qmail Digest 12 Sep 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1121
Topics (messages 48387 through 48454):
list down ?
48387 by: Jens Georg
48388 by: "Pr�spero, Esteban"
Reject it during the SMTP dialogue
48389 by: J.J.Gallardo
48393 by: Dave Sill
48421 by: postmaster.infoseek.de
Re: daemontools problem
48390 by: Dave Sill
Re: qmail-smtpd-auth crashes!!!
48391 by: Dave Sill
nofiles not no files?
48392 by: Raul Miller
SVSCAN not starting qmail
48394 by: Jimmy Newell
Questions...
48395 by: James Stevens
48396 by: Petr Novotny
48397 by: Ben Beuchler
48398 by: Steven Rice
48399 by: Greg Owen
48401 by: Aaron L. Meehan
48403 by: Ben Beuchler
48407 by: Peter van Dijk
48409 by: Scott D. Yelich
48410 by: Peter van Dijk
Tcpserver
48400 by: Jonathan Fanti
48404 by: David Dyer-Bennet
Re: Does Qmail support MUA on Win9x?
48402 by: David Dyer-Bennet
48411 by: Ihnen, David
qmail/mini.html
48405 by: Raul Miller
Maildir
48406 by: Mike Jimenez
48408 by: Steve Wolfe
Mail que
48412 by: Mike Jimenez
48413 by: Ben Beuchler
Locals, rcpthosts, tcprules or other?
48414 by: Andy Meuse
48418 by: Alexander Pennace
Catch all boxes and ~/.qmail
48415 by: Brian Moon
48416 by: Dave Sill
bounce handling
48417 by: ketan bajaj
48420 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: duplicate messages
48419 by: Christopher Taranto
Error invoking tcprules
48422 by: Al Sparks
48423 by: Galen Johnson
48424 by: markd.bushwire.net
48428 by: Al Sparks
tcpserver problems
48425 by: French, Michael
virtualdomains (again)
48426 by: ryan p bobko
48427 by: Adam McKenna
48429 by: Adam McKenna
48430 by: Adam McKenna
Spamming .....
48431 by: Jerry Hsieh
48432 by: James Stevens
48433 by: Rick Harris
48434 by: Austad, Jay
48435 by: Brett Randall
48436 by: shawn p. duffy
48437 by: shawn p. duffy
48438 by: Jerry Hsieh
48440 by: Rick Harris
48443 by: Steve Wolfe
48444 by: Brett Randall
Thank you
48439 by: Jerry Hsieh
Setting a default local delivery agent
48441 by: Ben Logan
subscribe qmail
48442 by: Micah Abrams
Reforward emails (RE: Spamming ..... )
48445 by: Muhamad A. Martoprawiro
48446 by: Brett Randall
48447 by: frob.powerup.com.au
connecting to my IMAP port
48448 by: shawn p. duffy
48450 by: Brett Randall
48451 by: shawn p. duffy
48452 by: Brett Randall
48453 by: shawn p. duffy
Comparation between Qmail and IMAP4(UW)
48449 by: big_qmail.email.com.cn
48454 by: Olivier M.
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hi,
didn't get message from this list since days now. is it down ?
--
regards,
jens
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
department computer science, university of dortmund
linux ... life's too short for reboots!
begin:vcard
n:Georg;Jens
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:University of Dortmund, Germany;computer science
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
fn:Jens Georg
end:vcard
If you get this message, it's not... if you don't get it... you won't notice
anyway!! ;-)
Esteban Javier Pr�spero
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jens Georg [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 7:57 AM
> To: qmail mailinglist
> Subject: list down ?
>
> hi,
>
> didn't get message from this list since days now. is it down ?
>
> --
> regards,
> jens
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> department computer science, university of dortmund
> linux ... life's too short for reboots! << File: Card for Jens Georg >>
I'm surprise today with a test that i've do it on my smtp server (qmail
1.03):
I send an e-amil (1Mb) to an invalid user and qmail accept it a then,
send a reply to the sender (another megabyte) saying that the user is
unknown. Total = 2Mb of my lines used for no actions.
Is there a way to reject mail during the SMTP dialogue so don't accept
mail to "invalids and/or unknowns user's"?
"J.J.Gallardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm surprise today with a test that i've do it on my smtp server (qmail
>1.03):
>I send an e-amil (1Mb) to an invalid user and qmail accept it a then,
>send a reply to the sender (another megabyte) saying that the user is
>unknown. Total = 2Mb of my lines used for no actions.
Bouncing an undeliverable mail is not "no actions". qmail treats an
undeliverable message trhe same as it treats any other mail: it does
everything it can to deliver the message *intact* to *someone*. That
message may contain the only existing copy of some valuable data...
>Is there a way to reject mail during the SMTP dialogue so don't accept
>mail to "invalids and/or unknowns user's"?
No, not without patching qmail, because qmail-smtpd is just not able
to tell which addresses are good and which are bad.
-Dave
if you decide that you rather want to truncate bounce messages:
on http://www.qmail.org/top.html (very worth reading all the way down ...)
you find:
Frank DENIS wrote a patch to truncate bounce messages, on the off chance
that the user may have kept a copy of the email:
http://www.qmail.org/www.jedi.claranet.fr/qmail-bounce.patch
wolfgang
Also sprach Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11.09.2000:
"J.J.Gallardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm surprise today with a test that i've do it on my smtp server (qmail
>1.03):
>I send an e-amil (1Mb) to an invalid user and qmail accept it a then,
>send a reply to the sender (another megabyte) saying that the user is
>unknown. Total = 2Mb of my lines used for no actions.
Bouncing an undeliverable mail is not "no actions". qmail treats an
undeliverable message trhe same as it treats any other mail: it does
everything it can to deliver the message *intact* to *someone*. That
message may contain the only existing copy of some valuable data...
QBA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've just installed daemontools on my linux. But I didn't find any
>documentacion within it.
See:
ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/daemontools.html
>And to be honest with you I don't know what is this program about.
>I thought that it is for qmail to better working but I guess I was wrong.
>Could you tell me what you are using it for?
"daemontools is a collection of tools for managing UNIX services."
That includes process control and logging. See the daemontools web
page for more information. LWQ's installation is a detailed example of
how it's used.
-Dave
"Manuel Gisbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Now when I connect to the server using outlook or outlook express (both are
>mentioned on the above website as working) qmail-smtpd exits with "421 out
>of memory (#4.3.0)".
>
><snipp from qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd/run>
>#!/bin/sh
>QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
>NOFILESGID=`id -g vpopmail`
>exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 4000000 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -l
>mydomain -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd
>/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /usr/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /bin/true
></snipp>
The "4000000" in the softlimit command is probably the culprit. Try
increasing it or removing "/usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 4000000"
temporarily to confirm that that's the problem.
-Dave
I'm trying to understand the recommendation of INSTALL.ids, which
corresponds to the following line from qmail-1.03/CHANGES:
19961117 change: qmail-start sets logger gid to GID_NOFILES.
Shouldn't the gid be named something like logfiles (GID_LOGFILES)?
I don't understand the point of creating a special nofiles gid which
is then used as the gid for some number of files. [I know that other
parts of the system can be probably be relied on to give such files x44
permissions, but the group name seems to imply something different.]
Anyone know?
Thanks,
--
Raul
Well I first installed qmail on my RH6.2 box as a
test. When I was ready to go live. I decided to copy over the
scripts that I hacked on for hours. My problem now is that svscan doesn't
seem to start the the services automatically. I can't start qmail at
all. I check the scripts and they are all ok. I'm enclosing the
scripts just in case.
I have made sure to create the symlinks for the
service directory. Svscan starts but the services don't. I know I've
made a goof but I don't know where.
Additionally I would like the pop3 to stop logging
to the console.
How do I allow unlimited access to my server?
(No SPAM FILTER)
My tcprules say :allow
"pop3"
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R 0
pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.alljax.net\
/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
2>&1
"rc"
#!/bin/sh
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH"
\
qmail-start "`cat /var/qmail/control/defaultdelivery`"
"send"
#!/bin/sh
exec /var/qmail/rc
"send/log"
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill
/usr/local/bin/multilog t
s2500000 /var/log/qmail/qmail-send
"smtpd"
#!/bin/sh
QMAILUID=`id -u
qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 5000000
\
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
-u $QMAILUID
-g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
"smtpd/log"
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid
qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t
s2500000
/var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
|
|
Okay couple questions..
1. In qmail how can I force it to go by both MX and
A records as opposed to just A records?? I have found that qmail seems to
have a problem when it can't resolve the A record even though the MX is fully
resolveable to an IP...
2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue
as oppsed to just seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the
queue like in the old Sendmail.
--JT
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 11 Sep 2000, at 9:36, James Stevens wrote:
> 1. In qmail how can I force it to go by both MX and A records as
> opposed to just A records??
Excuse me? qmail already does that - unless you're toying with
smtproutes. (smtproutes do really use only A's - or directly the
numeric address.)
> I have found that qmail seems to have a
> problem when it can't resolve the A record even though the MX is fully
> resolveable to an IP...
What exactly do you mean? Could you give us an example?
> 2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue as oppsed to just
> seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the queue
> like in the old Sendmail.
To review the queue use qmail-qread. You need to be root or
qmailq to run that command. To give access to unprivileged users,
learn how to use "sudo".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8 -- QDPGP 2.61b
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBOb0AIlMwP8g7qbw/EQKwlgCfUpm7V84fXZAs8itXe5z7dYgHLdwAoLNP
W7HieW1UdERgu6r3r5OMsRfL
=MXya
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
[Tom Waits]
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:36:07AM -0700, James Stevens wrote:
> 2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue as oppsed to just
> seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the queue
> like in the old Sendmail.
qmHandle from the qmail home page (you did look there, didn't you?) does
just that.
Ben
--
Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101
Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
> James Stevens wrote:
>
> Okay couple questions..
>
> 1. In qmail how can I force it to go by both MX and A records as
> opposed to just A records?? I have found that qmail seems to have a
> problem when it can't resolve the A record even though the MX is fully
> resolveable to an IP...
Every MX record should point to CNAME or an A record. "A" records work
better but CNAME are fine but you have to do more wierdness to get it
working.
I think qmail looks up the A record, then the MX record, but I'm not
sure about that.
> 2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue as oppsed to just
> seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the queue
> like in the old Sendmail.
It's a little wierd. The messages are stored in one place and the queue
in another.
The message is in /var/qmail/queue/mess/$n/$messagenumber
The addresses that is to be sent to is in
/var/qmail/queue/remote/$n/$messagenumber or
/var/qmail/queue/local/$n/$messagenumber
So cat /var/qmail/queue/mess/$n/$messagenumber to view the message and
/var/qmail/queue/remote/$n/$messagenumber to veiw where it's going.
This is one reason why I think the qmail-queue system sucks.
>
> --JT
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 09:36:07AM -0700, James Stevens wrote:
> > 2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue as oppsed to just
> > seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the queue
> > like in the old Sendmail.
>
> qmHandle from the qmail home page (you did look there, didn't
> you?) does just that.
Also plain old qmail-qread in the distribution.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Steven Rice ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > James Stevens wrote:
> > 1. In qmail how can I force it to go by both MX and A records as
> > opposed to just A records?? I have found that qmail seems to have a
> > problem when it can't resolve the A record even though the MX is fully
> > resolveable to an IP...
>
> Every MX record should point to CNAME or an A record. "A" records work
> better but CNAME are fine but you have to do more wierdness to get it
> working.
>
> I think qmail looks up the A record, then the MX record, but I'm not
> sure about that.
Noooo... MX records have preference, if they exist, like for all
reasonable MTAs.
> > 2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue as oppsed to just
> > seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the queue
> > like in the old Sendmail.
> It's a little wierd. The messages are stored in one place and the queue
> in another.
>
> The message is in /var/qmail/queue/mess/$n/$messagenumber
>
> The addresses that is to be sent to is in
> /var/qmail/queue/remote/$n/$messagenumber or
> /var/qmail/queue/local/$n/$messagenumber
>
> So cat /var/qmail/queue/mess/$n/$messagenumber to view the message and
> /var/qmail/queue/remote/$n/$messagenumber to veiw where it's going.
>
> This is one reason why I think the qmail-queue system sucks.
Oh, really? Are you prepared to whip up something better? It's all
transparant to you, unless you have some catastrophic queue failure.
The structure works extremely well for the majority of mail loads.
In what other respects does the queue system suck in your expert
opinion? heh..
I wonder if you have actually been using "cat" to view the mail queue
instead of qmail-qread? If so, it's no wonder you're panties are in a
bunch.
Aaron
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:59:59PM -0400, Greg Owen wrote:
> > qmHandle from the qmail home page (you did look there, didn't
> > you?) does just that.
>
> Also plain old qmail-qread in the distribution.
D'oh...
<grins shamefacedly>
Ben
--
Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101
Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:55:27PM -0500, Steven Rice wrote:
[snip]
> > opposed to just A records?? I have found that qmail seems to have a
> > problem when it can't resolve the A record even though the MX is fully
> > resolveable to an IP...
>
> Every MX record should point to CNAME or an A record. "A" records work
> better but CNAME are fine but you have to do more wierdness to get it
> working.
Pointing to CNAMEs is close to forbidden.
> I think qmail looks up the A record, then the MX record, but I'm not
> sure about that.
It looks up the MX(es), and then the A records the MXes point to. If
there are no MXes it looks up the A record directly.
> > 2. Is there any way to view whats actually in queue as oppsed to just
> > seeing numbers.. My boss likes being able to actually see the queue
> > like in the old Sendmail.
>
[snip]
> This is one reason why I think the qmail-queue system sucks.
Just implement the sendmail-queueing system then, in qmail, and see it
break and fall over.
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:55:27PM -0500, Steven Rice wrote:
> > > opposed to just A records?? I have found that qmail seems to have a
> > > problem when it can't resolve the A record even though the MX is fully
> > > resolveable to an IP...
> > Every MX record should point to CNAME or an A record. "A" records work
> > better but CNAME are fine but you have to do more wierdness to get it
> > working.
> Pointing to CNAMEs is close to forbidden.
ok, I can't resist:
"WHY" ?
Scott
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:03:01PM -0600, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > Pointing to CNAMEs is close to forbidden.
>
> ok, I can't resist:
>
> "WHY" ?
Because the behaviour of CNAMEs combined with MX or A on either side,
when it comes to mail, is not well-defined, and, indeed, different, for
different MTAs.
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
I'm trying to do selective relaying, and have tried to configure
tcpserver as per the "selective relaying with tcpserver and qmail-smtpd"
howto document.
when I run the command:
tcpserver -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u503 -g16 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
I get the following error:
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
So, I do a ps -A and see three instances for tcpserver running.
but as I try to kill them, they keep respawning! Is there a way to get
tcpserver to run as above from bootup?
TIA,
Jon.
--
ICMP - The protocol that likes to go: PING!
Jonathan Fanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 11 September 2000 at 18:08:26
+0100
> I'm trying to do selective relaying, and have tried to configure
> tcpserver as per the "selective relaying with tcpserver and qmail-smtpd"
> howto document.
> when I run the command:
>
> tcpserver -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u503 -g16 0 smtp
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
>
> I get the following error:
>
> tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
>
> So, I do a ps -A and see three instances for tcpserver running.
>
> but as I try to kill them, they keep respawning! Is there a way to get
> tcpserver to run as above from bootup?
If tcpserver is respawning, it's probably because you're running it
under supervise. If so, find the place that starts it, read that to
find the supervise directory it's running out of, and use svc -dx
<directory> to tell supervise to shut it down, and to shut down
itself. Or check if you're running supervise out of svscan; is there
an svscan running?
And do you know what all three instances are? That suggests three
different services being offered. Be sure you're killing what you
think you're killing!
--
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 11 September 2000 at 02:19:11 -0600
>
>
> > Steve Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 10 September 2000 at
> 18:52:00 -0600
> > > > It seems that Qmail supports only Unix's MUA.I'm using win9x on my
> client PC,does it mean I can't use Qmail as my SMTP/POP3/IMAP server?
> > > > Thank you!
> > >
> > > qmail supports any MUA that adheres to the pop3 and smtp
> protocols,
> > > which includes a wide variety of Unix and Windows MUA's.
> >
> > Um, qmail as such doesn't support pop3; that's done with various
> > add-on packages. So a rock-bottom qmail install won't support pop3.
>
> Well, although a rock-bottom installation doesn't have pop3 support, qmail
> does include a pop3 server in the standard distrobution, so (at least in my
> mind) it can be said to support pop3. Your opinion may differ. ; )
I misremembered, then, sorry. Not surprising, since I don't *use*
that pop3 server, since I don't use maildirs.
--
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > It seems that Qmail supports only Unix's MUA.I'm using
> > > win9x on my client PC,does it mean I can't use Qmail as my
> > > SMTP/POP3/IMAP server?
> > > Thank you!
> >
> > qmail supports any MUA that adheres to the pop3 and smtp protocols,
> > which includes a wide variety of Unix and Windows MUA's.
