lock users who
. read or write to much / slice of time
. login/logout too often / slice of time
Note : I'm still using the 1.2.x branch.
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
user, unless
maybe such UA makes a single 'gethostbyname()', thus connecting 5 times to the
same physical server ?
What are the options to achieve such a setup ? Any successful experiences ?
Thank you
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
login fails with
"Proxying loops" error. This feature exists only in v1.1+.
Besides, let's say you want to split your load between 2 dovecot servers :
would you need a 3rd that would do only the proxying ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 03:26:06PM +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> I don't quite understand the proxy_maybe option :
Also, 2 things which aren't quite clear to me in the Wiki :
a) Password forwarding
Make sure that the authentication succeeds with any given password. You can do
lows only SSL/TLS connections, then on the backend a bunch of
> servers that users get assigned to but they cannot have:
> disable_plaintext_auth = yes
> in the configuration.
Ok, I always use plaintext anyway, usually on SSL/TLS from clients (with a few
exceptions for old stuff/bad habits I plan to get ridd off).
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 04:13:51PM +0200, Sven Eulberg wrote:
> Call dovecot LDA inside of procmail!
[...]
> Works like a charm.
Thanks, I was thinking about something like that.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
aildir file naming.
What do you mean by good maildir file naming ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
list archives for an explanation of what changed in the code
that could explain such an improvement but mostly (except maybe some index code
rewrite mentions) found differences in features.
Where does that performance gap come from ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ot-uidlist is usually updated by
> appending to it instead of rewriting it.
So no big architectural changes ?
Or maybe changes in the locking code ?
What about the upcomming 2.0 ? Is the new master expected to provide load
improvement ?
Great work anyway ! ;-)
Thanks.
--
Thomas Humm
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:30:09AM -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Well, one change is that by default copying messages is now done using
> hard links, but you could have done that with v1.0 also by changing a
> setting.
Yes, that's what I did at the time I was running 1.0.1
What would
"saw" mean in that case ?
4. should the dovecot-uidlist and dovecot-keywords be updated after the
restore or is it better to let dovecot rearrange them itself ?
5. same question for the index and cache files ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
sages for the user (in the case it wouldn't be an option to let the user do
the dirty job ;-)) ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 06:41:34PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:35 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
>
> > Can this new mail be named identically, i.e.
> > 1215166123.52887_0.host.dom.ain:2, ?
> > if so, it would be a problem when merging.
>
from dovecot.uidlist. But what if the index is destroyed for some
reason : would that mean that the restoration would be unoticed by dovecot ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
).
I guess part of the answer is in the diffences between shared and public
namespaces handling.
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ort : what exactly are the difference (at a feature level, not a coding
level) between 1.1. and 1.2 regarding those concepts ? And is the support in
1.1. of personnal and shared namespace (as in rfc2342) stable ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
userPassword(password)=
shadowMax(userdb_system_user)=380
But I can't subscribe to the mailbox :
stat(/courriel/boites/doveshared/.box/tmp) failed: Permission denied
(euid=xxx egid=)
as a matter of fact, the egid seems to be the primary gid.
What am I missing ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 09:51:51AM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> What am I missing ?
Or maybe it's because I cannot implement symlink shared mailboxes without using
ACL (I
thought ACL were used to fine tune what unix permissions allowed to to) ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 09:51:51AM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> pass_attrs =
> uid=user,userPassword=password,homeDirectory=userdb_home,,,uidNumber=userdb_uid,gidNumber=userdb_gid,shadowMax=userdb_system_user
is it the correct way to pass userdb extra field other than home, uid a
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 09:51:51AM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> I'm trying to set up, as explained in the wiki, shared mailboxes with symlink.
Ok, I'm trying with namespaces and ACL now (it will be cleaner anyway than
symlinks) but I'm still missing something :
I'm stil
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 02:23:38PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
Hello again ;-(
I think the ambiguity may come from that statement in the doc (wiki) :
"Both symlinking and namespaces have a common problem: Dovecot needs to have
permissions to read, and possibly to write to the shared ma
blic too ?
My understanding is that my setup doesn't work because for some reason, dovecot
doesn't see my users secondary groups or doesnt take them into account...
Any thoughts which might help ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 03:28:27PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
Please, ignore this thread, I will sum up what I figure out in another one.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:06:20PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
Please ignore this message, I will sum up what I did figure out in another
thread.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ot rely on the native unix groups of the system the
user belong to ?
Thanks (and sorry for the 2 previous threads where I was blindly confused by
the system_user thing).
