qmail Digest 8 Apr 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 965
Topics (messages 39713 through 39767):
qmail-remote processes
39713 by: Ricardo D. Albano
39714 by: Uwe Ohse
Re: domain name with dash
39715 by: Dave Sill
Doubts: qmail and IMAP
39716 by: Gilberto Rodrigues
39717 by: Russell P. Sutherland
39718 by: Dave Sill
Strange Problems whith starting qmail
39719 by: root
39745 by: Dave Sill
locking out mail accounts ...
39720 by: Shaun Gibson
39726 by: rogers-qmail.h0050da615e79.ne.mediaone.net
39738 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39739 by: Aled Treharne
39742 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39765 by: Robert Sanderson
Yahoo still down?
39721 by: Bill Luckett
39722 by: octave klaba
39723 by: Bryan White
Re: funny
39724 by: Mate Wierdl
39727 by: Adam McKenna
39728 by: Chris Garrigues
Re: Understanding "To" and "From"
39725 by: Dave Kitabjian
39748 by: Dave Sill
qmail initiating identd lookups?
39729 by: brianb-qmail.technet.evoserve.com
39732 by: Charles Cazabon
39734 by: Bruno Wolff III
Local mail for virtual domains
39730 by: Jay Moore
39731 by: Russell P. Sutherland
Re: HELO in
39733 by: Markus Stumpf
Vapormail (was: Re: Problem: 552 max. message size exceeded)
39735 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39736 by: Soffen, Matthew
39741 by: Dave Sill
Unable to configure IMAP client
39737 by: Gilberto Rodrigues
39744 by: Dave Sill
new qmail install, man page question
39740 by: John W. Lemons III
39743 by: Magnus Bodin
Re: qmail-remote don't lunch
39746 by: Dave Sill
Re: qmail-smtpd/message parsing
39747 by: Dave Sill
39749 by: Dave Sill
Re: Relay allow
39750 by: Rogerio Brito
Off Topic: call a perl script
39751 by: Carlo Gibertini
39752 by: Jedi/Sector One
39753 by: Jedi/Sector One
Re: more qmail-remote
39754 by: Irwan Hadi
Re: qmailqueue patch?
39755 by: Irwan Hadi
Re: VPOPMAIL
39756 by: Irwan Hadi
Sorry, no mailbox (unusual)
39757 by: Kins Orekhov
quick question (qmail-1.03)
39758 by: Keith Warno
39762 by: Charles Cazabon
quick answer (qmail-1.03)
39759 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen
Is any thing wrong with this page
39760 by: bigkapusta.kapusta.com
39761 by: Charles Cazabon
39763 by: bigkapusta.kapusta.com
39764 by: bigkapusta.kapusta.com
problems with mercur/wsendmail/qmail
39766 by: Dale Anderson
39767 by: Uwe Ohse
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 can't set my qmail server to maximize the number of simultaneous qmail-remote procs. I can't get more than 20 simul. procs., I was created the file /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote with the value 60. What's wrong ? RDA.-
On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:06:39PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote: > I can't set my qmail server to maximize the number of simultaneous > qmail-remote procs. I can't get more than 20 simul. procs., I was created > the file /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote with the value 60. you need to restart qmail-send after certain configuration file modifications. see the manual page for more information. Regards, Uwe
"kapusta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >~user/.qmail-default is getting confusing I got response that I need to have >~user/.qmail-domain to be able to get e-mail and .qmail-default is like >whild card >and it worked until I started create more users for this domain >does anybody wrote something that make sense about virtual domains and >aliases I think: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#virtual-domains is pretty clear. What you seem to be missing is how virtual deliveries are redirected and how .qmail files work. If you have a virtualdomains entry like: example.com:john-example A message sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will be redirected to john-example-info. In order to "catch" that mail, you'll need one of: ~john/.qmail-example-info ~john/.qmail-example-default ~john/.qmail-default ~alias/.qmail-john-example-info ~alias/.qmail-john-example-default ~alias/.qmail-john-default ~alias/.qmail-default (And these are listed in the order qmail-local will look for them.) The ~alias .qmail files will only be used if "john" isn't a valid qmail user. -Dave
I want to use qmail, maildirs and IMAP to config a mail server. I installed qmail v1.03, daemontools and ucspi-tcp packages and everything is running ok. I downloaded UW-IMAP 4.7b, compiled it, applied David Harris patch and build it. Ok, now it's time to install IMAP, but I have some doubts (probably they're a little bit basic, but I would be very grateful if someone could help me). 1. I'm following the BUILD doc and according to it, I should install the pop2d, pop3d and imapd daemons in a system directory of my choosing. Is it necessary to install the pop2d and pop3d daemons? What are they for? Must all of them be running even if I wanna have only IMAP protocol? 2. According to the docs, I should update inetd.conf to invoke the daemons. I guess I could use tcpserver instead of editing it. Is it correct? Does IMAP daemon have to appear before qmail's dameons in init scripts? Thanks in advance, Gilberto Rodrigues
* Gilberto Rodrigues ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [ 7 Apr 2000 08:49]: > I want to use qmail, maildirs and IMAP to config a mail server. I > installed qmail v1.03, daemontools and ucspi-tcp packages and everything > is running ok. I downloaded UW-IMAP 4.7b, compiled it, applied David > Harris patch and build it. Ok, now it's time to install IMAP, but I have > some doubts (probably they're a little bit basic, but I would be very > grateful if someone could help me). You may also wish to consider Mr. Sam's courier-imap, which works nicely with Qmail and maildirs: http://www.inter7.com/courierimap/ [Dave: you could/should perhaps add this URL to the LWQ page in the IMAP server section] -- Quist Consulting Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 219 Donlea Drive Voice: +1.416.696.7600 Toronto ON M4G 2N1 Fax: +1.416.978.6620 CANADA WWW: http://www.quist.on.ca
Gilberto Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >1. I'm following the BUILD doc and according to it, I should install the >pop2d, pop3d and imapd daemons in a system directory of my choosing. Is >it necessary to install the pop2d and pop3d daemons? No. >What are they for? They're POP2 and POP3 server daemons. >Must all of them be running even if I wanna have only IMAP protocol? No. >2. According to the docs, I should update inetd.conf to invoke the >daemons. I guess I could use tcpserver instead of editing it. Is it >correct? I'm not sure. I know it runs out of inetd, though. >Does IMAP daemon have to appear before qmail's dameons in init >scripts? No, it doesn't matter what order you start them. -Dave
Hi, although I'm almost expect my problem not having to do with qmail at all it happens to me while I try to start qmail only. Maybe you can give me a hint whats wrong. Whenever I try to start qmail via /var/qmail/rc qmail doesn't seem to start. /var/qmail/rc is a copy from /var/qmail/boot/home Using the "nohup" command in the rc-script as LWQ tells I get the following output in nohup.out: /usr/bin/nice: exec: No such file or directory # bash --version bash --version GNU bash, version 2.03.0(1)-release (i386-suse-linux) Copyright 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc. # sh --version GNU bash, version 2.03.0(1)-release (i386-suse-linux) Copyright 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc. I compiled qmail via make make setup check ./config-fast wotan.arc (I just want to use it inhouse) Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Cyril Bitterich
root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Whenever I try to start qmail via /var/qmail/rc qmail doesn't seem to >start. >/var/qmail/rc is a copy from /var/qmail/boot/home > >Using the "nohup" command in the rc-script as LWQ tells I get the >following output in nohup.out: >/usr/bin/nice: exec: No such file or directory What happens if you run /var/qmail/rc interactively as root? Where is "nice" coming from? Does "nohup" run it? What does your /var/qmail/rc look like, exactly? -Dave
Hi there I need to do the following : - lock a mailbox (without deleting it or the mail contained in it) - if a user tries to access a mailbox locked like this all they get back when trying to collect mail is a preset 'call support to re-enable this mailbox'. Suggestions anyone ? -- Shaun Gibson ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Associate Unix and NT System Adminstrator Tel : +27-11-2667800 ext 8023 Intekom, Midrand, South Africa -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shaun Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 15:18:08 +0200 Hi there I need to do the following : - lock a mailbox (without deleting it or the mail contained in it) - if a user tries to access a mailbox locked like this all they get back when trying to collect mail is a preset 'call support to re-enable this mailbox'. Suggestions anyone ? -- Shaun Gibson The "big hammer" would be to chown and/or chmod it away from the user, depending on whether they had shell access. The message seen by the user might be confusing, but the technique is guaranteed to work for all MUAs. ;-} Unfortunately, this would also bottle up deliveries, though qmail would keep trying for a while. -- Bob Rogers
Quoting Shaun Gibson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > - lock a mailbox (without deleting it or the mail contained in it) How do you normally lock an account on your particular flavor of unix? What's your authentication scheme? > - if a user tries to access a mailbox locked like this all they get back > when trying to collect mail is a preset 'call support to re-enable this > mailbox'. You didn't say what pop-3 server you're using. qmail-pop3d could be easily hacked to return "-ERR Mail account locked. Call tech support." Whether the MUA actually displays to the user the server's response is another question. Aaron
Ok, here's a random idea that suddenly occurred to me: When the account is locked, the POP daemon recognises this, and when a user tries to get their mail, only send 1 message, which is a standard message from tech Support telling the user that their account is locked and instructions on what to do next. Just a thought. Aled.
