qmail Digest 9 May 2000 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 996
Topics (messages 41285 through 41399):
Which version of Qmail to use?
41285 by: James
41287 by: James
41306 by: Tony Wade
41351 by: John Palkovic
41358 by: John Palkovic
AVP and Scan4virus
41286 by: Andr�s
41378 by: Jason Haar
Re: scan4virus
41288 by: Jason Haar
41301 by: Einar Bordewich
41305 by: Will Harris
Re: Anti-virus
41289 by: Jason Haar
41319 by: Steve Peace
Re: Unable to Telnet
41290 by: Xionghui Chen
ORBS prevention
41291 by: Kristina
41309 by: Johan Almqvist
41310 by: Paul Schinder
Changing Passwords
41292 by: Isaiah Chua
Re: My take on Phoenix
41293 by: John White
41307 by: kingram
Help with virtual domains
41294 by: Isaiah Chua
Re: how to stop subscription
41295 by: System Administrator
41303 by: Anton Pirnat
Which version of Qmail to use? (fwd)
41296 by: James
41308 by: Vince Vielhaber
deletion of large queue.
41297 by: Marc-Adrian Napoli
Changing passwords and virtual domains
41298 by: Isaiah Chua
None of my
41299 by: James
41311 by: Peter van Dijk
Re: QMail Performance Question & Miscellaneous Issues
41300 by: Neil Schemenauer
41324 by: Bryan White
41327 by: Steve Wolfe
41331 by: markd.bushwire.net
41332 by: Dave Sill
Re: ETRN
41302 by: Anton Pirnat
Re: Open Today.
41304 by: Peter van Dijk
41312 by: Len Budney
41313 by: Peter van Dijk
41320 by: Timothy L. Mayo
41322 by: Anthony DeBoer
41330 by: Len Budney
restarting qmail quickly
41314 by: Tim Gollschewsky
41318 by: Will Harris
Re: Future of qmail: will it care about viri/worms/etc?
41315 by: Bruno Wolff III
41316 by: Bruno Wolff III
41321 by: Anthony DeBoer
41325 by: Steve Wolfe
41326 by: Steve Wolfe
41329 by: John W. Lemons III
Re: .qmail questions
41317 by: Dave Sill
More than 120 concurrencyremote
41323 by: Ricardo D. Albano
41333 by: Dave Sill
41343 by: Ricardo D. Albano
41344 by: markd.bushwire.net
41348 by: Ricardo D. Albano
41349 by: markd.bushwire.net
41350 by: Peter van Dijk
41357 by: Irwan
41364 by: Ricardo D. Albano
41377 by: Irwan Hadi
Re: URGENT ! Erased /var/qmail !!!
41328 by: Rogerio Brito
Re: qmail-inject
41334 by: ino-waiting.gmx.net
41338 by: markd.bushwire.net
41339 by: markd.bushwire.net
41385 by: Bob Rogers
41399 by: ino-waiting.gmx.net
VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
41335 by: R.Ilker Gokhan
41336 by: Bryan Hundven
41337 by: John W. Lemons III
41340 by:
41341 by: Soffen, Matthew
41342 by: Alex Shipp
41368 by: Andy Bradford
41396 by: Martin Brooks
Lowercasing non-ASCII chars?
41345 by: Mikko H�nninen
41346 by: markd.bushwire.net
41347 by: Peter van Dijk
41352 by: Mikko H�nninen
41356 by: Patrick Bihan-Faou
41359 by: Peter van Dijk
41361 by: Patrick Bihan-Faou
41384 by: Bob Rogers
Re: help qmail+vpopmail+ezmlm+qmailadmin+sqwebmail
41353 by: Kapil Nanda
41383 by: Kapil Nanda
ezmlm question
41354 by: gary.genashor.com
Re: field
41355 by: Thilo Bangert
ezmlm question (revisited)
41360 by: GARY GENDEL
Re: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
41362 by: Hector Tinoco
41367 by: Bryan Hundven
41369 by: Juan E Suris
41370 by: Vince Vielhaber
41371 by: Jon Saunders
41372 by: Kai MacTane
41373 by: Alex Shipp
41376 by: Len Budney
41390 by: Steffan Hoeke
41391 by: Alex Shipp
origins of Bracketed Quad notation
41363 by: David L. Nicol
41365 by: Bruno Wolff III
41366 by: Timothy L. Mayo
blocking mail from a certain address or domain
41374 by: Bill Parker
41375 by: Kai MacTane
Qmail Setup
41379 by: Robert Blaylock
41380 by: Irwan Hadi
badmailpattern
41381 by: Marc-Adrian Napoli
41382 by: Ronny Haryanto
qmail-smtpd
41386 by: Eric Pan
Retreiving spooled mail from my ISP ?
41387 by: blue
Netscape and Microsoft Outlook
41388 by: Mark Lo
Re: Filtering out already delivered mail
41389 by: Jozef Hitzinger
Off Topic: Posting virus warnings? (was Re: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II ***
Importante***)
41392 by: Steffan Hoeke
qmail-smptd hung problem
41393 by: mack.ms1.hinet.net
Oh no ! A VBS file !!!
41394 by: Jeroen ten Berge
41397 by: Kent Nilsen
41398 by: Scott D. Yelich
pop clients.
41395 by: Mark Lo
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After 4 days of not being able to get Qmail working properly for me, I've
decided to completely wipe *every* trace of sendmail and *every* trace of
qmail on my system (Mandrake 7.02).. then install Qmail from scratch all
over again using "life with Qmail" suggestions.
I've noticed there is a version of Qmail called
var-qmail-1.03-2-gnu-linux-i686 and another version just called
qmail-1.03.tar.gz Which one do I use for Mandrake 7.02? I was able to
get the var-qmail one to work only halfway (Can send but not receive), and
when I tried installing the regular qmail, I couldn't send OR receive.
After I wipe every trace of qmail and sendmail from my system, which
version will be the best for me to use?
james
Sorry if this is a double post.. but my first message hasn't come through
for 20 minutes. Don't know if the mail server is slow, or something went
wrong on my end.. but here it is again:
After 4 days of not being able to get Qmail working properly for me, I've
decided to completely wipe *every* trace of sendmail and *every* trace of
qmail on my system (Mandrake 7.02).. then install Qmail from scratch all
over again using "life with Qmail" suggestions.
I've noticed there is a version of Qmail called
var-qmail-1.03-2-gnu-linux-i686 and another version just called
qmail-1.03.tar.gz Which one do I use for Mandrake 7.02? I was able to
get the var-qmail one to work only halfway (Can send but not receive), and
when I tried installing the regular qmail, I couldn't send OR receive.
After I wipe every trace of qmail and sendmail from my system, which
version will be the best for me to use?
james
James.
Best to use the source and compile qmail yourself.
get the qmail-1.03.tar.gz
Thank You
Tony Wade (Postmaster)
The Internet Solution
Tel: (+27 11) 283 5000
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
-----Original Message-----
From: James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Which version of Qmail to use?
After 4 days of not being able to get Qmail working properly for me, I've
decided to completely wipe *every* trace of sendmail and *every* trace of
qmail on my system (Mandrake 7.02).. then install Qmail from scratch all
over again using "life with Qmail" suggestions.
I've noticed there is a version of Qmail called
var-qmail-1.03-2-gnu-linux-i686 and another version just called
qmail-1.03.tar.gz Which one do I use for Mandrake 7.02? I was able to
get the var-qmail one to work only halfway (Can send but not receive), and
when I tried installing the regular qmail, I couldn't send OR receive.
After I wipe every trace of qmail and sendmail from my system, which
version will be the best for me to use?
james
Tony Wade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Best to use the source and compile qmail yourself.
>
> get the qmail-1.03.tar.gz
On a Debian GNU/Linux system it can be painful to install from source
because of constraints imposed by the package management system dpkg.
Dpkg wants a mail transport agent defined (by default our friend
sendmail, of course). Lots of packages depend on the mail transport
agent.
In my case I found that an install of qmail from the source tarball
caused additional pain, since the Debian Gods have decided that it is
a great idea to enforce the qmail user IDs one must use:
qmaild:x:64011:65534:qmail daemon,,,:/var/qmail:/bin/false
qmails:x:64012:64010:qmail send,,,:/var/qmail:/bin/false
qmailr:x:64013:64010:qmail remote,,,:/var/qmail:/bin/false
qmailq:x:64014:64010:qmail queue,,,:/var/qmail:/bin/false
qmaill:x:64015:65534:qmail log,,,:/var/qmail:/bin/false
qmailp:x:64016:65534:qmail pw,,,:/var/qmail:/bin/false
I had created the IDs via the instructions in INSTALL.ids. Of course
they were different. No other set of ids works with the package one
gets. I only got the "debianized" qmail package install to work after
I wiped all traces of the vanilla install from my system and ran the
install script via 'dselect'. It does work, but one must let it do
*everything*.
-John
--
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
- Voltaire
I wrote:
> Dpkg wants a mail transport agent defined (by default our friend
> sendmail, of course). ...
Oops, that's a mistake. The default MTA on Debian is exim.
-John
--
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
- Voltaire
Hello.
Has anobody tried to use AVP with Scan4virus?
What do I have to change to make it use AVP?
Thanks.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 12:44:30AM +0200, Andr�s wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Has anobody tried to use AVP with Scan4virus?
> What do I have to change to make it use AVP?
Next release (0.50) will have support for it.
Yes, that's a big jump in versions - scan4virus now supports Email header
matching as well as attachment scanning. You'll be able to match "Subject:
ILOVEYOU" hours before you find out about the attachments involved.
I'm finishing testing of it this week - should be out next week.
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Can this be moved to [EMAIL PROTECTED]? (subscribers only
of course)
I'm sure the general Qmail population isn't that interested in this...
Jason Haar, author of scan4virus.
[to subscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
[see http://www.geocities.com/jhaar/scan4virus]
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
"octave klaba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > mail. Make sure debugging is turned on, also.
>
> I have nothing else in log :(
>
> it looks like qmail is not using antivirus-qmail-queue.pl
I've followed this thread since I have the same problem, and I think you are
using antivir.qmail-queue.pl
Fact:
I've installed the QMAILQUEUE-patch.
The maildrop-0.76b gives me shit. When trying to configure, it fails with
the configure in bdbobj with this from config.log:
----
configure:1084: c++ -o conftest conftest.C 1>&5
/usr/i486-linux/bin/ld: cannot open crtbegin.o: No such file or directory
configure: failed program was:
#line 1079 "configure"
#include "confdefs.h"
int main(){return(0);}
----
I've had this problem earlier with sqwebmail, but I don't remember how I
solved this.
# ls -lsa /var/spool/qmailscan/
total 64
1 drwxr-xr-x 5 qmailq qmail 1024 May 8 01:34 .
1 drwxr-xr-x 17 root root 1024 May 7 02:07 ..