>
> Um, qmail as such doesn't support pop3; that's done with various
> add-on packages. So a rock-bottom qmail install won't support pop3.
I suppose if you wanted to be completely technical about it, qmail, although
it does include smtp and pop3 programs with the distribution, in a ROCK
Bottom installation is only a delivery agent accepting messages from the
local host - you have to manually add the operation of the program
qmail-smtpd in order to get smtp service, and add qmail-pop3d to get pop3
service.
So I think a good answer is: You are right. Qmail itself does not support
any method of windows access.
Though you could probably use qmail-smtpd to accept messages and qmail-pop3d
to distribute messages. If you wanted to, for whatever reason. (Though
windows is probably a poor reason indeed) >:)
David
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/mini.html says:
* You don't need qmail entries in /etc/group or /etc/passwd.
mini-qmail runs with the same privileges as the user sending mail;
it doesn't have any of its own files.
But, it also says:
Here's what you do need:
* qmail-qmqpc, forward, qmail-inject, sendmail, predate, datemail,
mailsubj, qmail-showctl, maildirmake, maildir2mbox, maildirwatch,
qail, elq, and pinq in /var/qmail/bin;
But, qmail-showctl requires qmail entries in /etc/group and /etc/passwd.
--
Raul
Im getting this error message with one of my domains How do I fix this.
delivery 149: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)
Thanks
> Im getting this error message with one of my domains How do I fix this.
> delivery 149: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)
Make sure that the Maildir is set up correctly - correct location,
ownership, and permissions. As a quick and dirty hack, try:
chown -R {user.group} ~{user}/Maildir
chmod -R 700 ~{user}/Maildir
steve
How do I clear out my mail que?
Thanks
Mike
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:06:59PM -0700, Mike Jimenez wrote:
> How do I clear out my mail que?
> Thanks
> Mike
FAQ 7.2
It's in your source tree.
Ben
--
Ben Beuchler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MAILER-DAEMON (612) 321-9290 x101
Bitstream Underground www.bitstream.net
Good Day\Afternoon\Evening,
I've a problem that I know I could figure out. However, because of
restraints (non-physical) put on me I am being pressured to get this right
the first time. (for some reason it takes "others" an hour to test this)
Now that my ego feels better, here is my problem.
I have a web server off-site, web.mydomain.com. A java process on this
server sends mail using my local qmail server, qmail.mydomain.com. As seen
in the header below, firewall.mydomain.com, which is the offsite firewall
for the web server is also in on the deal somehow. Here is a header of a
successfully sent email from web.mydomain.com to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 24937 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2000 16:44:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO firewall.mydomain.com) (216.35.89.70)
by 4.17.165.190 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2000 16:44:33 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from web.mydomain.com by firewall.mydomain.com
via smtpd (for [4.17.165.190]) with SMTP; 8 Sep 2000 16:56:44 UT
The IP of qmail.mydomain.com is the 4.17.165.190 address, the 216.35.89.70
address is the firewall IP. I have gotten this to work by removing my
rcpthosts file (duh), but I would like it to work the proper way.
The relaying rules on qmail.mydomain.com work for the web server and the
firewall (tested with rcpthosts present using sendmail) so that doesn't seem
to be the problem.
Should I put firewall.mydomain.com and\or web.mydomain.com in locals and\or
rcpthosts to make this work?
Hope this is enough info,
-=Andy
Current rcpthosts and locals files contain;
mydomain.com
qmail.mydomain.com
Astrological sign:
Aries
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:12:33PM -0400, Andy Meuse wrote:
> I have a web server off-site, web.mydomain.com. A java process on this
> server sends mail using my local qmail server, qmail.mydomain.com. As seen
> in the header below, firewall.mydomain.com, which is the offsite firewall
> for the web server is also in on the deal somehow. Here is a header of a
> successfully sent email from web.mydomain.com to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip]
> The IP of qmail.mydomain.com is the 4.17.165.190 address, the 216.35.89.70
> address is the firewall IP. I have gotten this to work by removing my
> rcpthosts file (duh), but I would like it to work the proper way.
>
> The relaying rules on qmail.mydomain.com work for the web server and the
> firewall (tested with rcpthosts present using sendmail) so that doesn't seem
> to be the problem.
>
> Should I put firewall.mydomain.com and\or web.mydomain.com in locals and\or
> rcpthosts to make this work?
No, use tcp.smtp and tcpserver to set RELAYCLIENT when connections
from 4.17.165.190 come in. Its in the Life With Qmail book,
http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html
> Astrological sign:
> Aries
Fear not, the stars aren't necessary -- yet.
PGP signature
We want to have all unmatched mail delivered to a default box. The problem
is that if I put a .qmail-default in /var/qmail/alias I must also put a
.qmail-user for each user in /var/qmail/alias or all mail goes to
.qmail-default. This was not a problem until we started allowing mail
filters on the server. Now mail is not delivered to the ~/.qmail file to be
filtered so it is not filtered. Is there a way to have mail delivered to
the ~/.qmail and have a catch all? Do I need to edit
/var/qmail/users/assign?
Thanks,
Brian Moon
------------------------------------------
dealnews LLC
Makers of dealnews & dealmac
http://dealnews.com/ | http://dealmac.com/
"Brian Moon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We want to have all unmatched mail delivered to a default box. The problem
>is that if I put a .qmail-default in /var/qmail/alias I must also put a
>.qmail-user for each user in /var/qmail/alias or all mail goes to
>.qmail-default.
Huh?
>This was not a problem until we started allowing mail
>filters on the server.
What, specifically, does "allowing mail filters" mean?
>Now mail is not delivered to the ~/.qmail file to be
>filtered so it is not filtered.
What do you mean by that? If a valid user(*) has a .qmail file,
qmail-local will use it...unless you use qmail-users to preempt it.
