Hi; The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from < suzieprogrammer@gmail.com> qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remote suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success: 209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
@400000004b87b3d4338af434 status: local 0/10 remote 0/255
@400000004b87b3d4338d4dc4 end msg 97881462
[root qmail-send]# tail lock
[root qmail-send]# tail state
[root qmail-send]# ps wax|grep qmail
7759 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail-send
7761 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail-pop3d
7763 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail-smtpd
8011 pts/0 S+ 0:00 grep qmail
21589 ? S 0:00 qmail-send
21590 ? S 0:00 tcpserver -H -R -v -c100 0 110 qmail-popup mail.13gems.com /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw qmail-pop3d Maildir
21591 ? S 0:00 multilog t s100000 n20 /var/log/qmail/qmail-pop3d
21593 ? S 0:00 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -l mail.13gems.com-x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c 30 -u 508 -g 503 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd mail.13gems.com /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/bin/true
21595 ? S 0:00 multilog t s100000 n20 /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
21596 ? S 0:00 multilog t s100000 n20 /var/log/qmail/qmail-send
21597 ? S 0:00 qmail-lspawn ./Maildir
21598 ? S 0:00 qmail-rspawn
21601 ? S 0:00 qmail-clean
[root qmail-send]# qmailctl stat
/service/qmail-send: up (pid 21589) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-send/log: up (pid 21596) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-smtpd: up (pid 21593) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-smtpd/log: up (pid 21595) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-pop3d: up (pid 21590) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-pop3d/log: up (pid 21591) 60864 seconds
messages in queue: 0
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
Why? TIA, Susan
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
Hi; The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from suzieprogrammer@gmail.com qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remote suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success: 209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
remote end accepted message.
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
Why?
Remote smtp server is not working correctly or spamfilter on it kills message?
Note that it can take a bit time until gmail delivers it to mailbox.
-- Eero
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fiwrote:
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
Hi; The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from suzieprogrammer@gmail.com qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remote suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success:
209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
remote end accepted message.
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
Why?
Remote smtp server is not working correctly or spamfilter on it kills message?
No.
Note that it can take a bit time until gmail delivers it to mailbox.
Gmail's very quick and it's been an hour now. Usually takes a second. Another very strange thing about this is that the contact page refreshes to itself when I try to email (through the form elt). If I pull the email send stuff out of the script where the form goes, it doesn't refresh to itself; rather, it prints what is written in the script to print.
With respect to Kai's suggestion I find a qmail list, I'm sorry to say there don't appear to be ANY discussion lists for ANY email servers that are active. I'm desperate to get this working. TIA, Suzie
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fi wrote:
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
Hi; The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from suzieprogrammer@gmail.com qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remote suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success:
209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
remote end accepted message.
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
Why?
Remote smtp server is not working correctly or spamfilter on it kills message?
No.
Note that it can take a bit time until gmail delivers it to mailbox.
Gmail's very quick and it's been an hour now. Usually takes a second. Another very strange thing about this is that the contact page refreshes to itself when I try to email (through the form elt). If I pull the email send stuff out of the script where the form goes, it doesn't refresh to itself; rather, it prints what is written in the script to print. With respect to Kai's suggestion I find a qmail list, I'm sorry to say there don't appear to be ANY discussion lists for ANY email servers that are active. I'm desperate to get this working. TIA, Suzie
qmail is very old and not under development anymore. You should migrate your system to postfix. (if topic is unfamiliar, please use consult to perform this migration)
-- Eero, RHCE
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fiwrote:
qmail is very old and not under development anymore. You should migrate your system to postfix.
postfix isn't supported either. At least I have some experience with qmail. Susan
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fi wrote:
qmail is very old and not under development anymore. You should migrate your system to postfix.
postfix isn't supported either. At least I have some experience with qmail.
postfix has a very active mailing list -- the originator and primary developer, Wietse Venema,responds to posts quite often, as well as many other postfix experts.
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html
Susan _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Jeff jlar310@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fi wrote:
qmail is very old and not under development anymore. You should migrate your system to postfix.
postfix isn't supported either. At least I have some experience with
qmail.
postfix has a very active mailing list -- the originator and primary developer, Wietse Venema,responds to posts quite often, as well as many other postfix experts.
