qmail Digest 2 Nov 1999 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 808
Topics (messages 32319 through 32364):
Re: X-Face headers
32319 by: Dave Sill
32328 by: Florian G. Pflug
32335 by: Chris Garrigues
32336 by: Dave Sill
32337 by: Grant Edwards
32348 by: Russ Allbery
Mail forwarding
32320 by: nsaravanan.md.in.dsqsoft.com
Bounce refused due to empty "From<>", resulting in double bounced. Workaround?
32321 by: Pavel Ganelin
32325 by: Jeff Hayward
32340 by: Sam
setlock permission denied
32322 by: Peeter Pirn
qmail and HP's OpenMail
32323 by: Peter Green
setlock... permission denied
32324 by: Peeter Pirn
How to forward unrecognised mail to another host?
32326 by: Robin Bowes
32327 by: Dave Sill
32330 by: Robin Bowes
32333 by: Robin Bowes
32334 by: Magnus Bodin
32347 by: John R Levine
32349 by: Russ Allbery
32352 by: Robin Bowes
32353 by: Robin Bowes
32354 by: Robin Bowes
qmail dns related question
32329 by: olli
32339 by: Tomasz Papszun
what _should_ I call our internal domain?
32331 by: Robbie Walker
Re: Still trying to figure out delay on smtp/pop3
32332 by: nascheme.enme.ucalgary.ca
NFS mounted /var/qmail/queue directory
32338 by: Curtis Generous
32341 by: Racer X
32362 by: Curtis Generous
qmail -> PMDF weirdness
32342 by: David L. Nicol
32344 by: Sam
qmail.html through publicfile
32343 by: D. J. Bernstein
Need some advice...
32345 by: Mike
Mail hub, problem to talk to internal mailserver
32346 by: Hon Wai Wong
32350 by: Hon Wai Wong
Problem receiving mail (long)
32351 by: David Clark
32358 by: Stefan Paletta
What is /var/qmail/queue/pid for?
32355 by: Andy Bradford
Mail relaying with QMail
32356 by: Antonio Navarro Navarro
32359 by: Stefan Paletta
Dear Ol' DOS (and POP3 clients for same)
32357 by: Barry Dwyer
QMail an MySQL or similar
32360 by: Antonio Navarro Navarro
32361 by: Michael Boman
32363 by: Peter Gradwell
32364 by: Michael Boman
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Russell Nelson (apparently a xfmail user) wrote:
No, Russ uses VM under XEmacs.
>X-Face:
>[...]
>
>Is there any way to see these if you don't have XFmail?
VM under XEmacs and Zmail (which was bundled with IRIX for a while)
both handle X-Faces. I've also seen a way to view X-Faces from mutt.
>Would
>a preprocessor that converts them into attached inline MIME gifs
>be too too too tricky? Procmail rule? Pestering Mozilla.org
>wish list to replace the Customizable N-Thing with the X-Face
>would result in much greater popularity of X-Faces, re-tacking
>them onto messages as a trailing (or leading) inline picture would
>work too and wouldn't require changes to MUAs that already can
>see inline graphics.
It shouldn't be too hard to do something with
procmail+compface+metamail to convert them to MIME attachments.
-Dave
Hi
>>Would
>>a preprocessor that converts them into attached inline MIME gifs
>>be too too too tricky? Procmail rule? Pestering Mozilla.org
>>wish list to replace the Customizable N-Thing with the X-Face
>>would result in much greater popularity of X-Faces, re-tacking
>>them onto messages as a trailing (or leading) inline picture would
>>work too and wouldn't require changes to MUAs that already can
>>see inline graphics.
>
>It shouldn't be too hard to do something with
>procmail+compface+metamail to convert them to MIME attachments.
I think it's sick to send an _image_ with every mail (that's what you
man, isn't it?) - Thats worse than those hunge ascii-arts sent as
signatures...
Greetings, Florian Pflug
> From: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 08:42:21 -0500 (EST)
>
> "David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Russell Nelson (apparently a xfmail user) wrote:
>
> No, Russ uses VM under XEmacs.
>
> >X-Face:
> >[...]
> >
> >Is there any way to see these if you don't have XFmail?
>
> VM under XEmacs and Zmail (which was bundled with IRIX for a while)
> both handle X-Faces. I've also seen a way to view X-Faces from mutt.
exmh also displays x-face headers.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues virCIO
http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ http://www.virCIO.Com
+1 512 432 4046 +1 512 374 0500
4314 Avenue C
O- Austin, TX 78751-3709
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
Florian G. Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think it's sick to send an _image_ with every mail (that's what you
>man, isn't it?) - Thats worse than those hunge ascii-arts sent as
>signatures...
My X-Face is 187 bytes. Big deal.
See also:
ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/sarcasm/modest-proposal.txt
-Dave
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 02:58:30PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote:
> >I think it's sick to send an _image_ with every mail (that's what you
> >man, isn't it?) - Thats worse than those hunge ascii-arts sent as
> >signatures...
>
> My X-Face is 187 bytes. Big deal.
I'm not to concerned about attaching a couple hundred bytes to all my
outgoing e-mails, but I certainly wouldn't want those bytes to be a
picture of me. I don't think that there are that many people in the
world who want my face looking at them from their computer screen. If
they _do_ want pictures of me, they can probably figure out where to
find some.
--
Grant Edwards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not to concerned about attaching a couple hundred bytes to all my
> outgoing e-mails, but I certainly wouldn't want those bytes to be a
> picture of me. I don't think that there are that many people in the
> world who want my face looking at them from their computer screen. If
> they _do_ want pictures of me, they can probably figure out where to
> find some.
There are some interesting human interaction theories behind X-Face. A
large part of the initial concept was to present a face to the people
you're interacting with electronically, which can have the effect of
reminding people that they're interacting with a human. At least some
people will tend not to gratuitously flame as much when they're seeing a
human face.
