October 2011 - dovecot

[Dovecot] 2.0.14 doveadm proxy list segfault
by Tom Pawlowski 09 Feb '12

09 Feb '12

Hi Timo, Periodic segfaults with doveadm proxy list: root@director1:~) doveadm proxy list doveadm(root): Error: LIST failed: Disconnected Segmentation fault (core dumped) Sometimes it's just the 'LIST failed' error, other times it's the error with the segfault. Usually the first attempt to call it works, subsequent attempts fail. I've attached a strace log of it in action. -- Tom Pawlowski OIT-CSS System Administrator office: Hill 147 email: tompru(a)jla.rutgers.edu phone: (732) 445-2634

2 1

[Dovecot] movming mail out of alt storage
by Micah Anderson 31 Jan '12

31 Jan '12

I moved some mail into the alt storage: doveadm altmove -u johnd(a)example.com seen savedbefore 1w and now I want to move it back to the regular INBOX, but I can't see how I can do that with either 'altmove' or 'mailbox move'. thanks! micah --

3 5

[Dovecot] compressed mboxes very slow
by kjonca＠o2.pl 28 Jan '12

28 Jan '12

I have some archive mails in gzipped mboxes. I could use them with dovecot 1.x without problems. But recently I have installed dovecot 2.0.12, and they are slow. very slow. Creating index files takes about 10 minutes for ~20M file with 560 messages for bzipped mbox, for gzipped is little better but still unusable :( Stracing dovecot process shows that every ~ 20 messages it rereads complete mbox file. Am I doing something wrong? KJ -- http://modnebzdury.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/niewiarygodny-list-prof-majewsk…

4 13

[Dovecot] Dovecot crashes totally
by Gordon Grubert 18 Jan '12

18 Jan '12

Hello, our dovecot server crashes totally without any really useful log messages. The error log can be found in the attachment. The only way to get dovecot running again is a complete system restart. Dovecot version: 2:2.0.15-0~auto+5 (2.0.15 (6b7242ead6ed)) Configuration : see attachment OS : Debian Squeeze amd64 Dovecot source : http://xi.rename-it.nl/debian/ \ stable-auto/dovecot-2.0 main This problem has already occurred with the version 2.0.13 where the log says as few as the current logs :-( Best regards, Gordon -- Leiter AG Technische Infrastruktur und Basisdienste Universitaetsrechenzentrum (URZ) E.-M.-Arndt-Universitaet Greifswald Felix-Hausdorff-Str. 12 17489 Greifswald Germany Tel. +49 3834 86-1456 Fax. +49 3834 86-1401