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either. Same with cr.yp.to's list. No. If they worked I'd be there. Here's my question again:
The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from < suzieprogrammer@gmail.com> qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remote suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success: 209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
@400000004b87b3d4338af434 status: local 0/10 remote 0/255
@400000004b87b3d4338d4dc4 end msg 97881462
[root qmail-send]# tail lock
[root qmail-send]# tail state
[root qmail-send]# ps wax|grep qmail
7759 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail-send
7761 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail-pop3d
7763 ? S 0:00 supervise qmail-smtpd
8011 pts/0 S+ 0:00 grep qmail
21589 ? S 0:00 qmail-send
21590 ? S 0:00 tcpserver -H -R -v -c100 0 110 qmail-popup mail.13gems.com/home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw qmail-pop3d Maildir
21591 ? S 0:00 multilog t s100000 n20 /var/log/qmail/qmail-pop3d
21593 ? S 0:00 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -l mail.13gems.com -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c 30 -u 508 -g 503 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd mail.13gems.com /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw /usr/bin/true
21595 ? S 0:00 multilog t s100000 n20 /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
21596 ? S 0:00 multilog t s100000 n20 /var/log/qmail/qmail-send
21597 ? S 0:00 qmail-lspawn ./Maildir
21598 ? S 0:00 qmail-rspawn
21601 ? S 0:00 qmail-clean
[root qmail-send]# qmailctl stat
/service/qmail-send: up (pid 21589) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-send/log: up (pid 21596) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-smtpd: up (pid 21593) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-smtpd/log: up (pid 21595) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-pop3d: up (pid 21590) 60864 seconds
/service/qmail-pop3d/log: up (pid 21591) 60864 seconds
messages in queue: 0
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
Why? TIA, Susan
Susan _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either. Same with cr.yp.to's list. No. If they worked I'd be there. Here's my question again: The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from suzieprogrammer@gmail.com qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remotesuzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success: 209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
Please stop spamming centos mailing list with same question.
As I said line "209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/" means that message is delivered to remote smtp server.
It's not your mailserver problem after that.
-- Eero
postfix has a very active mailing list -- the originator and primary developer, Wietse Venema,responds to posts quite often, as well as many other postfix experts.
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either. Same with cr.yp.to's list. No. If they worked I'd be there. Here's my question again:
Sorry, I do not see your post on the qmail list. Certainly not last week nor in January either.
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
postfix has a very active mailing list -- the originator and primary developer, Wietse Venema,responds to posts quite often, as well as many other postfix experts.
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either. Same with cr.yp.to's list. No. If they worked I'd be there. Here's my question again:
Sorry, I do not see your post on the qmail list. Certainly not last week nor in January either.
Nor any post on the postfix list for that matter according to the postfix list archive. Too much traffic for you to stay subscribed I bet.
Susan Day wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:25:38 -0400:
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either.
Maybe that's because of the nature of your questions. I get the impression that you are mostly asking very basic questions that a sysadmin *should* know or at least know how to google them up. I get the impression that you are not trying hard enough to understand your software. You cannot just throw any problem you encounter at the next list you find. For your last two questions (about the python script and this one which also seems to be related to a script you wrote or use) I get the impression that in both cases you simply may have bugs in the code or use it incorrectly. These are then not questions for a mailing list about the MTA nor for this list, but problems with your code and it might be more helpful to ask on a mailing list/newsgroup for coders of that language.
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Susan Day wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:25:38 -0400:
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either.
Maybe that's because of the nature of your questions. I get the impression that you are mostly asking very basic questions that a sysadmin *should* know or at least know how to google them up. I get the impression that you are not trying hard enough to understand your software. You cannot just throw any problem you encounter at the next list you find. For your last two questions (about the python script and this one which also seems to be related to a script you wrote or use) I get the impression that in both cases you simply may have bugs in the code or use it incorrectly. These are then not questions for a mailing list about the MTA nor for this list, but problems with your code and it might be more helpful to ask on a mailing list/newsgroup for coders of that language.
Give her a break. Programmers always have a hard time picking up on the system admin side of things. I have had my fights with programmers.
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Susan Day wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:25:38 -0400:
Sorry, but this has NOT been my experience. I just tried that list __last_week__ and __no__ responses, no activity, either.
Maybe that's because of the nature of your questions. I get the impression that you are mostly asking very basic questions that a sysadmin *should* know or at least know how to google them up. I get the
<snip>
Give her a break. Programmers always have a hard time picking up on the system admin side of things. I have had my fights with programmers.
I agree. I've spent a good bit more of my career as a programmer than as a sysadmin, and in both cases, I expect the system software to *work* as expected, and when it doesn't, I find it tends to be truly obscure errors that senior admins scratch their heads over.
mark
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:01:28 +0800:
Programmers always have a hard time picking up on the system admin side of things.