Given the minimal byte cost, I don't think it's a particularly harmful
experiment. I'm personally paranoid enough that I'd rather not widely
advertise what I look like to any random person, but that's just my
personal hang-up.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Hi
I am new to qmail. In our office we have a lotus notes mail server ADSC which
handles incoming and outgoing mails. Now we want to introduce a linux based
qmail ( as we feel that qmail deliveries will be faster) in between ADSC and
router so that qmail will forward all the mails outgoing as well as qmail will
get all the incoming messages and forward it to ADSC. Also we want to remove
header information before a mail is sent out. it should have information saying
that it has come from qmail server.
It should be possible.Can any one help ?
Thanks in advance
Nainar Saravanan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unix Administrator
DSQ Software Limited
Chennai
INDIA
I looked through a lot of E-mail qmail archive discussing it, but I did not
see any solution.
We have domain A and run qmail-smtp server to relay E-mails for domain B.
When a user X from domain B sends a message to the wrong address using our
qmail server
The messages bounced and qmail sends a message to X@B with
From: <>
The SMPT server on B refuses to accept it (null from, spam filtering in
action I assume) and it ends double bouncing to me as postmaster@A.
I saw a lot of messages that I should mail postmaster@B a copy of RFC :-)
but I think it is useless, because B is a big ISP provider and they would
not change anything in their configuration for us. It there any way in
bounce message insert something like
bounce@A
without patching the code (i.e. using some configuration files?).
Qmail has doublebounce files no "singlebouncefrom"
PS. Yes I read about infinite loops and logic behind empty from
==================================================
Pavel Ganelin tel: (703)-444-6750 x 231
MarketSwitch Corp. fax: (703)-444-6812
==================================================
Please excuse my blunt language, but what you suggest is dumb,
broken, and a malicious attack on a fundamentally necessary property
of SMTP.
Far better would be to either (a) block reception of mail from the
broken site, which eliminates the need to bounce messages to them,
or (b) write a patch to qmail-send or possibly qmail-remote so that
it simply discards bounces which would go to that site.
And always - educate, educate, educate.
-- Jeff Hayward
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Pavel Ganelin wrote:
I looked through a lot of E-mail qmail archive discussing it, but I did not
see any solution.
We have domain A and run qmail-smtp server to relay E-mails for domain B.
When a user X from domain B sends a message to the wrong address using our
qmail server
The messages bounced and qmail sends a message to X@B with
From: <>
The SMPT server on B refuses to accept it (null from, spam filtering in
action I assume) and it ends double bouncing to me as postmaster@A.
I saw a lot of messages that I should mail postmaster@B a copy of RFC :-)
but I think it is useless, because B is a big ISP provider and they would
not change anything in their configuration for us. It there any way in
bounce message insert something like
bounce@A
without patching the code (i.e. using some configuration files?).
Qmail has doublebounce files no "singlebouncefrom"
PS. Yes I read about infinite loops and logic behind empty from
==================================================
Pavel Ganelin tel: (703)-444-6750 x 231
MarketSwitch Corp. fax: (703)-444-6812
==================================================
Pavel Ganelin writes:
> I looked through a lot of E-mail qmail archive discussing it, but I did not
> see any solution.
>
>
> We have domain A and run qmail-smtp server to relay E-mails for domain B.
>
>
> When a user X from domain B sends a message to the wrong address using our
> qmail server
> The messages bounced and qmail sends a message to X@B with
> From: <>
> The SMPT server on B refuses to accept it (null from, spam filtering in
> action I assume) and it ends double bouncing to me as postmaster@A.
>
>
> I saw a lot of messages that I should mail postmaster@B a copy of RFC :-)
My usual solution for this situation is to blacklist the idiots with a very
descriptive error message:
517-Your mail server, [hostname] violates RFC 822.
517 See <URL:ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc822.txt>
My response to any subsequent inquiries is that the sending mail server has
a problem. If necessary, I am always ready to launch into a very extensive
discussion regarding fine points of RFC 822, RFC 821, RFC 2045, and other
favorite topics of mine.
Sooner or later, the problem usually fixes itself :-)
--
Sam
I run setlock to lock qmail-pop3d sessions on a per-user basis. Setlock
runs the poplogger script to log POP activity.
After two days of running smoothly, setlock fails with something close to:
setlock:... poplogger.sh: permission denied
P. Pirn - Sys Admin - see complete headers for more info
I'm goofing around with HP's OpenMail for Linux. One of the things it
requires (wants) is a sendmail installation to route e-mail. During
installation, OpenMail attempts to add some rules to the sendmail.cf.
Basically, it looks like it just finds mail destined for "*/*" or "*;*" and
runs a provided filter on it. There's a bunch of other stuff, but I'm a
little dusty on sendmail rules. (I can provide the rules for the truly
sick.)
What I'd like to do is avoid having a sendmail installation, if possible.
However, it isn't at all clear how one could replicate this functionality
using qmail. I STFW (including HP's OpenMail site) to absolutely no avail.
Any thoughts before I just resign to installing sendmail on the box?
/pg
--
Peter Green
Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry for the preceding mispost!
I run the poplogger script with setlock for my qmail-pop3d invocation.
After running fine for two days, I get an error similar to:
setlock:... poplogger.sh: permission denied
and popping fails.
What's strange is that poplogger.sh is set to 755:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 376 Oct 29 12:13 poplogger.sh
Setlock is also set to 755. Any ideas?
Here's how I run qmail-pop3d:
csh -cf '/bin/qmailpop3drc &'
This is qmailpop3drc:
/usr/contrib/bin/tcpserver -c 40 0 pop3 \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.fwi.com \
/bin/checkpassword /usr/contrib/bin/setlock -nx Maildir/.poplock \
/bin/poplogger.sh /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
Checkpassword is patched to log to syslog in a manner borrowed from
existing checkpassword patches:
http://mail.fwi.com/qmail-1.03/pp-syslog.patch
This is the poplogger.sh script:
#!/bin/sh
/bin/echo " $USER: began with: " \
`/bin/ls /var/mail/${USER}/new/ | wc -l` "+"\
`/bin/ls /var/mail/${USER}/cur/ | wc -l` \
| /var/qmail/bin/splogger qmail-pop3d 3
$*
/bin/echo " $USER: ended with: " \
`/bin/ls /var/mail/${USER}/new/ | wc -l` "+"\
`/bin/ls /var/mail/${USER}/cur/ | wc -l` \
| /var/qmail/bin/splogger qmail-pop3d 3
P. Pirn - Sys Admin - see complete headers for more info
Hi all,
Our current mail system uses qmail as the front end to an MS Mail system.
It looks something like this:
SMTP (*@*.eoc.org.uk)
+--------------> (other hosts)
|
QMQP | SMTP (*@eoc.org.uk)
dido -----------> candace --------------> ms-mail
(qmail-smtpd) (qmail-qmqpd) (MailBeamer)
i.e. Incoming mail is recieved on dido by a "mini-qmail" installation which
forwards all mail to candace using QMQP. candance then re-delivers all mail
addressed to eoc.org.uk to ms-mail. All mail addressed to sub-domains is
processed according to our local DNS MX records, e.g. mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is delivered locally on candace.
The re-direction of eoc.org.uk is done with an smtproutes entry:
eoc.org.uk:ms-mail.eoc.org.uk
I'd like to modify this setup so that candace processes certain addresses in
the eoc.org.uk domain and forwards any it doesn't recognise to the ms-mail
system. This is essentially to allow mailing lists to run from the candace
box with an address like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So far, here's what I've come up with:
1. Create a virtual domain "eoc.org.uk" (using vpopmail as I use it in
another job and am familiar with how it works)
2. Add .qmail files and mailing lists, etc under the virtual domain as
required. All unrecognised addresses will be handled by .qmail-default for
the virtual domain (/home/vpopmail/domains/eoc.org.uk/.qmail-default)
3. In the .qmail-default put something to re-send all mail to the ms-mail
host, eg:
| redeliver msmail.eoc.org.uk
Where "redeliver" is a program that opens an SMTP session to the specified
host, and writes out the message being read from stdin.
Step 3. is where I'm stuck.
Does such a program exist? Or is there a better/different way to do this?
Thanks,
R.
"Robin Bowes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>| redeliver msmail.eoc.org.uk
>
>Where "redeliver" is a program that opens an SMTP session to the specified
>host, and writes out the message being read from stdin.
The program you want is "forward". You have to pass it the user,
too. E.g.:
| forward $[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Dave
> >| redeliver msmail.eoc.org.uk
> >
> >Where "redeliver" is a program that opens an SMTP session to the
specified
>host, and writes out the message being read from stdin.
>
>The program you want is "forward". You have to pass it the user,
>too. E.g.:
>
> | forward $[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Dave,
Thanks for the suggestion.
Firstly, let me just point out that I'm using vpopmail so I need to use $EXT
rather than $USER to get the "local" e-mail address.
That aside, the main problem is that forward re-writes the recipient to be
"$[EMAIL PROTECTED] . This causes the ms mail gateway to reject the
message since it only accepts messages for the domain "eoc.org.uk".
I'm doing some testing using a "test" virtualdomain "test.dom". Here's a
sample error message:
----------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
Date: 1 Nov 1999 17:47:22 -0000
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at candace.eoc.org.uk.
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]>:
172.16.65.8 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 551 relaying denied
Giving up on 172.16.65.8.
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 71629 invoked by uid 5000); 1 Nov 1999 17:46:37 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 71625 invoked by uid 0); 1 Nov 1999 17:46:36 -0000
Date: 1 Nov 1999 17:46:36 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: A test
----------------------------------------------------
Have you any further thoughts?
Cheers,
R.
Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >| redeliver msmail.eoc.org.uk
> > >
> > >Where "redeliver" is a program that opens an SMTP session to the
> specified
> >host, and writes out the message being read from stdin.
> >
> >The program you want is "forward". You have to pass it the user,
> >too. E.g.:
> >
> > | forward $[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
[snip]
Got it!
Here's what I've done:
Here's what I've done:
1. Created a virtual domain "eoc.org.uk" (used vpopmail)
2. Removed the line in smtproutes which was forwarding all eoc.org.uk mail
to ms-mail.eoc.org.uk
3. In .qmail-default, used the following command:
| qmail-remote ms-mail.eoc.org.uk $SENDER $EXT@$HOST
Bingo! Works like a dream.
Can anyone see any flaws in this setup? I haven't overlooked anything, have
I?
R.
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 06:36:01PM -0000, Robin Bowes wrote:
>
> Here's what I've done:
>
> 1. Created a virtual domain "eoc.org.uk" (used vpopmail)
> 2. Removed the line in smtproutes which was forwarding all eoc.org.uk mail
> to ms-mail.eoc.org.uk
> 3. In .qmail-default, used the following command:
>
> | qmail-remote ms-mail.eoc.org.uk $SENDER $EXT@$HOST
>
> Bingo! Works like a dream.
>
> Can anyone see any flaws in this setup? I haven't overlooked anything, have
> I?
Yes. It's gonna break if you have temporary failure.
What you want is either requeuing the mail (i.e. reporting 111 on temporary
and 0 on success. qmail-remote reports with letters and must be reparsed to
give good feedback back to qmail-local.
See qmail-remote(8)
--
magnus
-- MOST useless 1998 * http://x42.com/
>3. In the .qmail-default put something to re-send all mail to the ms-mail
>host, eg:
>
>| redeliver msmail.eoc.org.uk
>
>Where "redeliver" is a program that opens an SMTP session to the specified
>host, and writes out the message being read from stdin.
>
>Step 3. is where I'm stuck.
>
>Does such a program exist? Or is there a better/different way to do this?
If the volume of mail isn't too large, dump the mail into a maildir,
e.g.
$ cat .qmail-default
/var/mail/eoc-mail/
and then use serialsmtp to push the mail out to the Windows box.
Serialsmtp is fast but sends only one message at a time; if it can
keep up with the volume that's probably the best way to go since it'll
avoid swamping the NT box.
If that's not adequate, I'd run two copies of qmail (which as has been
noted is not as messy as it sounds), one for the inbound and sorting,
the other for outbound to the various NT boxes. The inbound copy of
qmail should be set up with virtual domains to catch the domains you
want to sort, the outbound copy with no virtual domains and perhaps
smtproutes for any domains that don't have MX records that point where
you want them to.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl,
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 3. In .qmail-default, used the following command:
> | qmail-remote ms-mail.eoc.org.uk $SENDER $EXT@$HOST
Never, ever pass potentially untrusted shell variables to the shell
without quoting. It's a security hole waiting to happen, even if it's
safe in one particular instance. Better to get into the habit:
| qmail-remote ms-mail.eoc.org.uk "$SENDER" "$EXT@$HOST"
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 3. In .qmail-default, used the following command:
>
> > | qmail-remote ms-mail.eoc.org.uk $SENDER $EXT@$HOST
>
> Never, ever pass potentially untrusted shell variables to the shell
> without quoting. It's a security hole waiting to happen, even if it's
> safe in one particular instance. Better to get into the habit:
>
> | qmail-remote ms-mail.eoc.org.uk "$SENDER" "$EXT@$HOST"
Thanks for the tip. Noted and actioned!
R.
Magnus Bodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 06:36:01PM -0000, Robin Bowes wrote:
[snip]
> > Can anyone see any flaws in this setup? I haven't overlooked anything,
have
> > I?
>
> Yes. It's gonna break if you have temporary failure.
>
> What you want is either requeuing the mail (i.e. reporting 111 on
temporary
> and 0 on success. qmail-remote reports with letters and must be reparsed
to
> give good feedback back to qmail-local.
>
> See qmail-remote(8)
Thanks for the response.
So, what I need to do is capture the output from qmail-remote and produce
and exit code dependant upon the result codes, ie:
r Recipient report: acceptance.
h Recipient report: permanent rejection.
s Recipient report: temporary rejection.
K Message report: success. host has taken responsibil-
ity for delivering the message to each acceptable
recipient.
Z Message report: temporary failure.
D Message report: permanent failure.
Hmmmm. Presumably, if the message has several recipients, I would need to
re-queue to specific recipients if there was a temporary failure for that
recipient? Hmmm... Sounds like it's getting messy. Perhaps I'll explore
another approach.
R.
John R Levine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >3. In the .qmail-default put something to re-send all mail to the ms-mail
> >host, eg:
> >
> >| redeliver msmail.eoc.org.uk
> >
> >Where "redeliver" is a program that opens an SMTP session to the
specified
> >host, and writes out the message being read from stdin.
> >
> >Step 3. is where I'm stuck.
> >
> >Does such a program exist? Or is there a better/different way to do
this?
>
> If the volume of mail isn't too large, dump the mail into a maildir,
> e.g.
>
> $ cat .qmail-default
> /var/mail/eoc-mail/
>
> and then use serialsmtp to push the mail out to the Windows box.
> Serialsmtp is fast but sends only one message at a time; if it can
> keep up with the volume that's probably the best way to go since it'll
> avoid swamping the NT box.
That might just do the trick. I notice Keith Burdis has written sdeliver.
According to his web page(http://rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/qmail/sdeliver.html)
it:
"Delivers mail from a maildir to a remote host using maildirsmtp. The
results of delivering each message are logged in the syslog.
"It runs under supervise so that it continues to deliver any mail in the
maildir using maildirsmtp as long as the supervise process is up. Delivery
is stopped and started using svc."
That would do the trick, but his ftp site is down :o(
> If that's not adequate, I'd run two copies of qmail (which as has been
> noted is not as messy as it sounds), one for the inbound and sorting,
> the other for outbound to the various NT boxes. The inbound copy of
> qmail should be set up with virtual domains to catch the domains you
> want to sort, the outbound copy with no virtual domains and perhaps
> smtproutes for any domains that don't have MX records that point where
> you want them to.
That sounds like a nicer solution. Can you point me at where I might learn
more about setting this up? Is it as easy as building qmail twice - once in
(e.g.) /var/qmail-in, and again in /var/qmail-out then use qmail-smtpd from
/var/qmail-in and qmail-send from /var/qmail-out ?
Thanks,
R.
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
Sorry for a noise.. I read the following in the FAQ:
--------
Answer: The SMTP standard does not permit aliased hostnames, so qmail
has to do a CNAME lookup in DNS for every recipient host. If the
relevant DNS server is down, qmail defers the message. It will try again
soon.
--------
Does this mean that I can't set up local (my LAN only) domain with MX set
to real dns name and I have to add non-real domain to
/var/qmail/control/locals ?
I.e. I've mynet.org that is for masqueraded mashines only & I resolve as
vgsn.glasnet.ru. If I then write in named configs
"mynet.org CNAME vgsn.glasnet.ru." do I have to add "mynet.org" to
/var/qmail/control/locals ?
Bye.Olli.
//System administrator of "Russia Young" internet group.
Any info around "Russia Young" & Boris Nemtsov:
http://www.rosmol.ru , http://www.nemtsov.ru , http://www.boris.nemtsov.ru
On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 at 21:03:03 -0300, olli wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
>
> Sorry for a noise.. I read the following in the FAQ:
> --------
> Answer: The SMTP standard does not permit aliased hostnames, so qmail
> has to do a CNAME lookup in DNS for every recipient host. If the
> relevant DNS server is down, qmail defers the message. It will try again
> soon.
> --------
>
> Does this mean that I can't set up local (my LAN only) domain with MX set
> to real dns name and I have to add non-real domain to
> /var/qmail/control/locals ?
>
> I.e. I've mynet.org that is for masqueraded mashines only & I resolve as
> vgsn.glasnet.ru. If I then write in named configs
> "mynet.org CNAME vgsn.glasnet.ru." do I have to add "mynet.org" to
> /var/qmail/control/locals ?
If I understand your question correctly: _yes_.
Even if a DNS record for mynet.org points to your server, it (your server)
will _not_ accept mail addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if mynet.org is not
present in (rcpthosts AND (locals OR virtualdomains)).
The above is a little simplified. In fact, sometimes a domain _can_ be
only in rcpthost and not in locals nor in virtualdomains. When you agree
to be an additional MX for the domain (you accept mail for them and keep
it in your spool (not deliver to local users) when the main MX is down or
unreachable.
BTW, a domain should _not_ be in locals AND virtualdomain at the same
time, only in one of these files.
> Bye.Olli.
> //System administrator of "Russia Young" internet group.
>
> Any info around "Russia Young" & Boris Nemtsov:
> http://www.rosmol.ru , http://www.nemtsov.ru , http://www.boris.nemtsov.ru
--
Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/ | ones and zeros.
Here's related question. What should internal domains be called and how
are they setup in DNS? I've always used a non-existant domain name that I
made up, but I know this is wrong. What's the correct solution?
Robbie Walker
NovaMetrix Development
At 07:03 PM 11/1/99 , you wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
>
>Sorry for a noise.. I read the following in the FAQ:
>--------
>Answer: The SMTP standard does not permit aliased hostnames, so qmail
>has to do a CNAME lookup in DNS for every recipient host. If the
>relevant DNS server is down, qmail defers the message. It will try again
>soon.
>--------
>
>Does this mean that I can't set up local (my LAN only) domain with MX set
>to real dns name and I have to add non-real domain to
>/var/qmail/control/locals ?
>
>I.e. I've mynet.org that is for masqueraded mashines only & I resolve as
>vgsn.glasnet.ru. If I then write in named configs
>"mynet.org CNAME vgsn.glasnet.ru." do I have to add "mynet.org" to
>/var/qmail/control/locals ?
>
>Bye.Olli.
> //System administrator of "Russia Young" internet group.
>
>Any info around "Russia Young" & Boris Nemtsov:
>http://www.rosmol.ru , http://www.nemtsov.ru , http://www.boris.nemtsov.ru
>
>
On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 08:56:51PM -0800, Bill Parker wrote:
> I am still trying to figure out why smtp/pop3 requests take so long
> to respond or process when users try to send/retrieve mail off of the
> server...
Are you using tcpserver or tcp-env? I had a similar problem. It
turned out that these programs try to use ident by default. In
my case a firewall caused this connection to timeout. Adding the
-R option fixed it for me. I used tcpdump to find this.
Neil
Is it possible (and safe) to use an NFS mounted /var/qmail/queue/* directory?
[NOTE: I'm _not_ advocating sharing /var/qmail/queue/* tree between
several qmail servers via NFS, but instead want to use an NFS filesystem
for the /var/qmail/queue/* tree instead of using local disks which have
limited space on them in our configuration.]
We have a NetApp 760 filer with lots of disks, and it makes better
sense to use those disks rather than buying external disk packs to
attach to our QMAIL servers (on which we already use NFS mounted
MAILDIR for user mailboxes).
There was a thread on this topic a couple of years ago but no resolution
to this issue. Here is that URL:
http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1997/04/msg00619.html
Would Appreciate any feedback/comments on this issue.
Thanks,
--curtis
I'm not entirely sure about the answers here but I'll see if I can add
something useful to the discussion...
For starters, qmail-1.03/INTERNALS says the following:
> The queue is designed to be crashproof, provided that the underlying
> filesystem is crashproof.
Whether NFS is considered crashproof or not, I don't know. I don't think it
really is.
The questions posed in the archive were:
> 1. Are inode numbers consistent across NFS?
> 2. Are named pipes possible across NFS?
> 3. Are link() and rename() defined to be atomic across NFS?
1. They appear to be, at least on Linux. I'm not sure if this is required
by the NFS specification, or if the NFS inode is related to the "real" inode
on the disk.
2. Yes (at least on Linux). However, they aren't a part of NFS; they're
handled by the kernel. Named pipes are merely an extension of the anonymous
pipe facility using the filesystem as the namespace. You can put the pipes
wherever you want and once they are opened, I would think you could unmount
the disk and pipe operations would still succeed. I'm not sure about that
though.
3. They may be so defined; however, a better question is "on what
implementations can this be guaranteed?" Also, I'm sure the semantics are
different depending on which version of NFS you're running.
My conclusion - Mounting the queue dir over NFS may very well be possible
assuming you can count on certain things. However, there's no way I would
EVER do it, and you're probably asking for trouble if you do.
I'm sure you've thought about this issue and have good reasons for wanting
to do this, but I'm curious to know why you need to put queues on each of
these machines with "limited space." If these machines were diskless (or
near-diskless) workstations, you'd be better off setting each machine up to
relay to a central hub.
