There's a "Limit number of messages per connection" setting in their Exchange server... I'm assuming that if I set that to "1", it will break a multi-recipient e-mail into multiple single messages... Not sure though.
I would think that this would result in individual bounces for bad e-mail addresses... Mike -----Original Message----- From: Tonix (Antonio Nati) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 8:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Disable CHKUSER Check on exchange side. Check also if there is an option to split a multi recipients delivery in several single recipient deliveries. Tonino Il 14/11/2010 17:37, Michael Colvin ha scritto: > Yes, but this is not the issue in, at least this specific case. It's > definitely a recipient MX resolution issue... > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tonix (Antonio Nati) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 7:50 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Disable CHKUSER > > Michael, one more element of discussion. > > If sender has (for error) domain with wrong MX in sender address, of > course no following rcpt could be accepted, as initial acceptance phase > of sender has not successed. This is unique case in which also server's > sending is rejected as a whole. > > Ciao! > > Tonino > > > Il 14/11/2010 00:37, Michael Colvin ha scritto: >>> On 11/13/2010 07:16 AM, Tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: >>>> Il 13/11/2010 15:04, Martin Waschbuesch ha scritto: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I wonder about this one... First of all, I agree with Jake that MX >>>>> verification is rather important. >>>>> However, the problem at hand is also a nuisance: Why should one bad >>>>> address out of 15 in the list cause all mails to not be delivered? >>>>> >>>> Is this problem related to clients or to emails coming from servers? >>> This is a key question, as they should be treated differently. Incoming >>> messages need MX verification so that bounces have a better probability >>> of being deliverable. Submissions, on the other hand, are rejected >>> directly during the smtp session to the user's client, so there is no >>> bounce (as far as QMT is concerned) and thus no need for MX verification. >>> >>>> Double check with clients, because a lot of them stop sending as receive >>>> the first error back, while servers continue sending remaining >>> recipients. >>>> For my authenticated senders I've completely disabled chkuser, using a >>>> dedicated ip only for this purpose (relaying). >>>> If you cannot have a dedicated IP you can always use submission port, >>>> and setup a dedicated qmail-smtpd for this usage. >>> I like this solution. I've said before that I think that port 25 >>> (incoming smtp) and port 587 (submission) should have separate tcp.smtp >>> files. Such configuration facilitates turning off chkuser on port 587, >>> which I like as a solution for this. >>> >>> Thanks for chiming in on this, Tonino. >>> >> I agree Jake, to some degree. As Martin pointed out, the issue is that > this >> particular customer is sending to a list with 200+ on it. When it bounces >> back saying ALL of them couldn't resolve an MX for the domain, that's an >> issue... It's hard for them to keep their list clean, when they can't > tell >> which one is causing the bounce, and I can't really expect them to test > each >> account, or call each person on their distribution list. Nor am I going > to >> do it. :-) >> >> As far as whether it's a mail client issue, or server issue, I'm not sure. >> But, I think in my particular case, it's neither...Well, that is, it's not >> *MY* server. This particular client has an Exchange server. They send >> their e-mail from Outlook, to their Exchange server, which then uses my >> servers for relaying, or a "Smarthost"... >> >> This particular cluster of servers is used solely for filtering client >> e-mail inbound, and for some clients to use for outbound. I have another >> cluster that I use for ISP "Access" customers (DSL, Dialup, Hosting, etc), >> but they are still using a non-toaster for outbound, so this issue hasn't >> surfaced, yet, but with most of them using Outlook to connect directly to >> the server, I'm assuming they'll get individual bounces back? >> >> I agree with, I think it was Eric, that fixing the actual issue with how >> CHKUSER handles these bad MX records would be better... If it would only >> bounce the bad addresses, that would be preferred. But, from what Tonino >> said, I'm now wondering if this isn't actually an issue with how Exchange > is >> handling CHKUSER's notification that a given address is "Bad"... >> >> I know during my testing, if I entered a bad e-mail domain via telnet >> session, it would give me the error message, but I could still enter > another >> address, and those would go through. So, is this Exchange seeing the > reject >> message, and then just assuming the rest are bad? It doesn't appear as >> though QMT is closing the session...So, this may be... >> >> I appreciate that you're switching to the stock CHKUSER setup in QMT2, but > I >> agree with you that this *IS* a valuable feature, and I would prefer to > have >> it enabled... It just needs a little tweaking, or Exchange does... >> >> Michael J. Colvin >> NorCal Internet Services >> www.norcalisp.com >> >> >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- >> Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group > (www.vickersconsulting.com) >> Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and > installations. >> If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today! >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- >> Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and > packages. >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: > [email protected] >> >> > -- ------------------------------------------------------------ in...@zioni Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group (www.vickersconsulting.com) Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and installations. If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and packages. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group (www.vickersconsulting.com) Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and installations. If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and packages. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