Still they should be able to find the best avenue for their questions, or not?
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:01:28 +0800:
Programmers always have a hard time picking up on the system admin side of things.
Still they should be able to find the best avenue for their questions, or not?
Fair question. But we don't have to imply certain things. Some people are just touchy not lazy. Hard to deal with the first and bring out the cane for the second when proven.
Of course, the clue-by-four should be brought at all times so that we can determine which it is.
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:33:17 +0800:
Fair question. But we don't have to imply certain things. Some people are just touchy not lazy. Hard to deal with the first and bring out the cane for the second when proven.
Well, just didn't want to see another qmail question from her next week ;-) And I think she understood, so that's "fair" with me.
Kai
Dear Susan,
Susan Day sent a missive on 2010-02-26:
Here's my question again:
The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
That's not a correct statement - your email does reach google as can be seen from your qmail log
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from suzieprogrammer@gmail.com qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remotesuzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success: 209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184 5 86_6si3416200pxi.53/
This ip address is google's and the remote host accepted the mail.
whois 209.85.216.35 [Querying whois.arin.net] [whois.arin.net] OrgName: Google Inc.
@400000004b87b3d4338af434 status: local 0/10 remote 0/255
@400000004b87b3d4338d4dc4 end msg 97881462
<<SNIP>>
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys. Also I think that if you are using a script to generate the email then ensure that you are creating the required headers and that your mail conforms to the rfc.
You can also try to send mail to your google address by hand i.e. telnet to google's mail platform on port 25 and mimic the smtp conversation by hand to see if you can get any further....
HTH
Simon.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
You can also try to send mail to your google address by hand i.e. telnet to google's mail platform on port 25 and mimic the smtp conversation by hand to see if you can get any further....
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
[root]# telnet mail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to mail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO mail.mydomain.com 250 mail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit 221 mail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]#
I didn't receive any message. Time for domainkeys? TIA, Susan
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
You can also try to send mail to your google address by hand i.e. telnet to google's mail platform on port 25 and mimic the smtp conversation by hand to see if you can get any further....
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
[root]# telnet mail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to mail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO mail.mydomain.com 250 mail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit 221 mail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]#
I didn't receive any message. Time for domainkeys? TIA, Susan
PS. These emails never reach my spam box, either!
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
You can also try to send mail to your google address by hand i.e. telnet to google's mail platform on port 25 and mimic the smtp conversation by hand to see if you can get any further....
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct: [root]# telnet mail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to mail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO mail.mydomain.com 250 mail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit 221 mail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]# I didn't receive any message. Time for domainkeys? TIA, Susan
PS. These emails never reach my spam box, either!
Well. Gmail can kill this kind of test messages and messages that look like spam. (messages with incorrect headers and so)
-- Eero
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
You can also try to send mail to your google address by hand i.e. telnet to google's mail platform on port 25 and mimic the smtp conversation by hand to see if you can get any further....
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
<snip>
PS. These emails never reach my spam box, either!
I'm not really up on it, but it looks good to me. At this point, it *looks* like it's in google's ballpark, Suzie. Time to contact their support, and ask wtfo.
mark
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:57 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
You can also try to send mail to your google address by hand i.e. telnet to google's mail platform on port 25 and mimic the smtp conversation by hand to see if you can get any further....
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
<snip> > PS. These emails never reach my spam box, either!
I'm not really up on it, but it looks good to me. At this point, it *looks* like it's in google's ballpark, Suzie. Time to contact their support, and ask wtfo.
Thanks, all Suzie
On Feb 26, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com wrote:
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
[root]# telnet mail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to mail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO mail.mydomain.com 250 mail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit 221 mail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]#
You didn't create a body to your email!
The proper way to send an email through SMTP is:
DATA 354 go ahead From: "Susan Day" suzie@mydomain.com To: "Susan Day" susieprogrammer@gmail.com Subject: Test
This is a test only a test. . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit
-Ross
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Ross Walker rswwalker@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 26, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com wrote:
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
[root]# telnet http://mail.mydomain.commail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to http://mail.mydomain.commail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 http://mail.mydomain.commail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO http://mail.mydomain.commail.mydomain.com 250 http://mail.mydomain.commail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.comsuzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.comsuzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit 221 http://mail.mydomain.commail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]#
You didn't create a body to your email!
The proper way to send an email through SMTP is:
DATA 354 go ahead From: "Susan Day" suzie@mydomain.com To: "Susan Day" susieprogrammer@gmail.com Subject: Test
This is a test only a test. . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit
Well I tried again and no it didn't come through. TIA, Susan
Suzie wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Ross Walker rswwalker@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 26, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com wrote:
I've not done this before. Here's what I did. Please see if this looks correct:
<snip>
You didn't create a body to your email!
The proper way to send an email through SMTP is:
DATA 354 go ahead From: "Susan Day" suzie@mydomain.com To: "Susan Day" susieprogrammer@gmail.com Subject: Test
This is a test only a test. . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432 quit
Well I tried again and no it didn't come through.
And it's not showing when you log into gmail? Then as I said, you need to contact gmail support.
mark
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34:34AM -0400, Susan Day wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
SPF & Co. is a reaction to spam proliferation. You'd better thank the spammers. :-)
Mihai
Mihai T. Lazarescu wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34:34AM -0400, Susan Day wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Simon Billis simon@houxou.com wrote:
Why?
That is a good question - I "guess" that google's email system thinks you're sending them spam. If you want your mail to be accepted you may need to have implemented SPF and domainkeys.
Oh, lovely. As if I didn't have enough work to do...Thanks, google.
SPF & Co. is a reaction to spam proliferation. You'd better thank the spammers. :-)
Yes, I think they would love to get a nuke for a gift.
From: Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
[root]# telnet mail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to mail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO mail.mydomain.com 250 mail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432
quit
221 mail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]# I didn't receive any message. Time for domainkeys?
Hum... maybe Google checks if the reverse dns matches... Or maybe check http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax
JD
Hi Sue,
From: Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
[root]# telnet mail.mydomain.com 25 Trying 209.216.9.56... Connected to mail.mydomain.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.mydomain.com ESMTP HELO mail.mydomain.com 250 mail.mydomain.com MAIL FROM suzie@mydomain.com 250 ok RCPT TO suzieprogrammer@gmail.com 250 ok DATA testing 354 go ahead . 250 ok 1267194591 qp 11432
quit
221 mail.mydomain.com Connection closed by foreign host. [root]# I didn't receive any message. Time for domainkeys?
Hum... maybe Google checks if the reverse dns matches... Or maybe check http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax
JD
From earlier posts you will have seen that you need to create the headers
correctly in the body part of the email (just after you entered in DATA). Also do not spoof the domain in the helo portion either.... your email MUST be valid in every way or it WILL be discarded by the anti-spam measures. Also if you continue to send "spam" to their servers you WILL become black listed and then even legitimate email will not be delivered.
If you implement SPF make sure that you get it right or your mail will be blocked.... there are plenty of spf checkers out there.
Finally, I would not send mail to service providers like hotmail or google until I had my script emailing my local domain correctly.... at least when you send mail to your localdomain, you're in control of the reception as well as the transmission.
Good luck
Simon.
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fi wrote:
qmail is very old and not under development anymore. You should migrate your system to postfix.
postfix isn't supported either. At least I have some experience with qmail. Susan
Postfix is under active development, qmail is not developed anymore by original author.
If you want live with qmail, maybe you can use consult to solve your problems with qmail.
-- Eero
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 08:57 -0400, Susan Day wrote:
<snip>
With respect to Kai's suggestion I find a qmail list, I'm sorry to say there don't appear to be ANY discussion lists for ANY email servers that are active. I'm desperate to get this working. TIA, Suzie
How about
qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to
There is also a postfix list as well.
Cheers, B.J.
CentOS 5.4, Linux 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5 athlon 08:13:27 up 4 days, 11:53, 1 user, load average: 0.30, 0.27, 0.24
B.J. McClure wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 08:57 -0400, Susan Day wrote:
<snip>
With respect to Kai's suggestion I find a qmail list, I'm sorry to say there don't appear to be ANY discussion lists for ANY email servers that are active. I'm desperate to get this working. TIA, Suzie
How about
qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to
That would be the wrong list. qmail@list.cr.yp.to would the correct one. Send email to qmail-subscribe@list.cr.yp.to to subscribe.
Susan Day wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fiwrote:
2010/2/26 Susan Day suzieprogrammer@gmail.com:
Hi; The following message appears to have been sent, but in fact never does reach their destination:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
@400000004b87b3d3392cbddc new msg 97881462
@400000004b87b3d3392cc5ac info msg 97881462: bytes 531 from suzieprogrammer@gmail.com qp 23629 uid 508
@400000004b87b3d33b7f700c starting delivery 4: msg 97881462 to remote suzieprogrammer@gmail.com
@400000004b87b3d33b7f7bc4 status: local 0/10 remote 1/255
@400000004b87b3d4338aec64 delivery 4: success:
209.85.216.35_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_2.0.0_OK_1267184586_6si3416200pxi.53/
remote end accepted message.