Quoting Aled Treharne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Ok, here's a random idea that suddenly occurred to me: > > When the account is locked, the POP daemon recognises this, and when a > user tries to get their mail, only send 1 message, which is a standard > message from tech Support telling the user that their account is locked > and instructions on what to do next. Yes, an obvious flaw to hacking the server's error response is that the account may not neccessarily be locked. The user may have entered an incorrect password. Anyway, more details from the guy who posted would be nice. Aaron
Shaun, Try something like this, Create a root owned Maildir with world read access: #mkdir /etc/pop3lock #mkdir /etc/pop3lock/users #/var/qmail/bin/maildirmake /etc/pop3lock/Maildir #chmod -R +rx /etc/pop3lock Add the e-mail message you want the user to retrieve to /etc/pop3lock/Maildir/new/ and make the file world readable. Create the file /var/qmail/bin/pop3mail with the following contents: #!/bin/sh if [ -e "/etc/pop3lock/users/$USER" ]; then exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d /etc/pop3lock/Maildir else exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d $1 fi Make this file executable: #chmod +x /var/qmail/bin/pop3mail Replace /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d with /var/qmail/bin/pop3mail in the command that starts you pop3 service. Restart your pop3 service. To lock a user's account create a file in /etc/pop3lock/users named the same as the user's account name: #touch /etc/pop3lock/users/shaung With the file in place the user will only retrieve the 'account locked' message that you created each time they check their mail. Remove the file to unlock their account: #rm /etc/pop3lock/users/shaung This is only one of many, many ways to do this. I welcome your feedback. Bob Shaun Gibson wrote: > Hi there > > I need to do the following : > > - lock a mailbox (without deleting it or the mail contained in it) > - if a user tries to access a mailbox locked like this all they get back > when trying to collect mail is a preset 'call support to re-enable this > mailbox'. > > Suggestions anyone ? > > -- > Shaun Gibson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Associate Unix and NT System Adminstrator Tel : > +27-11-2667800 ext 8023 > Intekom, Midrand, South Africa > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Robert Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ETRN.com, Inc. - The Internet Answering Service. http://www.ETRN.com
Hi, Anybody know if Yahoo is still having problems? I have a faily large anouncment list to post this weekend and I need to know if I have to rig something using a special box for yahoo addresses and serialmail. I can't find anything on the yahoo site about this problem at all. ******************************************* Bill Luckett Director of Information Systems Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society 1625 Eastover Dr. Jackson, MS 39211 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph : 601-984-3559 Fax: 601-984-3506 *******************************************
Hi, telnet mx2.mail.yahoo.com 25 telnet mx1.mail.yahoo.com 25 it seems it works :) Octave Bill Luckett a �crit : > > Hi, > > Anybody know if Yahoo is still having problems? I have a faily large > anouncment list to post this weekend and I need to know if I have to rig > something using a special box for yahoo addresses and serialmail. I can't > find anything on the yahoo site about this problem at all. > > ******************************************* > Bill Luckett > Director of Information Systems > Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society > 1625 Eastover Dr. > Jackson, MS 39211 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Ph : 601-984-3559 > Fax: 601-984-3506 > ******************************************* -- Amicalement, Octave >>>>> no swap allowed <<<<<
> Anybody know if Yahoo is still having problems? I have a faily large > anouncment list to post this weekend and I need to know if I have to rig > something using a special box for yahoo addresses and serialmail. I can't > find anything on the yahoo site about this problem at all. It seems to be working fine today. My impression was the situation was sporadically improving yesterday.
