- dovecot - dovecot.org

dovecot director redirect some user to always same backend
by Tobi 22 Jan '16

22 Jan '16

Hello list I have a question on how to enforce certain user(s) always to the same backend in a dovecot setup with director. So I changed my passdb-mysql query SELECT password AS password, username AS destuser, 'Y' as proxy, (CASE username WHEN LIKE 'user' THEN '10.66.99.6' ELSE null END) as host from mailbox WHERE username = '%u' AND active = 1; But then I saw in the dovecot manual that the director does nothing if the passdb query already returns a host field. So I'm quite unsure whether a host field with value NULL means that the host field is not present and therefore the director should insert it into the result or not. Thanks tobi

2 1

Hypothetical feature suggestion
by Stephen Feyrer 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Hi, Assuming one sends an E-mail which in turn requires either an update or correction. The current practise is to send a subsequent E-mail with the new or corrected info. I would like to suggest a small feature. I recognise that this would require that the sending application would need to support this same feature. The sender should be able to edit a sent email, transmit a diff of the original and then the receiving mail store composite the changes into a new email. This could be with or without features to allow the review historic versions of said E-mail. Alternatively, regular expressions could be employed to achieve this effect (albeit, a more complex approach). This would provide a kind of Web 2 look on E-mail. -- Kind regards Stephen Feyrer

2 1

Help with sieve
by Joy 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Dear Experts, I am having following script which is working perfectly on 3 server but not working as expected on new server. I have updated latest sieve software compiled from source, In case i use fileinto to move mail to other folder it works perfectly .. require ["fileinto","imap4flags","envelope","body"]; #1 if allof (header :contains ["Subject"] ["test"] ){ setflag "\\Seen"; addflag "\\Flagged"; addflag "BUG"; }

2 1

Multiple Domains
by Doug Hardie 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

I have Dovecot 2.2.19 running. However, one client has a rather unusual need. There are multiple domains that currently access their mail on the server. However, this on domain/client wants to use a different port for their users to access mail. Anyone on the standard port trying to download mail would receive an invalid user error (or whatever the proper error for that is). Likewise, only this clients users could access their mail on the new port. Is this possible? — Doug

2 2

Configure the sendmail with the dovecot.
by Lucky . 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

Hi Dovecot team/All, First of all, I always appreciated your contribution & effort. Can you please provide the step for configure sendmail with dovecot. We could not understand the parameter which mention in sendmail.cf file. Please provide the parameter description as well as where need to change exactly in sendmail.cf file. Thanks and Regards, Lucky ============================================================================================================================ Disclaimer: This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may review the policy at http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html externally http://tim.techmahindra.com/tim/disclaimer.html internally within TechMahindra. ============================================================================================================================

3 4

dsync: loss of keywords in 2.2.13
by Benoit Branciard 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

After some tests, we found that "dsync backup" sometimes fails to copy all the IMAP "keywords" (labels) from the source mailbox to the backup one. Our Dovecot version is 2.2.13 (Debian Jessie package 1:2.2.13-12~deb8u1). We are migrating mailboxes from MBOX (with separate indexes) to MDBOX (with custom DIRNAME) format. The source mail_location is: mail_location = mbox:~/mail:INBOX=~/mail/INBOX:INDEX=/var/cache/dovecot/indexes/%16Hu/%u and the target: mail_location = mdbox:~/mdbox:DIRNAME=_@@_dbox-Mails_@@_ and we use the following dsync command to replicate (twice, a first "hot" run, and a second "cold" run with lda and user kicked off). dsync -o mail_access_groups=$mgroup -u "$login" backup "mdbox:$mdbhome/mdbox:DIRNAME=_@@_dbox-Mails_@@_" where $login is username, $mgroup is an UNIX group which has write access to the (temporary chowned/chmoded) mailbox, and $mdbhome is the new (MDBOX) user's home. It appears that some keywords get replicated, but some other do not. The only workaroud we found is to backup all keywords with "doveadm fetch 'mailbox uid flags' keywords '*'", an restore them on the new mailbox with "doveadm flags add". This solution yields no keyword loss. has this problem already been addressed ? -- Benoit BRANCIARD Service InfraStructures (SIS) Direction du Système d'Information et des Usages Numériques (DSIUN) Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne Centre Pierre Mendès France 90 rue de Tolbiac - 75634 Paris cedex 13 - France Bur. B406 - Tél +33 1 44 07 89 68 - Fax +33 1 44 07 89 66 Accueil: +33 1 44 07 89 65 - Assistance-DSIUN(a)univ-paris1.fr http://dsi.univ-paris1.fr