3 3

[Dovecot] Mail lost - maybe a bug???
by Marco Carcano 21 Dec '11

21 Dec '11

Hello everybody I'm struggling against what seems a really serious trouble: sometimes mail get lost I did all the possible checks, but they seems really lost - I know is absurd, but it seems so it has been noticed by two users on my server: intially I tought that was their mistake (mail deleted, mail into spam, ecc), but it wasn't I deeply checked mail logs, and it seems that mail are delivered (the path is postfix->amavis->dovecotlda) - log files says that messages are delivered, but sometimes we lost a message. I also tried to get into the Maildir and grep the subject of the lost email: if it was addressed to more recipients I'm able to get it on some of them, but not to all (look at the example below) I hope I have clearly explained everything, otherwise let me knowmydomain now an extract from the log file: Oct 27 11:20:29 srv001 postfix/smtpd[24562]: connect from usstlz- psecap06.emerson.com[144.191.128.17] Oct 27 11:20:30 srv001 postfix/smtpd[24562]: CE0B74E4A9F: client=usstlz-psecap06.emerson.com[144.191.128.17] Oct 27 11:20:31 srv001 postfix/cleanup[25157]: CE0B74E4A9F: warning: header Subject: =?utf-8?B? RW1lcnNvbiBHbG9iYWwgVXNlcnMgRXhjaGFuZ2UgMjAxMiBpbiBEw7xzc2VsZG9yZiA6IFJlaWNoZW4gU2llIGpldHp0IElocmUgUHLDpHNlbnRhdGlvbmVuIGVpbg ==?= from usstlz-psecap06.emerson.com[144.191.128.17]; from=<Emerson.News(a)emersonprocess.com > to=<oil(a)mydomain.ch> proto=ESMTP helo=<USSTLZ-PSECAP06.EMERSON.COM> Oct 27 11:20:31 srv001 postfix/cleanup[25157]: CE0B74E4A9F: message- id=<e9447410-51fe-45ff-b624-197840b9a862(a)usstlz-pinfez02.emrsn.org> Oct 27 11:20:31 srv001 postfix/qmgr[11827]: CE0B74E4A9F: from=<Emerson.News(a)emersonprocess.com >, size=22689, nrcpt=3 (queue active) Oct 27 11:20:33 srv001 dovecot: imap(lromano): Disconnected: Logged out bytes=632/34319 Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/smtpd[25162]: connect from localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1] Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/smtpd[25162]: B16284E4AA2: client=localhost.localdomain[127.0.0.1] Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/cleanup[25157]: B16284E4AA2: message- id=<e9447410-51fe-45ff-b624-197840b9a862(a)usstlz-pinfez02.emrsn.org> Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/qmgr[11827]: B16284E4AA2: from=<Emerson.News(a)emersonprocess.com >, size=23094, nrcpt=3 (queue active) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 amavis[22923]: (22923-01) Passed CLEAN, [144.191.128.17] [155.177.20.144] <Emerson.News(a)emersonprocess.com> -> <user1(a)mydomain.local>,<user2(a)mydomain.local>,<user3(a)mydomain.local>, Message-ID: <e9447410-51fe-45ff-b624-197840b9a862(a)usstlz-pinfez02.emrsn.org >, mail_id: 6rtF4927FAjt, Hits: -0.518, size: 22687, queued_as: B16284E4AA2, 3293 ms Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/lmtp[25158]: CE0B74E4A9F: to=<user1(a)mydomain.local >, orig_to=<oil(a)mydomain.ch>, relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024, delay=4.2, delays=0.95/0.01/0.01/3.3, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 from MTA([127.0.0.1]:10025): 250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as B16284E4AA2) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/lmtp[25158]: CE0B74E4A9F: to=<user2(a)mydomain.local >, orig_to=<oil(a)mydomain.ch>, relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024, delay=4.2, delays=0.95/0.01/0.01/3.3, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 from MTA([127.0.0.1]:10025): 250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as B16284E4AA2) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/lmtp[25158]: CE0B74E4A9F: to=<user3(a)mydomain.local >, orig_to=<oil(a)mydomain.ch>, relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024, delay=4.2, delays=0.95/0.01/0.01/3.3, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 from MTA([127.0.0.1]:10025): 250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as B16284E4AA2) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/qmgr[11827]: CE0B74E4A9F: removed Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 dovecot: lda(user1): msgid=<e9447410-51fe-45ff-b624-197840b9a862(a)usstlz-pinfez02.emrsn.org >: saved mail to INBOX Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/pipe[25165]: B16284E4AA2: to=<user1(a)mydomain.local >, relay=dovecot, delay=0.04, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0.02, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via dovecot service) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 dovecot: lda(user2): msgid=<e9447410-51fe-45ff-b624-197840b9a862(a)usstlz-pinfez02.emrsn.org >: saved mail to INBOX Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/pipe[25168]: B16284E4AA2: to=<user2(a)mydomain.local >, relay=dovecot, delay=0.04, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0.02, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via dovecot service) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 dovecot: lda(user3): msgid=<e9447410-51fe-45ff-b624-197840b9a862(a)usstlz-pinfez02.emrsn.org >: saved mail to INBOX Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/pipe[25170]: B16284E4AA2: to=<user3(a)mydomain.local >, relay=dovecot, delay=0.05, delays=0.01/0.02/0/0.02, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via dovecot service) Oct 27 11:20:34 srv001 postfix/qmgr[11827]: B16284E4AA2: removed Oct 27 11:20:36 srv001 postfix/smtpd[24562]: disconnect from usstlz- psecap06.emerson.com[144.191.128.17] as you can see there was a message for oil(a)mydomain.ch (I obviously changed the domain for privacy) - logs says that all the three users got the email, but the third user didn't. I do not know why and when it happens, but seldom we have this issue maybe is there some kind of bug in the maildrop version I use? by the way, I had this issue also before installing amavisd-new now some infos: CentOS 5.3 postfix-2.3.3-2.1.el5_2 amavisd-new-2.6.6-1.el5.rf dovecot-2.0.11-1_126 dovecot-managesieve-0.2.2-15 dovecot-pigeonhole-0.2.2-15 users are on a Kerberized OpenLDAP please help me because this is really driving me crazy - don't leave me alone, please Marco Carcano