You say this is for a server setup though, so I'm assuming the machines
aren't diskless. Given that these are servers, they must have at least some
reasonable amount of local disk in them, so you've almost certainly got
enough room to put a queue on them.
shag
=====
Judd Bourgeois | CNM Network +1 (805) 520-7170
Software Architect | 1900 Los Angeles Avenue, 2nd Floor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Simi Valley, CA 93065
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
----- Original Message -----
From: Curtis Generous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Mon 1 Nov 1999 14.04
Subject: NFS mounted /var/qmail/queue directory
> Is it possible (and safe) to use an NFS mounted /var/qmail/queue/*
directory?
>
> [NOTE: I'm _not_ advocating sharing /var/qmail/queue/* tree between
> several qmail servers via NFS, but instead want to use an NFS filesystem
> for the /var/qmail/queue/* tree instead of using local disks which have
> limited space on them in our configuration.]
>
> We have a NetApp 760 filer with lots of disks, and it makes better
> sense to use those disks rather than buying external disk packs to
> attach to our QMAIL servers (on which we already use NFS mounted
> MAILDIR for user mailboxes).
>
> There was a thread on this topic a couple of years ago but no resolution
> to this issue. Here is that URL:
>
>
http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1997/04/msg00619.html
>
> Would Appreciate any feedback/comments on this issue.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --curtis
>
According to Racer X:
>
> My conclusion - Mounting the queue dir over NFS may very well be possible
> assuming you can count on certain things. However, there's no way I would
> EVER do it, and you're probably asking for trouble if you do.
>
> I'm sure you've thought about this issue and have good reasons for wanting
> to do this, but I'm curious to know why you need to put queues on each of
> these machines with "limited space." If these machines were diskless (or
> near-diskless) workstations, you'd be better off setting each machine up to
> relay to a central hub.
>
> You say this is for a server setup though, so I'm assuming the machines
> aren't diskless. Given that these are servers, they must have at least some
> reasonable amount of local disk in them, so you've almost certainly got
> enough room to put a queue on them.
Our configuration will handle a very large number of users. We have a
dedicated 'farm' of servers (SPARC Ultra 2's) which will be dedicated
for outbound SMTP relay traffic for our users. Access to these
machines are done via a redirector (e.g. BigIP) so as to handle both
load balancing and automatically deal with failures/crashes.
We know from experience that when something bad happens upstream
(network related on the Internet or sometimes with some large ISPs such
as AOL), that outbound mail queues can quickly fill up and start
causing havoc on the SMTP relays as their queues can quickly grow large
during peak hours and fill up your local disk. We want to avoid to
have to deal with this issue, and also provide the ability for another
SMTP machine to take over an outbound mail queue in the event of a hard
failure of a SMTP relay box. Also the NFS server (a NetApp machine)
provides additional protection because of it's RAID configuration.
Users really get upset when you loose their mail.
Thanks for the feedback.
--curtis
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Curtis Generous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Mon 1 Nov 1999 14.04
> Subject: NFS mounted /var/qmail/queue directory
>
>
> > Is it possible (and safe) to use an NFS mounted /var/qmail/queue/*
> directory?
> >
> > [NOTE: I'm _not_ advocating sharing /var/qmail/queue/* tree between
> > several qmail servers via NFS, but instead want to use an NFS filesystem
> > for the /var/qmail/queue/* tree instead of using local disks which have
> > limited space on them in our configuration.]
> >
> > We have a NetApp 760 filer with lots of disks, and it makes better
> > sense to use those disks rather than buying external disk packs to
> > attach to our QMAIL servers (on which we already use NFS mounted
> > MAILDIR for user mailboxes).
> >
> > There was a thread on this topic a couple of years ago but no resolution
> > to this issue. Here is that URL:
> >
> >
> http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1997/04/msg00619.html
> >
> > Would Appreciate any feedback/comments on this issue.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --curtis
The situation is, that messages for certain (but not all) recipients
on a VMS-PMDF system do not get delivered from qmail. PMDF issues
odd error messages or drops the connections, on only these users.
Messages to other users go through fine.
I have a sloppy working fix of setting up a smtproute to the
PMDF box through a relay running (boo, hiss) sendmail. Messages
to these same users neither bounce nor hang up in sendmail's queue:
these users don't have full mailboxes or something like that.
Does anyone have an idea what might be happening and how to fix it?
Here are qmail's two styles of log entries from the failed attempts:
Oct 26 00:46:51 gungadin qmail: 940916811.156160 delivery 30: deferral:
Connected_to_134.193.4.1_but_
connection_died._(#4.4.2)/
Oct 26 14:45:45 gungadin qmail: 940967145.640832 delivery 60: deferral:
134.193.4.2_failed_after_I_se
nt_the_message./Remote_host_said:_421_4.4.2_Timeout_while_waiting_for_command./
The PMDF site has a mention of qmail relating to the periods which
end SMTP data, but that is all.
The messages involved in these failed delivery attempts were identical
to messages to other PMDF users which went through without difficulty.
______________________________________________________________
David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"ereiamjh"
David L. Nicol writes:
>
> The situation is, that messages for certain (but not all) recipients
> on a VMS-PMDF system do not get delivered from qmail. PMDF issues
> odd error messages or drops the connections, on only these users.
> Messages to other users go through fine.
>
> I have a sloppy working fix of setting up a smtproute to the
> PMDF box through a relay running (boo, hiss) sendmail. Messages
> to these same users neither bounce nor hang up in sendmail's queue:
> these users don't have full mailboxes or something like that.
>
> Does anyone have an idea what might be happening and how to fix it?
[ snip ]
> The messages involved in these failed delivery attempts were identical
> to messages to other PMDF users which went through without difficulty.
The question is "how identical are they"? If they are the same exact
message - but with multiple recipients, then I have no answer. Otherwise,
my guess would be that the troublesome messages are 8bit MIME messages, and
the PMDF box does not accept 8bit MIME mail. Qmail violates a certain RFC
whose number I'm sure someone remembers better than I do, and attempts to
deliver an 8bit message without downshifting it to quoted-printable
encoding, to a relay that does not advertise support for 8bit MIME
messages.
