application) > exit 100;; > MS-DOS) > exit 100;; > Video) > exit 100;; > Movie) > exit 100;; > RealAudio) > exit 100;; > Bitmap) > exit 100;; > MP3) > exit 100;; > Wave) > exit 100;; > *) > exit 0;; > esac > fi > exit 0 > =============================================begin:vcard n:Castro;Juan tel;work:540-9100 Ramal 46 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.appi.com.br/~jcastro org:APPI Inform�tica;Desenvolvimento adr:;;Av. Ataulfo de Paiva, 135/1410 - Leblon;Rio de Janeiro;RJ;22499-900;Brasil version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Consultor note;quoted-printable:One man alone cannot fight the future. USE LINUX!=0D=0A=0D=0A -- The X Racer fn:Juan Carlos Castro y Castro end:vcard
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:20:32PM -0300, Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well people, this looks interesting. How can I make this kind of thing > transparently active throughout the entire mail server, no matter how many > aliases and mailing lists and virtualdomains I throw in? Better yet, deliver a > bounce message to the sender saying something like, "This kind of attachment > is not welcome here. Go complain to the ACLU if you don't like it." This is probably going to tick off your users. This kind of thing should be handled by educating your users. If you really want you can set up procmail filters for each user and reject any multipart messages or single part messages that aren't plain/text. You also need to make sure people aren't running mail readers that try to interpret plain/text as some other format (automatic uudecoding seems to a feature of some mail systems).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > This is probably going to tick off your users. This kind of thing should > be handled by educating your users. Unfortunately, while education is often the key, most users with whom I've had the displeasure of working do *NOT* want to learn anything. They want the MUA to do all the work for them. In a perfect world, all users want to learn how to be responsible users. In this world, most of them are technophobic sloths who blame their own errors on the administrators. And I'm being gentle here. Don't ask my opinion about users on a *bad* day. - -Jay ( ______ )) .--- "There's always time for a good cup of coffee" ---. >===<--. C|~~| (>--- Jay D. Dyson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---<) | = |-' `--' `- Superman had Kryptonite, I have NT. Life is real. -' `-----' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBN3o6Kc2OVDpaKXD9AQGRXwP/d6P2egaTfEFujc7ooFP0lkjhoDUuvs0Y Zp3zJMectN+I+/Y8nH6DxmVOunVdrZFDvQLU5PZwutiEyXM6qSi18hsecz8swpvR mMmZIuiT/yQpIs4bGWBIAed89Y85Ni+nkDpSlTu4KRm5KPbLSHADZzgjjXe6ssqT DQ/2x0fcB9g= =ZT+V -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi Tomasz, Thanks for notifying me about the problems... I forgot to include in the qmail post that I _only_ tested the script on M$ Client (MUA's) emails. I know what you mean. I did a test mail from another MUA and it shows that it is not using the "Content-Description:". I will look into this and make some changes on the script. That's the good thing about posting your script to the Iist. Someone can find the problems :) With regards to the "Application". Again this was based on the M$ Client (MUA) email. When an M$ Client sends an email, I noticed that it uses e.g. "Content-Description: Virusprg (Application)". The "Application" here is _not_ the same as the "application" you can find in the entry "Content-Type: application/octet-stream". They are totally different. But I will look into this and improve the script. I would appreciate however if you can make some suggestions on how to improve the script. Thanks, Noel Mistula ---------- > From: Tomasz Papszun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Noel Mistula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Quick & dirty way to filter attachment > Date: Wednesday, 30 June 1999 17:59 > > Hello, Noel > > I'm not writing to the list because my question may be stupid as I > don't know definitions of the types of mail headers exactly. > > So: *has* the name of the grepped header to be "Content-Description"? > I grepped some of my mailboxes and found not so many of them but, on the > other hand, many more headers named "Content-type" (or "Content-Type", > case doesn't matter). > > And many more attachments are described just by Content-type, not by > Content-Description. > > And another remark: I'm not sure if filtering the word "Application" isn't > too restrictive. Many quite honest messages (from the qmail list as well!) > contain such header: > > Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_598216261P"; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature" > > They are just PGP signed. > > Just my 2 cents... > -- > Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/ | ones and zeros. > > > > On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 at 12:03:36 +1000, Noel Mistula wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have a _very_ small script on filtering mails with file attachment. > > This will work only on single attachment. However, you can extend > > this script to filter multiple attachments > > > > As I have said this is a quick and dirty way to filter attachments. > > I'm not a good hack, you can write your own script much much > > better than this. > > > > I wrote this because I've been searching the qmail archive and I couldn't > > find a single _example_ script for this subject. This posting is directed > > to qmail beginners like me. I hope this will be kept in the archive for > > future reference. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Noel Mistula > > > > ========================================== > > #!/bin/bash > > # > > # qmail -- checkattach > > # Author: Noel G. Mistula > > # Date: 28 June 1999 > > # > > # This is release under the GNU/GPL. > > # This is a very crude program. Use at your own risk. > > # This will delete incoming email with executable, > > # video and other attachments. > > # Just comment/uncomment/add whichever is required. > > # > > # I use this in a user's .qmail file > > # by adding the line > > # |/usr/local/bin/checkattach > > # before the ./Maildir/ > > # > > # Save this script in /usr/local/bin as checkattach > > # > > > > # Check for executable, application and other attachment. > > ATTACHTYPE=`grep "Content-Description:" - | gawk {'print $3'} | cut -c 2-` > > if [ $ATTACHTYPE != "" ]; then > > case $ATTACHTYPE in > > Application) > > exit 100;; > > MS-DOS) > > exit 100;; > > Video) > > exit 100;; > > Movie) > > exit 100;; > > RealAudio) > > exit 100;; > > Bitmap) > > exit 100;; > > MP3) > > exit 100;; > > Wave) > > exit 100;; > > *) > > exit 0;; > > esac > > fi > > exit 0 > > ============================================= > >
Can't figure this one out. Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 .qmail-centroculturald elacooperacion-educacion and here is the bounce: Hi. This is the qmail-send program at nmail.rcc.com.ar. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) Is there a limit on the length of aliases? Anyone know why this alias is not working? thx - eric + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Spark Sistemas E-mail - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. Tel: 4702-1958 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote: > Can't figure this one out. > > Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 > .qmail-centroculturald > elacooperacion-educacion > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) You should handle it via .qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras or you can catch all using .qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-default -- Regards, Jose Luis Painceira.
The problem is simple. You need to add a .qmail file in the home directory of the user that is named in "virtualdomains" as being in control of the domain. If the user is alias, then you should create the following: ~alias/.qmail-letras If the user is one of your regular users, then you should create the .qmail-letras file in that user's home directory. Did you remember to HUP qmail-send after adding this entry to virtualdomains? --Adam On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:35:31PM -0300, Eric Dahnke wrote: > Can't figure this one out. > > Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 > .qmail-centroculturald > elacooperacion-educacion > > > and here is the bounce: > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at nmail.rcc.com.ar. > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following > addresses. > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) > > Is there a limit on the length of aliases? Anyone know why this alias is > not working? > > > thx - eric > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > Spark Sistemas E-mail > - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. > Tel: 4702-1958 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
There are no virtual domains involved. rcc.com.ar is a local domain. centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras is an alias for a regualar user. ie. this user wants the following address to be valid for his account. [EMAIL PROTECTED] many thx. - eric "Adam D. McKenna" escribi�: > > The problem is simple. You need to add a .qmail file in the home directory > of the user that is named in "virtualdomains" as being in control of the > domain. > > If the user is alias, then you should create the following: > ~alias/.qmail-letras > > If the user is one of your regular users, then you should create the > .qmail-letras file in that user's home directory. > > Did you remember to HUP qmail-send after adding this entry to virtualdomains? > > --Adam > > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:35:31PM -0300, Eric Dahnke wrote: > > Can't figure this one out. > > > > Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 > > .qmail-centroculturald > > elacooperacion-educacion > > > > > > and here is the bounce: > > > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at nmail.rcc.com.ar. > > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following > > addresses. > > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) > > > > Is there a limit on the length of aliases? Anyone know why this alias is > > not working? > > > > > > thx - eric > > > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > > Spark Sistemas E-mail > > - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. > > Tel: 4702-1958 > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Spark Sistemas E-mail - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. Tel: 4702-1958 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In that case then you should only need ~alias/.qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras. If this isn't working then you're doing something wrong... Are you sure you spelled everything right?? :) --Adam On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:50:28PM -0300, Eric Dahnke wrote: > > There are no virtual domains involved. rcc.com.ar is a local domain. > > centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras is an alias for a regualar user. > ie. this user wants the following address to be valid for his account. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > many thx. - eric > > > > > > "Adam D. McKenna" escribi�: > > > > The problem is simple. You need to add a .qmail file in the home directory > > of the user that is named in "virtualdomains" as being in control of the > > domain. > > > > If the user is alias, then you should create the following: > > ~alias/.qmail-letras > > > > If the user is one of your regular users, then you should create the > > .qmail-letras file in that user's home directory. > > > > Did you remember to HUP qmail-send after adding this entry to virtualdomains? > > > > --Adam > > > > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:35:31PM -0300, Eric Dahnke wrote: > > > Can't figure this one out. > > > > > > Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 > > > .qmail-centroculturald > > > elacooperacion-educacion > > > > > > > > > and here is the bounce: > > > > > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at nmail.rcc.com.ar. > > > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following > > > addresses. > > > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) > > > > > > Is there a limit on the length of aliases? Anyone know why this alias is > > > not working? > > > > > > > > > thx - eric > > > > > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > > > Spark Sistemas E-mail > > > - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. > > > Tel: 4702-1958 > > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > > -- > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > Spark Sistemas E-mail > - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. > Tel: 4702-1958 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Can't figure this one out. Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 .qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras and here is the bounce: Hi. This is the qmail-send program at nmail.rcc.com.ar. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) Is there a limit on the length of aliases? Anyone know why this alias is not working? thx - eric + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Spark Sistemas E-mail - presentado por IWCC Argentina S.A. Tel: 4702-1958 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Can't figure this one out. > > Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 > .qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras > > > and here is the bounce: > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at nmail.rcc.com.ar. > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following > addresses. > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) There must be something else happening. (Virtual domain?) I have just tested this and it works on my computer (Linux RH5.1). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60 Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBN3pLzVMwP8g7qbw/EQJeGgCfUT+N1r05FomRp0mxUr5CQGNDFx4AoI3z Z0pWW+YaKGwwa739UMomOjdH =3zb0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.antek.cz PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk. [Tom Waits]
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote: > Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 > .qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) .qmail-letras -- Regards, Jose Luis Painceira.
Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: :Can't figure this one out. :Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: : :-rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 :.qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras ^^^^ chown alias ~alias/.qmail-* Regards, -- Geoff Wing : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Work URL: http://www.primenet.com.au/ Rxvt Stuff : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ego URL : http://pobox.com/~gcw/ Zsh Stuff : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone : (Australia) 0413 431 874
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 05:03:09PM +0000, Geoff Wing wrote: > Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > :Can't figure this one out. > :Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > : > :-rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 >.qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras > ^^^^ > chown alias ~alias/.qmail-* Shouldn't matter.. It should only need to have permissions such that qmail-local can read it AFAIK.. Perhaps the permisisons on the directory itself are wrong? --Adam
By the way, if the alias is trying to do a program delivery, and is set +x, qmail will refuse to deliver the mail. Check and see if that's the case. --Adam On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:06:39PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 05:03:09PM +0000, Geoff Wing wrote: > > Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > :Can't figure this one out. > > :Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > : > > :-rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 >.qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras > > ^^^^ > > chown alias ~alias/.qmail-* > > Shouldn't matter.. It should only need to have permissions such that > qmail-local can read it AFAIK.. Perhaps the permisisons on the directory > itself are wrong? > > --Adam
