Dean Brooks wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 01:11:55PM +0100, Magnus Holmgren wrote: >> On Wednesday 14 February 2007 12:51, Renaud Allard wrote: >>> This is a _new_ mail sent from the internal server (192.168.100.12) from >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] using exim 4.66 as a mail >>> relay between the internal server and the internet. >>> >>> As we can see, a first attempt is made on the primary MX: SMTP1, it gets >>> a 450 error for greylisting. Quite obviously exim retries to SMTP2 and >>> also gets a 450 error. But exim never retries and interprets this as a >>> permanent error. >> This may be another instance of the address_retry_include_sender bug, >> introduded in 4.64 and fixed in CVS: >> >> PH/19 Change 4.64/PH/36 introduced a bug: when address_retry_include_sender >> was true (the default) a successful delivery failed to delete the retry >> item, thus causing premature timeout of the address. The bug is now >> fixed. > > It this fix something the rest of us should be concerned about? > > That is, is this considered an emergency hotfix we should all install, > or does it only affect unusual configurations? >
For my part, it only happens in a very peculiar situation where a server never appears to be up because there are two MX using greylisting in a very stupid way (never whitelisting even after one mail passes). I still think this is a serious bug (just because interpreting 4xx errors as 5xx is something weird) but you will only see drawbacks on very special cases where the remote servers are really strangely configured.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
