qmail Digest 21 Mar 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 947
Topics (messages 38801 through 38840):
FAQ discrepancies
38801 by: Aaron Goldblatt
38802 by: Vince Vielhaber
38803 by: Chris Johnson
Virtual virtual domain...
38804 by: Goran Blazic
38805 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
Multiple To:
38806 by: Christian Wiese
38807 by: Petr Novotny
38808 by: Christian Wiese
38810 by: Len Budney
38811 by: Don Wright
38812 by: Charles Cazabon
38813 by: Christian Wiese
38814 by: Len Budney
38819 by: Andy Bradford
38820 by: Andy Bradford
start/stop
38809 by: Jay Moore
Re: blocking a user
38815 by: Paul Farber
Re: Bounce Loops?
38816 by: Kai MacTane
38817 by: Stephen Bosch
How do I distribute mail for a domain partly locally partly through a relay host?
38818 by: Murthy Raju
Changes don�t work
38821 by: wilke
38822 by: Charles Cazabon
38823 by: Steve Wolfe
38827 by: Marco Leeflang
could it be? A bug?
38824 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
Re: Qmail Relay Question; A Newbie Speaks
38825 by: Kai MacTane
More information about qmail
38826 by: wilke
Re: Virtual domains - passwd
38828 by: Spades
can't send mail to virtual domain user
38829 by: PM Martin
2 servers and 1 domain with qmail ?
38830 by: Psabs�
"Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 17:33:11 zTo:" header
38831 by: stanislav shalunov
More virt domains questions
38832 by: Mark E. Drummond
38836 by: Magnus Bodin
Re: aliases
38833 by: Spades
38834 by: Spades
Re: pine/qmail
38835 by: Spades
/var/log/qmail
38837 by: Thomas Bell
qmail-getpw error
38838 by: Hong Taeki
38839 by: Michael Boman
vpopmail account question...
38840 by: Michael Chao
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was all ready to fire off a message to the list asking about setting up
authorized relay without sing tcpserver (the FAQ on qmail.org doesn't
discuss the possibility), when I happened to pull the same section on the
FAQ distributed with the tarball. There was the solution, so I managed to
spare myself another embarrassment.
So that brings up another question: When faced with a discrepancy between
the two FAQ's, and I haven't found another yet but wouldn't be surprised if
they're there, which governs? Is the web page one more recent and thus
preferred for the purposes of answering questions here? Am I looking at a
subtle hint that using tcpserver is vastly superior to inetd, even on a
low-volume system like mine, and that I should drop everything and switch now?
Private replies welcome, if yall don't want to clutter the list. Thank you.
ag
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Aaron Goldblatt wrote:
> So that brings up another question: When faced with a discrepancy between
> the two FAQ's, and I haven't found another yet but wouldn't be surprised if
> they're there, which governs? Is the web page one more recent and thus
> preferred for the purposes of answering questions here? Am I looking at a
> subtle hint that using tcpserver is vastly superior to inetd, even on a
> low-volume system like mine, and that I should drop everything and switch now?
If that was your solution I recommend against it. tcpserver is the only
supported anti open-relay solution. Many of my systems no longer run
inetd at all for anything. Telnet was the only thing that needed it and
it runs fine under tcpserver. I had trouble running telnetd under
tcpserver on an older (ver 9.0) HPUX system tho, so make sure you have
access to the console if you try it on a newer hp.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pop4.net
128K ISDN: $24.95/mo or less - 56K Dialup: $17.95/mo or less at Pop4
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 05:41:28AM -0600, Aaron Goldblatt wrote:
> So that brings up another question: When faced with a discrepancy between
> the two FAQ's, and I haven't found another yet but wouldn't be surprised if
> they're there, which governs? Is the web page one more recent and thus
> preferred for the purposes of answering questions here?
The FAQ on Dan's web site should rule. As you found out, the FAQ in the tarball
tells you how to relay selectively using inetd, but Dan no longer supports
inetd. I would imagine that he doesn't think a FAQ change merits a new release
of qmail.
> Am I looking at a subtle hint that using tcpserver is vastly superior to
> inetd, even on a low-volume system like mine, and that I should drop
> everything and switch now?
Yes.
Chris
Hi...
Because I have not been subscribed to this list for long, I hope that this
question has not come up before... I would go look for it in the archive,
but I have no fu#%$ng idea, what to search for...
The problem is as follows: I have a mail server (with qmail, off course)
which handles some virtual domains... All well until now. But now I have a
need to receive mail for a virtual domain (all users), but all the mail for
this domain will be picked up by another computer every two hours. This
computer uses a dialup connection onto the internet... When this computer
connects it should get all the mail for its "domain" and deliver it
acordingly... Also all bounces should be handled here, because the first
host (the one on the internet) has no idea what users are defined...
Any ideas?
Greetings, Goran
> computer uses a dialup connection onto the internet... When this computer
> connects it should get all the mail for its "domain" and deliver it
> acordingly... Also all bounces should be handled here, because the first
> host (the one on the internet) has no idea what users are defined...