OK I feel like an idiot now. Forget that last mail.. :) --Adam On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:09:41PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: > By the way, if the alias is trying to do a program delivery, and is set +x, > qmail will refuse to deliver the mail. Check and see if that's the case. > > --Adam > > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:06:39PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 05:03:09PM +0000, Geoff Wing wrote: > > > Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > > :Can't figure this one out. > > > :Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: > > > : > > > :-rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 >.qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras > > > ^^^^ > > > chown alias ~alias/.qmail-* > > > > Shouldn't matter.. It should only need to have permissions such that > > qmail-local can read it AFAIK.. Perhaps the permisisons on the directory > > itself are wrong? > > > > --Adam
Adam D. McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: :On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 05:03:09PM +0000, Geoff Wing wrote: :> Eric Dahnke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: :> :Can't figure this one out. :> :Here is the .qmail file in ~alias: :> :-rw-r--r-- 1 root qmail 7 Jun 29 12:18 :.qmail-centroculturaldelacooperacion-letras :> ^^^^ :> chown alias ~alias/.qmail-* :Shouldn't matter.. It should only need to have permissions such that :qmail-local can read it AFAIK.. Perhaps the permisisons on the directory :itself are wrong? Well, there's so little information here anyway. For all we know, he could have done % qmail-pw2u -someflags < passwordfile > assign; qmail-newu And maybe ``alias'' is incorrectly set up, or -someflags had -/ in it. To analyse the problem which is causing qmail-local to not deliver there needs to be a stack more information. Regards, -- Geoff Wing : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Work URL: http://www.primenet.com.au/ Rxvt Stuff : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ego URL : http://pobox.com/~gcw/ Zsh Stuff : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone : (Australia) 0413 431 874
We are undergraduate students of the Statistics Department and we are working in a small research project. We are trying to fit a queueing model for the e-mail delivery service. In our Institute they use Qmail to handle the e-mail service. We are using the log files produced every day by Qmail to obtain the information about the movement of messages. We have some doubts about the log files that were not answered by the local administrators and we hope that someone can help us. 1) When the delivery of a message is postponed for the next day, the sucessive log files regarding these postponned messages do not have the same information as before. For instance birth time and size are not present anymore. Since the message is delivered, this information is hidden somewhere. Is there some way to get this missing information? 2) Qmail has 23 queues for the local deliveries and 23 queues for the remote deliveries. We were informed that the message choose the queue across the relation QP (mod 23). A message to a list have the same QP but each destination is processed in a different queue. How can we know the queue number used in each destination? We appreciate any comments. Thanks. F�bio and Gustavo. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Undergraduates from IME-Institute of Mathematics and Statistics University of S�o Paulo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 14:04:58 -0300, F�bio Eiki Doy wrote: >1) When the delivery of a message is postponed for the next >day, the sucessive log files regarding these postponned messages >do not have the same information as before. For instance birth >time and size are not present anymore. Since the message is >delivered, this information is hidden somewhere. Is there some >way to get this missing information? Get qmailanalog for log analysis. The matchup script will output the pending deliveries (with the info you require) to fd#5. this makes it easy to carry it from matchup to matchup (see man matchup). >2) Qmail has 23 queues for the local deliveries and 23 queues for the >remote deliveries. We were informed that the message choose the queue >across the relation QP (mod 23). A message to a list >have the same QP but each destination is processed in a different queue. No, there is only one queue for local and one queue for remote. The 23-way split is just to avoid too many files in one directory (e.g. 200 in each of 23 directories rather than 4600 in one). This is to make access faster for very large queues. The local and remote destinations are processed by different programs, but the message is still stored only once in queue/mess. >How can we know the queue number used in each destination? it's the same message file name. QP is the pid of the qmail-queue process. -Sincerely, Fred (Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
Hi, I have a strange problem. When sending email from Outlook Express to Qmail I get "host not found" for known hosts, not always, but it seems to be rather frequent. And second - qmail smtpd (or what it could be) appends "yes" emails-addresses: A mail message could not be sent because the following host is unknown: nyavf.seyes To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: sometimes it rewrites the email like this: telia.somyes, should be "telia.com"... Havent got any clue...
> > sometimes it rewrites the email like this: telia.somyes, should be > "telia.com"... > com and som differs only in 1 bit. That might have some relation to the problem... Robert Varga
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 19:21:04 +0200, Anders V�nnman wrote: >I have a strange problem. When sending email from Outlook Express to Qmail I >get "host not found" for known hosts, not always, but it seems to be rather >frequent. And second - qmail smtpd (or what it could be) appends "yes" >emails-addresses: > >A mail message could not be sent because the following host is unknown: > > nyavf.seyes > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: > >sometimes it rewrites the email like this: telia.somyes, should be >"telia.com"... I think you need to determine where the problems occur. qmail will say "host not found" if there is no information on that host in DNS. If your DNS is set up wrong, this may happen because your server lies to qmail. Another reason is that ISPs disable MX lookups. A third (most common and a temporary error) is that there is no authoritative name server for the address. This is common if none of them can be reached (they are all on a bad net or you are) or (less common) misconfigured. I would not be surprised if OE and MS-E would happily send messages based on non-authoritative info, though. OE (at least normal use) contacts qmail as an SMTP client. It does all the header writing. Qmail doesn't. Qmail may change the envelope address by canonicalizing the address, but it does this correctly. If nyaf.se is a CNAME for nyaf.seyes (broken DNS) this might happen. However, I'd bet on OE being the culprit. V�nliga h�lsningar, Frederik -Sincerely, Fred (Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
Im running the DNS-server that Qmail uses for lookup, it has no cname for nyavf.se. nyavf.se is our own domain, and everything workes just fine when im not using qmail (letting the clients directly contact our internal smtp-server). The Outlook also does - :-) Perhaps you're right about the DNS - even though it seems to work fine - when using our internal mailserver it uses another DNS for it's lookups. Have to turn on some debugging (first find out how it on qmail) and check both the dns and qmail. I can live with some host not found once in a while - esp these last day there seems to be some problem on Telia/Tele2. But not that "yes" is appened after the email-address. What's different with this outlook-client besides everyone else trying to connect is that it has "setenv = RELAYCLIENT" in hosts.allow to allow relaying. Thanks for the advice. Im new at qmail have used sendmail some but when I took a look at qmail it seems more secure and easy to understand - now I dont know :-) Mvh Anders
I use qmail with a freemail system (webmail.dsmemo.com). Because I have a custom authentication system (I use a db), I tried to use a perl script to check login and password and this work well. The problem is that I never noticied about a pop3 server wich use a flexible authentication scheme (3 step) AND mailbox (not maildir). I think the alternative solution may be to modify other software, like qpopper, but if there is somewhat already made, would be the best :-))
Howdy folks, I'm using a script (found on this list, although I don't have the original auythor handy) to automate stat's analysis. The script sits in cron, and is run daily. #!/bin/sh # # Mail all the qmail stats out someplace sensible. # RAWLOG=/tmp/qmail.$$.raw STATSPROGS="zoverall zdeferrals failures zsuccesses zrecipients zrhosts zrxdelay zsenders zsuids zddist" # comma space seperate all email addresses RECIPIENTS="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" # cat <<EOF >/tmp/qmail.$$.comp X-Mailer: /bin/cat v1.0 To: $RECIPIENTS Subject: Qmail logs for `hostname` -------- EOF # Munge the logs into an intermediary format. awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' < /var/log/maillog \ | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup > $RAWLOG for i in $STATSPROGS; do /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/$i < $RAWLOG >/tmp/qmail.$$.$i echo "#text/plain [$i] /tmp/qmail.$$.$i" >> /tmp/qmail.$$.comp done echo send | comp -use -edit mhn -file /tmp/qmail.$$.comp >/dev/null # Must use leading "*", as mh renames things to "delete" them... rm -f /tmp/*qmail.$$.* It's been working fine for many months now. A few days ago, it started producing the error " matchup: fatal: unable to write fd 5: file descriptor not open". The stat's are still produced, however. The 3rd Stat's program (failures) doesn't produce any output, but that could simply be because there was no failures? - Tillman Hodgson
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 12:16:13 -0600, Tillman Hodgson wrote: >It's been working fine for many months now. A few days ago, it started >producing the error " >matchup: fatal: unable to write fd 5: file descriptor not open". The >stat's are still produced, however. The 3rd Stat's program (failures) >doesn't produce any output, but that could simply be because there was >no failures? This script doesn't work right. fd 5 from matchup is pending messages. I doubt the stats are valid if that info isn't fed back into matchup (unless you are analyzing logs for a time period >> 7 days in which case the result is a reasonable approximation). - AFAIK -Sincerely, Fred (Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
> >It's been working fine for many months now. A few days ago, it started > >producing the error " > >matchup: fatal: unable to write fd 5: file descriptor not open". The > >stat's are still produced, however. The 3rd Stat's program (failures) > >doesn't produce any output, but that could simply be because there was > >no failures? > > This script doesn't work right. fd 5 from matchup is pending messages. > I doubt the stats are valid if that info isn't fed back into matchup > (unless you are analyzing logs for a time period >> 7 days in which > case the result is a reasonable approximation). - AFAIK > > -Sincerely, Fred qmHandle identified two messages in the queue that were very messed up, the result of my experimentation with an email --> web (as opposed to web --> email) gateway beginning about the same time the script started to give that error. (See my post regarding that from yesterday; I'd love feedback on a better way to do that.) Since these messages could not be delivered (horribly munged), I removed them (using qmHandle) and re-ran the script. Unfortunately, it did not correct the problem. From a bit of playing around with the script, I'm pretty sure that the problem is in the final redirect in the line: awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' < /var/log/maillog | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup > /tmp/test.txt (Note that I've replaced the shell variable with a real file name in this example). It seems to work fine up to and including running matchup, but the redirect makes it unhappy. I'm showing my blatant lack of knowledge here, but why is the redirect failing? I'm curious also about what you're saying about the script not working right. It sounds like pending messages are not included in the stat's? I gather that as after 7 days the message to cycled out, so running it on logs longer than that is more accurate. Did I get the gist of what you're saying, or am I hopelessly lost? <grin> - Tillman Hodgson
Can anyone point me at any form of web-based address admin for virtual domain users? I'd like users who control domains to be able to easily add/modify/delete e-mail addresses from a web-form. Also, some sort of admin interface to setup the domains, etc would be nice. Has anyone done anything like this? Or do I need to knock something together? R. -- Two rules to success in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. -- Sassan Tat
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 08:01:54PM +0100, Robin Bowes wrote: > Can anyone point me at any form of web-based address admin for virtual > domain users? I'd like users who control domains to be able to easily > add/modify/delete e-mail addresses from a web-form. > > Also, some sort of admin interface to setup the domains, etc would be > nice. > > Has anyone done anything like this? Or do I need to knock something > together? Look at http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ It is a work in progress but does almost everything you need. I am working on the code right now to add and delete virtual domains. New documentation is being written now by our summer intern. Ken Jones Inter7
> > Look at http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ > Thanks, but: The requested URL /qmailadmin/qmailadmin-0.21a.tar.gz was not found on this server. Ooops! Looks interesting, though. R. -- Two rules to success in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. -- Sassan Tat
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:35:50PM +0100, Robin Bowes wrote: > > > > Look at http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ > > > > Thanks, but: > > The requested URL /qmailadmin/qmailadmin-0.21a.tar.gz was not found on > this server. > > Ooops! > > Looks interesting, though. Oops! Fixed. The file is there now Ken Inter7
If I create other maildirs using safecat or something similar, inside ~/mail , can a regular maildir-patched pine access them? Or if it cannot from itself, are there any patches that make that also possible? Robert Varga ps: sorry for the bit off-topic question, however the large memory usage of pine handling large mbox-format files can be problematic on small machines :-)
I've been talking to Mark Crispin about the Maildir format and he as brought up what really seems to be a valid concern to me. He says that Maildir is unsuitable for large servers because the filesytems serialize creation and deletion of files in a single file system, because the inode and free block tables have to be manipulated. Thus the file creation part of Maildir drivery ends up being serialized and you spend all your time in the filesystem. He states problems with servers processing more than a few hundred messages per second (300+ or so). Anybody else have some experience with this? - David Harris Principal Engineer, DRH Internet Services
From: David Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : I've been talking to Mark Crispin about the Maildir format and he as brought : up what really seems to be a valid concern to me. : : He says that Maildir is unsuitable for large servers because the filesytems : serialize creation and deletion of files in a single file system, because : the inode and free block tables have to be manipulated. Thus the file : creation part of Maildir drivery ends up being serialized and you spend all : your time in the filesystem. He states problems with servers processing more : than a few hundred messages per second (300+ or so). I'm not arguing with you, but what's the difference in disk access between appending to an existing file (mbox) and creating a new file (maildir)? It seems like appending an existing file would take at least one extra stat(), and the inode and free block tables would still have to be manipulated (wouldn't they?) --Adam
