I see your point, but I can't say I agree with it. ;-) I feel that
proper use of quotas gives me a much needed degree of control over
my mail spool that no amount of after-the-fact policing can provide.
Anything set up badly can be ... well, bad. When we first installed
mail quotas, we put 20MB hard limits on user mailboxes, and no limits
on staff/office mailboxes. We were hit *once* by an idiot user who
emailed our sales and support departments over a thousand times, but
the resultant spool file was still only a couple of MB.
If I ever experience an event where a DoS attack affects sales or
support mailboxes, I may change my tune. But for the moment, the
convenience of this automated disk space protection far outweighs
the remote eventuality of an attack.
As for the auto-ack script ... well, if I wasn't already confident that
ours worked 100%, your experience would be enough to convince me of the
value of having quota limits set on the sales mailbox as well. :)
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 09:05:56AM -0500, Justin Shore wrote:
I've never been a big fan of quotas on mail spools because they can
easily and quickly stop the flow of legit mail. A quota like that
can be used as a DoS attack against you. Fills all their salesreps
mail spools with junk mail and they won't be able to receive customer
mail. Honestly I think it's a bad bad thing. However I have also
seen a renegade auto-ack script fill two mail spools with around
1.5GB of mail in a very short period of time. I think assigning a
hard quota of around 100MB is a good idea. That way a user can't
consume all available drive space. Write a script to mail a form
letter to all users with a mail spool larger than X. In that form
letter make sure you describe the way to turn of the "Leave mail on
server" function in a couple of browsers. Also include their disk
usage on that spool. Send the first one to the user only. Run it
again the next day. If the user still hasn't fixed the issue, CC an
admin.
My $.02
Justin
At 2:23 PM +0300 10/18/01, Evren Yurtesen wrote:
yeah I have thousands of boxes but still then the problem would be so that
if the user is already overquota he cant get the email generated by the
script. he could become overquota in a few hours.
Evren
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Paul Chvostek wrote:
This is not something that Procmail would handle. Procmail merely
handles the delivery, and if the delivery fails because of an exceeded
quota, procmail will assist sendmail in generating a response message
explaining the failure. But if the delivery does *not* fail, procmail
really isn't paying attention to the user's quota.
You probably want such a warning to be sent by a script that runs once
a day and looks at the quota for each user. It shouldn't be a problem
to run something like that every day, unless you want to do this on a
system with hundreds of thousands of mailboxes.
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 09:46:19AM +0300, Evren Yurtesen wrote:
>
> Hello,
> Is it possible to make procmail work like so that
> when the user is low in quota he/she will receive a
> quota warning? (not the sender of the email also the receiver)
> > Evren
--
--
Justin Shore, ES-SS ES-SSR Pittsburg State University
Network & Systems Manager Kelce 157Q
Office of Information Systems Pittsburg, KS 66762
Voice: (620) 235-4606 Fax: (620) 235-4545
http://www.pittstate.edu/ois/
Warning: This message has been quadruple Rot13'ed for your protection.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail
--
Paul Chvostek
<paul(_at_)it(_dot_)ca>
Operations / Development / Abuse / Whatever vox: +1 416 598-0000
IT Canada http://www.it.ca/
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail