Mail to POP3 users still going only to wildcard

[bobstro]

Now that DNS issues have been resolved since changeover to OPS, I'm having problems with POP3 accoutns. Here's the history:

1. I originally enabled the wildcard feature using the old members interface, sending *@ttlexceeded.com to the ttlexceeded account. This worked as expected.

2. I later created four user accounts from the POP3 page on OPS. I do not see any option for disabling the wildcard.

3. E-mails sent to any of the four user accounts created in step 2 still wind up exclusively in the wildcard (ttlexceeded) inbox when viewed via webmail (have not polled using external POP3 client).

4. I created an alias for one of the accounts in the SMTP page on OPS that pointed back to itself (i.e. bobg@ttlexceeded.com is aliased to bobg, selected from the drop-down list of POP3 accounts. Mail for that account DOES wind up in the inbox when viewed from web mail.

While this works, I don't think it's supposed to work this way, is it? It strikes me as akin to creating a sendmail alias that points back to the original account. If it is supposed to work like that, no BIG problem, but the documentation is definitely confusing. If it's NOT supposed to be like that, I need a fix so things will work reliably.

Also, I understand it is NOT possible to disable the wildcard account, making it akin to a POSTMASTER catch-all. Is that correct?

I'm generally pleased with powweb, now into my 2nd week, but there are a few little things like this that are still keeping me from being where I want to be.

Any help appreciated!

- Bob

[fcsnc]

Bob,

As of right now, I think the Users (POP boxes) you create are only for use in your e-mail client as:

(1) The physical file where the mail is stored and retrieved;
(2) The name to use when authenticating via POP3; and
(3) The name to use when sending via SMTP, if you want to use the powweb SMTP server.

People can't send e-mail directly to the POP boxes you create in the new OPS.

People CAN send mail to the aliases you set up in the "SMTP" portion of the new OPS.

Make sure that your usernames in the POP3 portion are ALL LOWERCASE. The "add a user" function lets you add invalid usernames. The SMTP portion lets you point aliases to invalid usernames. This results in the incoming mail getting bounced.

After each change that you make in OPS, wait at least 1 hour before you expect it to become effective. For example, to delete a username, you must first click the "inactivate" link, then wait an hour, then go back in and find that a "delete" link has shown up, and click that, and then go do something else for another hour and then you can add the username back in lowercase. Then wait another hour and set up the alias to point to it.

Apparently Powweb is devoted to using this new OPS, so we all have to learn how to use it. Either that, or move on to another host with a different set of problems.

And yes, the documentation doesn't at all describe how this thing is working. I know as an IT professional that the traditional paradigm is to:
(1) Define the problem; if there's no problem, there's no point in designing a solution;
(2) Document what the solution should do;
(3) Get everybody to sign off on the specs;
(4) Develop the solution;
(5) Test the solution;
(6) Get everybody to sign off on the tests;
(7) Update the documentation, if necessary; then
(8) Implement the solution.

Looks like powweb has gone in this order:
8 - 5 - ..... and unfortunately I think we might still be in step 5.

Wonder what the world would be like if everybody started with step 1?

Most people start with step 4.

Anyway, I'm happy with Powweb. How about you? Anything else you'd like to discuss while we're waiting?

[Starr]

Tom, this is the last time I will ask you to relax on the destructive criticism and then I ban you from this forum.

Folks,

There is no way to see how a new system will work under the stresses of a real world scenario other than releasing and it entering "bug fix” mode until all the kinks are worked out. This is where we are now. PLEASE be patient!

Most of the problems with the new system are usage issues. We tested Ops extensively from our end and as a customer. Obviously, more needs to be done. Our developers are working hard on making Ops more functional AND user friendly.

We will also continue to populate the FAQ’s and our support pages with updated information. You may not see too many "how to's" in the immediate future until Ops settles into a more permanent mode. We still have much to do to adjust the look and feel of Ops.

If you have constructive criticism, or suggestions, please feel free to send them to myself personally, or support@powweb.com. While we may not reply to every email, we will read over them, and add them to our list of things to do for Ops.

Again, thank you for your patience and understanding as we strive to provide you with the best possible hosting solution ever. :)

[bobstro]

> As of right now, I think the Users (POP boxes) you create are
> only for use in your e-mail client as:
>
> (1) The physical file where the mail is stored and retrieved;
> (2) The name to use when authenticating via POP3; and
> (3) The name to use when sending via SMTP, if you want to use > the powweb SMTP server.
>
> People can't send e-mail directly to the POP boxes you create
> in the new OPS.

This is consistent with everything I've seen so far, and I do believe you are 100% correct.

> People CAN send mail to the aliases you set up in the
> "SMTP" portion of the new OPS.

In a way, I can see why this would be a plus. I just sure DID NOT take this away from reading the various FAQ documents. Partly my fault, as I was expecting it to be similar to other systems. I do think that:

a) the documentation could be clearer (I realize OPS is new and improving as I write.)

b) The tech support guys could've given as good an answer in the initial e-mail.

> Make sure that your usernames in the POP3 portion are
> ALL LOWERCASE. The "add a user" function lets you add
> invalid usernames. The SMTP portion lets you point aliases
> to invalid usernames. This results in the incoming mail
> getting bounced.

Good tips, thanks. It's also becoming clear that POP3 names must be unique SYSTEM-WIDE. Not a big deal with the (now clarified) SMTP alias links, but I am hungrily trying to grab all the really good names, just like the domain squatters! :)

> After each change that you make in OPS, wait at least
> 1 hour before you expect it to become effective. For
> example, to delete a username, you must first click
> the "inactivate" link, then wait an hour, then go back
> in and find that a "delete" link has shown up, and click
> that, and then go do something else for another hour
> and then you can add the username back in lowercase.
> Then wait another hour and set up the alias to point to it.

I hate that long of a pause to do something simple, but I think your rules will work reliably. Is it really only hourly?

> Apparently Powweb is devoted to using this new OPS, so
> we all have to learn how to use it. Either that, or move on
> to another host with a different set of problems.

Yeah, I just don't mind R'ing TFM to get going. Without that though, it's frustrating. I quite like PowWeb and I'm sure this'll all work out quite well in the end.

> And yes, the documentation doesn't at all describe how
> this thing is working. I know as an IT professional that
> the traditional paradigm is to: [...]

I was considering "Plan B" which is to usurp the powers-that-be and roll my own by shifting it all onto my own server. Hate to do that though, as I want to understand PowWeb in order to recommend it to others as an alternative to do-it-yourself.

> (1) Define the problem; if there's no problem, there's no
> point in designing a solution;

Stop that, will you? I'm a consultant! You'll ruin everything!

> Wonder what the world would be like if everybody started
> with step 1?

A saner world for sure.

> Anyway, I'm happy with Powweb. How about you?

Me too. Signing up so close to the transition to OPS probably has a lot to do with my frustration.

> Anything else you'd like to discuss while we're waiting?

Heh. Well, refining in-line virus and spam scanning for Linux, but that's a bit off topic for the ol' forums I suspect!

Thanks much, I appreciate your help!

- Bob

[bobstro]

Starr wrote:

> Tom, this is the last time I will ask you to relax on the
> destructive criticism and then I ban you from this forum.

Whoa! Tom was quite helpful to me personally and I do thank him. I took his comments more as dry humor, but perhaps there's a history there I'm not aware of.

> There is no way to see how a new system will work under
> the stresses of a real world scenario other than releasing
> and it entering "bug fix” mode until all the kinks are worked
> out. This is where we are now. PLEASE be patient!

I understand, and appreciate what you folks must be going through. Just it's been a week, and I want to get independent so I can QUIT bugging the PowWeb team.

FWIW: Tom's notes are the start of a GREAT HOWTO. If they'd been here a week ago, I'd have been up to speed by now. I think Tom's note about documentation being updated PRIOR to release are pertinent. That's not meant as a slam, just feedback.

> Most of the problems with the new system are usage issues.
> [...]

Probably. I suspect I'm the root of my problems for the most part. Again, I am generally VERY happy with the PowWeb value proposition, and am likely to recommend it to customers with small businesses. I need to understand it all better first though!

Thanks everyone,

- Bob

[Starr]

Re: "documentation being updated PRIOR to release"

The powers that be made the decision to release the system sooner, rather than later for 2 main reasons:

1) We wanted to be able to offer the services “Ops” had ASAP. We felt you would get more benefit from having all these new features available to you now.

2) While we knew we had the guts worked out, the style, look and feel of how you use Ops will be evolving over the next few weeks. Writing a whole bunch of documentation for something that is going through so many changes would be futile considering we would then have to rewrite or re-create most of it after the changes we're made.

We are very thankful and appreciative for all of our users that have been providing us positive constructive feedback. This is why we created this forum. :)