1 0

sieve and authentication
by Brendan Kearney 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

when i telnet to the sieve instance running with dovecot, i see that SASL is supported, but i cannot get thunderbird to connect to the sieve instance. it seems that i am not providing the right auth methods for sieve to work. "IMPLEMENTATION" "Dovecot Pigeonhole" "SIEVE" "fileinto reject envelope encoded-character vacation subaddress comparator-i;ascii-numeric relational regex imap4flags copy include variables body enotify environment mailbox date index ihave duplicate" "NOTIFY" "mailto" "SASL" "" "STARTTLS" "VERSION" "1.0" OK "Dovecot ready." i am setup with gssapi and pain auth mechanisms and want to leverage Kerberos / SASL for authentication. what do i need to enable (and where) to get sieve working in a MUA? i tried adding the digest-md5 mechanism to the auth_mechanisms directive, but that does not work with Kerberos (or maybe my implementation of Kerberos in my environment). any ideas where i should be looking? thanks brendan

3 2

remote | local blocks in protocol settings
by Nikolaos Milas 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

Hello, Where can I find detailed documentation on how "remote" & "local" blocks are used in protocol configuration to provide specific settings for particular IPs/Names? I've been searching around (wiki2, Google) but I found very few things. I also checked in the conf.d directory of the installation and couldn't find anything. One useful thread was here: http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2010-June/050069.html where we can read about the "filter" hierarchy: protocol name { remote <ip|name> { local <ip|name> { but I would really appreciate reading more complete documentation (and, hopefully, examples). Thanks, Nick

3 8

Re: remote | local blocks in protocol settings
by Joseph Tam 19 Jan '16

19 Jan '16

Nikolaos Milas <nmilas(a)noa.gr> wrote: >> ... >> Pragmatically, I set it high enough so that it meets the need of most >> clients, then deal with problems on a case by case basis >> ... > > Thank you very much Joseph for your quite useful advice and experience. > Are you monitoring using "doveadm who"? No, I occasionally look at log entries for "Maximum number of connections from user+IP exceeded" errors. I may look at the output of "doveadm who" if I want to see a breakdown of how many clients a user is using, or just getting an overall view of how my users are spread out. >>> 4. How can we set a different value to this directive for webmail >>> connections (coming from 127.0.0.1, ::1)? >> >> I don't know if there is another method, but at the very least, you >> can start another dovecot instance with another config file that does >> specific things for 127.0.0.1. > > I tried using a remote block for webmail, but without success yet. If you can get that working, that would be the better method. Running 2 different instances with 2 different config files might come in handy for cases where you have very different policies between localhost/remote networks. Joseph Tam <jtam.home(a)gmail.com>

1 0

Re: Increasing mail_max_userip_connections and sys resources
by Joseph Tam 19 Jan '16

19 Jan '16

> In our low-traffic server we have always kept the default value for IMAP > mail_max_userip_connections (10). > > The server has been working fine! (Thank you Timo for this!) > > However, recently we have been having: > > Maximum number of connections from user+IP exceeded > > errors both for IMAP and webmail users. > > Thus, we have now changed the value to 100. > > The questions: > > 1.Might this lead to overloading the server? > 2. Could another dovecot setting prevent the above setting from being > applied (e.g. due to connections exhaustion), i.e. should we also change > other setting(s)? > 3. What should we take into account when deciding the value for > mail_max_userip_connections? It depends on how many users you have, the number of simultaneous clients they use, and the #connections each client opens. Potentially, you could exhaust connection limits -- they usually don't max out memory or CPU or disk since most of the connections are idle. (There is a new IDLE hibernate feature that might help to minimize memory use by idle imap worker processes.) I haven't found a value that gets rid of users running into connection limits. If I set it to n, the next day someone will choke on n+1. This is a snapshot connections (count : #connections) which shows the typical decay: 25 1 14 2 14 3 7 4 9 5 1 6 2 7 1 8 1 10 Occasionally, some user's connection demand will spike and exceed the limit because - they started yat another client - they started global operation like searching - they're using a network that support roaming IP (I've tracked some users across the city on their bus ride.) Pragmatically, I set it high enough so that it meets the need of most clients, then deal with problems on a case by case basis (e.g. get them to lower their mail client's idle connection setting, or asking them to reduce the number of active clients by logging out). It also prevents what this setting was designed for: connection starvation by busy/buggy clients. Usually, hitting the limit doesn't produce problems as mail clients are smart enough to close idle connections or reuse them. If you only got a dozen users, setting it to 100 is feasible. If you got 1000 users, probably not. > 4. How can we set a different value to this directive for webmail > connections (coming from 127.0.0.1, ::1)? I don't know if there is another method, but at the very least, you can start another dovecot instance with another config file that does specific things for 127.0.0.1. Joseph Tam <jtam.home(a)gmail.com>

2 1