service. Is there a
possibility where I can change the smtp service while retrying for a
already deferred mail?
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Abhijeet Rastogi:
Hi Wietse,
Thanks for you reply. I may be wrong but I just know what I read in
http
always be tried via the same smtp service. Is there a
possibility where I can change the smtp service while retrying for a
already deferred mail?
You can specify an alternate MTA (with smtp_fallback_relay) for
delayed mail. There is no feature to specify an alternate delivery
agent for delayed mail
You can specify an alternate MTA (with smtp_fallback_relay) for
delayed mail. There is no feature to specify an alternate delivery
agent for delayed mail.
Hmm, I was aware of that thing. I've not used this feature but it's
definitely worth trying.
The example looks like an attempt to
Hi all,
1. If a mail is temporarily deferred from a remote MTA, postfix should
back-off instantly for some time but I observed this today.
Jul 24 06:40:16 server.name postfix-smtp4/smtp[6204]: DEC8B4F0185: host
mta6.am0.yahoodns.net[98.138.112.35] refused to talk to me: 421 4.7.0
[GL01] Message
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:16:15PM +0530, Abhijeet Rastogi wrote:
Hi all,
1. If a mail is temporarily deferred from a remote MTA, postfix should
back-off instantly for some time but I observed this today.
Jul 24 06:40:16 server.name postfix-smtp4/smtp[6204]: DEC8B4F0185: host
Hi Micheal,
Thanks for your reply. Actually, the issue was I was just writing the mail
and it got Sent by mistake. (But, then reading the mail I thought that the
message was conveyed.)
The issue is, why does postfix retry the second time instantly (within 1
sec)? Shouldn't postfix wait till the
Abhijeet Rastogi:
The issue is, why does postfix retry the second time instantly (within 1
sec)? Shouldn't postfix wait till the next deferred queue scan happens?
No, this is not required. If you disagree, please point out in
the SMTP standard, RTFM RFC 5321, where Postfix is in error.
Hi Wietse,
Thanks for you reply. I may be wrong but I just know what I read in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.4
The sender MUST delay retrying a particular destination after one
attempt has failed. In general, the retry interval SHOULD be at
least 30 minutes; however,
Abhijeet Rastogi:
Hi Wietse,
Thanks for you reply. I may be wrong but I just know what I read in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.4
The sender MUST delay retrying a particular destination after one
attempt has failed. In general, the retry interval SHOULD be at
Am 25.07.2013 09:52, schrieb Abhijeet Rastogi:
The issue is, why does postfix retry the second time instantly (within 1
sec)? Shouldn't postfix wait till the next deferred queue scan happens?
Because that's best Postfix can do. Because Postfix SHOULD do that:
*) Because if on MX is down, the
On 18 January 2013 21:14, Muzaffer to...@ozses.net wrote:
On 17 January 2013 08:55, Timo Röhling timo.roehl...@gmx.de wrote:
Am 17.01.2013 06:20, schrieb Muzaffer:
Jan 17 06:14:20 ommuse postfix/smtp[25504]: BC05AF629A:
to=sertacona...@gmail.com mailto:sertacona...@gmail.com,
On 17 January 2013 08:55, Timo Röhling timo.roehl...@gmx.de wrote:
Am 17.01.2013 06:20, schrieb Muzaffer:
Jan 17 06:14:20 ommuse postfix/smtp[25504]: BC05AF629A:
to=sertacona...@gmail.com mailto:sertacona...@gmail.com, relay=none,
delay=116212, delays=116107/0.02/105/0, dsn=4.4.1,
Muzaffer:
Hi,
I fear I might have misconfigured. Here's my logs:
Jan 17 06:14:20 ommuse postfix/smtp[25504]: BC05AF629A: to=
x...@gmail.com, relay=none, delay=116212,
delays=116107/0.02/105/0, dsn=4.4.1, status=deferred (connect to
I've searched but haven't found quite what I'm trying to do. I have
found a couple of similar questions here but no answer to my problem.
I have a dozen outbound Postfix mail servers (vers. 2.5.5-6.8 2.5.2)
processing a relatively large amount of e-mail from a service account,
which
Paul:
I was
asked to config the outbound mail servers to quit returning deferred
message delivery notifications back to our mail server but I'm not
really seeing way to do that.
The simplest option is to set delay_warning_time=0.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#delay_warning_time
Wietse, thanks for the quick response, and a solution that looks like it
might work. That wouldn't also suppress 5xx bounce notifications, would
it? In order to be good e-mail citizens we have to capture those
undeliverable addresses and remove them from our active mail database.
I'm assuming
Hi There,
We have two postfix servers (postfix from debian lenny). Is there any
way to move all deferred mail from one server to another?
Thanks
Simon
On 11/14/2010 11:06 PM, Simon wrote:
Hi There,
We have two postfix servers (postfix from debian lenny). Is there any
way to move all deferred mail from one server to another?
