| To: | "Marc Perkel" <marc@perkel.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx |
| From: | "Jason Frisvold" <xenophage0@gmail.com> |
| Date: | Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:30:58 -0500 |
| Cc: | qmail@list.cr.yp.to |
| Delivered-to: | sp-com-lists@consult.net |
| Delivered-to: | gmail-qmail@securepoint.com |
| Delivered-to: | sp.com.list@gmail.com |
| Delivered-to: | mailing list qmail@list.cr.yp.to |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jX38r5jexsTt5D+PwDVzZ+GHswyYC6W8I+WxUZ20QcpC5bGozDCy6ZnR6VzVayQ+1KKQNiMo2TyL0RkuhAd2XHUxqyYN8b0NswbmIChCk2T4LFEf0J+0Kp3sqeqfpurFnFj2NZgRfPkgc8/kwdlt8lyEFOESCqOFaKMrLVJsXIo= |
| Domainkey-status: | good (test mode) |
| In-reply-to: | <456B03BA.1060303@perkel.com> |
| Mailing-list: | contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm |
| References: | <45676987.2050808@perkel.com> <456789E5.3000508@gatworks.com> <20061125.101809.193764004.hanche@math.ntnu.no> <45686D69.5040003@perkel.com> <20061127143127.GA29898@discworld.dyndns.org> <456B03BA.1060303@perkel.com> |
On 11/27/06, Marc Perkel <marc@perkel.com> wrote: No - on my system a 4xx error only means that that particular server isn't ready. It means try the other servers or come back later. It certianly dos not mean that all the servers aren't ready. That's what I use EXIM and not Qmail. All other MTAs except Qmail behave this way. it's what the spec says. Qmail does it wrong. Hrm.. I find this interesting and slightly disturbing. Can you please provide the spec and highlight the passage which identifies this behavior as correct? I'm not sure I like the idea of a mail server immediately trying another MX if the initial one it contacted was busy. This just creates additional load on the other MXs and can cause additional meltdown. I believe the "correct" way for this to work is to queue the message when a 4XX is received and retry later. When later arrives, the MX lookup is repeated and at that point it's possible that an alternative server is chosen. -- Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold XenoPhage0@gmail.com |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Question about Qmail relating to MX retry processing, Adam McKenna |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx, Harald Hanche-Olsen |
| Previous by Thread: | Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx, Marc Perkel |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Advanced tricks I use to get rid of spam using MX 4xx, Uncle George |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |