G'Day Guys,
I've tried to add the -l hostname parameter, but ran into a problem.
As soon as i add that in, it starts failing authorisation for my virtual
domains. eg. my box domain works fine, but the virtual domains
(which each have their own individual ip and hence require a reverse
lookup to determine what their domain is) no longer works.
Any further ideas ?
Thanks
Nathan
PS. When i did add the -l for the box domain, it was lightning fast
!! ;)
> Usually, when there is a changeable parameter, like -l hostname, it means
> that you may use it accordingly to your needs and to the rules (man
> tcpserver and tcpserver source give the rules to me). I can't be forced to
> use the common choice because Dan wrote this way.
>
> So, in my opinion, for debugging purposes, for knowing which tcpserver is
> answering, for thousands of other reasons, you may use it as you want, as
> long as you know what you're doing (otherwise use the common choice).
>
> At 10/05/2001 10/05/2001 -0400, Ed Henderson wrote:
> > From Dan Bernstein's site for tcpserver
> > (http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/tcpserver.html ):
> >
> >-l localname: Do not look up the local host name in DNS; use localname for
> >the environment variable $TCPLOCALHOST. A common choice for localname is 0.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 'man tcpserver' says:
> > >
> > > -llocalname
> > > Do not look up the local host name; use localname
> > > for TCPLOCALHOST.
> > >
> > > This means that, simply, instead of making a DNS lookup for
> > > setting the
> > > TCPLOCALHOST variable with the name of the localhost,
> > > tcpserver trust what
> > > you're declaring with -l (so '0' or whatever you put is the
> > > same for him)
> > > and saves time.
> > >
> > > I prefer to declare the exact name instead of '0'.
> > >
> > > Tonino
> > >
> > >
> > > At 10/05/2001 10/05/2001 -0400, Ed Henderson wrote:
> > > >The correct form for "-l" parameter is "-l 0" not an actual
> > > hostname. I
> > > >added the following to both my pop3 and smtpd tcpservers: -l 0 -R -H
> > > >These switches are the ones most commonly recommended in the FAQ and
> > > >significantly sped up pop3 for me.
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Tonix [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 4:08 AM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Virtual Domains
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Nathan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I had the same problem. I have a similar situation, and my
> > > > > system handles
> > > > > DNS by himself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Although I may swear about the functionality and setup of my
> > > > > DNS, I had to
> > > > > force the
> > > > >
> > > > > -l <name.of.my.system>
> > > > >
> > > > > parameter in the tcpserver line. Having this, tcpserver assume
> > > > > <name.of.my.system> to be the name of the answering computer
> > > > > and avoid to
> > > > > make an extra call to DNS (that's the call that slowered all
> > > > > for me, don't
> > > > > ask me why).
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope this help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tonino
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > At 10/05/2001 10/05/2001 +1000, you wrote:
> > > > > >G'Day All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I have a question about the speed of my qmail server.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I look after 2 mail servers, 1 for the company and i
> > > help an isp run
> > > > > >the other. The company one has 1.03 qmail plain stock standard
> > > > > >and when you pop in and smtp in it reacts almost instantly. Works
> > > > > >fine.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >However we are not finding the same thing on the isp mail server.
> > > > > >There are about 20 virtual domains and poping in and smtp in is
> > > > > >starting to get slower and slower and even sometime time out.
> > > > > >Versions are :
> > > > > >qmail 1.03
> > > > > >vpopmail 3.4.11-1.released
> > > > > >qmailadmin 0.26e
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Each domain has their own ip which reverse resolves to their own
> > > > > >mail.domain.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >We house all dns entries for their domains and reverses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >What we get is that sometimes a customer of the virtual domain
> > > > > >will get a timeout while trying to check his email via pop3. We
> > > > > >have increased the timeouts on some of the pc's but really was
> > > > > >wondering is it because we are scaling more and more virtual
> > > > > >domains ? What should i be looking for ? Is it perhaps a known
> > > > > >bug and its fixed in a newer version ? PC is running at load
> > > > > >average of 0.00 and 98.6% idle. Its a P3 800 or something with
> > > > > >256Mb of memory....
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Thanks in Advance
> > > > > >Nathan
> > > > >
> > >
>
>