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
iptions
As expected, dovecot (and it shows in the logs), has not sufficient permissions
to create the files above (dovecot-acl-list, dovecot-uidvalidity,
dovecot-uidvalidity.4982fa7a). What are the consequences ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
at the file would have done ?
So maybe, if you want to share flags, 2) is safer dans if you want them
private, 1.b) is the only choice ?
thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 03:20:45PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> I follow the 'Shared subscriptions' section of the wiki :
>
> drw-r-s--- 4 root doveshared 4096 Jan 30 14:19 public
> -rw-r- 1 root doveshared18 Jan 30 13:38 public/subscriptions
>
> As exp
On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 06:57:29PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> Any idea, anyone ?
Sorry to insist, but I need this setup. Timo ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
subscriptions files)
. but indexes shared
as uid is listed in index : wouldn't that be a problem ?
thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 07:22:50PM +0200, Harry Lachanas wrote:
> Is there a way to prohibit users of creating subfolder(s) under a
> Public Namespace ???
Isn't that (for users (as opposed to admins) to create subfolders in a public
namespacejust impossible with 1.1.x) ?
--
Th
tup would I have
one) line complaining about no-acl in the system wide acl directory :
acl = vfile:/opt/dovecot/dovecot-acls:cache_secs=300
as a matter of fact, /opt/dovecot/dovecot-acls is empty for me (I don't need it
for now).
thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
ence of behavior normal ? Which is the correct behavior ?
And is there still no way (except to patch the source) to allow dots in mailbox
names in Maildir ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
t namespace.]
I cannot create a mailbox named "foo.bar" as I could with a global
configuration with no namespace at all.
> http://wiki.dovecot.org/Plugins/Listescape
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 07:24:47PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> I cannot create a mailbox named "foo.bar" as I could with a global
> configuration with no namespace at all.
Would you agree that the behavior which denies dot is the correct one ?
--
Thomas Hummel |
#x27;.' and '/'. I wonder if it is normal.
. with a private namesapce with '/' as a separator, only '/' is accepted, as
expected.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:54:10AM -0500, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> That's a Thunderbird feature then. Trying to use '/' directly gives
> just:
>
> x create foo/bar
> x NO Invalid mailbox name: foo/bar
Ok thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| P
a real
filesystem hierarchy.
I understand dovecot kept those for compatibility reasons but I'd like to know
what was the authors of thoses specs thinking when deciding this.
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
; doesn't already exist.
In your example (sorry I haven't had to use quota), you mean that both /foo et
/foo/bar would have a quota ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ze ?
Sounds strange : why not calculate Maildir size ? And regarding quotas : can I
have a quota on some folder and a quota on some of its subfolder(s) ? If yes,
wouldn't that change the problem ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
are dovecot -n output and a gdb backtrace of the core file.
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
# 1.2.12: /usr/local/dovecot-1.2.12/etc/dovecot.conf
# OS: FreeBSD 7.2-STABLE amd64 nfs
syslog_facility: local0
protocols: imap imaps pop3 pop3s
and dovecot-uidlist, wouldn't it need to be
proxied as well through director ? Is that the case ? If not, how can we use
deliver as LDA in a setup where n directors would proxy to m dovecot backends ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ht interpret as "an SMTP server connects via LMTP to an LDA". Or is
the LMTP server able to directly put the message in the final mailbox ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 03:16:44PM +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 15:11 +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> > Or is the LMTP server able to directly put the message in the final mailbox
> > ?
>
> Yes. LMTP server could be thought of as LDA.
But then you lo
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 03:58:12PM +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> No, you don't. dovecot-lda and Dovecot's LMTP server uses exactly the
> same code for writing mails.
Ok. Thanks. It would have been weird not to use such an advantage (early
indexing)
in a director environment.
-
z_limit should be increased to avoid out of memory errors, especially if
you're using SSL/TLS."
Is there a way/rule of thumb to guess the appropriate value ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
nyway
> better to set it too high than too low to avoid killing existing connections
> when vsz_limit is exceeded.
Just to be sure : what is that vsz_limit exactly to begin with ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
n the "client_limit" setting ? For instance,
if a client (User Agent like Thunderbird) is configured to open 5 connections,
does that increase the client count by 5 for this limit ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ng goes really wrong, is it safe to revert to 1.2.12 ? Maybe some
files has non-compatible format (dovecot-uidlist, indexes, ...) ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 04:13:20PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> This is user input so I don't have any details nor sufficient element to
> consider it a real problem. A Thunderbird restart seems to solve the problem.
However, some info seems to confirm that it involves moving a mes
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> However, some info seems to confirm that it involves moving a message from a
> mailbox to another where one of the mailbox has got non-ASCII character. A
> restart of TB seems to fix the problem indeed.
hmmm, not so sur
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> hmmm, not so sure as some other user states the message (which I still haven't
> seen myself) talks about "." as the invalid character.
And finally one case correctly described :
A user couldn't move a m
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:38:06PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
>
> > hmmm, not so sure as some other user states the message (which I still
> > haven't
> > seen myself) talks about "." as the
to do.
> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Debugging/Rawlog
Should I restart dovecot or just a SIGHUP ?
My other questions remains :
. can we revert from 2.0.8 to 1.2.12 (just in case) ?
. is there, between 1.2.12 and 2.0.8 some noticeable behavior regarding
mailbox name encoding ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ad TB to use a dot in a previously existing
mailbox name.
The separator is just the separator used by the client in the mailboxnames when
it sends commands to the server, right ?
> Do you have any shared/public namespaces?
Yes, one shared namespace, with separator = / too.
--
Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 09:52:51PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> in 1.2.12, I left the separator= commented out, so I had the default.
> in 2.0.8 I set separator = / myself.
>
> Still I can't see why it would lead TB to use a dot in a previously existing
> mailbox name.
Coul
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 10:03:00PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
So basically, I went from
1.2 with
#separator =
-> can you confirm the the client should use "." then ?
to
2.8.0 with
namespace {
type = private
separator = "/"
and now back to
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 02:19:22PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
Also, if we change the separator, do we have to change it on the subscription
file ? Could it be the source of my problem ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 02:19:22PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> 20101223-135556-38406.in:5 select "AA/BB/CC/foobar"
I forgot to mention that some of those mailboxes were not touched at all by the
user during the period where dovecot was using "/". And now that dovecot
dden = no
# list = no
list = children
}
# pwd
/courriel/boites/doveimap
# cat dovecot-acl-list
1294755382 Common
# cat .Common/dovecot-acl
user=dovepop akxeilprwts
# cat .Private/dovecot-acl
cat: .Private/dovecot-acl: No such file or directory
Also, I'm not sure I correctly understand what "Use the default namespace for
saving subscriptions." option is. Is it just the location of the subscription
file for mailboxes subscribed in the shared namespace ? Where would it be if
set to "yes" ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 03:46:24PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> Also, I'm not sure I correctly understand what "Use the default namespace for
> saving subscriptions." option is. Is it just the location of the subscription
> file for mailboxes subscribed in the shared na
Hello,
Silly question : what user is the "logged in system user" doveadm-expunge's man
page refers to when describing its first form of use ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 02:07:47PM +0100, Pascal Volk wrote:
> when you are logged in to your box as user 'thomas', then thomas is the
> logged in system user.
Ah sorry, I had interpreted "logged in" as "logged in through IMAP"...
--
Thomas Hummel | I
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 02:51:50PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 02:07:47PM +0100, Pascal Volk wrote:
>
> > when you are logged in to your box as user 'thomas', then thomas is the
> > logged in system user.
>
> Ah sorry, I had int
or multiple address on the same "address" line.
2. besides I don't know if it's possible to listen on the same address to
several ports for the same "subservice" : for instance could I have an
inet_listener imap {} listen on zz:zz:zz:zz:port1 and zz:zz:zz:zz:port2 ?
ion level) some
sources ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ppers) but I get :
doveot: imap-login: Error: connect(tcpwrap) failed: No such file or directory
Besides, my understanding is that with dovecot linked to libwrap, I can
avoid spawning imap-login through inetd. Is that correct ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle
t; }
Oh yes, thanks.
Also, is tcpwrap compatible with service_count = 0 in imap-login {} service ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
re comparing it to the LDAP crypted
password
or does dovecot try to simply bind to LDAP with the clear password ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
ess I still have the
option to use the litescape plugin.
Besides, how would one process to do the conversion ? Using dsync ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
posit on the mailbox since, by definition,
the user has not done any request yet ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
mailboxes on NFS, I'd want 2 LMTP servers :
on which servers should those LMTP servers run ? On the director servers (which
would mean director should have the mailboxes mounted) ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
000
default_client_limit,
right ?
-> is 1024M too high for vsz_limit and may expose to memory leaks ?
In other words, what limit should be raised to scale a lot a connections ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:08:18AM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> -> Does it make sense
Sorry, I was unclear. Let me rephrase :
from my understanding of the doc, process_min_avail seems to have a slightly
different behavior depending of if service_count is 1 or 0. Is it correct ?
