On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > Is it possible that this problem is more than just the buffer-size issue,
> > or that the patch that increases the buffer size isn't a complete
> > solution?
>
> Well, since you state that mailing to large-mx works for you, we
> should consider the option that it is indeed something else.
I suppose the next question is, since I'm a relative newbie to both qmail
and DNS issues: is there any wider interest in trying to figure out what's
going on, or is it my problem? :) I don't want to assume you all don't
have better things to do, and if I'm the only one affected by this issue,
maybe I'm the one that should roll up my sleeves and see what I can
do. I'd just be starting a long way back from where people familiar with
the code would start from.
Is there any other testing I can do to determine whether the buffer-size
issue is the problem, or whether it's something else? Is it possible that
the large-mx address isn't really returning a large result to me? Is
there a way I can test that?
I really don't mean to be a pest with this, and I appreciate everyone's
help so far. You can tell me to suck it up and deal with it myself if you
get sick of it at any time. :)
Cheers,
Steve
--
Steve Linberg, Chief Goblin
Silicon Goblin Technologies
http://silicongoblin.com
Be kind. Remember, everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
