Menu
▾
▴
fetchmail-users
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-17 17:43:47
|
Hi, On 7/17/06, Rob MacGregor <rob...@gm...> wrote: > These lists are depreciated - please use the lists found at www.fetchmail.info Should we continue this here for now, or move to there? > On 7/17/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote: > Upgrade to 6.3.4 Ok, didn't want to do that as it involves building from source, but I've done that now. > Spam messages almost never have a legit return address. All you'll > end up doing is annoying some poor innocent sod, and possibly becoming > a spam source yourself. Better to drop them on the floor. True, but I want legitimate mail (but with invalid addresses) to be bounced so that the sender knows they've got it wrong. > Otherwise, once you've upgraded to 6.3.4 please submit the output of > "fetchmail -v -v -v" showing the problem. This is the config: set bouncemail poll xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx protocol pop3 envelope 1 "Delivered-To" qvirtual "45-" localdomains xxx.xxx.xxx username xx...@xx... password "xxxxxx" is * here nokeep smtpaddress zzz.zzz.zzz Below: fetchmail: POP3> RETR 7 fetchmail: POP3< +OK 475 octets follow. reading message xx...@xx...@yyy.yyy:7 of 7 (475 octets) About to rewrite Return-Path: <yyy@yyy.yyy> Rewritten version is Return-Path: <yyy@yyy.yyy> About to rewrite From: yyy@yyy.yyy Rewritten version is From: yyy@yyy.yyy About to rewrite To: xx...@xx... Rewritten version is To: xx...@xx... fetchmail: passed through xx...@xx... matching xxx.xxx.xxx fetchmail: SMTP< 220 zzz.zzz.zzz ESMTP Exim 4.50 Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:15:41 +0100 fetchmail: SMTP> EHLO zzz.zzz.zzz fetchmail: SMTP< 250-zzz.zzz.zzz Hello localhost [127.0.0.1] fetchmail: SMTP< 250-SIZE 52428800 fetchmail: SMTP< 250-PIPELINING fetchmail: SMTP< 250 HELP fetchmail: forwarding to localhost fetchmail: SMTP> MAIL FROM:<xx...@xx...> SIZE=475 fetchmail: SMTP< 250 OK fetchmail: SMTP> RCPT TO:<yyy@yyy.yyy> fetchmail: SMTP< 550 unknown user fetchmail: SMTP error: 550 unknown user fetchmail: SMTP listener doesn't like recipient address `yyy@yyy.yyy' fetchmail: SMTP< 220 zzz.zzz.zzz ESMTP Exim 4.50 Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:15:41 +0100 fetchmail: SMTP> HELO zzz.zzz.zzz fetchmail: SMTP< 250 zzz.zzz.zzz Hello localhost [127.0.0.1] fetchmail: SMTP> MAIL FROM:<> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 OK fetchmail: SMTP> RCPT TO:<xx...@xx...> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 Accepted fetchmail: SMTP> DATA fetchmail: SMTP< 354 Enter message, ending with "." on a line by itself fetchmail: SMTP: (bounce-message body) fetchmail: SMTP>. (EOM) fetchmail: SMTP< 250 OK id=1G2Uov-0005GD-HY fetchmail: SMTP> QUIT fetchmail: SMTP< 221 zzz.zzz.zzz closing connection fetchmail: SMTP> RCPT TO:<postmaster@zzz.zzz.zzz> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 Accepted fetchmail: no address matches; forwarding to postmaster. fetchmail: SMTP> DATA fetchmail: SMTP< 354 Enter message, ending with "." on a line by itself #*fetchmail: SMTP>. (EOM) fetchmail: SMTP< 250 OK id=1G2Uov-0005GC-Kh not flushed fetchmail: POP3> QUIT fetchmail: POP3< +OK Bye-bye. fetchmail: SMTP> QUIT fetchmail: SMTP< 221 zzz.zzz.zzz closing connection fetchmail: 6.3.4 querying yyy.yyy.yyy (protocol POP3) at Mon Jul 17 16:15:41 2006: poll completed fetchmail: swapping UID lists fetchmail: Writing fetchids file. fetchmail: normal termination, status 0 fetchmail: Writing fetchids file. It looks like it has sent a bounce, but still forwarded the mail to the postmaster. Any ideas? Andy |
|
From: Rob M. <rob...@gm...> - 2006-07-17 19:06:11
|
As it says in the .sig - please keep list traffic on the list. Your
message has *NOT* been forwarded.