13 -rw-r----- 1 qmailq qmail 16384 May 8 00:09
antivirus-attachments.db
2 -rw-r--r-- 1 qmailq qmail 1577 May 7 18:52
antivirus-attachments.txt
1 -rw-rw---- 1 qmailq qmail 96 May 8 00:09
antivirus-qmail-queue-version.txt
1 drwxr-xr-x 5 qmailq qmail 1024 May 7 02:08 archive
43 -rw-rw---- 1 qmailq qmail 42881 May 8 09:05 qmail-queue.log
1 drwxr-xr-x 5 qmailq qmail 1024 May 7 02:08 viruses
1 drwxr-xr-x 5 qmailq qmail 1024 May 7 02:08 working
The symptoms are the same (no reaction on virus or .vbs attachements), and
my geuss was that I didn't have the maildrop program installed.
Does this count for you too?
regards
--
--------------------------------------------
IDG New Media Einar Bordewich
Technical Manager Phone: +47 2336 1420
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------
> QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/antivirus-qmail-queue.pl" export
>QMAILQUEUE
>
> env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
> tcpserver -H -R -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c100 -u503 -g502 0 smtp \
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > /dev/null &
> echo "smtp"
> ;;
Since you are already using tcpserver, the best way (and the one that works
well for me) is to put the environment variables into the tcp.smtp.cdb
rules file. Here's my entry:
:allow,QMAILQUEUE="/var/qmail/bin/antivirus-qmail-queue.pl"
Recompile the rules database and all should be well...
regards,
Will
__________________________________________________________________________
"I was going to be a Neo-Deconstructivist, but Mom wouldn't let me..."
multimedia laboratorium [EMAIL PROTECTED]
institut fuer informatik (pgp id) F703D035
der universitaet zuerich (office) +41 1 635 4346
winterthurerstr. 190 (fax) +41 1 635 6809
ch-8057 zuerich (mobile) +41 76 372 0913
switzerland www.ifi.unizh.ch/~harris
__________________________________________________________________________
On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 03:06:52PM +0200, Rainer Link wrote:
> Sweep, H+B EDV AntiVir, KasperskyLabs AVP or F-Secure AV. If a infected
> attachment is detected, the complete mail is moved to a quarantine
> directory. It is then up to you, to clean a infected attachment with one
> of the above commercial antivirus software.
Too right - in fact I think that's probably the best thing to do. Cleaning
up infected Email means what - you _don't_ bother telling anyone there was
an infection present? If you can clean out the virus automatically, where is
the "incentive" for the infected person to actually get rid of the virus?
Quarantines are the best option IMHO - they "suggest" to the infected party
that they should sort out their system, and still allow the recipient to get
access to the message (after it's been manually cleaned of course).
Of course, what do you do with viruses like ILOVEYOU? There is no message to
"clean" as such...
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
I am using the Amavis wrapper with Mcaffee's amti virus. Seems to work
great for me. The install was also a snap. Good luck!
Steve P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andr�s" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2000 6:02 PM
Subject: Anti-virus
> Hello.
>
> I've been looking for programs to install with my Qmail to detect those
> nasty virus. The only program which seems to work with Qmail is Scan4virus
> and AMaViS (this one hasn't been tested).
>
> Is there anyone more? Which one is the best?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
I can now use qmail's smtpd, but I have to manually start svscan by `cd
/var/qmail/svscan; /usr/local/bin/svscan &` (I used /var/qmail instead of /service),
with the help of scripts from "live with qmail", qmail get started by svscan, then I
use `/etc/init.d/qmail stop`, then `tcpserver -x/usr/local/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u103
-g102 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &`, then `/etc/init.d/qmail start`, at last I
find qmail all working ok.
But the problem comes when I make some changes to qmail's configuration, then I have
to stop svscan, stop qmail, stop tcpserver, and start over manually again. I know
there must be a much cleverer way to start and stop this set of things. I also don't
know how to start up svscan as the server starts up, I applied scripts from "live with
qmail" to /etc/rc2.d/S79svscan, but the server complains that it has no permission to
access some supervision files. How should I do it? Thanks in advance!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Vielhaber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Xionghui Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: Unable to Telnet
> On Mon, 8 May 2000, Xionghui Chen wrote:
>
> > Thank you, I followed the instructions at the URL you kindly provided, but when I
>finally run
> > `tcpserver -x/usr/local/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u103 -g102 0 smtp
>/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &`
> > I got "tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used" and tcpserver Exit
>111.
> > What's wrong? I also installed svscan, but when I killed svscan and qmail, I got
>the same message.
>
> Make sure there's no other tcpserver/qmail-smtpd running and that there's
> no sendmail process running.
>
> Vince.
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vince Vielhaber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Xionghui Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2000 11:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: Unable to Telnet
> >
> >
> > > On Sun, 7 May 2000, Xionghui Chen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oh, I don't know that I have to config a /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb file, actually, I
>got no output with the command `find / -name tcp.smtp.cdb`. How should I make this
>kind of file, where can I get detailed document about it? Thank you.
> > >
> > > Take a look here: http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html for
> > > a step by step.
> > >
> > > Vince.
I am at the point of setting up my qmail-server as the mail-hub for my
organization. I have only used qmail for testing purposes so far and I am not
experienced with anti-spam techniques.
Now that I want to use my qmail-server in real life, there are many
other issues involved--like preventing my qmail server from being put on
the ORBS database. I have referred to the archives, however, there is much
heated discussion without much pratical detail.
Pleae let me know what I need to do for ORBS prevention and any other
configuration details necessary for a secure, anti-spam mail-hub.
Thankyou in advance,
Kristina
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:34:27AM +0900, Kristina wrote:
> Now that I want to use my qmail-server in real life, there are many
> other issues involved--like preventing my qmail server from being put on
> the ORBS database. I have referred to the archives, however, there is much
> heated discussion without much pratical detail.
A standard qmail install will never be in the ORBS database. qmail is
relay-safe out of the box.
:->
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
At 11:34 AM +0900 5/8/00, Kristina wrote:
>I am at the point of setting up my qmail-server as the mail-hub for my
>organization. I have only used qmail for testing purposes so far and I am not
>experienced with anti-spam techniques.
>
>Now that I want to use my qmail-server in real life, there are many
>other issues involved--like preventing my qmail server from being put on
>the ORBS database. I have referred to the archives, however, there is much
>heated discussion without much pratical detail.
>
>Pleae let me know what I need to do for ORBS prevention and any other
>configuration details necessary for a secure, anti-spam mail-hub.
Absolutely nothing. qmail as installed won't relay for third
parties, and therefore won't get in ORBS.
It's what you *shouldn't* do that's important. Under no
circumstances should you remove the rcpthosts file. Read Dave Sill's
Life with qmail and some of the other documents that you must have
run across if you've read all the "heated discussion" to learn how to
properly set up relaying with qmail.
>
>
>Thankyou in advance,
>Kristina
--
--
Paul J. Schinder
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 693
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
hi folks,
I am just wondering if there is any frontend written for qmail
administrators who run only SMTP and POP3 services to allow users to easily
change their passwords through a browser?
Would appreciate any information.
Thanks!
Regards,
Isaiah Chua
|
On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 06:08:08PM -0700, Derek Briggs wrote:
>
> The Lakers are very fortunate not to face a healthy SA. Duncan presents most
> of the same problems as Webber offensively, plus he's better defensively.
> Robinson is tougher than Vlade. And Avery Johnson isn't an idiot like
> Williams.
>
I disagree with the premise (the Lakers are very -fortunate-).
The Spurs championship deserves an asterisk, as it depended on
Duncan playing virtually every single minute of the season.
That's possible in a shortened season, but not in a full season.
They sure tried, and he got injured.
The End.
John
John White wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 06:08:08PM -0700, Derek Briggs wrote:
> >
> > The Lakers are very fortunate not to face a healthy SA. Duncan presents most
> > of the same problems as Webber offensively, plus he's better defensively.
> > Robinson is tougher than Vlade. And Avery Johnson isn't an idiot like
> > Williams.
> >
>
> I disagree with the premise (the Lakers are very -fortunate-).
>
> The Spurs championship deserves an asterisk, as it depended on
> Duncan playing virtually every single minute of the season.
> That's possible in a shortened season, but not in a full season.
>
> They sure tried, and he got injured.
>
> The End.
>
> John
What are you talking about?
--
Best Regards from Poland
Krzysztof Ingram - secondary root where the power of Linux / is the
first
FF Computers Sp. z o.o.
Bielsko-Biala
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ffcomp.com.pl
|
hi folks,
My qmail is currently running well for my company's email
addresses. However, I need to setup some mailboxes that will cater for staff of
our sister company, and I'm having problems with the virtual domains in
qmail.
My company's domain is abc.com (for e.g.), and they have some
users on our system, e.g. johndoe. Now johndoe should only send mail out as [EMAIL PROTECTED], and should receive mails at
the same address. It should not be a local delivery as the mails for this domain
are in fact forwarded from their HQ in Hongkong.
I've read up the docs for virtual hosts and it still doesn't
seem to help. Changes I've made always point me back to error messages
indicating no user exists or cannot accept domain.
What am I doing wrong?
Regards,
Isaiah Chua
|
Hi
try sending a mail to :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 7 May 2000, Anthony Diaz wrote:
> hi,
>
> i want to unsubscribe to this service, whom should i
> email to?
>
> thanks.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com/
>
============================================================
Note:
Support is now available thru our Web Based Support System.
You can reach Support at :
http://support.puretech.co.in
============================================================
- Admin.
Parag Mehta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
System Administrator.
Puretech Internet Pvt. Ltd. http://puretech.co.in/
77 Atlanta. Nariman Point.
Mumbai - 400021. India. Tel: +91-22-2833158
To unsubsribe just send an empty message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hth
Anton Pirnat
--
this message is shareware, please register!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Urspr�ngliche Nachricht <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Am 07.05.00, 14:35:09, schrieb Anthony Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> zum Thema
how to stop subscription:
> hi,
> i want to unsubscribe to this service, whom should i
> email to?
> thanks.
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 16:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Which version of Qmail to use?
Sorry if this is a double post.. but my first message hasn't come through
for 20 minutes. Don't know if the mail server is slow, or something went
wrong on my end.. but here it is again:
After 4 days of not being able to get Qmail working properly for me, I've
decided to completely wipe *every* trace of sendmail and *every* trace of
qmail on my system (Mandrake 7.02).. then install Qmail from scratch all
over again using "life with Qmail" suggestions.
I've noticed there is a version of Qmail called
var-qmail-1.03-2-gnu-linux-i686 and another version just called
qmail-1.03.tar.gz Which one do I use for Mandrake 7.02? I was able to
get the var-qmail one to work only halfway (Can send but not receive), and
when I tried installing the regular qmail, I couldn't send OR receive.
After I wipe every trace of qmail and sendmail from my system, which
version will be the best for me to use?
james
On Sun, 7 May 2000, James wrote:
> Sorry if this is a double post.. but my first message hasn't come through
> for 20 minutes. Don't know if the mail server is slow, or something went
> wrong on my end.. but here it is again:
Something may have been down at uic. Mail seems to be flowing again.
> After 4 days of not being able to get Qmail working properly for me, I've
> decided to completely wipe *every* trace of sendmail and *every* trace of
> qmail on my system (Mandrake 7.02).. then install Qmail from scratch all
> over again using "life with Qmail" suggestions.
>
> I've noticed there is a version of Qmail called
> var-qmail-1.03-2-gnu-linux-i686 and another version just called
> qmail-1.03.tar.gz Which one do I use for Mandrake 7.02? I was able to
> get the var-qmail one to work only halfway (Can send but not receive), and
> when I tried installing the regular qmail, I couldn't send OR receive.
>
> After I wipe every trace of qmail and sendmail from my system, which
> version will be the best for me to use?
qmail-1.03.tar.gz is the source tarball. If you use this file and follow
the directions either in LWQ or the installation document INSTALL that
you'll find in the source tarball, you should be up and running in no time
at all.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pop4.net
128K ISDN from $22.00/mo - 56K Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
Qmailers,
Today i got into work to be faced with a local queue of 17000 odd messages.
We were spammed by an american company who offered cheap university
diploma's.
Anyhow.. this is what i did to remove the messages and was wondering if
anyone has a better alternative:
1. killed qmail-send
2. found out that the spam message contained "UNIVERSITY DIPLOMA" somewhere
within the mail
3. went into /var/local/queue/mess and did a grep on all files for
"UNIVERSITY DIPLOMA"
4. piped these to /tmp/messagenumbers which contained a list of 17000 odd
message id numbers of spammed mail
5. opened up three terminals to machine running qmail, one in
/var/qmail/queue/info, one in /var/qmail/queue/local and one in
/var/qmail/queue/mess and wrote a for loop to remove all the files that were
in the /tmp/messagenumbers file
6. restarted qmail-send and everything was okay again, queue was back down
to a couple of hundred mails which were cleared in 10 minutes or so
I originally tried using the qmhandle.cgi script that is floating around..
that works fine, however looking at the cgi it is obvious it takes time to
decide whether the mail is local or remote... and seeing as i knew these
were all in the local queue, i didn't have that time, i just had to remove
the mails myself.
Can anyone see if there is anything i've done wrong here?
Regards,
Marc-Adrian Napoli
Network Administrator
Connect Infobahn Australia
+61 2 9281 1750
hi folks,
My qmail is currently running well for my company's email
addresses. However, I need to setup some mailboxes that will cater for staff of
our sister company, and I'm having problems with the virtual domains in
qmail.
My company's domain is abc.com (for e.g.), and they have some
users on our system, e.g. johndoe. Now johndoe should only send mail out as [EMAIL PROTECTED], and should receive mails at
the same address. It should not be a local delivery as the mails for this domain
are in fact forwarded from their HQ in Hongkong.
I've read up the docs for virtual hosts and it still doesn't
seem to help. Changes I've made always point me back to error messages
indicating no user exists or cannot accept domain.
What am I doing wrong?
Also, I am just wondering if there is any frontend written for
qmail administrators who run only SMTP and POP3 services to allow users to
easily change their passwords through a browser?
Would appreciate any information.
Regards,
|
messages are getting through.. this is just a test.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 01:37:21AM -0700, James wrote:
> messages are getting through.. this is just a test.
This one is.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 01:17:13PM -0600, Steve Wolfe wrote:
> Despite the docs at RedHat.com, saying how easy it is to
> increase the file-handle limit on the new kernels, I found that
> it simply didn't work. Editing the source and recompiling the
> kernel (as you had to in older kernels) did the trick.
The documentation of RedHat.com is technically accurate, just not
complete. There are two limits. One is the total number of
files handles for all processes. This is adjustable through
/proc/sys/fs/file-max. The other limit is the number of file
handles opened by a single process. This is dynamic in the newer
kernels. You are probably running into a resource limit. Try:
ulimit -n
I just opened 2000 files after using "ulimit -n 2048" (the
default was 1024). No recompile was required.
Neil
> It's not even that hard, that was the first time I had ever fiddled
with
> the Kernel source. We went to 4096, which should allow for quite a few
> qmail-remotes. : )
Do you have any feel for how to evaluate what is an optimum number of
remotes? At 400 remotes I still have 80% CPU idle time. The load average
is around 4. This suggests to me that the system is limited by disk I/O,
network I/O or the responsiveness of remote servers. If it is Disk I/O more
remotes won't help. I track network traffic through our router fairly
closely and don't think that is the bottle neck. If it is the
responsiveness of remote servers then more remotes will help.
> The documentation of RedHat.com is technically accurate, just not
> complete. There are two limits. One is the total number of
> files handles for all processes. This is adjustable through
> /proc/sys/fs/file-max. The other limit is the number of file
> handles opened by a single process. This is dynamic in the newer
> kernels. You are probably running into a resource limit. Try:
>
> ulimit -n
>
> I just opened 2000 files after using "ulimit -n 2048" (the
> default was 1024). No recompile was required.
Ah. In this case, the number of files that a user can have open (1024) was
the same as the total number of files that the entire system could have - I
imagine that raising user files above total system files doesn't do much
good. : )
steve
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 10:56:43AM -0400, Bryan White wrote:
> > It's not even that hard, that was the first time I had ever fiddled
> with
> > the Kernel source. We went to 4096, which should allow for quite a few
> > qmail-remotes. : )
>
> Do you have any feel for how to evaluate what is an optimum number of
> remotes? At 400 remotes I still have 80% CPU idle time. The load average
> is around 4. This suggests to me that the system is limited by disk I/O,
> network I/O or the responsiveness of remote servers. If it is Disk I/O more
> remotes won't help. I track network traffic through our router fairly
> closely and don't think that is the bottle neck. If it is the
> responsiveness of remote servers then more remotes will help.
As always, there is a bottleneck. I like to see everything on an email
system as a set of queues. While some are tangible, such as the physical
mail queue, some are less so, such as the queue of I/O requests to the
disks, the queue of packets coming in and out of the interface, the
queue of processes to be run, the receiving servers at the other end, etc.
It is very rarely the case that all of these queues are in perfect
balance such that they all fill up and degrade at the same rate. Consequently
there has to be a slowest queue. That's your current bottleneck.
the slowest of those queues is going to be your current bottleneck. You
fix that, then the next slowest queue becomes your bottleneck. Keep fixing
until the first bottleneck comes around again, and you start the whole
process over.
As you say, in your case the bottleneck may well be disk or network I/O or
even a queue at the other end, namely the remote servers. If you have
good connectivity and a diverse range of recipients and a large
concurrencyremote, then it's probably not the remote servers.
But there's only one way to find out. Analyze each queue and find
out where it's currently at in terms of utilization. Start tuning
the queue with the highest utilization and you'll probably see
improvements.
Regards.
"Bryan White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Do you have any feel for how to evaluate what is an optimum number of
>remotes?
Measure the delivery rate at various settings of concurrencyremote.
Choose the setting that yields the highest delivery rate.
>At 400 remotes I still have 80% CPU idle time.
400 qmail-remote processes running, or concurrencyremote=400? Some
systems never hit their concurrencyremote due to I/O restriction.
>The load average
>is around 4. This suggests to me that the system is limited by disk I/O,
>network I/O or the responsiveness of remote servers.
You should be able to monitor disk I/O rates and see if they go up as
concurrencyremote is raised. Same with network I/O.
>... If it is the responsiveness of remote servers then more remotes
>will help.
So add more remotes. If it helps, you aren't I/O (network or disk)
limited yet.
-Dave
Have a look for �serialmail� at the qmail pages (www.qmail.org) or
even at http://cr.yp.to/serialmail.html
hth
Anton Pirnat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Urspr�ngliche Nachricht <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Am 07.05.00, 16:21:27, schrieb Tomasz Antczak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> zum
Thema ETRN:
> Hello. Is any way to add ETRN support for my qmail ? any patches or
ideas
> ?
> Thx, thom
On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 03:19:20PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Len, you've sent me mail directly; no problem. Yet I block on the DUL.
> > I think the reason you haven't had any problems is because your ISP
> > hasn't listed its dialups with the DUL.
>
> Ah, that explains it! Well, bully for my ISP! They're cool for reasons
> other than running qmail I see.
Uhm no, actually every ISP should list their blocks with the DUL. If not,
somebody else probably will.
Not listing themselves in the DUL gives other ISPs _not_ the choice of
rejecting dial up mail from them.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not listing themselves in the DUL gives other ISPs _not_ the choice of
> rejecting dial up mail from them.
...rejecting all of my mail, for example. I have no problem resisting
stupidity by not volunteering information.
Casting it as a choice issue is a red herring. For example, what about
my ISPs privacy right? It's nobody's business what runs behind a given
IP. Should they also list OS and version, plus modem make and model, in
the cracker phoneboook?
Len.
--
A good business is not always a good purchase--although it's a good
place to look for one.
-- Warren Buffet, 1983
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 08:17:58AM -0400, Len Budney wrote:
> Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Not listing themselves in the DUL gives other ISPs _not_ the choice of
> > rejecting dial up mail from them.
>
> ...rejecting all of my mail, for example. I have no problem resisting
> stupidity by not volunteering information.
To which I agree. But that is not the point of DUL.
> Casting it as a choice issue is a red herring. For example, what about
> my ISPs privacy right? It's nobody's business what runs behind a given
> IP. Should they also list OS and version, plus modem make and model, in
> the cracker phoneboook?
I see your points, I am just talking about the point DUL is trying to make.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
And his ISP won't. :) Especially since I was a dial-up user when the
whole "block the dial-ups" discussion started and was adamant that it was
a mistake. :) If one of our users SPAMs, regardless of how, and we are
notified, they lose their account. It's that simple and it is very
effective, I can assure you. :)
Tim Mayo
On Sun, 7 May 2000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> John White writes:
> > On Sat, May 06, 2000 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Len Budney wrote:
> > > (BTW blocking DUL has not interfered with my own email in a couple of
> > > years now. So despite the big talk of folks who use it, I continue to
> > > send mail directly from my machine. DUL blocking only works because it
> > > is a rarely-taken measure.)
> >
> > Amazing. In one year, our office ran across:
> >
> > aol.com
>
> Add to that list crynwr. Len, you've sent me mail directly; no
> problem. Yet I block on the DUL. I think the reason you haven't had
> any problems is because your ISP hasn't listed its dialups with the
> DUL. In general, the DUL doesn't go looking. It lists modems for
> ISPs that contribute, or those with a spamming problem.
>
> --
> -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
> Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
>
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
Len Budney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [ the DUL ]
>
> Casting it as a choice issue is a red herring. For example, what about
> my ISPs privacy right? It's nobody's business what runs behind a given
> IP. Should they also list OS and version, plus modem make and model, in
> the cracker phoneboook?
On the one hand, it's reasonable not to DUL your own dialup pool if
you're ready to respond and act on abuse complaints relating to them and
have a trustworthy user base, and on the other hand if you don't want to
deal with complaints at all you should filter tcp/25 from your dialup
pool to the Internet; registering with DUL and not filtering is a wierd
sort of compromise in between.
This does raise the question of some sort of crowbar functionality in
one's qmail relay servers, such that you're actually accomplishing
anything by forcing them to relay rather than going straight out from the
dialup pool; you'd need to ID your user, probably by consulting your
RADIUS server, track RCPTs/user/hour, share that data among multiple
redundant relay servers, and be able to shunt the user's outbound mail
into a holding tank when it goes over the volume threshold and alert a
human admin.
--
Anthony DeBoer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> And his ISP won't. :) Especially since I was a dial-up user when the
> whole "block the dial-ups" discussion started...
I must say, I like my ISP! :) One of these days, I'll have to meet Tim
and buy him a beer.
Len.
--
P.S. ezmlm sent you some mail. Read it. Pay attention this time.
-- Dan Bernstein
Hi,
I'm trying to write some scripts, and my script add lines to smtproutes, I
believe qmail must be restarted when you do this, yes?
When I run the rc script with the 'stop' option, it seems to take AGES
giving me stuff like this:
last qmail log line [957788665.031323 status: local 0/80 remote 6/100 exitasap ->
local] - sleeping 1
last qmail log line [957788807.634725 warning: trouble injecting bounce message, will
try later -> trouble] - sleeping 1
I'm sure its just trying to do things cleanly, but I can't wait 5 minutes
to restart my mail software in my script. Is there anything better I can
do?
Any advice will be appreciated.
Tim.
At 13:32 8.05.2000, Tim Gollschewsky wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm trying to write some scripts, and my script add lines to smtproutes,
I
>believe qmail must be restarted when you do this, yes?
No, smtproutes is read by qmail-remote each time it is spawned, so you
don't need to restart. Hopefully this will alleviate the other problems
mentioned in your message.
Will
__________________________________________________________________________
"I was going to be a Neo-Deconstructivist, but Mom wouldn't let me..."
multimedia laboratorium [EMAIL PROTECTED]
institut fuer informatik (pgp id) F703D035
der universitaet zuerich (office) +41 1 635 4346
winterthurerstr. 190 (fax) +41 1 635 6809
ch-8057 zuerich (mobile) +41 76 372 0913
switzerland www.ifi.unizh.ch/~harris
__________________________________________________________________________
On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 05:14:46PM -0600,
Steve Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > there should be no need to "hack" qmail
> >
> > And there isn't! Why do people persist on insecure MUAs?
>
> I'll chime in on this, even though my view may not be the same as
> everyone else's.
>
> The problem isn't MUA's. The problem is that users were duped into
> executing a program of a malicious intent.
I disagree. The problem is that Microsoft markets their systems to people
who don't know what they are doing, but includes features in them that
make it easy for the same people to shoot themselves in the foot.
An MUA marketed at people who don't know a lot about computers, should not
have a way to run executable (scripts, native executables, macros or
whatever) attachments.
On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 05:14:46PM -0600,
Steve Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When I sent my analysis of the "iloveyou" virus to BugTraq, I was
> deluged with email - all of them bounces. Because my message started with
> "ilove you", many, many mail servers had blocked it. That was within
> something like 12 hours of the release. Think of the immense amount of
> headaches the system administrators for those companies saved themselves.
> The ounce of prevention was worth a metric ton of cure.
That is supposed to be an example of good effects of virus scanning?
Subject based scanning is bad. You get a lot of false positives and well
written viruses will choose from a large set of common subjects to make
subject blocking costly.
Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'll be suprised if the next version of qmail doesn't have better
> support for filtering/processing messages. DJB is good at addressing
> users needs in subsequent releases. Look at the development of
> DNScache or the early qmail days for two examples.
I think he might draw the line at writing secure replacements for
Microsoft Outhouse and Windows, though, and IMHO that's where the problem
lies. You can't swap files across the Internet that contain system-level
scripting embedded deeply inside proprietary file formats.
It'd be trivial to block all .doc-file attachments, but you'd have the
lusers up in arms almost instantly.
--
Anthony DeBoer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > The problem isn't MUA's. The problem is that users were duped
into
> > executing a program of a malicious intent.
>
> I disagree. The problem is that Microsoft markets their systems to people
> who don't know what they are doing, but includes features in them that
> make it easy for the same people to shoot themselves in the foot.
>
> An MUA marketed at people who don't know a lot about computers, should
not
> have a way to run executable (scripts, native executables, macros or
> whatever) attachments.
It's not just MS. Two people here got the virus. One used Outlook, and
had to specifically open the file. The other had Netscape, and it ran
automatically...
Let's face reality. Clueless users want to be able to easily open up
programs easily. There's enough of them that they're going to get it one
way or another. : )
steve
> > When I sent my analysis of the "iloveyou" virus to BugTraq, I was
> > deluged with email - all of them bounces. Because my message started
with
> > "ilove you", many, many mail servers had blocked it. That was within
> > something like 12 hours of the release. Think of the immense amount of
> > headaches the system administrators for those companies saved
themselves.
> > The ounce of prevention was worth a metric ton of cure.
>
> That is supposed to be an example of good effects of virus scanning?
For long-term scanning, no. For immediate needs such as that, it's not
bad. In a large company, it probably saved them a few thousand man-hours
of disinfecting computers.
steve
However, since this was 12 hours after the initial attack, it was a
reasonable response. My first server-based filter was a subject filter,
meant to stem the tide while I developed something a little better. Turns
out "something better" was easily implemented, but nowhere near as easy as
the 3 min or so it took to write the procmail subject filter. So, as a
stopgap measure, subject filters are fine. But long term (I guess anything
more than 24 hours) it is a poor substitute.
>On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 05:14:46PM -0600,
> Steve Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> When I sent my analysis of the "iloveyou" virus to BugTraq, I was
>> deluged with email - all of them bounces. Because my message started
with
>> "ilove you", many, many mail servers had blocked it. That was within
>> something like 12 hours of the release. Think of the immense amount of
>> headaches the system administrators for those companies saved themselves.
>> The ounce of prevention was worth a metric ton of cure.
>
>That is supposed to be an example of good effects of virus scanning?
>
>Subject based scanning is bad. You get a lot of false positives and well
>written viruses will choose from a large set of common subjects to make
>subject blocking costly.
Jonathan McDowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 05:20:25PM -0700, Chris Hanlon wrote:
>> Is there anyway to restrict which users/groups can execute commands
>> via the | option in there .qmail file? I realise that the problem
>> could be solved by not giving users access to the .qmail file but this
>> is not always an option.
>
>I changed qmail to use a modified smrsh from sendmail instead of /bin/sh
>- this allows you to say that users can only execute programs that
>you've enabled. It works on a system wide level rather than a user/group
>level though.
All you need to do, then, is make smrsh executable only by a certain
group, and put the users you want to have that ability in the group.
-Dave
Hello, I'm tunning a high volume smtp server, I'm trying to get more than
120 remote delivery simultaneos, I touched the control file
"concurrencyremote " with the value 300, but remote procs. don't go more
than 120..... there is a "hardcoded" limit with this parameter ?
Thank you.
RDA.-
"Ricardo D. Albano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello, I'm tunning a high volume smtp server, I'm trying to get more than
>120 remote delivery simultaneos, I touched the control file
>"concurrencyremote " with the value 300, but remote procs. don't go more
>than 120..... there is a "hardcoded" limit with this parameter ?
See:
http://www.faqts.com/knowledge-base/view.phtml/aid/2572/fid/203/lang/en
-Dave
Yes, in the past the concurrencyremote was in "40", when I changed to 300
the remote procs. go up to 120, but no more 120. :(
RDA.-
-----Original Message-----
From: Johan Almqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ricardo D. Albano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
>On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:20:55AM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>> Hello, I'm tunning a high volume smtp server, I'm trying to get more than
>> 120 remote delivery simultaneos, I touched the control file
>> "concurrencyremote " with the value 300, but remote procs. don't go more
>> than 120..... there is a "hardcoded" limit with this parameter ?
>
>Have tou restarted qmail and the smtpd?
>
>> Thank you.
>> RDA.-
>>
>-Johan
>--
>Johan Almqvist
Read then modify conf-spawn in the qmail sources, re-compile, re-install, restart.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 03:35:59PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> Yes, in the past the concurrencyremote was in "40", when I changed to 300
> the remote procs. go up to 120, but no more 120. :(
>
> RDA.-
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johan Almqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Ricardo D. Albano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:54 PM
> Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
>
>
> >On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:20:55AM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> >> Hello, I'm tunning a high volume smtp server, I'm trying to get more than
> >> 120 remote delivery simultaneos, I touched the control file
> >> "concurrencyremote " with the value 300, but remote procs. don't go more
> >> than 120..... there is a "hardcoded" limit with this parameter ?
> >
> >Have tou restarted qmail and the smtpd?
> >
> >> Thank you.
> >> RDA.-
> >>
> >-Johan
> >--
> >Johan Almqvist
>
This work fine, but for a max of 255..... How can I Increment up to 1000 for
example ??, this is not a joke, I really need tons of remote delivery
threads!....
A concurrency of 255 is not suficcient for my server.
RDA.-
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ricardo D. Albano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
>Read then modify conf-spawn in the qmail sources, re-compile, re-install,
restart.
>
>On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 03:35:59PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>> Yes, in the past the concurrencyremote was in "40", when I changed to 300
>> the remote procs. go up to 120, but no more 120. :(
>>
>> RDA.-
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Johan Almqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: Ricardo D. Albano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:54 PM
>> Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
>>
>>
>> >On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:20:55AM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>> >> Hello, I'm tunning a high volume smtp server, I'm trying to get more
than
>> >> 120 remote delivery simultaneos, I touched the control file
>> >> "concurrencyremote " with the value 300, but remote procs. don't go
more
>> >> than 120..... there is a "hardcoded" limit with this parameter ?
>> >
>> >Have tou restarted qmail and the smtpd?
>> >
>> >> Thank you.
>> >> RDA.-
>> >>
>> >-Johan
>> >--
>> >Johan Almqvist
>>
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 04:12:23PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> This work fine, but for a max of 255..... How can I Increment up to 1000 for
> example ??, this is not a joke, I really need tons of remote delivery
> threads!....
> A concurrency of 255 is not suficcient for my server.
Run multiple instances. This question has been asked and answered plenty
of times, so you might want to review some of the answers in the archives
pointed at from www.qmail.org
Regards.
>
> RDA.-
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Ricardo D. Albano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 3:46 PM
> Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
>
>
> >Read then modify conf-spawn in the qmail sources, re-compile, re-install,
> restart.
> >
> >On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 03:35:59PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> >> Yes, in the past the concurrencyremote was in "40", when I changed to 300
> >> the remote procs. go up to 120, but no more 120. :(
> >>
> >> RDA.-
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Johan Almqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: Ricardo D. Albano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:54 PM
> >> Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
> >>
> >>
> >> >On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:20:55AM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> >> >> Hello, I'm tunning a high volume smtp server, I'm trying to get more
> than
> >> >> 120 remote delivery simultaneos, I touched the control file
> >> >> "concurrencyremote " with the value 300, but remote procs. don't go
> more
> >> >> than 120..... there is a "hardcoded" limit with this parameter ?
> >> >
> >> >Have tou restarted qmail and the smtpd?
> >> >
> >> >> Thank you.
