Hello, On Tuesday 06 November 2007 00:08, Chris Hoogendyk wrote: > I want to apologize to Kern and to the list for being mistaken and for > pushing my mistaken point of view too far.
Thank your for your feedback, there is really nothing to apologize for. We need to keep all our discussions open to all points of view. The only request that I make is to keep the conversation civil, which certainly was the case -- if you want to count mistakes (I'm not counting), just look at bugs.bacula.org and about 90% are mine :-) Thanks to David and you for the link, I have now added it to the web site on the Mail Lists page along with a brief explanation of the problem ... Best regards, Kern > > It turns out that greylisting can cause problems with list serves, and > sourceforge, which hosts the bacula list, does do callbacks to verify > email addresses. These callbacks and greylisting can get tangled up in > one another and result in difficulties with messages going through. So > it probably is worthwhile to whitelist sourceforge. > > David Romerstein sent me the link to the sourceforge documentation on > exactly what they do: > > > http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=6695&group_id=1#et_send >er_validation > > With that information, I was able to find the interaction in my mail > logs. I must say that just one of my mail servers generates over a > million lines of logging every day. So reading log files is a pattern > matching exercise. The interactions for one mail message to the bacula > list were spread out over an hour of time and separated by thousands of > lines of other log messages. What I found is that my server contacts the > sourceforge server indicating it has a message to deliver. Shortly, the > sourceforge server contacts my server with a callback attempting to > validate a null sender going back to my email address. If either the > null sender or my email address fail, then sourceforge will fail my > message. What happened was that my server greylisted the sourceforge > callback. That appeared again in the logs as a greylist of my own > message. Then, although my greylisting period was only 2 minutes, > sourceforge took more than an hour to try again. That is likely related > to the dynamics of how busy the sourceforge server is. Anyway, when they > tried the callback again, it was accepted, and my message went through. > > So, there is a lot of dancing back and forth there. If either server had > some sort of misconfiguration, the interaction could fail, and the > message would not go through. Because of this, milter-greylist has an > option "delayedreject" that will wait to reject messages until the data > phase (instead of the rcpt phase), just so that it doesn't get tripped > up by callbacks. If you use milter-greylist, this option is described in > `man greylist.conf`. > > In one other instance, I saw 2 callbacks -- One to confirm the null > sender and my address, and another to confirm that I had postmaster. I'm > not sure why that didn't show up in the other example. I did search for it. > > So, again, let me apologize for pushing a mistaken point of view and > offer the information in this message as a contribution to the smooth > communication among the list participants. > > And thanks to David for pointing out the information on sourceforge. > > > > --------------- > > Chris Hoogendyk > > - > O__ ---- Systems Administrator > c/ /'_ --- Biology & Geology Departments > (*) \(*) -- 140 Morrill Science Center > ~~~~~~~~~~ - University of Massachusetts, Amherst > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --------------- > > Erdös 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