Simply deliver all mail for that domain to a Maildir. Then use turnmail or
UUCP for transmission to the other host. There is a nice BSMTP-package on
www.qmail.org that you can use for UUCP.
Regards, Frank
Hi,
I've a problem with incoming mails, which contain multiple "to:".
i.e.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Qmail delivers the mail to our internal "mailuser" but also to the
"otheruser". So "otheruser" receives multiple copies of the same mail.
I use fetchmail and serialmail in cunjuction with a dial-up connection
to our ISP.
Ho can I disable this behavior ?
Does anybody know how I can solve this problem ?
Thank you very much.
Best regards
Christian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 20 Mar 00, at 14:54, Christian Wiese wrote:
> I've a problem with incoming mails, which contain multiple "to:". i.e.
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Qmail delivers the mail to our internal "mailuser" but also to the
> "otheruser".
Yes, it does what it's told to do.
> So "otheruser" receives multiple copies of the same mail.
Why? Perhaps you forgot to tell us that "mailuser" forwards his
mail to "otheruser", too. Perhaps I don't understand what you mean.
> Ho can I disable this behavior ?
There's no way. Send two copies to mailbox, two copies are written
into the mailbox. As far as I can see, that's the correct behaviour.
> Does anybody know how I can solve this problem ?
Certainly. That "otheruser" can employ a tool to detect received
duplicates, and remove them. Or you should not send two copies,
if you don't want two copies to get delivered.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBONYf01MwP8g7qbw/EQL7KgCcCvGifhcF9TPxzzc0hYeztXIJEQsAoOrH
rBWD2bYu+Oi5rxLEye3n/7cT
=syJ7
-----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]
Hi Petr,
Thank you very much for your quick answer.
Ok. I'll try to explain my problem more detailed.
Some people want to send mails to multiple people, but they use "To:"
instead of "Cc:" for sending the mail to more than one person.
Let's expect that "anyone@anydomain" writes an email to more than one
person, using just "To:", and one of this recipients is a user in our
domain (aka "mailuser@ourdomain") and a user "otheruser@otherdomain".
[our Qmail SMTP HUB]
1. Fetchmail fetch the mail from POP3 mailbox at our ISP
2. The HUB transfers the mail to our internal Qmail server.
[internal Qmail server]
3. our internal Qmail server delivers the mail into the local mailbox of
"mailuser", but there are still messages that the qmail server can't treat
local
4. the internal qmail server transfers the outgoing messages back to HUB
[HUB]
5. outgoing messages will be transferd via maildirserial to our ISP's
SMTP server
But I don't want to deliver the other messages, just the message for
"mailuser@ourdomain", because
the SMTP server for "otherdomain" has still received the message for
"otheruser"
Petr Novotny wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 20 Mar 00, at 14:54, Christian Wiese wrote:
>
> > I've a problem with incoming mails, which contain multiple "to:". i.e.
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Qmail delivers the mail to our internal "mailuser" but also to the
> > "otheruser".
>
> Yes, it does what it's told to do.
Sure, qmail does just what it's told to do.
>
>
> > So "otheruser" receives multiple copies of the same mail.
>
> Why? Perhaps you forgot to tell us that "mailuser" forwards his
> mail to "otheruser", too. Perhaps I don't understand what you mean.
>
"mailuser@ourdomain" has no forwarding to "otheruser@foreigndomain"
>
> > Ho can I disable this behavior ?
>
> There's no way. Send two copies to mailbox, two copies are written
> into the mailbox. As far as I can see, that's the correct behaviour.
>
> > Does anybody know how I can solve this problem ?
>
> Certainly. That "otheruser" can employ a tool to detect received
> duplicates, and remove them. Or you should not send two copies,
> if you don't want two copies to get delivered.
Ok ... I know it's a little bit confusing, but I hope you know what I try
to say.
Greetings
Christian
Christian Wiese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [our Qmail SMTP HUB]
> 1. Fetchmail fetch the mail from POP3 mailbox at our ISP
> 2. The HUB transfers the mail to our internal Qmail server.
>
> [internal Qmail server]
> 3. our internal Qmail server delivers the mail into the local mailbox of
> "mailuser", but there are still messages that the qmail server can't
> treat local
> 4. the internal qmail server transfers the outgoing messages back to HUB
>
> [HUB]
> 5. outgoing messages will be transferd via maildirserial to our ISP's
> SMTP server
This is the fault of fetchmail. More specifically, you're using fetchmail
wrong. It has nothing to do with using "To:" instead of "Cc:" at all.
You're letting fetchmail forward popped mail through qmail, to all of
the recipients in the headers. But that's exactly what the original,
remote sender already did! So you're letting your mail server do
something which is properly none of its business.
Your only real option, if you want to use fetchmail in this setting,
is to do one of the following:
1. Scan the email's headers for specific local users addresses. This
is hard; in fact for mailing list emails or BCC-ed emails, it is
basically impossible. (If your ISP uses qmail, then you can do it
after all, since qmail writes the envelope at the top of every
message.)
