- dovecot - dovecot.org

[Dovecot] Date sort-order ignoring timezone, and a few Q's.
by Stuart Henderson 11 Jul '03

11 Jul '03

Timo, thanks for writing and releasing Dovecot. I've recently discovered it and have been very impressed at the speed and balance between flexibility and simplicity. I had to make a packet-trace to be sure that encryption with OpenSSL was working correctly, since it all 'just worked' first time without complex configuration, which I don't think I've ever seen before ;-) LDAP too was quite straightforward (after I worked out where my virtual-domain schema differed from what was required). One small glitch I have noticed is that when the client requests a list of messages sorted by date, the timezone is ignored. For example, listed in descending order: 07/07/2003 00:01 +0300 (= 21:01 UT) 06/07/2003 23:15 +0100 (= 22:15 UT) 06/07/2003 19:03 +0100 (= 18:03 UT) I think that this should instead be... 06/07/2003 23:15 +0100 (= 22:15 UT) 07/07/2003 00:01 +0300 (= 21:01 UT) 06/07/2003 19:03 +0100 (= 18:03 UT) It's most noticable when the client (Mulberry in my case) is configured to display all times in the local timezone. (Mulberry has recently added custom flags which work perfectly with Dovecot - I was hoping this would be the case, and was one of the reasons I was looking for something to replace the version of Courier I previously had installed). Mulberry does like to have NAMESPACE otherwise it usually asks for folder locations on connecting, btw. No real problem, though. A little tip: if anyone is interested in having their MDA write Maildir with CR+LF so that sendfile(2) can be used on all messages (not just those created by Dovecot), Exim offers this natively by adding the "use_crlf" option to the appendfile transport which seems to work fine with 0.99.10 (though not 0.99.9.1, maybe because of 2003-06-04 17:39 in Changelog). It seems Dovecot is using the ,W= Maildir tag for some type of size instead of ,S= but I haven't traced far enough to work out what exactly W/virtual_size means, am I right in guessing that it might be 'wire size' i.e. message-size-with-CRLF-line-endings? (If so, use_crlf in exim.conf can be augmented with "maildir_tag = ,W=$message_size" to help keep overheads to a minimum). And, one final question: for a dual-stack machine to listen on both IPv6 and IPv4 sockets, is the currently preferred option simply to start two instances of Dovecot with their own dovecot.conf containing different *_listen parameters? --Stu

5 23

[Dovecot] Re: Uncaught bounce notification
by Timo Sirainen 09 Jul '03

09 Jul '03

Lots of bounces from you, I'm moving this subscription to new address.. On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 22:15, mailman-bounces(a)procontrol.fi wrote: > The attached message was received as a bounce, but either the bounce > format was not recognized, or no member addresses could be extracted > from it. This mailing list has been configured to send all > unrecognized bounce messages to the list administrator(s). > > For more information see: > http://procontrol.fi/cgi-bin/mailman/admin/dovecot/bounce > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > From: Joburg_Notes1 <Joburg_Notes1(a)icoc.org> > To: dovecot-bounces(a)procontrol.fi > Subject: Re: [Dovecot] LDAP bind questions > Date: 09 Jul 2003 21:13:31 +0200 > > Your email to Leslie Viljoen has been forwarded to his new email address: > lesliev(a)icoc.co.za. Please use this address in future! > > Thanks, > Leslie >

2 3

[Dovecot] Concerns switching from Courier to Dovecot
by marcotte＠panix.com 09 Jul '03

09 Jul '03

[ I'm posting this again since I wasn't subscribed to the list when I first posted. I'm sorry if this gets posted twice] I was considering replacing Courier-IMAP with dovecot in the future, but have some concerns. I realize that some things simply haven't been finished yet like quotas, but some other things may prevent me from using dovecot as a drop in replacement in the future. Subfolders have different names in the file system. A folder (INBOX.subfolder) is named ".subfolder" in Courier, but "INBOX.subfolder" in dovecot. I can't simply rename all the subfolders, because our customers have direct access to the maildirs, and write to it directly with procmail and mail clients like mutt. Certain files have different names, but contain the same information. For example, the subscription lists and UID files look the same to me but have different names. I suppose they could be converted, but this would make it difficult to run both IMAP servers side-by-side, which I'd like to do until dovecot has all the features I need. I also heard talk of the hierarchy separator being changed from "." to "/". Now, is it possible configuration options could be added to allow for better Courier compatibility? I would be willing to help with this. Thanks! -- - Brian

