Dave Sill wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Incidentally, if there are THAT many 256's showing up in our logs, I wonder
>>if, rather than taking it as a Hard error, the remote smtp server is
>>treating it as a deferral, and continuing to retry repeatedly...
>
>Stray LF's are a temporary pro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Incidentally, if there are THAT many 256's showing up in our logs, I wonder
>if, rather than taking it as a Hard error, the remote smtp server is
>treating it as a deferral, and continuing to retry repeatedly...
Stray LF's are a temporary problem in qmail's opinion. T
g to retry repeatedly...
Dave
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Kitabjian
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 10:43 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: so much qmail-smtpd activity, so little qmail-send
> activity...
>
>
> I recently started monitoring qmail-sm
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 10:43:09AM -0400, Dave Kitabjian wrote:
> I recently started monitoring qmail-smtpd's activity via "tcpserver -v",
> and at the moment it's burning through a steady 15-20 concurrencies,
> scrolling by beyond readability.
>
> Meanwhile, as I "tail -f maillog" for qmail-send
I recently started monitoring qmail-smtpd's activity via "tcpserver -v",
and at the moment it's burning through a steady 15-20 concurrencies,
scrolling by beyond readability.
Meanwhile, as I "tail -f maillog" for qmail-send's activity, it sits
predominantly idle, with an occasional message to pro
