On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 10:46:44 +0100 (BST) Andrew C Aitchison wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Jeremy Harris wrote: > > > On 26/07/17 01:29, Christian Balzer wrote: > >> 2017-07-26 08:12:33 1da6x5-0005fV-IX > >> H=redacted.mail.protection.outlook.com [23.103.139.138] TLS error on > >> connection (gnutls_handshake): timed out > >> --- > >> > >> And more importantly in a massive delay like this: > >> --- > >> 2017-07-26 08:12:33 1da6x5-0005fV-IX TLS session failure: delivering > >> unencrypted to redacted.mail.protection.outlook.com [23.103.139.138] (not > >> in hosts_require_tls) > >> > >> 2017-07-26 08:12:35 1da6x5-0005fV-IX Completed QT=2h11m24s > >> --- > > > >> interested in a generic solution, read, can the gnutls handshake timeout > >> be configured to be something more sensible (like a minute or less)? > > > > Unclear what delay you're calling "massive". I only see a 2-minute > > window from the timestamps you show. > > I see a two-*second* gap between the log lines, but a two *hour* > "QT" (queue time?) report in the completed line. > > Precisely.
The original connection was actually in the previous logfile. ^o^ --- 2017-07-26 06:01:14 1da6x5-0005fV-IX <= redacted@redacted U=mail P=spam-scanned S=5454 id=20170725210042.D41044062A@redacted --- Christian -- Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer [email protected] Rakuten Communications -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
