On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 02:09:24PM -0500, Bryan Fullerton wrote: > Why wasn't their bounce score determined to be stale and discarded? > bounce_info_stale_after is set to 3 (was set to 7 until last night).
The cron/disabled task doesn't consider the "staleness" of the bounces. (The comments say it is intentionally done to catch the case where the bounce threshold was reduced after someone has started bouncing. I suspect this is a bug, since the bouncer only seems to purge "stale" info when a new bounce is registered.) > Why was it logged that they were disabled due to a probe bounce when > that wasn't the case? My mail server is pretty quick, but I can't see The same log message is used in the normal course of events when someone is disabled by the probe bounces. The special case of the threshold being reduced after someone has started bouncing reuses that code (and flags the reason for disabling the subscriber with the same code, BYBOUNCE). -- Jim Tittsler http://www.OnJapan.net/ GPG: 0x01159DB6 Python Starship http://Starship.Python.net/ Ringo MUG Tokyo http://www.ringo.net/rss.html ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