Adam D. McKenna wrote: > I'm not arguing with you, but what's the difference in disk access between > appending to an existing file (mbox) and creating a new file (maildir)? > > It seems like appending an existing file would take at least one extra stat(), > and the inode and free block tables would still have to be manipulated > (wouldn't they?) Appending does not require creation of a new inode. It seems that both would need to grab from the free block table. However, there might be pre-allocation of block algorithms (with the goal of reducing fragmentation) that ease this burden. I'm not the expert. I'm just asking. :-) The alternative is not just the mbox format but other formats which store multiple messages in one file using an internal kind of database. Mbox fits in this category, but it's a really annoying database format. - David Harris Principal Engineer, DRH Internet Services
"David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | He says that Maildir is unsuitable for large servers because the filesytems | serialize creation and deletion of files in a single file system, because | the inode and free block tables have to be manipulated. Thus the file | creation part of Maildir drivery ends up being serialized and you spend all | your time in the filesystem. He states problems with servers processing more | than a few hundred messages per second (300+ or so). | | Anybody else have some experience with this? 300 * 60 * 60 * 24 == 25,920,000. Did Mark actually measure a single mail server doing 25M deliveries per day? I don't think that's a bad figure. My humble opinion: Not everyone puts their entire enterprise on one mail server. Many mail systems serve department sized units, and they aren't asked to deliver anything remotely approaching 25M messages/day. For this population, Mark's concerns are totally irrelevent. The purpose of Maildir is to serialize operations without recourse to flock, and to enable safe operation over NFS. Mark rejects NFS a-priori, but most department sized outfits use NFS for everything, and so maildir can be a huge win.
Hi all, We've deciced that our company is going to archive copies of all E-mail's as they enter and leave our network. Privacy issues aside, what is the proper Qmail way of achieving this end? Thanks in advance, Gavin []-----------------------------------+------------------------------------[] | Gavin Cameron | ITworks Consulting | | Ph : +61 3 9667 0297 | Suite 100, 85 Grattan Street | | Fax : +61 3 9347 6544 | Carlton, Victoria | | Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Australia, 3053 | []-----------------------------------+------------------------------------[]
On Thu, Jul 01, 1999 at 02:49:59PM +1000, Gavin Cameron wrote: > We've deciced that our company is going to archive copies of all E-mail's > as they enter and leave our network. > > Privacy issues aside, what is the proper Qmail way of achieving this end? Read the FAQ: 8.2. How do I keep a copy of all incoming and outgoing mail messages? -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 3391 377 Fax: +64 3 3391 417
Qmail seems to continue to run (i.e. qmail-smtpd and qmail-send are both running) but all connections to port 25 are timing out. The server is not busy, and there is no firewall between the client and the server. I Kill qmail send and all tcpserver processes and restart by hand... then no problems... There are no messages in any syslogs, and all other processes function correctly Does anyone want to take a stab at it??? -- Doug Lumpkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Karl Lellman wrote: > I agree that the ideal place to have the SMTP relay is on the firewall in > place of the proxy, but the firewall doesn't like having extra bits running > on it, so I'm stuck with our scenario. What about adding another qmail server _outside_ the firewall then and routing all outgoing mail through it? -- Sergei Kolobov Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CPMC Phone: +7-501-967-1256 http://www.cpmc.net Fax: +7-501-967-1257
Hello, I've installed qmail 1.03, daemontools, ucspi-tcp and rblsmtpd. I set up rcpthosts and tcp.smtp files in order to allow incoming and outgoing mails only for my domain. I use an EXTERNAL PC with a different IP address to test this configuration. I use this set of tests doing a telnet connection to my mailhub : 1- mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] rcpt to [EMAIL PROTECTED] : mail is delivered : OK it's the correct situation 2- mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] rcpt to [EMAIL PROTECTED] : mail is denied : OK I don't want to relay outside to outside mails thanks to rcpthosts file 3- mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] rcpt to [EMAIL PROTECTED] : mail is denied : OK I don't want to relay inside (the sender IP address is not on my IP network) to outside mails thanks to tcp.smtp file 4- mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] rcpt to [EMAIL PROTECTED] : mail is delivered : I'M NOT SATISFIED WITH THIS I don't know how to fix this problem and I wonder if there is a mean to fix it Please, can you give me clues or links where I can find a solution ? Regards. Tarkan HOCAOGLU.