> So, a male bra-salesperson is not allowed? Who cares? Maybe there's no > free archiver that uses postfix yet. Why don't we take the best of > both worlds? In this case, the brasalesman tells his customer "nobody wears bras nowadays". In agreement with the subject of my message, I really do not see what part of my original message invited flame. Mate
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 03:03:18PM -0500, Ronny Haryanto wrote: > This thread is silly and doesn't give any valuable knowledge. > Both software are good and have their own +/-. Please let us keep this > list objective and use it to discuss qmail. I would hate to see this > becomes another flame war, I've seen it in postfix-users list, it's > not good. This message is the first one in the thread that reminded me of anything like a flame war. --Adam
> From: Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 11:55:36 -0400 > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 03:03:18PM -0500, Ronny Haryanto wrote: > > This thread is silly and doesn't give any valuable knowledge. > > Both software are good and have their own +/-. Please let us keep this > > list objective and use it to discuss qmail. I would hate to see this > > becomes another flame war, I've seen it in postfix-users list, it's > > not good. > > This message is the first one in the thread that reminded me of anything like > a flame war. Personally, I found it amusing to see a message with the subject line 'Re: funny' complaining that a thread was silly. What did he expect? 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
Yes, Charles, I'm pretty darn happy at this point. Thank you both, Charles and Claus. So here's what I think you're saying. 1) The To: and From: headers are basically completely forgeable, and can't be trusted for tracing spam (along with Reply-To). 2) The only things that matter are the envelope sender and recipient, and qmail stores these as Return-Path: and Delivered-To:, respectively. And Return-Path: can be forged anyway. -> Looking at INTERNALS, qmail appears to store the envelope sender under queue/info and the recipients under queue/local and queue/remote, eh? 3) So the only thing I can trust (ignoring spoofing) is the IP address shown in the Received: header from which my server got the message. Thanks guys, Dave -----Original Message----- From: Charles Cazabon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 10:45 AM To: Dave Kitabjian Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: Understanding "To" and "From" Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's time for me to understand this stuff clearly once and for all, > partly so that I can handle spam intelligently and properly. > > I'm unclear on the exact relationships between the following: > > ------------------- > 1) MUA: "From", "To", "Bcc", "Reply Address" fields > > 2) SMTP: "MAIL FROM:" and "RCPT TO:" > > 3) Delivered Message: "To:", "From:", "Reply-To:", "Return-Path:" > headers. Also, the terms "envelope sender" and "envelope recipient". SMTP "MAIL FROM:" is the envelope sender, and "RCPT TO:" is the envelope recipient. These are the only things that matter to an MTA; it doesn't care what addresses are listed in the From: and To: headers in the message itself. > From what I currently understand, the MUA fields are (obviously) > completed by the sender. (Let's assume a common client like Eudora or > Outlook Express rather than qmail-inject for this discussion). They are all effectively completed by the sender. MS-Windows mail clients may automatically use the contents of the From: header as the envelope sender, but with many mail programs the user can set the envelope addresses to whatever he likes. > When connecting to the SMTP server to send the message, the "From" and > "To" fields are copied by the MUA to become the "From:" and "To:" > headers of the message. The "From" field is also used in the SMTP > conversation as the "MAIL FROM:". Not necessarily. For example, if the user has QMAILUSER/QMAILHOST set in their environment, qmail will construct the envelope sender address from those if injected locally. > The "Reply-To" header is created by the MUA from either the "Reply > Address" field, if present, or else the "From" field. The "Return-Path:" > header is added by the SMTP server based on the "Reply-To" or "From" > header (?) Reply-To: is not necessarily, unless you want replies to go to an address different from the From: address. > -> Question: So, now what do we look at to determine the "envelope > sender" and "envelope recipient"? Secondly, which of these terms/headers > is used to determine whom qmail delivers the message to? With qmail, the envelope sender is preserved in the Return-path: header. The envelope recipient is preserved in the Delivered-To: header. > Okay, now the message bounces because because it's an evil spam message. > > -> Question: Where does MAILER-DAEMON send the bounce message? To the > "From:" person? "Reply-To:"? The Return-Path: header, which is a copy of the envelope sender address. But since it's spam, it will be one of: -Empty <> -Fake/nonexistent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -Real, but an innocent bystander's address <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> And the bounce will either bounce or be delivered to the innocent bystander. > If I could understand THIS much, I'd be very happy. Happy? 