Qmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: timeoutsmtpd downsides

To: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject: Re: timeoutsmtpd downsides
From: Kyle Wheeler <kyle-qmail@memoryhole.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:07:03 -0600
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
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=default; d=memoryhole.net; b=LEU8eqV9+cseHKLaJd9jTRQKOc/E4jtJa0WVf4fxOmwCiQC5iqisX0U7osPYPXpEWkA8OpcWTkmndteydLn8asY8U2duxZj/oKolJT8rLTfTsIDn1zY9sCRMPhvQ9nuq91S2BXMi0xUto0bBPZKdOopfR00WRnAiyKYdKSCCAeA= ;
Domainkey-status: good
In-reply-to: <20070404193242.GA20320@discworld.dyndns.org>
Mail-followup-to: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
References: <20070404185032.GA22829@c-76-18-79-168.hsd1.nm.comcast.net> <20070404193242.GA20320@discworld.dyndns.org>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-04-03)
On Wednesday, April  4 at 01:32 PM, quoth Charles Cazabon:
Section 4.5.3.2 of rfc2821 talks a little about this, although mostly from a client's point of view. It does recommend at least a 3 minute timeout on each send during the DATA phase.

Ah! I don't know how I missed that, thanks.

I suppose, more precisely, the critical bit is at the end of that section:

     An SMTP server SHOULD have a timeout of at least 5 minutes while
     it is awaiting the next command from the sender.

So I'll set the timeoutsmtpd to be 300 and see if that solves my reverse-tarpitting concurrency problem. If not, I'll bump it down from there, but it's good to know there aren't significant problems even as low as 15 seconds.

~Kyle
--
Of course it's the same old story. Truth usually is the same old story.
                                                   -- Margaret Thatcher

Attachment: pgpewsNKI3C6b.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>