4 10

[Dovecot] mail_max_userip_connections=10
by Tom Clark 12 Dec '11

12 Dec '11

Hi, A couple of questions rather than a problem for once! We've got our Dovecot server running smoothly now apart from our MD. He's having problems with mail_max_userip_connections. He has 3 (Phone/Laptop/Tablet) items that all connect to the server at about the same time. Which means he's frequently running over the max_userip_connections. My questions are: Is there anyway of whitelisting an IP so that it can ignore mail_max_userip_connections=10? What should we set mail_max_userip_connections too realistically? 10 seems a bit low? Thanks Tom

6 10

[Dovecot] Indexes to MLC-SSD
by Patrick Westenberg 29 Nov '11

29 Nov '11

Hi all, is anyone on this list who dares/dared to store his index files on a MLC-SSD? Regards, Patrick

9 26

[Dovecot] Seen flag getting lost
by Edgar Fuß 26 Nov '11

26 Nov '11

We have two dovecot 1.2 instances sharing Maildirs on NFS. Indexes are local to the individual servers. Occasionally (no idea how to trigger this), the Seen flag gets lost on some messages. I've verified that actually the ``S'' is missing from the filename. I suspect something like server A caching the flags, server B setting Seen, and then server A flushing its cache for another change so overwriting what B changed. Any ideas short of switching to 2.0?

6 8

[Dovecot] [PATCH] SCRAM-SHA-1 authentication
by Florian Zeitz 23 Nov '11

23 Nov '11

Hy, over the last days I have implemented SCRAM-SHA-1 in Dovecot's 2.1 branch. It does not do SCRAM-SHA-1-PLUS, but should be extendable enough to introduce it later. There are some checks for the message format which (assuming the client acts correclty) are not strictly necessary during parsing. This is partially in the hope that it might aid client implementers, partially because it (IMHO) improves readability when checking against the RFC. Also errors found in this way could be sent to the client, this is however strictly OPTIONAL in the RFC, for now they are just logged. Some of the variable names are rather long. This is in order to have them match the terms introduced in the RFC, again I expect it to help readability (maybe my recent Objective-C programming showing though). I do feel somewhat insecure about my usage of some lib functions. Hopefully no API has been abused too much. I also note that there are a lot of fields in the scram_auth_request struct. I think they are all there for a reason, however feel free to prove me wrong. Attached is a hg export. It also includes a hmac-sha1 implementation, an adaption off of the hmac-md5 implementation already in Dovecot. I guess those should eventually be merged into a hash-independent hmac implementation, but I figured this would have to do for now. The implementation has been tested against GNU SASL and does appear to work fine. (The command line was `gsasl -m SCRAM-SHA-1 -a user -p pass --imap host` for those curious) Regards Florian "Florob" Zeitz

3 5

[Dovecot] Port variable in LMTP userdb lookups?
by Mark Zealey 17 Nov '11

17 Nov '11

Hi all, I'm currently changing some systems to use the redirector service, which means that to get local deliveries going I need to get lmtp set up so it can be redirected as well. This is working fine, however we have a number of different ports running on our servers depending on which brand a customer is using. When the time comes to do the user look up, we use (port, user, domain) to do a unique database lookup which works fine for everything (proxied pop, imap, lmtp & straight pop, imap) but not straight lmtp - perhaps because it doesn't have a 2-stage login process unlike the pop/imap protocols. Looking at the SQL query we are issuing, the %a port variable is set to 0 even though the connection is coming in from TCP. Is there a way to change this? We are running dovecot 2.0.12 however looking through the changelogs I can't see this would be fixed in the newest version. Thanks, Mark

3 4