4 4

Re: [Dovecot] Date sort-order ignoring timezone, and a few Q's.
by Stuart Henderson 09 Jul '03

09 Jul '03

>> One small glitch I have noticed is that when the client requests a >> list of messages sorted by date, the timezone is ignored. > > It's not ignored, I just recently "fixed" it. Now it's properly fixed > :) Heheh.. Yes, I confirm that. (: >> It seems Dovecot is using the ,W= Maildir tag for some type of size >> instead of ,S= but I haven't traced far enough to work out what >> exactly W/virtual_size means, am I right in guessing that it might >> be 'wire size' >> i.e. message-size-with-CRLF-line-endings? > > Yes. S means the actual size of the file, W is the size with CRs. Thanks, that's good. >> And, one final question: for a dual-stack machine to listen on both >> IPv6 and IPv4 sockets, is the currently preferred option simply to >> start two instances of Dovecot with their own dovecot.conf >> containing different *_listen parameters? > > Currently, yes. I'll probably add support for multiple listening > sockets per server some day. There is no problem to have two instances running, though it might be more admin-friendly to allow the listen addresses to be supplied on the command-line, since it would save maintaining a second config file (and I imagine this would be easier for you than changing the socket code), but this is quite a low priority I think.

1 0

[Dovecot] search throwing "Sequence out of range"
by Stuart Henderson 09 Jul '03

09 Jul '03

Mulberry client-side message filtering can be persuaded to search for a nonexistent message ... <tag> UID SEARCH UNSEEN UNDELETED UNDRAFT 12 (OR FROM "Cron Daemon <sthen(a)eeyore.37.spacehopper.org>" SUBJECT "Cron <sthen@wide> /home/sthen/pingme") Dovecot 0.99.10 returns this ... <tag> NO Sequence out of range: 12 I *think* the correct behaviour here is to return a null set of search results and avoid the error message in the client. i.e. * SEARCH <tag> OK Certainly this is how other servers seem to work, and my understanding of the next paragraph from IMAP4REV1 RFC seems to backs this up (though the wording in the RFC isn't 100% clear to me) "Message set ranges are permitted; however, there is no guarantee that unique identifiers be contiguous. A non-existent unique identifier within a message set range is ignored without any error message generated." it's not Mulberry's fault that it sent this immediately after deleting message 12, since on closer investigation this is exactly what my filter rules are asking it to do because I forgot to set "stop if matched", however it would be helpful to change sometime since I'm sure I'm not the only person to have done that (-: of course I've fixed my filters now, so it isn't a high priority for me. Commented protocol log follows, it's not really any more information than above though. --> #4.364 Tue Jul 8 12:54:19 2003 A00448 STATUS INBOX (MESSAGES RECENT UNSEEN UIDVALIDITY UIDNEXT) * STATUS "INBOX" (MESSAGES 0 RECENT 0 UIDNEXT 1 UIDVALIDITY 1052370612 UNSEEN 0) A00448 OK Status completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01259 NOOP * 12 EXISTS * 3 RECENT A01259 OK NOOP completed. ... incoming mail ... --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01260 FETCH 12 (FLAGS RFC822.SIZE UID INTERNALDATE ENVELOPE BODYSTRUCTURE) * 12 FETCH (UID 140 FLAGS (\Recent) INTERNALDATE "08-Jul-2003 12:54:36 +0100" RFC822.SIZE 2372 BODYSTRUCTURE ("text" "plain" ("charset" "us-ascii") NIL NIL "7bit" 0 0 NIL NIL NIL) ENVELOPE ("Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:00:11 +0000" "***SPAM*** I wish I could be there" (("Kieth Hairston" NIL "kiethhairston_ji" "sedona.net")) (("Kieth Hairston" NIL "kiethhairston_ji" "sedona.net")) (("Kieth Hairston" NIL "kiethhairston_ji" "sedona.net")) ((NIL NIL "stu" "spacehopper.org")) NIL NIL NIL "<d1d801c34548$6364549c$6e8ec7ab@0aqdi32>")) A01260 OK Fetch completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01261 SORT (DATE) us-ascii ALL * SORT 9 1 2 8 3 4 5 6 7 11 10 12 A01261 OK Sort completed. ... filter rule #1 ... --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01262 UID SEARCH UNSEEN UNDELETED UNDRAFT 12 SUBJECT "***SPAM***" * SEARCH 140 A01262 OK Search completed. ... ok, it's junk, we want it marked seen/deleted and placed in another folder ... --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01263 UID STORE 140 +FLAGS (\Seen) * 12 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen \Recent) UID 140) A01263 OK Store completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01264 UID STORE 140 +FLAGS (\Deleted) * 12 FETCH (FLAGS (\Deleted \Seen \Recent) UID 140) A01264 OK Store completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:19 2003 A01265 UID COPY 140 "ZZ spam" A01265 OK Copy completed. --> #1.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:20 2003 A00087 STATUS "ZZ spam" (MESSAGES RECENT UNSEEN UIDVALIDITY UIDNEXT) * STATUS "ZZ spam" (MESSAGES 1 RECENT 1 UIDNEXT 2 UIDVALIDITY 1057513495 UNSEEN 0) A00087 OK Status completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:20 2003 A01266 UID STORE 140 +FLAGS (\Deleted) * 12 FETCH (FLAGS (\Deleted \Seen \Recent) UID 140) A01266 OK Store completed. ... and expunge this message (only) from the inbox: Mulberry checks so that it can keep any other deleted messages in the folder intact ... --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:20 2003 A01267 UID SEARCH DELETED * SEARCH 140 A01267 OK Search completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:20 2003 A01268 EXPUNGE * 12 EXPUNGE A01268 OK Expunge completed. --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:20 2003 A01269 SORT (DATE) us-ascii ALL * SORT 9 1 2 8 3 4 5 6 7 11 10 A01269 OK Sort completed. ... and on to filter rule #2 ... --> #2.364 Tue Jul 8 12:55:20 2003 A01270 UID SEARCH UNSEEN UNDELETED UNDRAFT 12 (OR FROM "Cron Daemon <sthen(a)eeyore.37.spacehopper.org>" SUBJECT "Cron <sthen@wide> /home/sthen/pingme") A01270 NO Sequence out of range: 12

2 2

[Dovecot] LDAP bind questions
by Jared 09 Jul '03

09 Jul '03

Hello, I've got dovecot set up to authenticate against our LDAP server. So far seems to work well. I have two concerns that I haven't been able to find answers for in the documentation or archives. Is there any intention to support "authentication binds" so you don't have to bind as a user with read privileges to everyone's userPassword attribute? For security purposes I'd like to see this functionality. And my next concern would become a non-issue if the above was supported, but is there a way to set the dnpass equal to a SSHA password? When I try setting it like this: dnpass = {SSHA}VhxqnmwCLVQj7g3rQV+g9F3XnaJ6bRXR in dovecot-ldap.conf It still tries to do a simple bind and fails. I get this error: dovecot-auth: LDAP: ldap_simple_bind_s() failed \ (dn cn=authadmin,ou=people,dc=domain,dc=com): Invalid credentials I'd prefer not to have the password for the authentication admin user stored in plain text in the conf file. Thanks, -jared