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
Why?
Remote smtp server is not working correctly or spamfilter on it kills message?
No.
How do you know? Remote end accepted responsibility. If it does not get delivered, it is their problem.
Note that it can take a bit time until gmail delivers it to mailbox.
Gmail's very quick and it's been an hour now. Usually takes a second.
Check spam box. Contact gmail postmaster. Nothing to do with the qmail installation.
Another very strange thing about this is that the contact page refreshes to itself when I try to email (through the form elt). If I pull the email send stuff out of the script where the form goes, it doesn't refresh to itself; rather, it prints what is written in the script to print.
With respect to Kai's suggestion I find a qmail list, I'm sorry to say there don't appear to be ANY discussion lists for ANY email servers that are active. I'm desperate to get this working.
You are mistaken. The qmail list and the postfix list are very much active. Only sendmail does not have a discussion list.
Susan Day wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 08:21:01 -0400:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
Hello, I would appreciate if you could stop to send all your software problems to this list. Most of your problems seem to be qmail-related, please go to a qmail list for these. Thanks.
Kai
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:32:46PM +0100, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Susan Day wrote on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 08:21:01 -0400:
[root qmail-send]# tail current
Hello, I would appreciate if you could stop to send all your software problems to this list. Most of your problems seem to be qmail-related, please go to a qmail list for these. Thanks.
Kai
And please, stop send mails with html encoding.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Dominik Zyla gavroche@gavroche.pl wrote:
And please, stop send mails with html encoding.
-- Dominik Zyla
No, do not stop sending emails with HTML encoding.
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
Brian Mathis wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Dominik Zyla gavroche@gavroche.pl wrote:
And please, stop send mails with html encoding.
-- Dominik Zyla
No, do not stop sending emails with HTML encoding.
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
Do we have to get into this one? Wave to all the mutt users who just love html tags. Oh, also we should follow the rules of the list so I suppose you can tell me where it says use html on this list and get a capable reader if you do not have one.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Dominik Zyla gavroche@gavroche.pl wrote:
And please, stop send mails with html encoding.
No, do not stop sending emails with HTML encoding.
Yes, *DO* stop.
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
Why, so it can spread viruses and trojans easily?
mark, who has all his mail readers set to plain text, and NO SCRIPTING EVER
Brian Mathis wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Dominik Zyla <gavroche@gavroche.pl mailto:gavroche@gavroche.pl> wrote:
And please, stop send mails with html encoding.No, do not stop sending emails with HTML encoding.
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
no thanks, not on this list http://centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16
On 26/02/2010 15:32, Brian Mathis wrote:
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
Hahahaha. I don't even have X, please can you suggest a mail reader?
Geerd-Dietger Hoffmann wrote:
On 26/02/2010 15:32, Brian Mathis wrote:
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
Hahahaha. I don't even have X, please can you suggest a mail reader?
That's strange. Your mail headers say that not only do you have a graphical email client, you are specifically using Thunderbird 3.0.2 to read email. Which since I use it myself, I know displays HTML emails just fine.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100216 Thunderbird/3.0.2
On Saturday, February 27, 2010 06:46 AM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
Geerd-Dietger Hoffmann wrote:
On 26/02/2010 15:32, Brian Mathis wrote:
Welcome to the second decade of the 21st century. We may not have flying cars or found the monolith on the moon yet, but at least we can have proportional fonts with word wrap and basic formatting like bold and italics. If your mail reader can't handle it, get a new one that can.
Hahahaha. I don't even have X, please can you suggest a mail reader?
That's strange. Your mail headers say that not only do you have a graphical email client, you are specifically using Thunderbird 3.0.2 to read email. Which since I use it myself, I know displays HTML emails just fine.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100216 Thunderbird/3.0.2
You know, technically, he is right. Unless he installed X, he really does not have X on his Mac OS X box. Thunderbird on Mac OS X is not compiled against X.
He is just having some fun.
-
B.J. McClure -
Benjamin Franz -
Brian Mathis -
Chan Chung Hang Christopher -
Christopher Chan
-
Dominik Zyla -
Eero Volotinen -
Geerd-Dietger Hoffmann -
Jeff -
John Doe -
Kai Schaetzl -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Mihai T. Lazarescu -
Nicolas Thierry-Mieg -
Ross Walker -
Simon Billis -
Susan Day