Result: undefined behavior. I've seen it happen.
--
Sam
I'm about to release a new anonymous FTP/HTTP server, publicfile. The
main relevance to qmail is that http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail.html will
soon be handled by the publicfile HTTP server instead of anonftpd.
(publicfile also shows how qmail 2 handles boot scripts.)
If you're interested in making sure that you can still download qmail
through publicfile, try
http://koobera.math.uic.edu:580/
http://koobera.math.uic.edu:580/qmail.html
ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu:521/qmail.html
Best place to send interoperability reports is the publicfile mailing
list. To join, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The qmail web pages will continue to be accessible through FTP. I plan
to set up
http://web.cr.yp.to/qmail.html
ftp://web.cr.yp.to/qmail.html
through publicfile. ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/qmail.html will
continue to work; some of you have already noticed the www->. symlink.
(If you have a mirror program that can't handle loops, try teaching it
about EPLF's identifiers: http://pobox.com/~djb/ftp/list/eplf.html.)
---Dan
I work for a company that sends out several email newsletters. 1 list has
13,000 subscribers, 4,000 trials and a seperate newsletter that goes out to
65,000 people. I need some advice on the 65,000 one. We have a freebsd
server offsite at a nearby ISP. The isp installed qmail, and ezmlm. So far
I have been cutting the list in half and referencing the list in the bcc
field. Here is the deal. Everyday WE add people to our list, and everyday
we take people off of our list. I cannot run the standard ezmlm mailing
list. The from: box has to say something specific, and the to: box, and the
subject: box all have to be specific. In about a week I will be mailing 2
more newsletters both over 65,000 people. I am very unfamiliar with qmail,
and ezmlm. I need to know the best way to handle all this.. My ideal
situation would be to set up the bcc: list on the server, then just shoot
one email to the server, and have it start spitting it off to the
subscribers. Any help is appreciated.
Mike
P.S. I did read the docs.
Hi all,
I am very new to qmail, just install qmail yesterday in my AIX 4.3.2. I am
able to compile it and up the tcpserver using qmail start script (provided in
www.qmail.org)
Before this, I am using fwmail (by IBM). I am using qmail as a mail hub and
will sent whatever mails with the domain name abc.com to my internal mailserver
mailserver.abc.com.
Please advise on what configuration I need to change in order to make that
happen. Thanks.
Regards,
HW Wong
Hi there, here is the error message I am getting from the file in
/var/qmail/queue/mess/
Any tips.
Received: (qmail 8110 invoked for bounce); 1 Nov 1999 09:45:51 -0000
Date: 1 Nov 1999 09:45:51 -0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mailpg.hhits.com.
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)
"Hon Wai Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11/02/99 09:28:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: (bcc: Hon Wai Wong/ebx)
Subject: Mail hub, problem to talk to internal mailserver
Hi all,
I am very new to qmail, just install qmail yesterday in my AIX 4.3.2. I am
able to compile it and up the tcpserver using qmail start script (provided in
www.qmail.org)
Before this, I am using fwmail (by IBM). I am using qmail as a mail hub and
will sent whatever mails with the domain name abc.com to my internal mailserver
mailserver.abc.com.
Please advise on what configuration I need to change in order to make that
happen. Thanks.
Regards,
HW Wong
I'm having a problem with my newly installed qmail, and I hope someone
can help me. I'm a bit of a newbie, so I'm not sure what info you'll
need - I'll just include it all, and hope you find what you need below :)
First some background. My username is david, and my host is
a3a88198.bconnected.net.
My e-mail address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] My ~/.qmail contains the string
./Maildir/,
and qmail is run with the following rc file:
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start ./Mailbox/ splogger qmail
I can send mail local-to-local and local-to-remote, but cannot receive mail
sent locally or remotely. Specifically, the doc/TEST.deliver tests work fine,
but doc/TEST.receive test #1 fails as shown below.
[david@a3a88198 david]$ telnet 127.0.0.1 25
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to 127.0.0.1.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 a3a88198.bconnected.net ESMTP
helo dude
250 a3a88198.bconnected.net
mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
250 ok
rcpt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
250 ok
data
354 go ahead
Subject: blah
blah
.
250 ok 941519761 qp 4767
produces the following:
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.504736 new msg 223317
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.504898 info msg 223317: bytes 198
from <> qp 4767 uid 503
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.683230 starting delivery 3: msg
223317 to local @a3a88198.bconnected.net
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.683379 status: local 1/10 remote
0/20
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.684374 delivery 3: success:
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.684471 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20
Nov 1 21:16:01 a3a88198 qmail: 941519761.684541 end msg 223317
Note line 3 - to local @a3a88198.bconnected.net. That's weird - there's no user
in front of the @. So I tried adding an alias file, called .qmail-silenus,
containing the string "david" - I hoped that qmail would route incoming mail to
silenus to user david. Unfortunately, this didn't work.
Next I tried adding a users/assign file, written thusly:
=futility:david:500:500:/home/david:::
.
This also didn't work. Next, I tried the TEST.receive test #1, but replaced
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following strings:
silenus@localhost
david@localhost
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Each of these attempts produced the exact same log report.
I can't think of anything else I can do. As far as I know, the alias dotfile
should have worked - I don't know why it failed, and I don't know what to do
next.
Apologies for the long post. I hope someone can help me.
--
--
"But why Hell for me?" he asked. "And why for all? Was it not to keep it
only for a few that Christ redeemed us?"
Father Casper laughed like the God of the damned. "Why, when did He redeem
you? On what planet, in what universe do you think you are living now?"
- Umberto Eco, The Island of the Day Before
David Clark wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
> [david@a3a88198 david]$ telnet 127.0.0.1 25
> Trying 127.0.0.1...
> Connected to 127.0.0.1.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 a3a88198.bconnected.net ESMTP
> helo dude
> 250 a3a88198.bconnected.net
> mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 250 ok
> rcpt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 250 ok
> data
> 354 go ahead
> Subject: blah
>
> blah
> .
> 250 ok 941519761 qp 4767
You're not speaking valid SMTP. Try this:
helo dude
mail from:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
data
Subject: blah
blah
.
quit
Stefan
I have a server that does not seem to want to send out any email. If I
start and stop the qmail daemons it will will send out bounced messages but
it doesn't send out any email that should be directed to mailing lists.
All the aliases are in place... There are hundreds of files in
/var/qmail/queue/pid and I think that they are related somehow... Also, I
can see that qmail-queue is doing something with the mail but it doesn't
seem to be going into the queue. Thanks.
Andy
--
+====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+
| Linux is about freedom of choice |
+== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
Hi all !
I have been testing the mail relay cgi from abuse.net
(http://www.abuse.net/relay.html) and after entering the name of the Qmail server that
I am testing, one of the tests fails with the following message:
(xxxx.xxxxxxxx.xx is the name of the server)
<<< 220 xxxx.xxxxxxx.xx ESMTP
>>> HELO www.abuse.net
<<< 250 xxxx.xxxxxxx.xx
Relay test 1
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 2
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 3
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 4
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 5
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<spamtest@[194.179.67.23]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 6
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 7
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<relaytest%abuse.net@[194.179.67.23]>
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 8
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<"[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
<<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Relay test 9
>>> RSET
<<< 250 flushed
>>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 250 ok
>>> RCPT TO:<"relaytest%abuse.net">
<<< 250 ok
Relay test result
Uh oh, host appeared to accept a message for relay.
How I can patch this error ? It seems that the server accepts relaying !
Regards,
Antonio Navarro Navarro
BemarNet Management
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bemarnet.es
Antonio Navarro Navarro wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
> Relay test 9
> >>> RSET
> <<< 250 flushed
> >>> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <<< 250 ok
> >>> RCPT TO:<"relaytest%abuse.net">
> <<< 250 ok
> Relay test result
> Uh oh, host appeared to accept a message for relay.
The percent sign does not have any special meaning to qmail in
this case. The address given is an address without a host-
part, like e.g. a plain "root" is. In most cases qmail will later
determine that a user with the name "relaytest%abuse.net" does not
exist locally and bounce the message. It is doing nothing wrong.
Abuse.net is concluding too rash.
Stefan
I've been asked to hang a DOS-based dialin PC on a client's LAN wherein
we have a Linux server running Qmail.
They need email access on this dialin so I need:
1. A freeware DOS TCP/IP stack;
2. A DOS-based POP3 client.
Anyone have any ideas on these?
(I've considered WATTCP + a packet driver for the former; PC Pine is
IMAP so won't work in this situation).
Thanks,
Barry
Hi again !
Thanks for clarifiyng the matter with the abuse.net cgi. Now one more question. Where
can I found a path for qmail that coul maintain the usernames/passwords in a RDBS like
Oracle o MySQL compatible with vpopmail (I need several domains in a IP address).
Thanks in advance !
Antonio Navarro Navarro
BemarNet Management
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bemarnet.es
It's something simmular I just set up here. You need to grab the QMail+mySQL
patch from www.qmail.org and follow the instructions. If you need more help
from there feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Michael Boman
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antonio Navarro Navarro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 02 November, 1999 5:47 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: QMail an MySQL or similar
>
>
> Hi again !
>
> Thanks for clarifiyng the matter with the abuse.net cgi. Now one
> more question. Where can I found a path for qmail that coul
> maintain the usernames/passwords in a RDBS like Oracle o MySQL
> compatible with vpopmail (I need several domains in a IP address).
>
> Thanks in advance !
>
> Antonio Navarro Navarro
> BemarNet Management
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.bemarnet.es
>
Hi,
At 5:52 pm +0800 2/11/99,the wonderful Michael Boman wrote:
>It's something simmular I just set up here. You need to grab the QMail+mySQL
>patch from www.qmail.org and follow the instructions. If you need more help
>from there feel free to contact me.
i'm interested in this patch... i've just searched
www.qmail.org/top.html for 'sql' and drawn a blank.
Perhaps my glasses need cleaning - i'd really appreciate a more specific link.
thanks
peter
--
peter at gradwell dot com; http://www.gradwell.com/
gradwell dot com Ltd. Enabling the internet you don't see.
** Cheap and easy ecommerce: http://www.gradwell.net/ **
Oh, sorry. The correct URL is
http://www.softagency.co.jp/mysql/qmail.en.html
Can someone notify the maintainer of www.qmail.org and ask him to include
the page? You can found this link on the mySQL.com homepage.
Regards,
Michael Boman
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Gradwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 02 November, 1999 6:44 PM
> To: Michael Boman; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: QMail an MySQL or similar
>
>
> Hi,
>
> At 5:52 pm +0800 2/11/99,the wonderful Michael Boman wrote:
> >It's something simmular I just set up here. You need to grab the
> QMail+mySQL
> >patch from www.qmail.org and follow the instructions. If you
> need more help
> >from there feel free to contact me.
>
> i'm interested in this patch... i've just searched
> www.qmail.org/top.html for 'sql' and drawn a blank.
> Perhaps my glasses need cleaning - i'd really appreciate a more
> specific link.
>
> thanks
>
> peter
>
>
> --
> peter at gradwell dot com; http://www.gradwell.com/
> gradwell dot com Ltd. Enabling the internet you don't see.
>
> ** Cheap and easy ecommerce: http://www.gradwell.net/ **
>