On 7/17/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi,
--
Please keep list traffic on the list.
Rob MacGregor
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he
doesn't become a monster. Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-18 10:37:36
|
Hi,
On 7/17/06, Rob MacGregor <rob...@gm...> wrote:
> It wouldn't hurt to provide the output of "fetchmail --configdump" so
> we can see what fetchmail thinks of it's config file.
Below (I've cut out the entries for the other servers I check, but
they're all very similar in terms of configuration).
TRUE=1; FALSE=0
os_type = 'linux'
feature_options = ('pop3','imap','sdps','etrn','odmr','ssl',)
# Start of configuration initializer
fetchmailrc = {
'poll_interval':0,
"logfile":None,
"idfile":"/var/lib/fetchmail/.fetchids",
"postmaster":"fetchmail",
'bouncemail':TRUE,
'spambounce':FALSE,
"properties":None,
'invisible':FALSE,
'showdots':TRUE,
'syslog':FALSE,
# List of server entries begins here
'servers': [
# Entry for site `xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx' begins:
{
"pollname":"xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx",
'active':TRUE,
"via":None,
"protocol":"POP3",
"service":None,
'timeout':300,
'interval':0,
"envelope":"Delivered-To",
'envskip':1,
"qvirtual":"45-",
"auth":"any",
'dns':TRUE,
'uidl':TRUE,
"aka":[],
"localdomains":["xxx.xxx.xxx"],
"interface":None,
"monitor":None,
"plugin":None,
"plugout":None,
"principal":None,
'tracepolls':FALSE,
'users': [
{
"remote":"xx...@xx...",
"password":"xxxxxxx",
'localnames':["fetchmail", '*'],
'fetchall':FALSE,
'keep':TRUE,
'flush':FALSE,
'limitflush':FALSE,
'rewrite':TRUE,
'stripcr':FALSE,
'forcecr':FALSE,
'pass8bits':FALSE,
'dropstatus':FALSE,
'dropdelivered':FALSE,
'mimedecode':FALSE,
'idle':FALSE,
"mda":None,
"bsmtp":None,
'lmtp':FALSE,
"preconnect":None,
"postconnect":None,
'limit':0,
'warnings':3600,
'fetchlimit':0,
'fetchsizelimit':100,
'fastuidl':4,
'batchlimit':0,
'ssl':FALSE,
"sslkey":None,
"sslcert":None,
"sslproto":"",
'sslcertck':FALSE,
"sslcertpath":None,
"sslfingerprint":None,
'expunge':0,
"properties":None,
"smtphunt":["localhost"],
"fetchdomains":[],
"smtpaddress":"yyy.yyy.yyy",
"smtpname":None,
'antispam':'',
"mailboxes":[],
}
, ]
}
]
}
# End of initializer
|
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-18 11:15:58
|
Hi, On 7/17/06, Matthias Andree <mat...@gm...> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Andy Hawkins wrote: > > > I don't want to bounce it because it's Spam, I want to bounce it > > because the destination address isn't valid. > > Then why doesn't your upstream server know it's invalid and reject the > message right away? I have a server on the net that handles mail for my domains. It does this by just putting all mail for each domain into one mailbox (one per domain). I don't want to have to set up an individual mailbox for each account in each domain I have. When the mail is downloaded via fetchmail, my local machine knows what accounts are valid and will bounce any that aren't. Fetchmail appears to be sending bounce message, but then delivering the message to the postmaster address anyway. I just want to turn off this postmaster delivery for mail that should be bounced. Andy |
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-18 21:08:40
|
Hi, I guess the question I have is why my configuration works as I want (bounces mail to invalid addresses) when I run it interactively, but not when I run fetchmail as a daemon (as I'd rather do)? Anyone? Andy |
|
From: Rob M. <rob...@gm...> - 2006-07-18 23:42:30
|
On 7/18/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess the question I have is why my configuration works as I want
> (bounces mail to invalid addresses) when I run it interactively, but
> not when I run fetchmail as a daemon (as I'd rather do)?