The doc
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 02:04:07PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> Besides, why would [...]
I think I get it, I might have been confused by the term "unlimited" in "the
only useful values are 0 (unlimited)" in the sample config file comment.
As I see it now :
- service_co
pace settings and a dsync copy but I
cannot figure out how exactly.
What do you think ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
the #shared (even if no one shares mailboxes to me) "folder"
(because of list = yes )?
. let me share, let's say the .sous.arbo mailbox ? If yes, how ? Or should I
first pre-set some acl files ???
For now, it says : "This is a personnal mail folder. It is not shared."
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:50:44PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> But isn't a client like Thunderbird (3.0.3) supposed to
>
> . show me the #shared (even if no one shares mailboxes to me) "folder"
> (because of list = yes )?
>
> . let me share, let'
in the system user case ? (I
mean on an OS level, problems related to such loose permission are the same
and, if in 777, permissions are no longer a problem for dovecot) ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
t the shared-mailbox file format and try to hack it directly,
right ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
ny groups (similar in purpose to your
doveshared one) as needs to share a mailbox, if and only if I could somehow
restrict (politically I mean) the use of shared mailboxes to "privileged" users
(for instance a unit chief and his assistant, ...). Not really scalable I'm
afraid thou
give access to the mailboxes
by anything else than IMAP. If so, isn't it quite the same as 0777 with a
mail_location outside of user's reach (except through IMAP) ?
You maybe would you rely on filesystem acls to have a finer grain access
control ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
you deal with that
> > ?
>
> You don't need to put all users into doveshared group. You just need to
> set mail_extra_groups=doveshared, so only Dovecot processes have such
> extra access.
You lost me again : what's the use of the userdb " acl_groups" extra-f
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 03:40:23PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 14:34 +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote:
>
> > You lost me again : what's the use of the userdb " acl_groups" extra-field
> > then ?
>
> That only adds user to given ACL group
the
"system_groups_user" extra-field ? As I see it now, system_groups_user gives
finer grain control since it's on a user basis.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
nderstanding is that
in 1.2x, it's for backward compatibility reason).
Any idea ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
quot;
* LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "INBOX"
* LIST (\Noselect \HasChildren) "/" "#shared"
19 OK List completed.
* LIST (\Noselect \HasChildren) "/" "#shared/doveimap"
20 OK List completed.
21 OK Lsub completed.
* LIST (\Noselect \HasCh
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 07:40:29PM +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> Hello Timo,
>
> I'm running dovecot-1.2.11/Maildir and plan to migrate to single UID mailboxes
> some day, but for now, I've got "system" users and I'm testing permissions
> handling in or
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 11:17:26AM +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> > and the 'dovecot-shared' file doesn't help (besides, my understanding is
> > that
> > in 1.2x, it's for backward compatibility reason).
Which makes me wonder : does the dovecot-shared file s
ng
for
another client (user2), will they ?
[Note : isn't it the same event with no shared mailboxes but with one user
using several clients ?]
But, if they're private, they have to be stored outside the filename : how
can we do that ?
Thanks
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
erent user agent of even the same user
? Can't we end up in a message tagged as "important" in a client being tagged as
"personnal" in another client ?
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
(hidden=, list=, "Allow Server to
override [the namesapce] settings") where TB knows about the namespace.
Any ideas ?
Thanks.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
= no
> }
Thanks. I have to look further in what is allowed to go into those sections.
But in the case of disabling/enabling STARTTLS, this is indeed what I need.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 07:04:13PM +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 15:31 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
>
> > I've noticed that Thunderbird (3.0.3) seems to wrongly "repeat" the
> > namespace
> > prefix when selecting the top level maildir
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 06:17:49PM +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On ke, 2010-06-09 at 18:58 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 07:04:13PM +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 15:31 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> > >
> >
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 02:48:57PM +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On to, 2010-06-10 at 18:18 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> > > See this thread:
> > > http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/2010-May/001076.html
> > >
> >
> > I&
in the namespace only if we somehow know the name of the namespace and
specify it in the list command.
You seem to imply that a client who would do list "" * would list the
mailboxes of all namespaces configured with list=yes. I thought it would
list only the default namespace mailboxe
f it doesn't support NAMESPACE or
doesn't have the namespace prefix somewhere in its conf.
--
Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur
| Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau
t too". And since all namespaces are default
namespace children (since it's the one with an empty prefix), any
namespace with "list=yes" will be listed (and their content) by a list
"" * command, correct ?
Or, said in a simple way : list=yes == list "" * breaks name
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo
