incorrect spam setups cause spool messes on forwarders
jared at puck.nether.net
Mon Dec 1 19:16:48 UTC 2003
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 11:10:16AM -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
> > I think he's saying that they were unable to perform the
> > validation hence the 450. If the validation was successful,
> > they'd return a 200 series code, if it was unsuccessful, they
> > would return a 500 series code.
> nice words, but crap. due to needs to spool mail for sites in
> countries with very poor connectivity, mail spool time here is
> quite long. if verizon and others seem unable to decide in weeks,
> why should i pay the penalty?
you should likely queue those other countries on
a seperate machine dedicated to that purpose. this way one
user/host site doesn't unduly cause significant impact to other
it's interesting you view the interpertation (which at least one
other person views as correct) as "crap". this behaviour does
seem to fit strict interpretation of the rfc in question.
> but, i guess the problem is easily solved with exim config. i have
> set it so that if it can not deliver to verizon in say one hour, it
> dumps the mail.
> verizon.net * F,1h,5m
> life is simple, except for verizon users i guess.
this is the ability of a single host operator to make
their own local policy decisions. you've both done what
you feel is appropriate.
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared at puck.nether.net
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
More information about the NANOG