> >> >> RDA.-
> >> >>
> >> >-Johan
> >> >--
> >> >Johan Almqvist
> >>
>
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 12:12:36PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 04:12:23PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> > This work fine, but for a max of 255..... How can I Increment up to 1000 for
> > example ??, this is not a joke, I really need tons of remote delivery
> > threads!....
> > A concurrency of 255 is not suficcient for my server.
>
> Run multiple instances. This question has been asked and answered plenty
> of times, so you might want to review some of the answers in the archives
> pointed at from www.qmail.org
Or use the excellent 16-bit concurrency patch from SuSE.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
At 03:35 PM 5/8/00 -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>Yes, in the past the concurrencyremote was in "40", when I changed to 300
>the remote procs. go up to 120, but no more 120. :(
then you have to patch your qmail with big-concurrency-patch
find it at http://www.qmail.org/top.html
Can you give a pointer to this patch (web page, source docs, how to,
etc)...?
RDA.-
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: More than 120 concurrencyremote
>On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 12:12:36PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 04:12:23PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>> > This work fine, but for a max of 255..... How can I Increment up to
1000 for
>> > example ??, this is not a joke, I really need tons of remote delivery
>> > threads!....
>> > A concurrency of 255 is not suficcient for my server.
>>
>> Run multiple instances. This question has been asked and answered plenty
>> of times, so you might want to review some of the answers in the archives
>> pointed at from www.qmail.org
>
>Or use the excellent 16-bit concurrency patch from SuSE.
>
>Greetz, Peter.
>--
>Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
>|
>| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
>| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
>| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
At 06:41 PM 5/8/00 -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
>Can you give a pointer to this patch (web page, source docs, how to,
>etc)...?
http://www.qmail.org/big-concurrency.patch
On May 07 2000, Bob Rogers wrote:
> I think that should have pretty much taken care of reinstallation.
> You will need to replace any system-wide aliases in the ~alias/
> directory (e.g. for postmaster, root, abuse, etc.), though. And, if
> I were you, I'd start it up by going through the testing sequence in
> the qmail installation instructions.
There is a problem, though if the original poster restored the
queue to the new installation and it contained any message,
for they could have "wrong" names. In such a case, he will
need to run one of the queue fix scripts out there.
[]s, Roger...
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/
Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
every once in a while, but rarely, i get "qmail-inject: illegal option -- B"
when handing off a mail for outbound delivery. the number is "100". i let
mail be handled by (this is .muttrc of mutt):
set sendmail="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" # how2deliver
set sendmail_wait=15
=nothing= makes a mail so flagged by the "sendmail" option leave my
machine. whats wrong? there is no "-B" option anywhere!
--
clemens ([EMAIL PROTECTED], pgp key available)
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 06:14:49PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> every once in a while, but rarely, i get "qmail-inject: illegal option -- B"
> when handing off a mail for outbound delivery. the number is "100". i let
> mail be handled by (this is .muttrc of mutt):
Well, there is no string "illegal option" in the standard qmail source.
Are you sure you're getting this exact message?
If you don't give exact details we can't give an exact answer.
Regards.
> On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 06:14:49PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> every once in a while, but rarely, i get "qmail-inject: illegal option -- B"
>> when handing off a mail for outbound delivery. the number is "100". i let
>> mail be handled by (this is .muttrc of mutt):
> Well, there is no string "illegal option" in the standard qmail source.
Oops. I take that back, sorry. I must have grepped in the wrong place.
My suggestion might be to make a little qmail-inject wrapper and
capture the command line args and env variables. Make that wrapper the
sendmail in your .muttrc
Something as trivial as this might do the trick:
#! /bin/sh
(
echo args are $*
echo Env is:
env
) > $HOME/mutt.trace.$$
exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject $*
At least that way you'll see what mutt is invoking it with.
Regards.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 18:14:49 +0200
every once in a while, but rarely, i get "qmail-inject: illegal option -- B"
when handing off a mail for outbound delivery. the number is "100". i let
mail be handled by (this is .muttrc of mutt):
set sendmail="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" # how2deliver
set sendmail_wait=15
=nothing= makes a mail so flagged by the "sendmail" option leave my
machine. whats wrong? there is no "-B" option anywhere!
Not here, but that may not mean much. My guess is that mutt is
expecting the named program to be sendmail-compatible and is passing it
extra options, but qmail-inject is not taking sendmail options. Try
set sendmail="/var/qmail/bin/sendmail"
instead.
-- Bob Rogers
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 18:14:49 +0200
every once in a while, but rarely, i get "qmail-inject: illegal option -- B"
when handing off a mail for outbound delivery. the number is "100". i let
mail be handled by (this is .muttrc of mutt):
set sendmail="/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject" # how2deliver
set sendmail_wait=15
=nothing= makes a mail so flagged by the "sendmail" option leave my
machine. whats wrong? there is no "-B" option anywhere!
Not here, but that may not mean much. My guess is that mutt is
expecting the named program to be sendmail-compatible and is passing it
extra options, but qmail-inject is not taking sendmail options. Try
set sendmail="/var/qmail/bin/sendmail"
instead.
-- Bob Rogers
Title: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
>SUBJECT: ILOVEYOU
>
> YOU MUST DELETE IT BEFORE OPEN, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR OS IS WINDOWS !!!!!!!!!
>
Title: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
|
LOL,
Your a little late on this one!
Bryan Hundven
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 2:07
AM
Subject: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
>SUBJECT: ILOVEYOU
>
> YOU MUST DELETE IT BEFORE OPEN, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR OS IS
WINDOWS !!!!!!!!!
>
|
Considering the recent spate of VB bourne virii, please don't post using
active-content-enabled formats, like HTML.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Hundven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:16 PM
To: R.Ilker Gokhan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
LOL,
Your a little late on this one!
Bryan Hundven
----- Original Message -----
From: R.Ilker Gokhan
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 2:07 AM
Subject: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
>SUBJECT: ILOVEYOU
>
> YOU MUST DELETE IT BEFORE OPEN, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR OS IS WINDOWS !!!!!!!!!
>
Title: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
Thanks
for the heads up. Any news on the impending release of Windows 3.1
?
>SUBJECT: ILOVEYOU
>
> YOU MUST DELETE IT BEFORE OPEN, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR OS IS
WINDOWS !!!!!!!!!
>
If you notice.. The date on the mail is Thursday... Some mailer somewhere
held it up in transit it would appear..
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: Alan Day [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 1:55 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
>
> Thanks for the heads up. Any news on the impending release of Windows 3.1
> ?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: R.Ilker Gokhan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 4:07 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
>
>
>
>
> >SUBJECT: ILOVEYOU
> >
> > YOU MUST DELETE IT BEFORE OPEN, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR OS IS WINDOWS
> !!!!!!!!!
> >
>
>Subject: Re: VIRUS WARNING!!!!!!!
>
>LOL,
>Your a little late on this one!
Seriously though, would people in this newsgroup appreciate more heads-up
warnings like this (only a bit more timely!). I believe my company were
the first AV company in the world to detect this virus (Wed 3rd May)
so we could have warned this newsgroup and you could have all put
filters in place etc - but we didn't think it appropriate.
My view is that alt.comp.virus or even scan4virus is probably the best place
for stuff like this, but if you want it, I'll send here as well.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alex Shipp
Imagineer
MessageLabs www.messagelabs.com
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T: 44 1285 884496
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_______________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Soffen, Matthew wrote:
>If you notice.. The date on the mail is Thursday... Some mailer somewhere
>held it up in transit it would appear..
Or the date on his computer is wrong... :-)
Andy
-
+----- Andy ------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----+
| Great minds discuss ideas; |
| Average minds discuss events; |
| Small minds discuss people. |
+------ http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo -----+
At 12:07 04/05/00 +0300, R.Ilker Gokhan wrote:
> >SUBJECT: ILOVEYOU
> >
> > YOU MUST DELETE IT BEFORE OPEN, ESPECIALLY IF YOUR OS IS WINDOWS !!!!!!!!!
> >
http://www.hinterlands.org/iloveyou.html
Martin A. Brooks
------------------------------------
The package said Windows NT 4 or better - I installed Linux.
Hi,
I'm wondering if qmail will also lowercase the non-ASCII (or, "high
ASCII", 8bit) characters in local email addresses? For example, if
I create ~alias/.qmail-mikko:h�nninen, will this catch both
mikko.h�nninen@myserver and MIKKO.H�NNINEN@myserver, or do I need to
have two .qmail files?
I looked in the man pages, but the only reference I could find to
lowercasing was in dot-qmail, which said simply that qmail will convert
upper case letters to lower case.
And yes, I know it's not a good idea to use 8bit characters in the
email addresses. I'm not planning to use these addresses except as a
safety catch in case someone happens to use them by accident...
Regards,
Mikko
--
// Mikko H�nninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
Bumper sticker: EARTH FIRST! We'll stripmine the other planets later.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 09:49:22PM +0300, Mikko H�nninen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering if qmail will also lowercase the non-ASCII (or, "high
> ASCII", 8bit) characters in local email addresses? For example, if
> I create ~alias/.qmail-mikko:h�nninen, will this catch both
> mikko.h�nninen@myserver and MIKKO.H�NNINEN@myserver, or do I need to
> have two .qmail files?
>
> I looked in the man pages, but the only reference I could find to
> lowercasing was in dot-qmail, which said simply that qmail will convert
> upper case letters to lower case.
Correct. Uppercase LETTERS (my emphasis :>). The typical preciseness of these
manpages suggests to me that if it says letters, then that's all it means,
no more, no less...and a quick squizz at the source confirms this.
Oh, and you'd need a *lot* more than two qmail files if it didn't do
this. What if someone sent to extensions like Mikko, mIkko, miKko, etc?
Regards.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 09:49:22PM +0300, Mikko H�nninen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering if qmail will also lowercase the non-ASCII (or, "high
> ASCII", 8bit) characters in local email addresses? For example, if
> I create ~alias/.qmail-mikko:h�nninen, will this catch both
> mikko.h�nninen@myserver and MIKKO.H�NNINEN@myserver, or do I need to
> have two .qmail files?
You will need two. This is the exact code:
while (x = *s) {
x -= 'A';
if (x <= 'Z' - 'A') *s = x + 'a';
++s;
}
(there is another version for fixed-length strings, which does the same
conversion).
This code only converts A-Z to a-z, all else is left alone.
> I looked in the man pages, but the only reference I could find to
> lowercasing was in dot-qmail, which said simply that qmail will convert
> upper case letters to lower case.
Yeah well since it doesn't support LOCALE 'n stuff, it can't now which
characters are special in your country.
Oh, and Breyten says hi :)
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 08 May 2000:
> This code only converts A-Z to a-z, all else is left alone.
Right, thanks for the answer. :-)
> Yeah well since it doesn't support LOCALE 'n stuff, it can't now which
> characters are special in your country.
Indeed, though it doesn't say one way or another about local support.
I guess the reasonable assumption in that case is that it doesn't,
but...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 08 May 2000:
> Correct. Uppercase LETTERS (my emphasis :>). The typical preciseness of these
> manpages suggests to me that if it says letters, then that's all it means,
> no more, no less...and a quick squizz at the source confirms this.
Ahh, hmm. But �, � and � *are* letters in the Finnish alphabet, so by
that logic it should convert them? My point is that the man page is
*not* precise in this instance (it doesn't specify only English
letters), although it is possible that elsewhere it's stated that qmail
does not have locale support.
Maybe you think of this as obvious, if you live in an English speaking
country, but it doesn't strike me as such, living in a non-English
speaking country.
> Oh, and you'd need a *lot* more than two qmail files if it didn't do
> this. What if someone sent to extensions like Mikko, mIkko, miKko, etc?
Yes, of course. I'd prefer to have only one, but I can live with
needing two. :-)
Thanks for the answers, again.
Mikko
--
// Mikko H�nninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
If you have to run heating in winter, you don't own enough computers.
Hi,
Maybe I am missing the point, but I thought that only 7 bits ASCII
characters were legal in an email address...
Just as a side question, how do I type the following email address with my
standard US keyboard ? Mikko.H�[EMAIL PROTECTED] ? More precisely how do I type
the "�" ?
Please don't take this as a US-centric comment because I am NOT a US
citizen...
Patrick.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 10:37:55PM +0300, Mikko H�nninen wrote:
> Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 08 May 2000:
> > This code only converts A-Z to a-z, all else is left alone.
>
> Right, thanks for the answer. :-)
>
> > Yeah well since it doesn't support LOCALE 'n stuff, it can't now which
> > characters are special in your country.
>
> Indeed, though it doesn't say one way or another about local support.
> I guess the reasonable assumption in that case is that it doesn't,
> but...
I think this assumption is reasonable, but for me the reasoning is: djb
avoids libc where he can. He therefore can't use LOCALE-stuff.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 08 May 2000:
> > Correct. Uppercase LETTERS (my emphasis :>). The typical preciseness of these
> > manpages suggests to me that if it says letters, then that's all it means,
> > no more, no less...and a quick squizz at the source confirms this.
>
> Ahh, hmm. But �, � and � *are* letters in the Finnish alphabet, so by
> that logic it should convert them? My point is that the man page is
> *not* precise in this instance (it doesn't specify only English
> letters), although it is possible that elsewhere it's stated that qmail
> does not have locale support.
The manpage is inprecise, in my opinion. This is ofcourse just a matter of
interpretation.
> Maybe you think of this as obvious, if you live in an English speaking
> country, but it doesn't strike me as such, living in a non-English
> speaking country.
It's obvious to me in some ways, and non-obvious in others. My second
natural language is English, which makes it obvious. But my first natural
language is Dutch, in which accented letters do exist but are not very
common.
> > Oh, and you'd need a *lot* more than two qmail files if it didn't do
> > this. What if someone sent to extensions like Mikko, mIkko, miKko, etc?
>
> Yes, of course. I'd prefer to have only one, but I can live with
> needing two. :-)
AFAICS you will need two in this case.
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Hi Mikko
> > Just as a side question, how do I type the following email address with
my
> > standard US keyboard ? Mikko.H�[EMAIL PROTECTED] ? More precisely how do I
type
> > the "�" ?
>
> I don't know, actually. No easy way I guess. The Finnish keyboard
> (and other umlaut-character keyboards, I guess) has the � as a key,
> but there's also an extra key which just has two dots on it. When you
> press that key and and followed by another key, like e, you get an e
> with two dots above it... Well, it doesn't work for me since my X key
> mappings aren't done correctly. :-) But it works that way in Windows
> at least. But I guess the US keyboard doesn't have even that.
Exactly my point: if you use such email addresses you will make it difficult
for a lot of people to send you email. I know there is a reply button on
outlook and once your email is in my address book, I don't have to worry
anymore... But then I may have other problems (outlook love bug)...
Plus the fact that it is tolerated by some email agents does not make it
right. You may also cause problems with some servers/clients that are not as
tolerant... My position would be: if it is not allowed by the standard,
don't do it.
Patrick.
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mikko_H=E4nninen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 21:49:22 +0300
. . .
And yes, I know it's not a good idea to use 8bit characters in the
email addresses. I'm not planning to use these addresses except as a
safety catch in case someone happens to use them by accident...
Regards,
Mikko
To belabor what is perhaps obvious by now, RFC822 forbids 8-bit
characters in the local-part of an address (or anywhere else, for that
matter). The key lines are as follows:
atom = 1*<any CHAR except specials, SPACE and CTLs>
CHAR = <any ASCII character> ; ( 0-177, 0.-127.)
I haven't actually seen this particular violation in use; has anybody
else?
-- Bob Rogers
Hi Ken
I had three lines in the assign file, and a single period for the last line.
I had added single period's after each line. But the problem still remains.
Kapil
> You probably don't have a ending line with a single period
> .
>
> That is why qmail-newu is failing to compile. and without a
> compiled assign file, qmail won't be able to find the virtual
> domain directory to deliver it to.
Cool Stuff Ken... Thanks...
No No don't go away, now my one problem is solved i.e users/assign, by
doing what you said.
I am able to send+recieve the mails using sqwebmail. But when I use outlook
express or Netscape messenger it gives me error
There was a problem logging onto your mail server. Your Password was
rejected. Account: 'kapil', Server: '208.248.123.45', Protocol: POP3, Server
Response: '-ERR authorization failed', Port: 110, Secure(SSL): No, Server
Error: 0x800CCC90, Error Number: 0x800CCC92.
Any thoughts....
Regards,
Kapil.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Kapil Nanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: help qmail+vpopmail+ezmlm+qmailadmin+sqwebmail
> Kapil Nanda wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ken
> >
> > I had three lines in the assign file, and a single period for the last
line.
> > I had added single period's after each line. But the problem still
remains.
> >
> > Kapil
> >
> > > You probably don't have a ending line with a single period
> > > .
> > >
> > > That is why qmail-newu is failing to compile. and without a
> > > compiled assign file, qmail won't be able to find the virtual
> > > domain directory to deliver it to.
>
> dont' put periods at the end of each line.
>
>
> If you want to try starting over, run ~vpopmail/bin/vdeldomain domain
> for each of the current domains. Then remove the assign file, and
> start again by adding the domains with ~vpopmail/bin/vadddomain domain
> pass
>
> ken
>
Hi. I've set up a family mailing list. When I send an email to the
mailing list server, the message is send out as From: me, where me is
the sender's email. I'd like responses to go to the mailing list, rather
than the sender. I was thinking of adding a Reply-To: to 'headeradd'
but I'm not sure what side effects might arise.
Is there a better way to go about this?
Thanks,
BTW, ezmlm-idx does not compile or install properly on my Solaris 7
machine (using gcc). I'll look into it further when I have time.
Hi,
I noticed my name appears in one of the From: fields a couple messages up.
How could that happen? I don�t remember posting anything to this list.
greetings
Thilo
I just noticed that the qmail list server puts itself as a carbon-copy. Is
this preferred over a reply-to? In any event, how do I set this up?
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Eddy wrote:
>
> >
> >OTRO VIRUS ESPANTOSO, PONGAN ATENCION:
> >>
> >>ATENCION VIRUS
> >>
> >>IBM y AOL acaban de informar que un nuevo Virus - WOBBLER - anda
> >>suelto. Llegara en un E-mail titulado: "How to Give a Cat a Colonic".
> >IBM
> >>y AOL
> >>han anunciado que es MUY poderoso, mas que Melissa, y que no hay NINGUN
> >>remedio conocido. Este virus comera toda su informacion sobre la unidad
> >de
> >>disco duro, y tambien destruye al Navegante de Netscape y Microsoft
> >Internet
> >>Explorador.
> >>
> >>No abra nada con este titulo y por favor pase este mensaje a todos sus
> >>contactos y cualquiera que usa con asiduidad el e-mail. No demasiadas
> >>personas parecen saber esto todavia, asi que propague esta informacion
> >>tan rapido como le sea posible. Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer por
> >la
> >>manana por IBM.
> >>
> >>Por favor compartalo con todos los de su libro de direccion para que la
> >>propagacion del virus puedan detenerse. Este es un Virus muy peligroso
> >>y no hay ningun remedio para 'el en este momento. Todos agradeceran
> >saberlo.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
Hector Ryan Tinoco Reed
Administrador Nodo Internet, WebMaster.
Direccion de Investigaciones Academicas
Universidad Catolica de Nicaragua
Tels. : (505) 276-0004 - Ext. 5602 (Oficina UNICA) 3:00pm - 9:40pm
(505) 268-2362 - Ext. 116 (Oficina CRIES) 8:00am - 1:00pm
(505) 289-4829 (Casa)
Faxs : (505) 276-0590 (UNICA)
(505) 268-1565 (CRIES)
Beeper: 19533 (2784800 Alfanumeric)
URL : http://www.unica.edu.ni/htinoco
| | | | ___ / __\ |_______| ___ _ __
| |__| | / _ \ / / | | / _ \ | '_ \
| |__| || __/ / /___ | | | (_) || |_) |
|_| |_| \___| \____/ |_| \___/ | .__ \
|_| \_\
/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
Could we possibly get this in english?
Please?
Thanx in advance,
Bryan Hundven
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: Hector Tinoco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 2:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Eddy wrote:
>
> >
> >OTRO VIRUS ESPANTOSO, PONGAN ATENCION:
> >>
> >>ATENCION VIRUS
> >>
> >>IBM y AOL acaban de informar que un nuevo Virus - WOBBLER - anda
> >>suelto. Llegara en un E-mail titulado: "How to Give a Cat a Colonic".
> >IBM
> >>y AOL
> >>han anunciado que es MUY poderoso, mas que Melissa, y que no hay NINGUN
> >>remedio conocido. Este virus comera toda su informacion sobre la unidad
> >de
> >>disco duro, y tambien destruye al Navegante de Netscape y Microsoft
> >Internet
> >>Explorador.
> >>
> >>No abra nada con este titulo y por favor pase este mensaje a todos sus
> >>contactos y cualquiera que usa con asiduidad el e-mail. No demasiadas
> >>personas parecen saber esto todavia, asi que propague esta informacion
> >>tan rapido como le sea posible. Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer por
> >la
> >>manana por IBM.
> >>
> >>Por favor compartalo con todos los de su libro de direccion para que la
> >>propagacion del virus puedan detenerse. Este es un Virus muy peligroso
> >>y no hay ningun remedio para 'el en este momento. Todos agradeceran
> >saberlo.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
Hector Ryan Tinoco Reed
Administrador Nodo Internet, WebMaster.
Direccion de Investigaciones Academicas
Universidad Catolica de Nicaragua
Tels. : (505) 276-0004 - Ext. 5602 (Oficina UNICA) 3:00pm - 9:40pm
(505) 268-2362 - Ext. 116 (Oficina CRIES) 8:00am - 1:00pm
(505) 289-4829 (Casa)
Faxs : (505) 276-0590 (UNICA)
(505) 268-1565 (CRIES)
Beeper: 19533 (2784800 Alfanumeric)
URL : http://www.unica.edu.ni/htinoco
| | | | ___ / __\ |_______| ___ _ __
| |__| | / _ \ / / | | / _ \ | '_ \
| |__| || __/ / /___ | | | (_) || |_) |
|_| |_| \___| \____/ |_| \___/ | .__ \
|_| \_\
/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
Not very useful. You can ignore it!