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your questions have been answered well, and you seem to have a good handle on the situation, but here's a message I sent to the majordomo-users list last year that explains the relationship between message headers, bodies, and envelopes. ---- This is a long explanation, but if you're not an SMTP guru it's probably worth reading. SMTP is kind of like snail mail in that you have a letter (message) inside an envelope. The letter has the addresses of the sender and recipient(s) (e.g., the To/From/CC header fields) but the envelope has the true sender/recipient addresses used to deliver the letter. In the case of SMTP, the envelope addresses are conveyed by the SMTP MAIL (sender or return path) and RCPT (recipient) commands. Just like the post office uses the envelope addresses to control delivery or return undeliverable letters, so SMTP uses its envelope addresses. If a message can't be delivered to one of the recipients, a bounce message is sent to the sender (return path). Let's look at some typical scenarios. Case 1: User-to-user User A sends a message to user B. The From header field is A, the To header field is B, the envelope return path is A, and the envelope recipient is B. E.g.: (Envelope) Sender: A Recipient: B (Message) From: A To: B body of message Case 2: User-to-user with BCC User A sends a message to user B and BCC's user C. The From field is A, the To field is B, the envelope return path is A, and the envelope recipients are B and C: (Envelope) Sender: A Recipients: B, C (Message) From: A To: B body of message Case 3: User-to-list User A sends a message to list LIST. List mail is a little tricky because the message is first delivered to the mailing list resender, then forwarded by the resender to the subscribers. The first hop is like Case 1 except the Recipient/To is the list submission address: (Envelope) Sender: A Recipients: LIST (Message) From: A To: LIST body of message The second hop is like Case 2 except the Recipients are the subscribers and the Sender is the list owner alias: (Envelope) Sender: LIST owner Recipients: LIST subscribers (Message) From: A To: LIST body of message Note that by setting the Sender on the second hop to the list owner address, bounces to undeliverable recipients are directed to the list owner rather than the originator of the message. Of course, some MTA's aren't fully SMTP-compliant, and they grab a return address from the headers. -Dave
Is there any component of qmail/ucspi-tcp that would initiate identd lookups on a remote host? A network admin has complained that his server has been receiving a large amount of identd queries to his server coming from our mailserver. Here's the excerpt from the logfile he sent us. 210.16.71.2 is our mailserver. Apr 6 07:40:11 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.110.247.244:53 161.184.159.82:111 in via ed0 Apr 6 08:06:37 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:4963 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 08:06:58 lillie last message repeated 3 times Apr 6 08:36:04 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:3168 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 08:36:22 lillie last message repeated 2 times Apr 6 09:06:12 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:1153 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 09:06:33 lillie last message repeated 3 times Apr 6 10:05:51 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:3246 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 10:06:12 lillie last message repeated 2 times Apr 6 10:39:18 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:4250 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 10:39:36 lillie last message repeated 2 times Apr 6 11:06:09 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:4038 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 11:06:18 lillie last message repeated 2 times Apr 6 12:07:37 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:1681 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 12:07:46 lillie last message repeated 2 times Apr 6 12:35:40 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:1410 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 Apr 6 12:36:01 lillie last message repeated 3 times Apr 6 13:05:38 lillie /kernel: ipfw: 500 Deny TCP 210.16.71.2:1899 161.184.159.82:113 in via ed0 TIA, Brian -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.baquiran.com AIM: bbaquiran
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there any component of qmail/ucspi-tcp that would initiate identd > lookups on a remote host? A network admin has complained that his > server has been receiving a large amount of identd queries to his > server coming from our mailserver. tcpserver does identd lookups by default. You're probably using it to run qmail-smtpd and possibly qmail-pop3d. man tcpserver to disable these lookups. 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 12:12:24AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is there any component of qmail/ucspi-tcp that would initiate identd > lookups on a remote host? A network admin has complained that his > server has been receiving a large amount of identd queries to his > server coming from our mailserver. As long as email is coming from his server to yours, do ident lookups back to his server is reasonable and he really shouldn't have a problem with that. If he doesn't want to provide ident, than he shouldn't run a server on that port. It may be that you don't want to have ident lookups done. They are really to help the remote site track back problems, rather than do anything for you directly.
I have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED] that has an account on our qmail box and would like the mail delivered to /home/testme/Maildir. The qmail box is also a virtual domain for sailnet.com. The default domain for the qmail box is sailnet.net. How do I get her mail delievered /home/test/Maildir instead of /home/vpopmail/domains/sailnet.com/testme/Maildir? Thanx, Jay
* Jay Moore ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [ 7 Apr 2000 12:21]: > I have a user [EMAIL PROTECTED] that has an account on our qmail box > and would like the mail delivered to /home/testme/Maildir. The qmail > box is also a virtual domain for sailnet.com. The default domain for > the qmail box is sailnet.net. > How do I get her mail delievered /home/test/Maildir instead of > /home/vpopmail/domains/sailnet.com/testme/Maildir? One way is to put: /home/test/Maildir/ as the contents of file: /home/vpopmail/domains/sailnet.com/.qmail-testme E.g. % cd ~vpopmail/domains/sailnet.com % echo /home/test/Maildir/ > .qmail-testme and make sure that /home/test/Maildir/ et. al. is writable by the vpopmail user. E.g. chown -R vpopmail.vchkpw /home/test/Maildir -- Quist Consulting Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 219 Donlea Drive Voice: +1.416.696.7600 Toronto ON M4G 2N1 Fax: +1.416.978.6620 CANADA WWW: http://www.quist.on.ca
On Fri, Apr 07, 2000 at 10:58:42AM +0700, A. Yahya Sjarifuddin wrote: > Is there any incomptability with Lotus or just wrong > setting? > > >> Remote host said: 500 Session already established. The domain name > >[smtp-a.cbn.net.id] passed in with HELO will be ignored. The current domain > >name of sending SMTP is [www.wtwh.com.cn]. DJB removed from Cc: We had this problem sporadically with some of our customers, too. This is a bug in Lotus for which AFAIK exists a fix. Upgrade the Lotus Server. \Maex -- SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Quoting Jeremy Hansen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > This is true, yet I don't understand why Wietse claims so many more people > are using Postfix. I don't have the link to the thread off hand, but I > remember reading something along the lines of "No one uses qmail, a few > people are using Postfix" which boggled my mind because all the places > I've visited in the past month or so in the Silicon Valley, about 10 - 15 > companies all use qmail, none use Postfix. So where is he getting his > information? The proverbial ether, probably! I really think he should have left the name as Vapormail, which DJB suggested he should name is "vaporware" MTA. Heh. Well, hmm, if I remember correctly. It was awhile ago Wietse came here trolling for a name for his new qmail replacement. I remember getting a laugh out of it, whatever the name was ;-) I like Vapormail better than ``Postfix.'' What does that mean, anyway? :) Aaron
postfix sounds like a formatter for a online form submittal program, not a mail server.. I mean, How do you go from postfix to mail server (at least qmail and sendmail have the word MAIL in their titles). Matt Soffen Web Intranet Developer http://www.iso-ne.com/ ============================================== Boss - "My boss says we need some eunuch programmers." Dilbert - "I think he means UNIX and I already know UNIX." Boss - "Well, if the company nurse comes by, tell her I said never mind." - Dilbert - ============================================== > -----Original Message----- > From: Aaron L. Meehan [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 12:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Vapormail (was: Re: Problem: 552 max. message size exceeded) > > Quoting Jeremy Hansen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > This is true, yet I don't understand why Wietse claims so many more > people > > are using Postfix. I don't have the link to the thread off hand, but I > > remember reading something along the lines of "No one uses qmail, a few > > people are using Postfix" which boggled my mind because all the places > > I've visited in the past month or so in the Silicon Valley, about 10 - > 15 > > companies all use qmail, none use Postfix. So where is he getting his > > information? > > The proverbial ether, probably! I really think he should have left > the name as Vapormail, which DJB suggested he should name is > "vaporware" MTA. Heh. Well, hmm, if I remember correctly. It was > awhile ago Wietse came here trolling for a name for his new qmail > replacement. I remember getting a laugh out of it, whatever the name > was ;-) > > I like Vapormail better than ``Postfix.'' What does that mean, > anyway? :) > > Aaron
"Soffen, Matthew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >postfix sounds like a formatter for a online form submittal program, not a >mail server.. The term "postfix" is computer science jargon for grammars where the operands of an operation precede the operator. For example, "1 1 +" is the postfix version of "1 + 1". (Our normal grammar, where the operator is between the operands, is called "infix".) >I mean, How do you go from postfix to mail server (at least qmail and >sendmail have the word MAIL in their titles). Well, "post" is "mail", and "fix", well, I guess that means it fixes mail problems (namely sendmail :-). I think Postfix is as good a name for an MTA as any. -Dave
I'm using qmail v1.03 and UW-IMAP 4.7b and both of them are running ok. All users have a Maildir directory in their home, with read-write-execute access. qmail can send local and remote messages and new messages are being delivered in ~/Maildir/new. Below is a copy of my IMAP log file: 2000-04-07 17:15:40.781340500 tcpserver: status: 0/40 2000-04-07 17:16:56.991030500 tcpserver: status: 1/40 2000-04-07 17:16:56.993396500 tcpserver: pid 991 from 192.168.30.9 2000-04-07 17:16:57.093989500 tcpserver: ok 991 :192.168.30.9:143:192.168.30.9::32819 2000-04-07 17:21:11.801655500 tcpserver: status: 2/40 2000-04-07 17:21:11.804038500 tcpserver: pid 995 from 192.168.30.9 2000-04-07 17:21:11.848831500 tcpserver: ok 995 :192.168.30.9:143:192.168.30.9::32824 Users are using Netscape Messenger 4.6 to deal with their mail. I configured it (as below) to use the IMAP server I set up, but it can't read any messages. GENERAL tab Server Name: magenta Server Type: IMAP IMAP tab Only the second option selected (When I delete a message: Mark it as deleted.) ADVANCED tab IMAP server directory: INBOX Personal Namespace: nothing Public (shared): nothing Other Users: nothing (note: when I pressed the OK button, it changed the last textboxes to: Personal Namespace:"#mh/","#mhinbox","" Public (shared): "#public/","#news.","#ftp/","#shared/" Other Users: "~") Does anybody know what is wrong? I imagine it won't exist, but does anybody know any tutorial or how-to to configure IMAP clients? Thanks in advance, Gilberto Rodrigues