>Is there a way to have mail delivered to
>the ~/.qmail and have a catch all?
That's the way things work, normally.
>Do I need to edit /var/qmail/users/assign?
Perhaps...what do you have in there now? We're not mind readers.
-Dave
(*) see "man qmail-getpw"
Hi,
I have a couple of questions:
1. How does qmail handle bounces? any pointers or documentation which
describes this?
2. Can qmail's bounce handling be configured, i.e. the number of tries and
the frequency.
thanks,
ketan
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
ketan bajaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2. Can qmail's bounce handling be configured, i.e. the number of tries and
> the frequency.
? Bounces go once. If a bounce bounces, it's a double-bounce and is
handled differently. However, if you're really asking how often qmail will
try to deliver a message which is in the queue, please see Dave Sill's
excellent "Life with qmail":
http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#retry-schedule
You can easily control how long messages stay in the queue using
/var/qmail/control/queuelifetime ; changing the delivery schedule other than
maximum lifetime requires hacking the code, but shouldn't be necessary.
Charles
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
QCC Communications Corporation Saskatoon, SK
My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jamie,
My post of a couple of days ago has a similar problem - but no one has
responded to my message.
I am using Net::SMTP to send out my email and I get the same thing but only
for Bcc recipients.
I have read so many qmail posts and they only talk about double bounces,
configuration problems, etc... but none discuss sending out emails through
Perl. In fact, there seemed to be a similar problem with the Perl Porters
mailing list using qmail last year but I could not find any resolution.
You might want to try to use the Net::SMTP code that I posted and see if it
doesnt take care of your problem since only Bcc fields give the double
messages.
HTH,
SIncerely,
Christopher Taranto
At 04:07 PM 9/11/00 +0900, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I apologize if this was covered before.
>I am having probles after my fresh qmail install, and being
>new to all of this I am a little confused with what is going
>on.
>
>BTW, qmail is working great and I think its awesome.
>
>Situation:
>In my lan I am testing qmail on my two LINUX boxes.
>Sending mail out from binmail is no problem, but when I use
>my ugly perl script (pasted below) to do some performance
>tests (just for ball park figures) I get duplicate messages.
>
>Using sendmail was OK but qmail seems to duplicate all
>the messages.
>
>Did anybody get this and over come this before?
>If so, I would appreciate it if someone could shed some
>light on the situation (hints, pointers, url anything).
>
>MY SETUP:
>qmail 1.03
> + DNS and local-time patch
> + vsm and procmail
> # slowly attempting the migration to Maildir/...
>daemontools 0.70
>ucspi-tcp 0.88
># mosly following lwq.html - great doc/info!
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>jamie
>
>--script--
>#!/usr/local/bin/perl
>
># sendmail below is symlinked to
># /var/qmail/bin/sendmail
>$sendmail = '/usr/sbin/sendmail -t';
>$mailto = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]';
>$mailfrom = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]';
>$subject = 'This is a test';
>
># for more mail at once uncomment below and
># and the line above exit 0 way below.
>
>#for $i (1 .. 100) {
> open (MAIL, "| $sendmail $mailto");
> print MAIL << "__EOF";
>To: $mailto
>From: $mailfrom
>Subject: $subject
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Type: text/plain
>
>Hello, this is a test.
>12345678901234567890 12345678901234567890
># and approx 1 kb worth of garbage text proceeds...
>__EOF
>
> close(MAIL);
>#}
>exit 0;
>
>--/script--
>
>#---------#---------#---------#---------#---------#---------#---------#
>-- If somebody can help create a search engine for my room,
> I will call them a Saint...
> GUI == Graphical User Interference
Ok, I'm a newbie at this. Here's the info you might need before I show
you the error:
Redhat 6.2 (Intel)
qmail-1.03
ucspi-tcp-0.88
daemontools-0.70
I'm manually invoking
supervise qmail-smtpd &
The run file is:
*************************
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
-u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1
*************************
The errors I get are:
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
[until killed]
I've already ensured that an tcp.smtp.cdb file has been created, and
the entry in the tcp.smtp file it was created is,
*************************
10.1.1.83:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
*************************
which I got from Sill's "Life with Qmail".
I also checked to make sure that command,
id -u qmaild
worked.
Hints? I'm sure I'm missing something stupid.
=== Al
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Make sure sendmail is not still running.
=G=
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:14:39PM -0700, Al Sparks wrote:
> The errors I get are:
> tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
> tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
> tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
> tcpserver: fatal: unable to bind: address already used
> [until killed]
It's telling you the truth. Some other process is already using
that address/port combination.
What output do you get if you go:
telnet localhost 25
That will probably give you a clue as to what has that port.
Regards.
markd@xxxxxxxxx says, on Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:23:48 -0700
> It's telling you the truth. Some other process is already using
> that address/port combination.
>
> What output do you get if you go:
>
> telnet localhost 25
>
> That will probably give you a clue as to what has that port. Regards.
Thanks for the prompt response. To summarize, Galen suggested I check
for sendmail running, and I checked and not it's not. I had disabled
sendmail long ago.
However, I realize what's happening. I did what Markd suggested, and
guess what? The qmail smtpd server did come up. I forgot to remove
the inetd entry before trying to invoke tcprules. Duhhhh.
Thanks again. BTW, Yahoo! is still slow in receiving these things. I
went to the archives to read your responses. I still haven't gotten
anything in my Yahoo! account. Oh well. I guess you get what you pay
for.
Thanks again.
=== Al
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Hi, this is my first time posting, hope that you all can help me
out. I running qmail 1.03 on an Alpha Personal Workstation 500, Redhat 6.2.
I did just a standard server install of the OS, then untarred qmail. ucspi,
daemon tools, and dot-forward. I compiled and installed all of the
components and used the Life with qmail setup guide scripts. All of the
services start (when you do a ps -ax, you see all of the services running)
when I do /usr/local/sbin/qmail start. When I try to telnet to port 25, I
get a connection refused message. Checked the qmail logs and in the smtpd
log, I get a message that says"tcpserver: error in loading shared
libraries:libc.so.6.1:failed to map segment from shared object:Cannont
allocate memory". This repeats over and over again.
I have nothing running in inetd. I wanted to make sure that nothing
else could possibly be interferring with tcpserver administrering port 25.
Could something else be using the libc library and not allowing access? Is
the libc corrupt? I tried re-rpming some of the glibc stuff with no effect.
Is something wrong with my qmail setup? Please help!!!
BTW, I triple checked my scripts and the are exactly the ones from
life with qmail. My aliases are there and so are my soft links.
Michael French
I.T. Department
Asheville Citizen-Times
application/ms-tnef
Hi,
I know this topic has been beaten to death, but I just can't get virtualdomainsto work
in my setup. Hopefully some kind soul can help, especially since this seems to be the
most vanilla setup I could have. Just like the FAQs say, I want to have all mail for
the domain Y to be delivered to a user a domain X. I control both domains, and they're
both on the same server.
my locals file:
--------
mail.X
X
--------
my rcpthosts file:
--------
mail.X
mail.Y
X
Y
--------
and finally, my virtualdomains:
--------
Y:bronco15
mail.Y:bronco15
--------
My understanding is that all mail to Y or mail.Y will go to user bronco15. However,
when I send mail to ryan@Y, I get the following message:
--------
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at X.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<ryan@Y>:
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
--------
What's going on! This setup couldn't be more straightforward, so I'm starting to think
that perhaps there is a compile-time configuration option or something. Again, any
help you be enormously welcome.
Thanks,
ryan
--
"Ain't that something what happened today. One of us got traded to
Kansas City."
-- Casey Stengel, informing outfielder Bob Cerv he'd
been traded
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:34:19PM -0700, ryan p bobko wrote:
> <ryan@Y>:
> Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)
Does ryan have a .qmail-default file in his homedir?
--Adam
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:43:16PM -0700, ryan p bobko wrote:
> I don't see why it should have anything to do with ryan's .qmail-default.
> Isn't the whole point that the mail gets forwarded to bronco15? I'd like
> all users (even the ones that don't exist) to be forwarded to the user
> bronco15 (who does exist).
Kindly wrap your email at 78 characters.
If you want this type of behavior, then create a .qmail-default file in
ryan's homedir. If you want to know how it works or why it is this way, man
qmail-send and dot-qmail.
--Adam
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 08:47:58PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:43:16PM -0700, ryan p bobko wrote:
> > I don't see why it should have anything to do with ryan's .qmail-default.
> > Isn't the whole point that the mail gets forwarded to bronco15? I'd like
> > all users (even the ones that don't exist) to be forwarded to the user
> > bronco15 (who does exist).
>
> Kindly wrap your email at 78 characters.
>
> If you want this type of behavior, then create a .qmail-default file in
> ryan's homedir. If you want to know how it works or why it is this way, man
Sorry, I meant to say bronco15's homedir, not ryan's. brain fart.
--Adam
Hi,
I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
Regards,
Jerry
Talk about a brain fart....
--JT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Hsieh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Qmail" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 6:40 PM
Subject: Spamming .....
> Hi,
>
> I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
> server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents
at
> one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Jerry
>
>
Perhaps you should watch the list before you wish to declare yourself an
evil spammer :) , but perhaps some other list members might have a viewpoint
?
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:41 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: Spamming .....
Hi,
I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
Regards,
Jerry
There is no way to send to 100k recipients at a time. Most spammers hire
minimum wage workers to cut and paste messages into Outlook Express and send
them to each recipient.
You can always point your Outlook Express client at your qmail machine, but
it's more efficient to just point it at the mailserver of your ISP. Always
put your real email address in the messages. Most spammers make the mistake
of putting fake ones and all of the potential customers can't respond.
Usually a phone number is good also since many people prefer not to use
email for business purposes.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:55 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: RE: Spamming .....
Perhaps you should watch the list before you wish to declare yourself an
evil spammer :) , but perhaps some other list members might have a viewpoint
?
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:41 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: Spamming .....
Hi,
I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
Regards,
Jerry
Where did spamming come from anyway? The first spam that I consciously
remember was the spicy ham that you buy at the supermarket down the
street... Oh I get it. Maybe junk e-mail was called spam cos no one likes
it!
/BR
Manager
InterPlanetary Solutions
http://ipsware.com/
actually,
most spammers don't put their real email address in there because they relayed
it through a mail server that is an open relay and they don't want people to
respond directly to them. at the ISP I work at, we spend a lot of time tracking
down spammers. they connect to an mail server that should not relay mail for
them but it does anyway. they identify themselves as someone that they are not
and they send mass email. they don't want responses. they just want you to
click on whatever is in their ad or go to their website...
also, even though they say you will be taken off their list if you respond, you
won't most of them do that so they can get hold of a real email address...
shawn
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> There is no way to send to 100k recipients at a time. Most spammers hire
> minimum wage workers to cut and paste messages into Outlook Express and send
> them to each recipient.
>
> You can always point your Outlook Express client at your qmail machine, but
> it's more efficient to just point it at the mailserver of your ISP. Always
> put your real email address in the messages. Most spammers make the mistake
> of putting fake ones and all of the potential customers can't respond.
> Usually a phone number is good also since many people prefer not to use
> email for business purposes.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:55 PM
> To: Qmail
> Subject: RE: Spamming .....
>
>
> Perhaps you should watch the list before you wish to declare yourself an
> evil spammer :) , but perhaps some other list members might have a viewpoint
> ?
>
> Rick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:41 PM
> To: Qmail
> Subject: Spamming .....
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
> server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
> one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Jerry
--
got root?
one more thing...
if you use your ISP's mail server to send unsolicited bulk or commercial email,
I have no doubt that they will cancel your service... just thought you might
want to know
shawn
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> actually,
>
> most spammers don't put their real email address in there because they relayed
> it through a mail server that is an open relay and they don't want people to
> respond directly to them. at the ISP I work at, we spend a lot of time tracking
> down spammers. they connect to an mail server that should not relay mail for
> them but it does anyway. they identify themselves as someone that they are not
> and they send mass email. they don't want responses. they just want you to
> click on whatever is in their ad or go to their website...
> also, even though they say you will be taken off their list if you respond, you
> won't most of them do that so they can get hold of a real email address...
>
> shawn
>
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> > There is no way to send to 100k recipients at a time. Most spammers hire
> > minimum wage workers to cut and paste messages into Outlook Express and send
> > them to each recipient.
> >
> > You can always point your Outlook Express client at your qmail machine, but
> > it's more efficient to just point it at the mailserver of your ISP. Always
> > put your real email address in the messages. Most spammers make the mistake
> > of putting fake ones and all of the potential customers can't respond.
> > Usually a phone number is good also since many people prefer not to use
> > email for business purposes.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:55 PM
> > To: Qmail
> > Subject: RE: Spamming .....
> >
> >
> > Perhaps you should watch the list before you wish to declare yourself an
> > evil spammer :) , but perhaps some other list members might have a viewpoint
> > ?
> >
> > Rick
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:41 PM
> > To: Qmail
> > Subject: Spamming .....
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
> > server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
> > one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Jerry
> --
> got root?
--
got root?
Hi all,
I am sorry for using the wrong word. Basically, I just wanna send the
newsletter to those users who would like to receive the newsletter from us.
I use this word because lot of people said this is "spamming". But if those
people they want to receive mail for what they want, it's not spamming,
right? Correct me if I am wrong. (Just like I want to receive any
information from this qmail mailing list).
Forgive me for use the wrong world because English is not my native
language. For those people who get mad, sorry again.
Regards,
Jerry
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 6:55 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: RE: Spamming .....
Perhaps you should watch the list before you wish to declare yourself an
evil spammer :) , but perhaps some other list members might have a viewpoint
?
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:41 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: Spamming .....
Hi,
I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
Regards,
Jerry
That being the case, you will probably need to look toward things like Ezmlm
and do the whole mailing list thing. IMHO ..... YOu might notofy your ISP
that you are running a listserv or going to email out that much. THe
provider I work for , we monitor that kind of traffic and when you decide to
send 100k emails in a very short timespan , someone is very likely to notice
and it wil raise an eyebrow or two. There is I would think better ways to
disseminate this information than mass emails. Takes up to much servers
space and just eats bandwitdh if you plan on doing this on any kind of
regular basis ..
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 9:40 PM
To: Rick Harris; Qmail
Subject: RE: Spamming .....
Hi all,
I am sorry for using the wrong word. Basically, I just wanna send the
newsletter to those users who would like to receive the newsletter from us.
I use this word because lot of people said this is "spamming". But if those
people they want to receive mail for what they want, it's not spamming,
right? Correct me if I am wrong. (Just like I want to receive any
information from this qmail mailing list).
Forgive me for use the wrong world because English is not my native
language. For those people who get mad, sorry again.
Regards,
Jerry
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 6:55 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: RE: Spamming .....
Perhaps you should watch the list before you wish to declare yourself an
evil spammer :) , but perhaps some other list members might have a viewpoint
?
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hsieh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:41 PM
To: Qmail
Subject: Spamming .....
Hi,
I would like to get into the spamming business and I have a basic qmail
server setup already. I have no idea how to send mail to 100k receiptents at
one time. Can someone give me some hints? Thanks for your time.
Regards,
Jerry
> if you use your ISP's mail server to send unsolicited bulk or commercial email,
> I have no doubt that they will cancel your service... just thought you might
> want to know
Shhh, don't tell. If he's stupid enough to ask for advice, he might
just be stupid enough to put his real email address in...
steve
> Shhh, don't tell. If he's stupid enough to ask for advice, he might
> just be stupid enough to put his real email address in...
I'll agree that asking about bulk mailing on this list is a little
suicidial, (especially since www.qmail.org/top.html talks about mailing
lists with ezmlm) but considering how many people don't speak English
natively on this list, I think it is a little rude to go insulting them for
their errors... We don't know what his situation is so we don't have the
right to call him 'stupid'.
/BR
Manager
InterPlanetary Solutions
http://ipsware.com/
I would like to thank those people who give me the advise.
Regards,
Jerry
Hi,
Could someone please tell me how to configure qmail to use maildrop as the
default LDA? (I uninstalled procmail instead of trying to get it to work with
qmail.)
Thanks,
Ben Logan
subscribe qmail
--
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Micah Abrams office: 480-317-2001
Network Operations mobile: 602-740-7550
Neoplanet dot com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Brett Randall wrote:
>I'll agree that asking about bulk mailing on this list is a little
>suicidial, (especially since www.qmail.org/top.html talks about mailing
>lists with ezmlm) but considering how many people don't speak English
>natively on this list, I think it is a little rude to go insulting them for
>their errors... We don't know what his situation is so we don't have the
>right to call him 'stupid'.
Thanks Brett, for your kind message.
I don't speak English natively, either, so it's a bit
difficult to ask questions to 'English-speaking' list like this.
Since my question several days ago, I keep thinking
that perhaps I was not clear enough (or 'polite' enough)
so that nobody answer my question .. :-)
Maybe, I can have some reply to my question now .. :-) (Please .. :-))
My question is:
All emails come to X.org ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], etc.) are forwarded to me (say, [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
I use qmail at chem.itb.ac.id. What's the simplest way to reforward
those emails to the right person or to the right place?