Give it another couple of days. I'm reasonably sure somebody with
knowledge of the source will be by before the weekend. The
development team is pretty small (not sure of the exact number, but I
suspect only 2 or 3).
--
Please keep list traffic on the list.
Rob MacGregor
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he
doesn't become a monster. Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-19 11:13:58
|
Hi, On 7/18/06, Rob MacGregor <rob...@gm...> wrote: > Give it another couple of days. I'm reasonably sure somebody with > knowledge of the source will be by before the weekend. The > development team is pretty small (not sure of the exact number, but I > suspect only 2 or 3). Ok. I've found a workaround by changing the postmaster setting to an empty string. However, I suspect that's not a particularly good idea... Andy |
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-26 15:51:56
|
Hi, On 7/19/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/18/06, Rob MacGregor <rob...@gm...> wrote: > > Give it another couple of days. I'm reasonably sure somebody with > > knowledge of the source will be by before the weekend. The > > development team is pretty small (not sure of the exact number, but I > > suspect only 2 or 3). > > Ok. I've found a workaround by changing the postmaster setting to an > empty string. However, I suspect that's not a particularly good > idea... Anyone? ??? Andy |
|
From: Matthias A. <mat...@gm...> - 2006-07-27 23:19:18
|
"Andy Hawkins" <adh...@gm...> writes: >> Ok. I've found a workaround by changing the postmaster setting to an >> empty string. However, I suspect that's not a particularly good >> idea... > > Anyone? ??? Hang on, you haven't paid 24x7 2-hour response support level. I've seen your questions, but not yet found the necessary time for research. Send 30 Euro via PayPal and I'll look at your issue ASAP as long as it doesn't take longer than 20 minutes (and send what I figured in that period), else you'll *have* to wait until it's your turn. -- Matthias Andree |
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-28 10:29:44
|
Hi, On 7/27/06, Matthias Andree <mat...@gm...> wrote: > Hang on, you haven't paid 24x7 2-hour response support level. > I've seen your questions, but not yet found the necessary time for research. Apologies, I just wanted to make sure someone else had seen it. I realise that support here is worth every penny I pay for it :) And in fairness, I did leave over a week between my original request and the reminder... > you'll *have* to wait until it's your turn. Understood. Andy |
|
From: Rob M. <rob...@gm...> - 2006-07-29 00:07:20
|
On 7/28/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote:
>
> And in fairness, I did leave over a week between my original request
> and the reminder...
You've probably missed the fact that these days Matthias pretty much
is the entire fetchmail development team (or at least all of it you'll
see on the lists, I think some of the others are still around, if not
terribly active). This means that there isn't a lot of developer time
available, hence why you rarely see him on the lists.
You're welcome to try the original maintainer, ESR, but some of us
have been trying to get a response from him for literally years now :)
--
Please keep list traffic on the list.
Rob MacGregor
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he
doesn't become a monster. Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-31 10:36:54
|
Hi, On 7/28/06, Rob MacGregor <rob...@gm...> wrote: > You've probably missed the fact that these days Matthias pretty much > is the entire fetchmail development team (or at least all of it you'll > see on the lists, I think some of the others are still around, if not > terribly active). This means that there isn't a lot of developer time > available, hence why you rarely see him on the lists. Not so much 'missed' as 'didn't know'. My 'hurry up' e-mail was in no way intended to show dissatisfaction in the responses I was receiving, more a reminder to people that I was still interested in an answer. A simple 'I'll take a look at it when I have time' was all I was looking for. Cheers Andy |
|
From: Matthias A. <mat...@gm...> - 2006-07-31 10:46:56
|
"Andy Hawkins" <adh...@gm...> writes: > Hi, > > On 7/28/06, Rob MacGregor <rob...@gm...> wrote: >> You've probably missed the fact that these days Matthias pretty much >> is the entire fetchmail development team (or at least all of it you'll >> see on the lists, I think some of the others are still around, if not >> terribly active). This means that there isn't a lot of developer time >> available, hence why you rarely see him on the lists. > > Not so much 'missed' as 'didn't know'. > > My 'hurry up' e-mail was in no way intended to show dissatisfaction in > the responses I was receiving, more a reminder to people that I was > still interested in an answer. > > A simple 'I'll take a look at it when I have time' was all I was looking for. I'll take a look as my time permits. 8-) -- Matthias Andree |
|
From: Andy H. <adh...@gm...> - 2006-07-31 10:50:05
|
Hi, On 7/31/06, Matthias Andree <mat...@gm...> wrote: > I'll take a look as my time permits. > > 8-) That's all I can ask for :) Andy |
|
From: Rob M. <rob...@gm...> - 2006-07-17 18:23:33
|
On 7/17/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote:
>
> Should we continue this here for now, or move to there?
Here :-) Very few people watch the old lists. As far as I can tell
mostly only me.
> > On 7/17/06, Andy Hawkins <adh...@gm...> wrote:
> > Upgrade to 6.3.4
>
> Ok, didn't want to do that as it involves building from source, but
> I've done that now.
Great.
> > Spam messages almost never have a legit return address. All you'll
> > end up doing is annoying some poor innocent sod, and possibly becoming
> > a spam source yourself. Better to drop them on the floor.
>
> True, but I want legitimate mail (but with invalid addresses) to be
> bounced so that the sender knows they've got it wrong.
As long as you're aware of the risks. Keep an eye on the volume of
bounces. If/when people realise what you're doing they may target you
for a spam run (basically using you to "bounce" the spam to the
recipient).
That isn't theory - that's a pretty standard spam tactic.
> Below:
>
<---SNIP--->
> fetchmail: SMTP> RCPT TO:<yyy@yyy.yyy>
> fetchmail: SMTP< 550 unknown user
> fetchmail: SMTP error: 550 unknown user
> fetchmail: SMTP listener doesn't like recipient address `yyy@yyy.yyy'
> fetchmail: SMTP< 220 zzz.zzz.zzz ESMTP Exim 4.50 Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:15:41 +0100
> fetchmail: SMTP> HELO zzz.zzz.zzz
> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 zzz.zzz.zzz Hello localhost [127.0.0.1]
> fetchmail: SMTP> MAIL FROM:<>
> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 OK
> fetchmail: SMTP> RCPT TO:<xx...@xx...>
> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 Accepted
> fetchmail: SMTP> DATA
> fetchmail: SMTP< 354 Enter message, ending with "." on a line by itself
> fetchmail: SMTP: (bounce-message body)
> fetchmail: SMTP>. (EOM)
> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 OK id=1G2Uov-0005GD-HY
> fetchmail: SMTP> QUIT
> fetchmail: SMTP< 221 zzz.zzz.zzz closing connection
> fetchmail: SMTP> RCPT TO:<postmaster@zzz.zzz.zzz>
> fetchmail: SMTP< 250 Accepted
> fetchmail: no address matches; forwarding to postmaster.
<---SNIP--->
>
> It looks like it has sent a bounce, but still forwarded the mail to
> the postmaster.
Not sure why it did that - hopefully one of the maintainers will come
by and have an idea what's going on.
It wouldn't hurt to provide the output of "fetchmail --configdump" so
we can see what fetchmail thinks of it's config file.
--
Please keep list traffic on the list.
Rob MacGregor
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he
doesn't become a monster. Friedrich Nietzsche
|
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X