2. Give each local user a separate POP account at your ISP; run
fetchmail separately for each user. Deliver to that specific
user. This prevents you from using mailboxes with addresses like
user+extension@ or user-extension@, which is a major bummer.
Since most mailers discard envelopes (or record them in a hard-to-parse
way), you will have big problems mixing a push-protocol (SMTP) with a
pull-protocol (POP3).
A better alternative is to get your ISP to set up AutoTurn for your
maildrop. In that scenario, it is the ISP's problem to keep all mail
envelopes straight. All you have to do is perform the local delivery.
Len.
--
You're deluding yourself if you think that these anti-reliability
features actually affect the spammers.
-- Dan Bernstein
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Len Budney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> 1. Scan the email's headers for specific local users addresses. This
> is hard; in fact for mailing list emails or BCC-ed emails, it is
> basically impossible. (If your ISP uses qmail, then you can do it
> after all, since qmail writes the envelope at the top of every
> message.)
I'm looking at setting up a qmail server for a midsize corporation. Are you
saying that all delivery addresses that were supposed to be hidden by the
BCC and mailing list functions would be exposed to all recipients? In the
case of large mailing lists, that could add hundreds of kilobytes to each
message being sent, resulting in excessive bandwidth charges. Obviously the
qmail list is not doing this, or is someone along the line deleting the
additional header info?
If only BCC is being defeated (it is no longer blind) then this is a serious
security consideration for us. Please explain further.
Don Wright -- Computer Support
Rennert World Travel, Inc.
Don Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Len Budney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > 1. Scan the email's headers for specific local users addresses. This
> > is hard; in fact for mailing list emails or BCC-ed emails, it is
> > basically impossible. (If your ISP uses qmail, then you can do it
> > after all, since qmail writes the envelope at the top of every
> > message.)
> If only BCC is being defeated (it is no longer blind) then this is a serious
> security consideration for us. Please explain further.
What was meant (I believe) is that qmail records the envelope recipient that
it is currently delivering to at the top of each delivered mail, in a
"Delivered-To: " header. Other envelope recipients are not recorded. This
allows you to recover the original envelope recipient the message was
addressed to, for use with qmail mail address extensions.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Len,
thank you very much for detailed description.
So I'll check fetchmail to get only the local mails.
Best regards
Christian
Len Budney wrote:
> Christian Wiese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [our Qmail SMTP HUB]
> > 1. Fetchmail fetch the mail from POP3 mailbox at our ISP
> > 2. The HUB transfers the mail to our internal Qmail server.
> >
> > [internal Qmail server]
> > 3. our internal Qmail server delivers the mail into the local mailbox of
> > "mailuser", but there are still messages that the qmail server can't
> > treat local
> > 4. the internal qmail server transfers the outgoing messages back to HUB
> >
> > [HUB]
> > 5. outgoing messages will be transferd via maildirserial to our ISP's
> > SMTP server
>
> This is the fault of fetchmail. More specifically, you're using fetchmail
> wrong. It has nothing to do with using "To:" instead of "Cc:" at all.
>
> You're letting fetchmail forward popped mail through qmail, to all of
> the recipients in the headers. But that's exactly what the original,
> remote sender already did! So you're letting your mail server do
> something which is properly none of its business.
>
> Your only real option, if you want to use fetchmail in this setting,
> is to do one of the following:
>
> 1. Scan the email's headers for specific local users addresses. This
> is hard; in fact for mailing list emails or BCC-ed emails, it is
> basically impossible. (If your ISP uses qmail, then you can do it
> after all, since qmail writes the envelope at the top of every
> message.)
>
> 2. Give each local user a separate POP account at your ISP; run
> fetchmail separately for each user. Deliver to that specific
> user. This prevents you from using mailboxes with addresses like
> user+extension@ or user-extension@, which is a major bummer.
>
> Since most mailers discard envelopes (or record them in a hard-to-parse
> way), you will have big problems mixing a push-protocol (SMTP) with a
> pull-protocol (POP3).
>
> A better alternative is to get your ISP to set up AutoTurn for your
> maildrop. In that scenario, it is the ISP's problem to keep all mail
> envelopes straight. All you have to do is perform the local delivery.
>
> Len.
>
> --
> You're deluding yourself if you think that these anti-reliability
> features actually affect the spammers.
> -- Dan Bernstein
"Don Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Len Budney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > ...qmail writes the envelope at the top of every
> > message...
>
> I'm looking at setting up a qmail server for a midsize corporation. Are
> you saying that all delivery addresses that were supposed to be
> hidden by the BCC and mailing list functions would be exposed to
> all recipients?
Definitely not. As you say, that would be a very bad privacy problem. Each
recipient gets a copy of the message which tells _only_ the final
envelope recipient--in other words, what address resulted in delivery
to that recipient. (The envelope sender is also included, but that has
no security implications.)
> In the case of large mailing lists, that could add hundreds of kilobytes
> to each message being sent, resulting in excessive bandwidth charges.
What qmail does, specifically in order to honor BCC and mailing lists, is
send out one copy of the message per recipient. That's why other MTAs have
leaked BCC information, but qmail never has.
In general, this does not lead to excessive bandwidth consumption over
other mailers, for several reasons. Among them:
1. Other mailers waste so much bandwidth on redundant DNS queries that
they completely negate savings in transferred message bytes.
2. Other mailers are not able to take advantage of multiple envelope
recipients on the same host nearly as often as people imagine.
Except possibly certain scenarios involving mailing lists, a tiny
fraction of all deliveries consist in the same message to many
recipients at one host.
3. Other forms of traffic, particularly HTTP, completely blows away
the much smaller bandwidth consumption of SMTP traffic.
Dan will not change this feature in qmail, despite periodic holy wars,
for all of the above reasons, and more besides. Among them:
1. The pathological case of mailing lists has a much better solution.
Set up a sublist nearer to the cluster of subscribers, and subscribe
the sublist to the main list.
Consider your corporation. If most of your employees are subscribed
to the same foreign mailing list, then setting up a sublist on
your internal mail server lightens the load on the main server,
enhancing throughput. It also moves all of your employees to the
``front of the list'', enhancing perceived performance. Finally,
it means that for each list post, exactly one email passes through
your external connection.
If few of your employees subscribe to a given list, then you can
ignore it. Who cares about the minimal traffic that entails?
For purely internal lists, LAN bandwidth is all you care about--your
Internet connection is involved only minimally, if at all. LAN
bandwidth is hardly touched if your mailing list server is on or
near the mail server box.
(Dan's ezmlm, plus the IDX patches, can even work as a sublist of
non-ezmlm foreign lists. Check <http://www.ezmlm.org/> for details.)
2. Another pathological case is hyper-restricted bandwidth at your
Internet connection. The best solution to that is to use serialmail
with QMTP to store-and-forward outgoing email, and AutoTurn at your
ISP. Since your corporation is ``mid-sized'', your bandwidth concerns
can't possibly be that stringent.
3. If you consider serialmail sending two copies of the same message, and
wish you could shrink the bandwidth even further, then consider an
experiment recommended by Dan himself:
> wc -c MESSAGE
7752
> gzip -c MESSAGE | wc -c
3548
> gzip -c MESSAGE MESSAGE | wc -c
3651
In other words, ganging messages by recipient host is a piddly attempt
to conserve bandwidth which still consumes over twice the bandwidth
that a real solution, i.e. compression, would consume. If bandwidth
were _that_ tight for you, then it would be easy enough to use
compression to achieve some _real_ savings.
Hope this helps,
Len.
--
Do you really expect us to believe that you completely misunderstood
what Henders said, don't know what ``queue'' means, and can't speak
English?
-- Dan Bernstein, author of qmail
Thus said "Petr Novotny" on Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:55:47 +0100:
> > Ho can I disable this behavior ?
>
> There's no way. Send two copies to mailbox, two copies are written
> into the mailbox. As far as I can see, that's the correct behaviour.
Sounds like an instant replay of last weeks question about why two
messages are delivered with two To: addresses. :-)
Andy
--
+====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+
| Linux is about freedom of choice |
+== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
PGP signature
Thus said "Don Wright" on Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:10:50 CST:
> qmail list is not doing this, or is someone along the line deleting the
> additional header info?
qmail should have no need to do this.
> If only BCC is being defeated (it is no longer blind) then this is a serious
> security consideration for us. Please explain further.
BCC is a function of the MUA not the MTA, therefore, a BCC will never
be seen by qmail as your mail reader should have already stripped the
BCC recipients. If it relies on the underlying MTA to do this then it
is at fault. Then again, I could be wrong as I haven't yet finished
reading all of the related RFCs. :-)
Andy
--
+====== Andy ====== TiK: garbaglio ======+
| Linux is about freedom of choice |
+== http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/ ===+
PGP signature
I'm running starting qmail with the following script, how do I start
and stop qmail with tcpserver?
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
qmail-start ./Maildir/ /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
| /usr/local/bin/setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog -s 1040000 \
-n 200 /var/log/qmail &
echo "Starting qmail ..."
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -c100 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup \
sailnet.com \
/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
echo "Starting pop ..."
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c100 -u1001 -g102 0 smtp \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > /dev/null &
echo "Starting smtp ..."
If this person gets an IP via DHCP (not static) then tcprules probibly
won't help.
Post your tcpwrapper text file (before you run tcprules on it).. basically
to get a lot of eyeballs on your syntax, etc.
Paul Farber
Farber Technology
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph 570-628-5303
Fax 570-628-5545
On Sun, 19 Mar 2000, Chris Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2000 at 05:38:18PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I need to block a user from sending internal e-mail. Ive tried using
> > tcprules to deny them but it dosent seem to be working....is there any way i
> > could do this through qmail-queue or anythign else.
>
> This is a particularly good example of how to ask a question that's guaranteed
> not to generate an answer.
>
> You're going to need to define exactly what problem you're trying to solve,
> exactly what you did to try to make it happen, and in exactly what way it
> failed.
>
> Chris
>
At 3/18/2000 12:56 PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote or quoted:
>Users reply to the damnedest things. If an MTA is configured to
>generate mail from "rumpelstiltskin", then it ought to be configured to
>accept mail for "rumpelstiltskin" as well.
I would have to agree with this first sentence. I have a friend who works
in Hotmail's customer support center, and he had to deal with a woman who
claimed that she couldn't send mail to anyone, and she was getting spammed
by someone named "Damon Mahler".
After much useless question-asking, my friend got her to forward him these
spams, and they of course turned out to be messages from Mailer-Daemon,
trying to inform her that her mail couldn't get anywhere because she needed
to include host names (or something similarly bogus).
There were also a bunch of replies from the woman to "Mr. Mahler" asking
him not to send her any more mail.
My friend informed this lady at great length that there was no Mr. Mahler
out there on the Internet sending her spam; that Mailer-Daemon was a
program, not a human being; and that she needed to do whatever in order to
send out her mail.
She did not believe him. Apparently some friend of hers told her that the
idea was ridiculous, and that of course mere pieces of software couldn't
send people emails, and she decided to take that person's word for it over
that of a (very correct) Hotmail technician.
For all I know, the woman is still persisting in sending mail to "Mr. Damon
Mahler", or has cancelled her Hotmail service because they can't get Mr.
Mahler to stop spamming her.
(Note: This story is only to-the-best-of-my-recollection; if you want to
repost it elsewhere or otherwise distribute it, please let me know and I'll
see if I can get my friend to write it up with the details in place and
corrected so you can send out the true and accurate version rather than my
messed-up retelling. Thanks.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
house wizard /n./
A hacker occupying a technical-specialist, R&D, or systems position
at a commercial shop. A really effective house wizard can have influ-
ence out of all proportion to his/her ostensible rank and still not
have to wear a suit.
> (Note: This story is only to-the-best-of-my-recollection; if you want to
> repost it elsewhere or otherwise distribute it, please let me
> know and I'll
> see if I can get my friend to write it up with the details in place and
> corrected so you can send out the true and accurate version
> rather than my
> messed-up retelling. Thanks.)
Oh, you MUST get him to give a detailed recollection -- that story is gold!
-Stephen-
PS: Please tell Mr. Mahler to stop sending me spam, too.
Hi,
I have just installed Qmail on Linux.
Some addresses under mydomain.com are local users( users of
mymachine.mydomain.com) and other addresses belonging to the same domain
are not local users. So the mail for the second category will have to go to
remotemail server serving the domain.
Also I have to receive mail from the local machines ( not only for
mydomain.com but all outgoing mail ) on my LAN to be relayed to my ISP when
I connect using serial mail.
What are the configuration changes required to treat mydomain.com as local
domain partially?
Thansk for all the help
with regards
Raju
|
I�m setup qmail smtpd by change some files like
"qmail-smtpd.c" but the changes don�t work......
There is another file to setup??
Than�k�s
Wilke Murakami
|
wilke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I�m setup qmail smtpd by change some files like "qmail-smtpd.c" but the changes
>don�t work......
> There is another file to setup??
You haven't given the list enough information to even begin to understand
what your problem is. For all we know, you modified "qmail-smtpd.c" by
putting some Fortran77 in the middle of it.
If you want help from the list, try telling us the following:
-How you originally installed qmail
-What you didn't like and decided needed changing
-Exactly what changes you made (i.e. source code diffs, not "I sorta changed
the part where...")
-What isn't working now.
-What error messages you are getting, and from what programs or in what
logs.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
<<
I�m setup qmail smtpd by change some files like "qmail-smtpd.c" but the
changes don�t work......
There is another file to setup??
>>
If you changed the source files, did you compile them and move the new
binaries to the correct location?
steve
> wilke wrote:
>
> I�m setup qmail smtpd by change some files like "qmail-smtpd.c" but
> the changes don�t work......
> There is another file to setup??
>
> Than�k�s
> Wilke Murakami
did you re-compile ??
marco leeflang
Well;
People... (Dan?) Is there any particular reason why qmail-rspawn's default
behaviour is to mark failures as permanent, instead of temporary?
--
Here's why I ask... Our relays have an incoming interface, and an outgoing
interface... also, those relays send the mail back in if it's recipient is a customer,
and send it out if not. Yesterday, one of the mail relays my ISP uses for customers
had a hardware problem: the "outgoing" NIC was malfunctioning. So, qmail-remote
crashed whenever it was called by qmail-rspawn.
According to this snippet of rspawn's code...
switch(wait_exitcode(wstat))
{
case 0: break;
case 111: substdio_puts(ss,"ZUnable to run qmail-remote.\n"); return;
default: substdio_puts(ss,"DUnable to run qmail-remote.\n"); return;
}
The default behaviour is to return "D" status (permanent failure)...
So, for a period of 13 hours, over 12k mails were lost (bounced to
postmaster), instead of remaining in queue. (needless to say, that was not a nice
thing to happen)
I've done a few tests (removing the exec bit from qmail-remote, and replacing
qmail-remote with a non-functioning binary) and confirmed all mails are bounced to
postmaster, instead of being queued.
Then, I changed the default exit code to "Z" (temporary failure), recompiled,
and ran the same tests. This time, it went like it should... mails were not delivered,
but were stored in queue... qmail-remote was restored, I SIGALRM'ed qmail-send, and
all of the test messages were delivered.
So... Is there any reason why it should return "D"? Or is there any reason why
it shouldn't return "Z"?
Best regards;
Ricardo Cerqueira
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Rede T�cnica
| P�. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7� E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
At 3/18/2000 11:20 AM -0700, Stephen Bosch wrote or quoted:
>Just so you all know, I've only been running Linux for three months, and
>q-mail for about one month. I am a newbie in every sense of the word. Here
>is my
>
>PRIMER ON HOW TO GET A DECENT RESPONSE ON THE QMAIL LIST
>*for the lost and confused*
Thank you very much for posting this; I'd love to see an edited version
become part of the sign-up/subscription information for this list (along
with that info on how to unsubscribe).
>3. Here's the part where you get stuck. First and foremost, RECORD THE ERROR
>OUTPUT - you'll want to put this (preferably UNEDITED) in your e-mail to the
>list. So few people understand how important this is it staggers me.
Yes, yes, yes, yes YES! And while you're at it, any time you're including
something in an email, *copy and paste* it; do *NOT* retype it. I recall
about a month or so ago when somebody said "the contents of my such-and-so
file are: foo bar wombat". Everyone looked at it, found no errors, and
expended a lot of effort trying to figure out what was wrong. Then the guy
wrote back saying "Hey, I found the problem! My such-and-so file reads: foo
baz wombat, but the baz should be a bar." (I liked the response from
whoever said "So, when you told us the contents of your file were this,
they actually weren't?")
Also, if your problem is DNS-related (or potentially might be DNS-related),
*do not* anonymize your host information. There are many DNS gurus on this
list who will be very happy to poke around in the public DNS records for
the domains that are causing trouble and let you know if there's anything
wrong with their configuration, but they can't do this if you won't tell
them what domain you're administering.
>5. Give a clear explanation of *what* you are trying to accomplish.
As well as what you've done, how to reproduce the problem, what kind of
platform (hardware and software) you're running on, etc. If you have some
knowledge of Unix and qmail, you may be sure that certain data aren't
necessary (for example, if you're having the ubiquitous "how do I set up
selective relaying?" problem, we really don't need to know what kind of
hard disk you've got, but if you're wondering about deliveries per second,
it does matter). If you aren't sure if some data is important, put it in.
It's always easier to deal with a question that has more information (and
I've never seen anyone on any list say "You gave me too much information,
now I'm going to be all huffy at you or not answer your question!").
Don't ever say "I've done such-and-so correctly." If you think you did it
all correctly, then why are you writing into the list with a problem? If
you are really positive that a certain subsection of your installation is
okay and want to make life easier for the people trying to help you by
ensuring that they don't expend effort on debugging that sheaf of
possibilities, then instead tell us *why* you think a certain thing is
fine. Examples:
Instead of: How about:
"qmail-smtpd is installed I can telnet to port 25, send a message
correctly" with SMTP, and see it show up in the logs.
"selective relaying is From a Windows client, I can send mail to
installed correctly" anyone @mydomain.tld, but when I try to send
to other domains, I get the expected "that
address is unacceptable to your SMTP server"
error message
(Note that in the last example, the two situations are *not* synonymous!)
Ideally, a help request should like the following examples.
I am attempting to install qmail 1.03 from tarball on a [describe
all hardware and OS, plus your development/compilation environment].
During the compile, I get this error: [cut and paste nasty error from
make, gcc, or whatever].
or:
I am running qmail on a Foonly F-1, installed using Mate Weirdl's
Memphis RPM. I can send mail with SMTP just fine, but when any user
tries to pop mail, their POP client gives them the message: "ERR:
Authorization failed." Looking in /var/log/maillog, I see the follow-
ing: "[multi-line log excerpt here]"
(In this case, we can presume that you want users to be able to receive
mail via POP.)
or even:
I'm trying to set up selective relaying. I've read the part about
that in Life With Qmail, but I still can't understand what to do.
I have installed tcpserver in /usr/local/bin, with the rules file:
[copy and paste rules file]. I am invoking it with: [actual line(s)
from startup script(s), copied and pasted]. When I attempt [specific
action -- "to start tcpserver" or "to send mail via SMTP" or some
such], I see the following results: [copy and paste of actual console
session, log entry, error message, or whatever]. What am I doing wrong?
>Follow these five (I should add - EASY) steps, and you WILL get a useful,
>very often verbose response from the many talented people who frequent this
>mailing list. I did.
They also work nicely for dealing with your local tech support
face-to-face. I started off the day dealing with someone who just told me
"my computer's just totally not working" -- what was I supposed to do with
that?
>First, I've done a bit of looking but it's not immediately obvious to me
>where qmail puts its logs -- in fact, I don't even know where to find the
>system logs. Would somebody kindly point me in the right direction?
Usual places are /var/log/maillog and /var/log/qmail/ (note the trailing
slash).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
house wizard /n./
A hacker occupying a technical-specialist, R&D, or systems position
at a commercial shop. A really effective house wizard can have influ-
ence out of all proportion to his/her ostensible rank and still not
have to wear a suit.
|
I�m just install my qmail in /usr/loca/src/qmail/ .
There is other configuration files in the /var/qmail/
Today, just the smtp service is running, on port
25, but i dont know how add users in the smtp. Even the more simple changes
dont take effect (E.g. change the smtp login message), to help me understand
how these files work.
My doubt is not about the whole qmail system (smtp
pop, ...),is how to begin and understand how this system works first the smtp
service later the pop3 and the rest.
THAK�S FOR THE PATIENT!
Wilke Murakami
|
I keep getting passwd error.
When i change ./vpasswd [EMAIL PROTECTED] mypasswd2999
is this correct?
Please help,
I can create a virtual user and access the mail via pop, and send to
others, however,
when I send from a user on another computer outside of the network to
the virtual user, I get an invalid account error and it goes to the
postmaster. I'm using
vchkpw and vpopmail. Do I need to do something in qmail to allow mail to
get through? I do have a.b.c.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" in my tcp.smtp file
thanks, Mike Martin
I've serv1.test.com (with qmail configured) and serv2.test.com (with
qmail configured) !
I like : if [EMAIL PROTECTED] not in serv1.test.com then send email
to serv2.test.com !
Other example ! AOL ! aol.com have many users ! this users not in 1
server, but in 2 ,3 or more servers !! and users are : [EMAIL PROTECTED] !
if AOL had used qmail, how she would do ??
Thanks !! And sorry my bad english :)
A (clueless) relative of my wife sent her an "animated Purim greeting
card." She showed me the message asking how she can stop seeing such
mail or somesuch.
What caught my eye was a strange header in the message (also shown in
subject):
Received: (qmail 11650 invoked from network); 21 Mar 2000 01:33:12 -0000
Received: from web-c4.pa.bmarts.com (HELO client.bmarts.com) (209.247.132.142)
by mail-d3.pa.bmarts.com with SMTP; 21 Mar 2000 01:33:12 -0000
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 17:33:11 zTo: [correct address withheld]
Did they just screw up generating the header outside of MTA or could
that possibly indicate a problem in qmail?
(I'm not subscribed to the qmail mailing list.)
I am about to migrate a site from an old sendmail to qmail. The host
over 100 domains and also handle email for those domains. In almost
every case they are simply the MX for the domains in question and they
are forwarding the mail to other accounts not under their control.
In some cases all mail for adomain.com is directed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In other cases various addresses within anotherdomain.com are directed
to various other people. say [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] while [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is the easiest way of handling these 2 cases? I would guess that
the first case can easily be handled by vituraldomains pointing to
~alias, and .qmail files directing mail appropriately. But the second
case could involve 100s of addresses. What would the best case there?
--
Mark Drummond|ICQ#19153754|mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
UNIX System Administrator|Royal Military College of Canada
The Kingston Linux Users Group|http://signals.rmc.ca/klug/
Saving the World ... One CPU at a Time
On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 12:18:23AM -0500, Mark E. Drummond wrote:
> I am about to migrate a site from an old sendmail to qmail. The host
> over 100 domains and also handle email for those domains. In almost
> every case they are simply the MX for the domains in question and they
> are forwarding the mail to other accounts not under their control.
>
> In some cases all mail for adomain.com is directed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> In other cases various addresses within anotherdomain.com are directed
> to various other people. say [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] while [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> What is the easiest way of handling these 2 cases? I would guess that
> the first case can easily be handled by vituraldomains pointing to
> ~alias, and .qmail files directing mail appropriately. But the second
> case could involve 100s of addresses. What would the best case there?
Take a look at the fastforward package.
http://cr.yp.to/fastforward.html
It's fast.
/magnus
--
http://x42.com/
Today's scary bonuslink: http://x42.com/metawo/0100101110101101/1000100110/
Hi,
I like to work /etc/aliases with qmail, so i added into ~alias/.qmail-default:
| /usr/ports/distfiles/fastforward-0.51/fastforward -d /etc/aliases.db
Does it work with .db or only .cdb, thats what i get what i get when
newaliases
# ls /etc/alias*
/etc/aliases /etc/aliases.db
Doesnt seem to work..
Anyone?
Spades (CService5)
CService Nick Password
http://cservice.galaxynet.org
` _ , '
- (o)o) -
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-ooO'(_)--Ooo-*-*-*
Bryan, Lee Chenghui |
ICQ UIN: 1558635 |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Global - irc.provalue.net |
=================================
"A man of words and not of deeds is like
a garden full of weeds..."
How do i get pine to work with qmail. I did as FAQ says to put:
sendmail-path=/usr/sbin/sendmail -oem -oi -t (into pine.conf)
Doesnt work still
pine error: Can't open Mailbox
Any idea?