Gilberto Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm using qmail v1.03 and UW-IMAP 4.7b and both of them are running ok. I don't think so, or you wouldn't be posting... Did you install maildir patches for imap? Which ones? >IMAP server directory: INBOX Should that be Maildir? -Dave
Ok, got my server back up with tripwire, dnscache, swatch, and a few other security toys... We'll see how long it stays up. :/ Anyway, I have qmail installed and working, but I'm just wanting to verify how the man pages can be installed. Is it as simple as just cp *.X into /usr/man/manX, maybe even gziping then on the way? thanks, John
On Fri, Apr 07, 2000 at 01:14:20PM -0500, John W. Lemons III wrote: > Ok, got my server back up with tripwire, dnscache, swatch, and a few other > security toys... We'll see how long it stays up. :/ > > Anyway, I have qmail installed and working, but I'm just wanting to verify > how the man pages can be installed. Is it as simple as just cp *.X into > /usr/man/manX, maybe even gziping then on the way? Yes it's just that simple. BUT: The even more simpler and more koscher way to do it is to add /var/qmail/man to your MANPATH. It's much easier to clean, upgrade and know what's what. But I reckon this is sometimes a religious choice. /magnus -- absolutely useless --> http://x42.com/
"Ricardo D. Albano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Some times my mail server don't delivery mails, qmail-remote not run and my >queue grow up. What can cause this ? I these cases the solution is kill all >qmail-xxxxx and run the init script again (/var/qmail/rc). What Do The Logs Say? (tm) Have You Checked Your Trigger? (sm) References: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#logs http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#trigger -Dave
"Daniluk, Cristopher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Is it possible to have qmail-smtpd dump mail into a place where it can be >preprocessed by some spawned script? Yes. Set up two qmail installations. The one that listens to port 25 has an empty control/locals, and control/virtualdomains files that feed everything though your script and re-inject into the second qmail installation, which delivers normally. -Dave
Dave Sill wrote: > >has an empty control/locals, and control/virtualdomains files that Make that "control/virtualdomains *entries*" -Dave
On Apr 06 2000, Daniel Carlos wrote: > My email server (qmail 1.03) is accepting a message for relay > internally. Here is the test made for abuse.net. The Ip > 200.XXX.XX.XX is my e-mail server. How solve this? You don't have a problem. Therefore, you don't have to solve anything. You should get a bounce for the message that was tried to be delivered and no spam relayed. []s, Roger... -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/ Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hello, I need to call a perl script every time a message arrives at one mail box on qmail. reading the docs I found that creating a .qmail file in the directory of the user with "|/my_program" will call the program. This work but I cannot receive the message in stdin... (Obs: my perl is very bad too) If some good soul can send me a example perl script that gets the content of the message, i will apreciate... thanks, Carlo
Carlo Gibertini a �crit : > If some good soul can send me a example perl script that gets the content of > the message, i will apreciate... #! /usr/local/bin/perl -w while (<>) { /microsoft/oi && exit 100 } What is the exact content of your .qmail file ? Did you check Qmail logs ? Best regards, -- Frank DENIS aka Jedi/Sector One aka DJ Chrysalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -> Software : http://www.jedi.claranet.fr <- -> Music : http://www.mp3.com/chrysalis <-
Carlo Gibertini a �crit : > user with "|/my_program" will call the program. "| ./my_program" would be better. -- Frank DENIS aka Jedi/Sector One aka DJ Chrysalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -> Software : http://www.jedi.claranet.fr <- -> Music : http://www.mp3.com/chrysalis <-
At 17:23 06/04/2000 +0200, octave klaba wrote: >Hi, >I want to run more qmail-remote process. At the moment >it is only 10 and it is slow :( > >where can I setup it to 30 or 50 ? recompile your qmail, and change the value of conf-spawn to be 255 from 120 before. then add /var/qmail/control/concurrencylocal and put the value of 255 there. and your qmail speed to deliver outbound would be faster. don't forget to restart the qmail-send program afterall. > >thanks ! > >Octave > >-- >Amicalement, >Octave >>>>>> no swap allowed <<<<<
At 15:38 06/04/2000 +0000, Jennifer Tippens wrote: >Hello, >I'm having difficulty with the qmailqueue patch >(http://www.qmail.org/qmailqueue-patch) I'm not sure if I'm doing it >correctly, as I have not had to patch anything before. I copied the patch >part of the text to a file on my box and called it qmailqueue-patch and put >it into a newly untarred qmail-1.03 source. Then I just did: patch ><qmailqueue-patch and it came back with: > >patching file `Makefile' >Hunk #1 FAILED at 1483. >1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to Makefile.rej then do vi qmailqueue-patch and see the line 1483. usually the problem is like this the end of a line is ;} but the } go to the second line and make the line only contain ; you should move the } to the correct line (it is the upper line of its now) ------- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
At 01:16 07/04/2000 +0545, Bill Moller wrote: >Hi, > >I've setup vpopmail in my RH6.2 box. Do I have to make any changes in >inetd.conf file as well. How do I check that it's working? Also could you ought to run qmail from tcpserver if you want to run qmail with vpopmail, if not, then if there IS rcpthosts at /var/qmail/control then you couldn't do send any outbound messages. >anyone suggest me a good manual page site for VPOPMAIL. then take a loot at http://www.inter7.com/vpopmail they have the manual and admin page for vpopmail. > >Thanks > >Regards > >Bill > ------- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
Hello people! I have a many machines installed with qmail-1.03 with simular config. But today I found that mail for one user (oracle) on one of machines is just bounced with "Sorry, no mailbox by that name #5.1.1" error. This has .qmail for forwarding his email to mailhub. All other users with simular config, oracle user on other machines with same config work just fine, but this one...ugh... I've checked all permissions, tried to create ./Maildir/, everything looks good for. But not for qmail. Any thoughts/suggestions? Thanks in advance! -- Kins Orekhov Outlook Technologies, Inc. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 773-775-2099, ext. 226 http://swoop.outlook.net
Concerning uids and gids of the qmail system users: Are the numeric uids and gids compiled into the qmail-1.03 programs, or are the names used? I'm assuming (after having some difficulties; read on) the numeric uids/gids are compiled in. Is this a correct assumption? I moved qmail binaries from one Linux box to another wich are identitical except for a few things, one of them being the uids & gids of various accounts and groups. qmail-start yacked with a alert: cannot start: unable to switch to queue directory. kw
Keith Warno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Concerning uids and gids of the qmail system users: > > Are the numeric uids and gids compiled into the qmail-1.03 programs, or are > the names used? Yes, it's numeric, as the (quicker) reply noted. But you may be interested in Bruce Guenter's qmail RPMs -- they include a patch which makes qmail get its UIDs/GIDs from a set of control files instead of being compiled in. His qmail+patches RPMs are available from: http://www.em.ca/~bruceg/ 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
+ "Keith Warno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Concerning uids and gids of the qmail system users: | | Are the numeric uids and gids compiled into the qmail-1.03 programs? Yes. - Harald
Is anything wrong with this page or is it just me?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is anything wrong with this page or is it just me? > > http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#config-files It loads fine here, and the content (from a quick glance) still appears sane. What problem are you having? 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. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does not align correctly and I am missing all the text from tables, but I think its my broweser -----Original Message----- From: Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, April 07, 2000 8:42 PM Subject: Re: Is any thing wrong with this page >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is anything wrong with this page or is it just me? >> >> http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#config-files > >It loads fine here, and the content (from a quick glance) still appears >sane. What problem are you having? > >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. >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
It must be my browser everything looks good on other computer I was missing text in tables strange -----Original Message----- From: Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, April 07, 2000 8:42 PM Subject: Re: Is any thing wrong with this page >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is anything wrong with this page or is it just me? >> >> http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#config-files > >It loads fine here, and the content (from a quick glance) still appears >sane. What problem are you having? > >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 have a utility on my web server called wsendmail.exe that's used for turning forms on web pages into email messages. The program that fails to work for delivering messages to any qmail server. Other mailing exe's work fine, it's just wsendmail. Our mail server is Mercur and the failure notice I get back just says the mail is undeliverable, as if the mail server didn't exist at all. Is there any known reason for this? I thought it might have something to do with the way that the wsendmail program formats the headers in the message. Dale Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 12:57:34AM -0700, Dale Anderson wrote: > I have a utility on my web server called wsendmail.exe that's used for wsendmail is a piece of bad software. > exist at all. Is there any known reason for this? I thought it might have > something to do with the way that the wsendmail program formats the headers > in the message. wsendmail violates the SMTP protocol by not sending a CR/LF (\r\n) at the end of the all lines. You might want to replace wsendmail with something not so stupid. Otherwise you could use fixcrio from the ucspi-tcp package. Regards, Uwe