On the one with the deferred mail, add
relay_host = [name.or.ip.of.other.postfix]
to main.cf, then run
Hello,
I'm using two instances of postfix and lately I've been getting a lot of
deferred email, any suggestions how to stop accepting email that can't be
delivered. I do have local recipients table, server should not accept email
that can't be deliver. Please help!
host# perl check_outmail
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 02:42:17PM -0700, motty.cruz wrote:
Hello,
I'm using two instances of postfix and lately I've been getting a lot of
deferred email, any suggestions how to stop accepting email that can't be
delivered. I do have local recipients table, server should not accept email
Hi,
I have setup postfix as an mx backup using:
relay_domains = betterthanbacon.com
defer_transports = smtp
Works ok, but upon browsing the log /var/log/mail.log, I have found the
following entry:
May 18 13:06:56 ks postfix/error[14135]: 781A83E1F9: to=eweivivuhi7...@blokowe.
pl, relay=none,
Juan Devas:
Hi,
I have setup postfix as an mx backup using:
relay_domains = betterthanbacon.com
defer_transports = smtp
Works ok, but upon browsing the log /var/log/mail.log, I have found the
following entry:
May 18 13:06:56 ks postfix/error[14135]: 781A83E1F9:
On 9/15/2009 8:02 AM, Vernon A. Fort wrote:
I had an internal server problem which ended up with 1000 or so messages
sitting in the mail queue with a HOP-COUNT exceeded. These are good
emails so i need to find a way to remove most of the Received lines in
the message header and re-queue
Noel Jones wrote:
On 9/15/2009 8:02 AM, Vernon A. Fort wrote:
I had an internal server problem which ended up with 1000 or so messages
sitting in the mail queue with a HOP-COUNT exceeded. These are good
emails so i need to find a way to remove most of the Received lines in
the message header
hi all
what's the default deferred mail retry time in postfix?
can i change it?
appreciate ur help
* K bharathan kbhara...@gmail.com:
hi all
what's the default deferred mail retry time in postfix?
retry time for what?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Postfix - Einrichtung, Betrieb und Wartung Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
http://www.computerbeschimpfung.de
Standard Cyrus SASL behaviour. SASL
retrying time for attempting deliver the message
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote:
* K bharathan kbhara...@gmail.com:
hi all
what's the default deferred mail retry time in postfix?
retry time for what?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Postfix
thanks
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote:
* K bharathan kbhara...@gmail.com:
retrying time for attempting deliver the message
I assume you're thinking of non-local delivery
queue_run_delay = 300s
maximal_backoff_time = 4000s
=4.3.0,
status=deferred (mail transport unavailable)
postfix/qmgr[22419]: qmgr_active_done: BA9452DA112C
postfix/qmgr[22419]: wakeup BA9452DA112C after 300 secs
postfix/qmgr[22419]: qmgr_active_defer: defer BA9452DA112C
postfix/qmgr[22419]: qmgr_job_free: BA9452DA112C local
postfix/qmgr[22419
Tobi:
Hi All,
I set up an after-queue content filter following the instructions on
http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html .
Everything works fine except that mail directed to local users is
deferred when it is re-injected to postfix after the content filter.
However, virtual and remote
On Mar 29, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Tobi:
Hi All,
I set up an after-queue content filter following the instructions on
http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html .
Everything works fine except that mail directed to local users is
deferred when it is re-injected to postfix after
I use an after queue filter to filter incoming email. When the filter
queue grows because email comes in faster than it can handle the filter
returns a 450 until the filter queue is empty again. Now when email is
received in a big burst it can happen that the filter queue temporarily
grows and
Martijn Brinkers:
I use an after queue filter to filter incoming email. When the filter
queue grows because email comes in faster than it can handle the filter
returns a 450 until the filter queue is empty again. Now when email is
received in a big burst it can happen that the filter queue
Wietse Venema wrote:
Martijn Brinkers:
I use an after queue filter to filter incoming email. When the filter
queue grows because email comes in faster than it can handle the filter
returns a 450 until the filter queue is empty again. Now when email is
received in a big burst it can happen that
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 11:43:07AM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
If that's ineffective for some reason, then implement the suggestions
outlined in
http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html#backlog
Note, for Postfix 2.5.x with x=6, there is an error in the parameter
names actually used by qmgr(8),
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 11:43 -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
Seems to me the first action should be to reduce the number of
smtp connections to the content_filter to a number it's able
to consistently handle.
There is a big difference in filtering speed between messages. The
filter is an encryption
Martijn Brinkers wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 11:43 -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
Seems to me the first action should be to reduce the number of
smtp connections to the content_filter to a number it's able
to consistently handle.
There is a big difference in filtering speed between messages. The
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 08:14:22PM +0100, Martijn Brinkers wrote:
If I'm not mistaken the described approach (with
fragile_destination_concurrency*) works when you have small bursts of
errors. In my case it can take some time before connections are allowed
(email is
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 01:45:29PM -0600, Noel Jones wrote:
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 08:14:22PM +0100, Martijn Brinkers wrote:
If I'm not mistaken the described approach (with
fragile_destination_concurrency*) works when you have small bursts of
errors. In my case it
iminate all queues from the filter, it should be a proxy. Let Postfix
do all the queueing, it is much better at this than the filter.
The filter is based on James which is a Java based email server and
cannot be used as a proxy, at least not without a major overhaul. The
biggest reason I added
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 09:00:26PM +0100, Martijn Brinkers wrote:
iminate all queues from the filter, it should be a proxy. Let Postfix
do all the queueing, it is much better at this than the filter.
The filter is based on James which is a Java based email server and
cannot be used as a
41 matches
Mail list logo