Spades (CService5)
CService Nick Password
http://cservice.galaxynet.org
` _ , '
- (o)o) -
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-ooO'(_)--Ooo-*-*-*
Bryan, Lee Chenghui |
ICQ UIN: 1558635 |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Global - irc.provalue.net |
=================================
"A man of words and not of deeds is like
a garden full of weeds..."
This is mine...do i change it?
inbox-path=Mailbox
At 02:05 PM 3/21/00 +0800, you wrote:
>How do i get pine to work with qmail. I did as FAQ says to put:
>
>sendmail-path=/usr/sbin/sendmail -oem -oi -t (into pine.conf)
>
>Doesnt work still
>
>pine error: Can't open Mailbox
>
>
>
>Any idea?
>
>
>Spades (CService5)
>CService Nick Password
>http://cservice.galaxynet.org
>
> ` _ , '
> - (o)o) -
>-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-ooO'(_)--Ooo-*-*-*
>Bryan, Lee Chenghui |
>ICQ UIN: 1558635 |
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
>Global - irc.provalue.net |
>=================================
>
>
>
> "A man of words and not of deeds is like
> a garden full of weeds..."
>
Spades (CService5)
CService Nick Password
http://cservice.galaxynet.org
` _ , '
- (o)o) -
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-ooO'(_)--Ooo-*-*-*
Bryan, Lee Chenghui |
ICQ UIN: 1558635 |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Global - irc.provalue.net |
=================================
"A man of words and not of deeds is like
a garden full of weeds..."
Using lwq I get the followin loggings:
953617349.061170 warning: trouble opening local/21/366; will try again
later
953617349.061200 warning: trouble opening local/13/335; will try again
later
953617349.061226 warning: trouble opening local/1/323; will try again
later
953617349.061252 warning: trouble opening local/0/345; will try again
later
953617349.061278 warning: trouble opening local/3/325; will try again
later
953617349.061304 warning: trouble opening local/6/374; will try again
later
any help / need more information?
Thanks
Thomas
|
I'm going to use qmail with MySQL.
I used "qmail-1.03" and "mysql-3.22.32". They worked
well.
With "qmail-1.03-mysql-0.6.5.patch", I patched qmail and
compile again.
To check the path, I tried qmail-getpw. But it failed. It
showed this error message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
[root@selab5 /usr/source/qmail-1.03]#
./qmail-getpw
./qmail-getpw: error in loading shared libraries:
libmysqlclient.so.6
: cannot open shared object file: No such file or
directory
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the library directory, I have
libmysqlclient.so.6.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
[root@selab5 /usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql]#
ls
libdbug.a libmysqlclient.a
libmysqlclient.so.6@
libmysys.a
libheap.a libmysqlclient.la*
libmysqlclient.so.6.0.0* libnisam.a
libmerge.a
libmysqlclient.so@
libmystrings.a
-----------------------------------------------------------------
How can I find the library properly?
Thank you.
|
On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 04:39:40PM +0900, Hong Taeki wrote:
> I'm going to use qmail with MySQL.
>
> From http://www.softagency.co.jp/mysql/qmail.html, I'v got some patches.
>
> I used "qmail-1.03" and "mysql-3.22.32". They worked well.
>
> With "qmail-1.03-mysql-0.6.5.patch", I patched qmail and compile again.
>
> To check the path, I tried qmail-getpw. But it failed. It showed this error message.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> [root@selab5 /usr/source/qmail-1.03]# ./qmail-getpw
> ./qmail-getpw: error in loading shared libraries: libmysqlclient.so.6
> : cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In the library directory, I have libmysqlclient.so.6.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> [root@selab5 /usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql]# ls
> libdbug.a libmysqlclient.a libmysqlclient.so.6@ libmysys.a
> libheap.a libmysqlclient.la* libmysqlclient.so.6.0.0* libnisam.a
> libmerge.a libmysqlclient.so@ libmystrings.a
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> How can I find the library properly?
>
> Thank you.
>
>
Check your /etc/ld.so.conf so it include's the mysql library directory
(/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql). After that you run ldconfig -v (this is
for Linux - you didn't include what OS you are running on).
Best regards
Michael Boman
--
W I Z O F F I C E . C O M P T E L T D - Your Online Office Wizard
16 Tannery Lane, Crystal Time Building, #04-00, Singapore 347778
Voice : (+65) 844 3228 [extension 118] Fax : (+65) 842 7228
Pager : (+65) 92 93 29 49 ICQ : 5566009
Mobile: (+65) 97 87 39 14
eMail : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL : http://www.wizoffice.com
I have already installed the qmail and vpopmail packages.
Everything works fine right now, but I still have some questions.
According to the vpopmail package, all the users have to retrieve
their e-mail with the account name "username%domain.com",
instead to the traditional "username" within the POP3 clients.
Of course the vpopmail is pretty cool & good for multi-domains,
but the users may confuse about the abnormal account name.
Is there any solution for this case??
Michael
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