Or, do I have to write a perl script to process those emails?
(Unfortunately, I currently cannot write any single line of
perl script .. :-))
For your info, in the header of those emails, the "To:" field
still contains the original recipient ([EMAIL PROTECTED]),
and the "From:" field contains the original sender.
Thanks.
Muhamad
> I use qmail at chem.itb.ac.id. What's the simplest way to reforward
> those emails to the right person or to the right place?
I suggest looking into fetchmail and similar programs...we had to use it for
a while (albeit with sendmail, not qmail, but since it works via POP3
retrieval, I would guess it should still work the same). There was a
discussion on this topic earlier in the year and fetchmail was mentioned, so
try searching the qmail ML archives (find them on www.qmail.org) for
fetchmail and see what you find...
/BR
Manager
InterPlanetary Solutions
http://ipsware.com/
On 12-Sep-2000 Muhamad A. Martoprawiro wrote:
>
> My question is:
> All emails come to X.org ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc.) are forwarded to me (say, [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> I use qmail at chem.itb.ac.id. What's the simplest way to reforward
> those emails to the right person or to the right place?
> Or, do I have to write a perl script to process those emails?
> (Unfortunately, I currently cannot write any single line of
> perl script .. :-))
>
> For your info, in the header of those emails, the "To:" field
> still contains the original recipient ([EMAIL PROTECTED]),
> and the "From:" field contains the original sender.
If they're in Maildir format, just do:
for i in * ; do qmail-inject < $i ; done
You may want to add arguments to qmail-inject to control
delivery in the case of forwarded email; see the manpage
for qmail-inject for more info.
If the mail is in a file (mbox format), split it into
Maildir format with convert-and-create (http://www.qmail.org/convert-and-create).
--
Rick Lyons
WebCentral
um,
The first email I have ever sent to this list was a few hours ago. and as soon
as I sent it, someone has been spending ALL night trying to connect to my
machine to an IMAP port.
207.155.121.162
207.155.121.170
207.155.121.166
just quit it, I am watching.
thanks
shawn
--
got root?
You may be interested in knowing that those IP addresses belong to
emumail.net, an email checking web site. I would almost suggest you block
those IP addresses from accessing your machine, since I doubt you will have
any use for email from that site... An insecure site where people expose
their usernames, passwords, and email hosts? I don't think so...
/BR
Manager
InterPlanetary Solutions
http://ipsware.com/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shawn p. duffy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 6:15 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: connecting to my IMAP port
>
>
> um,
>
> The first email I have ever sent to this list was a few hours
> ago. and as soon
> as I sent it, someone has been spending ALL night trying to connect to my
> machine to an IMAP port.
> 207.155.121.162
> 207.155.121.170
> 207.155.121.166
>
> just quit it, I am watching.
>
> thanks
> shawn
>
> --
> got root?
thanks, but I already checked it out and portsentry has blackholed them
already. the IP that tries the most is running red hat linux, apache 1.3.9, and
qmail. I emailed root@that IP and told them if it doesn't stop then I will
contact their service provider...
thanks guys!
shawn
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> You may be interested in knowing that those IP addresses belong to
> emumail.net, an email checking web site. I would almost suggest you block
> those IP addresses from accessing your machine, since I doubt you will have
> any use for email from that site... An insecure site where people expose
> their usernames, passwords, and email hosts? I don't think so...
>
> /BR
>
>
> Manager
> InterPlanetary Solutions
> http://ipsware.com/
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: shawn p. duffy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 6:15 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: connecting to my IMAP port
> >
> >
> > um,
> >
> > The first email I have ever sent to this list was a few hours
> > ago. and as soon
> > as I sent it, someone has been spending ALL night trying to connect to my
> > machine to an IMAP port.
> > 207.155.121.162
> > 207.155.121.170
> > 207.155.121.166
> >
> > just quit it, I am watching.
> >
> > thanks
> > shawn
> >
> > --
> > got root?
--
got root?
-------------------------------------------------------
--
got root?
> I emailed root@that IP and told them if it doesn't stop then I will
> contact their service provider...
A machine that runs qmail and accepts mail for its IP address... Pretty easy
to do, but not many people (AFAIK) do this...maybe this machine is an open
relay? ;)
/BR
Manager
InterPlanetary Solutions
http://ipsware.com/
actually, the email got bounced back to me so I know it is from this list...
ever since I posted that message, the connections have stopped...
shawn
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> > I emailed root@that IP and told them if it doesn't stop then I will
> > contact their service provider...
>
> A machine that runs qmail and accepts mail for its IP address... Pretty easy
> to do, but not many people (AFAIK) do this...maybe this machine is an open
> relay? ;)
>
> /BR
>
> Manager
> InterPlanetary Solutions
> http://ipsware.com/
--
got root?
Is there anybody know the main features different between Qmail and IMAP4(UW).
I know they support different protocol,I want to choose one of them to construct
a mail server.Wish somebody give me some advice.
----------------------------------------------
��ӭ��ʹ�� �ټ���������ʼ�ϵͳ http://www.email.com.cn
Welcome to E-mail business system
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:33:29PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is there anybody know the main features different between Qmail and IMAP4(UW).
> I know they support different protocol,I want to choose one of them to construct
> a mail server.Wish somebody give me some advice.
well, it's impossible to make a comparaison, because qmail doesn't
have an integrated imap daemon...
But you can use UW-IMAP or Courier-IMAP with qmail if you want.
The first one only with Mailbox-type boxes, and the second with
Maildirs.
Regards,
Olivier
--
_________________________________________________________________
Olivier Mueller - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - PGPkeyID: 0E84D2EA - Switzerland