JES
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Hundven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Hector Tinoco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 5:52 PM
Subject: RE: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
> Could we possibly get this in english?
> Please?
>
> Thanx in advance,
>
> Bryan Hundven
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hector Tinoco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 2:20 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
>
>
> On Mon, 8 May 2000, Eddy wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >OTRO VIRUS ESPANTOSO, PONGAN ATENCION:
> > >>
> > >>ATENCION VIRUS
> > >>
> > >>IBM y AOL acaban de informar que un nuevo Virus - WOBBLER - anda
> > >>suelto. Llegara en un E-mail titulado: "How to Give a Cat a Colonic".
> > >IBM
> > >>y AOL
> > >>han anunciado que es MUY poderoso, mas que Melissa, y que no hay
NINGUN
> > >>remedio conocido. Este virus comera toda su informacion sobre la
unidad
> > >de
> > >>disco duro, y tambien destruye al Navegante de Netscape y Microsoft
> > >Internet
> > >>Explorador.
> > >>
> > >>No abra nada con este titulo y por favor pase este mensaje a todos sus
> > >>contactos y cualquiera que usa con asiduidad el e-mail. No demasiadas
> > >>personas parecen saber esto todavia, asi que propague esta informacion
> > >>tan rapido como le sea posible. Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer
por
> > >la
> > >>manana por IBM.
> > >>
> > >>Por favor compartalo con todos los de su libro de direccion para que
la
> > >>propagacion del virus puedan detenerse. Este es un Virus muy peligroso
> > >>y no hay ningun remedio para 'el en este momento. Todos agradeceran
> > >saberlo.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> /__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
>
> Hector Ryan Tinoco Reed
> Administrador Nodo Internet, WebMaster.
> Direccion de Investigaciones Academicas
> Universidad Catolica de Nicaragua
> Tels. : (505) 276-0004 - Ext. 5602 (Oficina UNICA) 3:00pm - 9:40pm
> (505) 268-2362 - Ext. 116 (Oficina CRIES) 8:00am - 1:00pm
> (505) 289-4829 (Casa)
> Faxs : (505) 276-0590 (UNICA)
> (505) 268-1565 (CRIES)
> Beeper: 19533 (2784800 Alfanumeric)
> URL : http://www.unica.edu.ni/htinoco
>
> | | | | ___ / __\ |_______| ___ _ __
> | |__| | / _ \ / / | | / _ \ | '_ \
> | |__| || __/ / /___ | | | (_) || |_) |
> |_| |_| \___| \____/ |_| \___/ | .__ \
> |_| \_\
>
> /__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
>
>
>
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Bryan Hundven wrote:
> Could we possibly get this in english?
> Please?
Compliments of the babelfish (not perfect but you'll get the gist
of it):
ANOTHER FRIGHTFUL VIRUS, PUTS ATTENTION:
ATTENTION VIRUS
IBM and AOL finish informing that a new Virus - WOBBLER -
walks loose. It arrived in a
titled email: " How to Give to Cat to Colonic ". IBM and
AOL have announced that are
VERY powerful, but that Melissa, and who is no NINGUN
well-known remedy. This
comere virus all its information on the HDD, and also
destroys the Navigator of Netscape
and Microsoft Exploratory Internet.
It does not open anything with this I title and please it
passes east message to all his
contacts and whatever it uses with assiduity the
email. Too many people do not seem to
know to this todavia, asi that she propagates this
information as fast as it is possible to
him. This information was announced yesterday by the
manana by IBM.
Please compartalo with all those of its book of direction
so that the propagation of the
virus can stop. This it is a very dangerous Virus and
remedy for ' at this moment is no
ningun. All you would agradeceran to know it.
Vince.
>
> Thanx in advance,
>
> Bryan Hundven
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hector Tinoco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 2:20 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
>
>
> On Mon, 8 May 2000, Eddy wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >OTRO VIRUS ESPANTOSO, PONGAN ATENCION:
> > >>
> > >>ATENCION VIRUS
> > >>
> > >>IBM y AOL acaban de informar que un nuevo Virus - WOBBLER - anda
> > >>suelto. Llegara en un E-mail titulado: "How to Give a Cat a Colonic".
> > >IBM
> > >>y AOL
> > >>han anunciado que es MUY poderoso, mas que Melissa, y que no hay NINGUN
> > >>remedio conocido. Este virus comera toda su informacion sobre la unidad
> > >de
> > >>disco duro, y tambien destruye al Navegante de Netscape y Microsoft
> > >Internet
> > >>Explorador.
> > >>
> > >>No abra nada con este titulo y por favor pase este mensaje a todos sus
> > >>contactos y cualquiera que usa con asiduidad el e-mail. No demasiadas
> > >>personas parecen saber esto todavia, asi que propague esta informacion
> > >>tan rapido como le sea posible. Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer por
> > >la
> > >>manana por IBM.
> > >>
> > >>Por favor compartalo con todos los de su libro de direccion para que la
> > >>propagacion del virus puedan detenerse. Este es un Virus muy peligroso
> > >>y no hay ningun remedio para 'el en este momento. Todos agradeceran
> > >saberlo.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> /__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
>
> Hector Ryan Tinoco Reed
> Administrador Nodo Internet, WebMaster.
> Direccion de Investigaciones Academicas
> Universidad Catolica de Nicaragua
> Tels. : (505) 276-0004 - Ext. 5602 (Oficina UNICA) 3:00pm - 9:40pm
> (505) 268-2362 - Ext. 116 (Oficina CRIES) 8:00am - 1:00pm
> (505) 289-4829 (Casa)
> Faxs : (505) 276-0590 (UNICA)
> (505) 268-1565 (CRIES)
> Beeper: 19533 (2784800 Alfanumeric)
> URL : http://www.unica.edu.ni/htinoco
>
> | | | | ___ / __\ |_______| ___ _ __
> | |__| | / _ \ / / | | / _ \ | '_ \
> | |__| || __/ / /___ | | | (_) || |_) |
> |_| |_| \___| \____/ |_| \___/ | .__ \
> |_| \_\
>
> /__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
>
>
>
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pop4.net
128K ISDN from $22.00/mo - 56K Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
My guess, this is a hoax as outlined on some of the major virus protection
sites - The hoax states that IBM and AOL acknowledge the WOBBLER virus, it
is worse than Melissa, and that it destroys Netscape.
Jon Saunders
SECPA
-----Original Message-----
From: Hector Tinoco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Eddy wrote:
>
> >
> >OTRO VIRUS ESPANTOSO, PONGAN ATENCION:
> >>
> >>ATENCION VIRUS
> >>
> >>IBM y AOL acaban de informar que un nuevo Virus - WOBBLER - anda
> >>suelto. Llegara en un E-mail titulado: "How to Give a Cat a Colonic".
> >IBM
> >>y AOL
> >>han anunciado que es MUY poderoso, mas que Melissa, y que no hay NINGUN
> >>remedio conocido. Este virus comera toda su informacion sobre la unidad
> >de
> >>disco duro, y tambien destruye al Navegante de Netscape y Microsoft
> >Internet
> >>Explorador.
> >>
> >>No abra nada con este titulo y por favor pase este mensaje a todos sus
> >>contactos y cualquiera que usa con asiduidad el e-mail. No demasiadas
> >>personas parecen saber esto todavia, asi que propague esta informacion
> >>tan rapido como le sea posible. Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer por
> >la
> >>manana por IBM.
> >>
> >>Por favor compartalo con todos los de su libro de direccion para que la
> >>propagacion del virus puedan detenerse. Este es un Virus muy peligroso
> >>y no hay ningun remedio para 'el en este momento. Todos agradeceran
> >saberlo.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
Hector Ryan Tinoco Reed
Administrador Nodo Internet, WebMaster.
Direccion de Investigaciones Academicas
Universidad Catolica de Nicaragua
Tels. : (505) 276-0004 - Ext. 5602 (Oficina UNICA) 3:00pm - 9:40pm
(505) 268-2362 - Ext. 116 (Oficina CRIES) 8:00am - 1:00pm
(505) 289-4829 (Casa)
Faxs : (505) 276-0590 (UNICA)
(505) 268-1565 (CRIES)
Beeper: 19533 (2784800 Alfanumeric)
URL : http://www.unica.edu.ni/htinoco
| | | | ___ / __\ |_______| ___ _ __
| |__| | / _ \ / / | | / _ \ | '_ \
| |__| || __/ / /___ | | | (_) || |_) |
|_| |_| \___| \____/ |_| \___/ | .__ \
|_| \_\
/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/__/
At 5/8/2000 02:52 PM -0700, Bryan Hundven wrote or quoted:
>Could we possibly get this in english?
>Please?
Very loose translation:
"There's a big, bad virus out there, which is even worse than Melissa. Be
very afraid. It will eat your hard drive, crash your aquarium, and max out
your credit cards, and that's just before breakfast."
Plus, a direct translation on one line:
> > >>Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer por la manana por IBM.
"This information was announced yesterday morning by IBM."
IOW, this is one of the standard hoax email virus warnings that's been
littering the Internet for past six years or more, only translated into
Spanish.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
finger trouble /n./
Mistyping, typos, or generalized keyboard incompetence (this is
surprisingly common among hackers, given the amount of time they
spend at keyboards). "I keep putting colons at the end of statements
instead of semicolons", "Finger trouble again, eh?".
I think this therefore eloquently answers my previous question
and confirms my original feeling that it is a bad idea to post
virus warnings to this group.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 08 May 2000 23:22
Subject: RE: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
At 5/8/2000 02:52 PM -0700, Bryan Hundven wrote or quoted:
>Could we possibly get this in english?
>Please?
Very loose translation:
"There's a big, bad virus out there, which is even worse than Melissa. Be
very afraid. It will eat your hard drive, crash your aquarium, and max out
your credit cards, and that's just before breakfast."
Plus, a direct translation on one line:
> > >>Esta informacion fue anunciada ayer por la manana por IBM.
"This information was announced yesterday morning by IBM."
IOW, this is one of the standard hoax email virus warnings that's been
littering the Internet for past six years or more, only translated into
Spanish.
_______________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IOW, this is one of the standard hoax email virus warnings that's been
> littering the Internet for past six years or more, only translated into
> Spanish.
You mean, I can't find out how to give my cat a colonic?
Len.
--
Frugal Tip #31:
Incrementally reduce your year-to-year operating expenditures while
aggressively recognizing unrealized receivables in the current quarter.
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:17:32PM +0100, Alex Shipp wrote:
> I think this therefore eloquently answers my previous question
> and confirms my original feeling that it is a bad idea to post
> virus warnings to this group.
I don't agree.
Posting Virus warning to a mailing list like this _can_ be a good
idea, as long as they are *VALID*.
The Cat Colonic hoax has been going on for quite some time and is
to be found on all major Anti-Virus site, categorized as such!
The content of the Cat Colonic mail makes it obvious it's a hoax.
C'mon guys, crashing an aquarium ? Not possible unless it's an
IP drive one <G>
I'ts IMHO not smart to blindly post that kind of messages anywhere
you can, *before* checking with the major AV providers to see if
it't not listed as a hoax...
Well, that's my 2 cent's worth.
Steffan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: 08 May 2000 23:22
> Subject: RE: FW: FW: VIRUS PEOR QUE MELISSA II *** Importante***
>
>
> At 5/8/2000 02:52 PM -0700, Bryan Hundven wrote or quoted:
> >Could we possibly get this in english?
> >Please?
>
> Very loose translation:
>
> "There's a big, bad virus out there, which is even worse than Melissa. Be
> very afraid. It will eat your hard drive, crash your aquarium, and max out
> your credit cards, and that's just before breakfast."
>
--
http://therookie.dyndns.org
>Posting Virus warning to a mailing list like this _can_ be a good
>idea, as long as they are *VALID*.
Well, *I* know they are valid, because I work in the AV industry.
(although of course I'm not infallible...but that's another story)
However, if other people see me posting, they will also be
encouraged to post, and the whole thing could quickly degenerate.
_______________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the
MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
Can anyone point me to the IETF RFC describing e-mail addresses
of the form david@[10.10.10.10] Although web pages refer to
this construction as a "821-compliant address" I found no discussion
of referring to hosts by anything other than names within 821.
--
"Lord Macbeth knew he was approaching the SITE of the rout
from the SIGHT of odd body parts scattered on the blasted heath."
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 04:35:01PM -0500,
"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can anyone point me to the IETF RFC describing e-mail addresses
> of the form david@[10.10.10.10] Although web pages refer to
> this construction as a "821-compliant address" I found no discussion
> of referring to hosts by anything other than names within 821.
It should be there. That construct is called a domain literal.
On Mon, 8 May 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
>
> Can anyone point me to the IETF RFC describing e-mail addresses
> of the form david@[10.10.10.10] Although web pages refer to
> this construction as a "821-compliant address" I found no discussion
> of referring to hosts by anything other than names within 821.
>
RFC 821 page 29 (Section 4.1.2 COMMAND SYNTAX)
<mailbox> ::= <local-part> "@" <domain>
<domain> ::= <element> | <element "." <domain>
<element> ::= <name> | "#" <number> | "[" <dotnum> "]"
<dotnum> ::= <snum> "." <snum> "." <snum> "." <snum>
<snum> ::= one, two, or three digits representing a decimal integer value
in the range 0 through 255
The item you missed was the third form of the <element>.
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
Hello All,
I need to block my mail server from receiving anymore mail from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] inserting this into 'badmailfrom' in
/var/qmail/controls do what I want?
-Bill
At 5/8/2000 04:01 PM -0700, Bill Parker wrote or quoted:
>I need to block my mail server from receiving anymore mail from
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] inserting this into 'badmailfrom' in
>/var/qmail/controls do what I want?
Sure will. You don't even need to restart anything, as badmailfrom is read
by qmail-smtpd, which is invoked at need whenever an incoming SMTP request
is formed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
finger trouble /n./
Mistyping, typos, or generalized keyboard incompetence (this is
surprisingly common among hackers, given the amount of time they
spend at keyboards). "I keep putting colons at the end of statements
instead of semicolons", "Finger trouble again, eh?".
I am having a hard time setting up Qmail on a FreeBSD4.0 machine and was
wondering if there was anyone on this list that I could correspond with that
is running a similar build. My goal is to set up a mail server with POP3
that will support around 100,000 pop boxes. Although I have read the
documentation I am unsure what the best way of going about this would be.
First of all what software would you all recommend. Here is what I have so
far.
FreeBSD4.0 (Setup and working great)
Qmail-1.03 (When I telnet to localhost port 25 I get "421 unable to read
controls (#4.3.0)"
UCSPI-TCP 0.88 (I compiled it and now I am not sure what to do!) I read in
the /etc/inetd.conf file that I should use tcpserver.
Still need a POP3 Server
By the way if you cant tell already I am pretty new to UNIX (FreeBSD) but
the mail server that I am setting up will be a great way for me to learn. I
do have 3 years of networking experience, just not with UNIX and I will be a
contributing to this list as much as I can after I figure out what I am
doing.
Thanks in advance,
At 06:03 PM 5/8/00 -0700, Robert Blaylock wrote:
>Qmail-1.03 (When I telnet to localhost port 25 I get "421 unable to read
>controls (#4.3.0)"
you have to do ./config-fast your.host.name from your qmail instalation dir
>UCSPI-TCP 0.88 (I compiled it and now I am not sure what to do!) I read in
>the /etc/inetd.conf file that I should use tcpserver.
better to read this http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html , i think
Hi all,
Just getting conflicting information here.. i know badmailfrom and badrcptto
work with the standard qmail-smtpd, but do i need to patch with anything to
get the badmailpattern file to work as well?
I'm assuming yes, as i put in a string into
/var/qmail/control/badmailpattern and it didn't work.
Regards,
Marc-Adrian Napoli
Network Administrator
Connect Infobahn Australia
+61 2 9281 1750
On 09-May-2000, Marc-Adrian Napoli wrote:
> Just getting conflicting information here.. i know badmailfrom and badrcptto
> work with the standard qmail-smtpd,
Hmm, AFAIK badrcptto is not standard qmail feature either.
I think both patches are available from qmail.org
Ronny
|
I write a mail client based on pine c-client
library.
but no error if run on sendmail.
can anyone help me?
|
Hello. I would like to know if there is any way i can download messages
from my isp server
if it is acting as secondary MX record for my domain ? If my connection
goes down I would
like my qmail server to poll the ISP server in order to retreive all mail.
Any help would be a
appreciated !.
regards
Tony
Hi,
I would like to know what kind of MUAs do i need , if all of my
client is using Netscape or Microsoft Outlook to retrieve e-mail.
Should I use pop-3 server comes with qmail and also Maildir.??? or
others ???
Thank You
Mark Lo
Here's a little tool I made to get rid of unwanted mail already delivered
to ~/Maildir/ on the system (most of my 2000+ mail users _aren't_ the
smart ones when it comes to computers). The logic is quite simple:
You notice you're hit by a worm or chain letter or anything. So you set up
filtering, you kill copies already in ~/Maildir/new, you're done.
I'm sure someone did this before, but couldn't find it somehow. Well,
here's my $.02. It's a #!/bin/sh script. You can
[1] scan all ~/Maildir/new, see the list of files with matches and choose
whether delete them (the -n option)
[2] scan all ~/Maildir/new, then see each message which matched, and
decide whether delete it, leave it in /new or move it to /cur so you won't
see it during next search.
It's not meant to replace on-delivery mail filtering, but to supplement it.
Use with care. It works for me. If it works for you, great. If not, you
may hack it as you wish. If you loose your mails, don't blame me, you've
been warned.
ftp://158.195.33.220/pub/qmail/check-mail-src
--
jozef :-)
On Tue, May 09, 2000 at 07:17:00AM +0100, Alex Shipp wrote:
>
> >Posting Virus warning to a mailing list like this _can_ be a good
> >idea, as long as they are *VALID*.
>
> Well, *I* know they are valid, because I work in the AV industry.
> (although of course I'm not infallible...but that's another story)
> However, if other people see me posting, they will also be
> encouraged to post, and the whole thing could quickly degenerate.
<G> My previous remark 'solves' the degenerating problem...
If only people would check a couple of AV sites before posting
'world wide', 'important' fake warnings the world would be a better
place.
I'm still trying to educate everybody i know to *first* check the
AV sites before warning me about a fake virus i already know about.
Doesn't the degenerating problem occur on AV dedicated lists?
Or are the moderated?
Bye,
Steffan
--
http://therookie.dyndns.org
Hi there,
I'm running qmail-1.03 w/vpopmail on a Solaris2.6 box and am
encountering the hung qmail-smptd's problem discussed here in
Feb. As no better way to solve it at this moment, I wonder if
I could just kill the hung qmail-smptd's. Is it safe to do so ?
Also, I wonder if anyone out there did encounter this problem as
an end user. I would like to know what (error message, or so)
it said when one's smtp connection got hung. Will this become
something like (from the sender's view) it seems the mail got sent but
it actually never be delivered due to the problem ?
Thanks in advance!
-----------
Wang-hua Li
This is just another reason to stop using microsoft, I bet you can make
linux use easier for your employee's, just use X-terminals (from NCD for
instance) and make a nice KDE or the like desktop for your user's, corel
office should be alright for professional use, paradox is almost
finished... So no reason to use ms right ?
The problem is that these viruses are based on user
stupidity/unawareness. A script attached to a mail sent to a Linux
system would do just as much damage to files the user has full
access to. If a user doubleclicks an unknown attachment in
Windows, you can bet he'd do the neccesary things to open the
script in Linux too.
So though I agree that moving to Linux is smart for a lot of people,
Linux would be just as vulnerable if some spotty teen with a big
brain wanted to do some damage to Linux users.
Kent
> This is just another reason to stop using microsoft, I bet you can
> make linux use easier for your employee's, just use X-terminals (from
> NCD for instance) and make a nice KDE or the like desktop for your
> user's, corel office should be alright for professional use, paradox
> is almost finished... So no reason to use ms right ?
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 9 May 2000, Kent Nilsen wrote:
> The problem is that these viruses are based on user
> stupidity/unawareness. A script attached to a mail sent to a Linux
> system would do just as much damage to files the user has full
> access to. If a user doubleclicks an unknown attachment in
> Windows, you can bet he'd do the neccesary things to open the
> script in Linux too.
>
> So though I agree that moving to Linux is smart for a lot of people,
> Linux would be just as vulnerable if some spotty teen with a big
> brain wanted to do some damage to Linux users.
Plain and simple. You are wrong.
Is this the proper forum to be discussing stupid OS tricks
to play on brain dead users?
Can't we get back to complaining about qmail or something
a little more useful -- or at least entertaining?
Scott
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBORfXqFpGPE+AF6qBAQF6XAQAq9FmSEUB+wrG187azaQxh4QKk5UJNR8V
8RVxtaPGvdLXL9pS9BcNznqIGeE9KY8g5w8M0oxnC0mACmadknacXNTSMyoUpook
E9Aduw/kc9VkvFLm5tCwmqWc/pvznLXN+LcYqOlVFgYoRR4+5cdrGvPF8n8YM6xf
NvO9rbedM1w=
=ql/j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi,
I am using qmail as my MTA and qmail-pop3 as my MUA. For client to
send and receive e-mail from my qmail server by using Netscape or
Microsoft Outlook as their pop client. They have to fill out the
incoming mail server and outgoing mail server. Does the incoming and
outgoing mail servers imply that I need to set up two different server
for them so that they can send and receive e-mail, is that true ??...
For example, .one qmail server is for outgoing purpose and the other one
is for incoming purpose !!! As a result, I need two qmail server
located at two different machines !!!
Thank you so much,
Mark Lo