4 6

[Dovecot] Auth problems against Eudora
by Lars Clausen 06 Jul '03

06 Jul '03

Hi, I'm trying to set up dovecot to do pop3 from Eudora, but it keeps breaking on authentication attempts using plain auth. When I snoop the connection with tcpflow, here's what I see: 128.174.246.068.00110-062.107.004.050.49653: +OK dovecot ready. 128.174.246.068.00110-062.107.004.050.49653: +OK dovecot ready. 128.174.246.068.00110-062.107.004.050.49653: 062.107.004.050.49653-128.174.246.068.00110: CAPA 128.174.246.068.00110-062.107.004.050.49653: +OK CAPA TOP USER UIDL RESP-CODES STLS SASL PLAIN DIGEST-MD5 . 062.107.004.050.49653-128.174.246.068.00110: auth plain AG1p2YtlQBebz12YmXQ 128.174.246.068.00110-062.107.004.050.49653: -ERR Unsupported authentication mechanism. It seems to me that sending 'auth plain <MD5>' is against the RFCs (1734, 2195, 1939). What can be done about this? I'm also curious why MD5 auth is not allowed for shadow passwords whenthat has been standard on Linux for a while now. Or am I missing something? Thanks in advance, -Lars -- Lars Clausen (http://shasta.cs.uiuc.edu/~lrclause)| Hårdgrim of Numenor "I do not agree with a word that you say, but I |---------------------------- will defend to the death your right to say it." | Where are we going, and --Evelyn Beatrice Hall paraphrasing Voltaire | what's with the handbasket?

2 1

[Dovecot] "Internal Error" from maildirs (new user)
by Sean 'Shaleh' Perry 05 Jul '03

05 Jul '03

I decided to give dovecot a try this morning. To create a test system I copied mail from my wife and myself into /var/spool/imap. This mail was already in maildir format from our mail clients. I set the mail env to maildir:/var/spool/imap/%u. Below is a session (via telnet): <begin> . OK Logged in. . list "" * * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "blackbox" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "blackbox-devel" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-devel" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-dpkg" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-ipv6" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-laptop" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-legal" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-lint" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-mentors" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-policy" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-private" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-publicity" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-python" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-qa" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-release" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-security" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-spi" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-testing" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-user" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-vote" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "drafts" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "lsb-impl" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "bad" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "lsb-test" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "maradns" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "narval" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "python-list" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "sent-mail" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "spam" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "storage" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "trash" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "xdg" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "outbox" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "bf-python" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "debian-bug" * LIST (\UnMarked) "." "python-tutor" * LIST (\Marked) "." "INBOX" . OK List completed. . select inbox . NO Internal error [2003-07-04 10:50:51] . examine inbox . NO Internal error [2003-07-04 10:52:22] . examine bad * NO Couldn't use index files * FLAGS (\Answered \Flagged \Deleted \Seen \Draft) * OK [PERMANENTFLAGS ()] Read-only mailbox. * 0 EXISTS * 0 RECENT * OK [UIDVALIDITY 1057341147] UIDs valid * OK [UIDNEXT 1] Predicted next UID . OK [READ-ONLY] Select completed. <end> I can find no cause of the inbox error in any log. Suggestions? All of my sub folders come back as read only (even when I use select). I presume this is a permissions issue. What should the perms be? I am using 0.99.10 from Debian if it matters.

2 2

[Dovecot] NetBSD Support
by Charlie Allom 03 Jul '03

03 Jul '03

Timo, you can safely update the NetBSD support from 1.5 to 1.5, 1.6 and 2.0 (-current/1.7). C. -- charlie(a)rubberduck.com - Melbourne, Australia http://rubberduck.com/~yeled/ PGP: 0x14AA7941 || finger yeled(a)lazy.spodder.com

4 4

RE: [Dovecot] 0.99.10 released
by Maikel Verheijen 02 Jul '03

02 Jul '03

Hi Timo (and list :) > No bug reports since rc4, so here it is. [snip] One small question: How far is nfs safety implemented now? You did a lot of work on nfs-safety for the index files, how about the other files? And does it need specific configure options? Thank you for this release though, I will have a look at it tonight ;-) Kind regards, Maikel Verheijen.

3 5