I wasn't trying to say SpamDyke was responsible for the issue I saw, nor that it would solve anyone's issue... Mearly that by creating the timeoutsmtpd file that Paulo had mentioned, which seems to not be present in the "Stock" Qmailrocks install, and possibly others, seems like it would trivialize the timeout function of SpamDyke, and may possibly, in addition, rectify any issues that are being seen by people who have issues with SpamDyke timeing out connections causing duplicates...
I know what was causing/is causing *MY* duplicate issues. When my server becomes so busy handling Spam that the amount of mail being handled by Qmail becomes very large (Usually because it's not getting caught by SpamDyke's RBL's and has already been greylisted, SpamAssassin takes so long to process, that the timeout event in SpamDyke is triggered. Of course, lengthening that value only makes things worse, since it allows more SMTP sessions to just sit there.... So, not only does this cause duplicates, but then SpamAssassin stops it's scanning (Because it timed out), and allows even more mail through... Not to mention the fact that the duplicates that are being sent just compound the problem. :-) BTW, you can tell this is happening when the SpamAssassin scores show ?/? instead of the usual numberic values... So, for me, a quick search for that header information, and "Timeout" in the logs, lets me know things are going to start being duplicated. My guess is, this is partially related to the issue that Sam has indicated would be fixed in the next version (Which I figured, based on the previous thread I'd posted), and that may resolve at least the duplicate e-mail portion of my issue. Of course, the best way to resolve it would be more servers to handle the load. :-) I'm working on that. I know that, without SpamDyke, my existing server wouldn't be handling the load it does now. Michael J. Colvin NorCal Internet Services www.norcalisp.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam > Clippinger > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 7:59 AM > To: spamdyke users > Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] Timeout problem > > The issue where timed-out messages are delivered anyway will > be fixed in version 4.0.0. > > I don't see how ClamAV could be causing Eric's timeouts but > again, since I don't (yet) understand what's happening, it's > worth a shot. Keeping ClamAV up to date is always a good > idea, whether any problems are occurring or not. Generally > speaking, a slow/unresponsive qmail (or other child process) > can cause an idle timeout in spamdyke 3.1.7 -- I've fixed > this in the next version. > > -- Sam Clippinger > > Bruce Schreiber wrote: > > Michael, > > > > I had the exact same symptom with multiple users. The > problem turned > > out to be in ClamAV. There is a DOS exploit in ClamAV that > is solved > > with an upgrade to 0.91 or later. (see > > http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/xfdb/35367) Upgrading ClamAV > solved the > > problem for the most part. > > > > I agree that the symptom is disturbing. If the mail client > is being > > sent a message indicating that the message failed, then it > should not > > be sent by Qmail. I believe this is a Spamdyke bug. Spamdyke is > > terminating the client session, but is failing to stop Qmail from > > sending the email. Outlook exacerbates this problem by > automatically > > retrying the failed message, without notifying the user. I had one > > customer complain that a message was sent 170 times. > Customers eyes > > glaze over when you try to explain why it happened. > > > > Sam, I would appreciate your thoughts on this. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > Michael Colvin wrote: > >> Doing this, kind of negates the need for doing it in > SpamDyke, except > >> for maybe a "Backup" in case Qmail doesn't for some reason. > >> > >> I think the problem is, some people don't have a > timeoutsmtpd file. > >> I had a "Stock" Qmailrocks install that did not have it, and > >> apparently, the "Default" value used by Qmail if that file > is missing > >> is 1200 seconds (20 minutes), which of course is kind of > ridiculous. > >> So, with even a modest value in SpamDyke of 300 seconds, SpamDyke > >> would occassionally timeout a connection, and in some > cases, I think > >> because of the way SpamDyke disconnected the session, the sending > >> server didn't realize the message had been sent. I belive it is > >> discusses in this thread: > >> > >> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00746.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> **Michael J. Colvin** > >> > >> **NorCal Internet Services** > >> > >> **//www.norcalisp.com// <http://www.norcalisp.com/>** > >> > >> > >> > >> <http://www.norcalisp.com/> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > >> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Paulo > >> Henrique > >> *Sent:* Sunday, April 27, 2008 6:18 PM > >> *To:* spamdyke users > >> *Subject:* Re: [spamdyke-users] Timeout problem > >> > >> I had a problem like this and decided putting the timeout from > >> qmail less than the timeout from spamdyke, see: > >> > >> cat /var/qmail/control/timeoutsmtpd > >> 240 > >> grep idle-timeout-secs > /var/qmail/control/spamdyke/spamdyke.conf > >> idle-timeout-secs = 300 > >> > >> > >> > >> After that never had problem with the repetition of messages. > >> > >> 2008/4/22 Eric Shubert <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: > >> > >> I had a problem receiving a particular email message. It > >> would always send > >> the same amount of data, then timeout. The same amount of > >> data was > >> sent/received with timeouts of 60 and 180 seconds. > >> > >> I logged the message (great little feature of > spamdyke btw), > >> and the end > >> part of the message log always shows: > >> <HR align="left" SIZE=1 color=black> > >> <div align="left"><font face="arial" > >> size="1">14072172</font></div></td></tr></TBODY></TABLE> > >> </BODY></HTML> > >> > >> FF> 04/22/2008 17:11:13 > >> . > >> QUIT > >> > >> <FF 04/22/2008 17:11:13 > >> 421 Timeout. Talk faster next time. > >> > >> <XX 04/22/2008 17:11:33 > >> 250 ok 1208909493 qp 11949 > >> 221 doris.shubes.net <http://doris.shubes.net> - Welcome to > >> Qmail Toaster Ver. 1.3 SMTP Server > >> > >> 04/22/2008 17:11:33 CLOSED > >> > >> > >> Here's the smtp log for the successful receipt (with no > >> spamdyke): > >> 04-22 17:21:13 tcpserver: pid 12162 from 208.46.47.130 > >> <http://208.46.47.130> > >> 04-22 17:21:13 tcpserver: ok 12162 doris:192.168.71.11:25 > >> <http://192.168.71.11:25> :208.46.47.130::51303 > >> 04-22 17:21:13 CHKUSER accepted sender: from > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]::> remote > >> <rapport.mysurvey.com:unknown:208.46.47.130 > >> <http://208.46.47.130>> rcpt <> : sender accepted > >> 04-22 17:21:13 CHKUSER accepted rcpt: from > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]::> remote > >> <rapport.mysurvey.com:unknown:208.46.47.130 > >> <http://208.46.47.130>> rcpt <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> : > >> found existing recipient > >> 04-22 17:21:34 simscan:[12162]:CLEAN > >> (-6.20/99.00):20.2626s:April Edition of > >> MySurvey.com Opinion > >> > Matters:208.46.47.130:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:ac [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> 04-22 17:21:34 tcpserver: end 12162 status 0 > >> > >> > >> After receiving the entire message, I see this portion that > >> was received > >> after the part logged by spamdyke: > >> <IMG > >> > SRC="https://www.mysurvey.com/gems/gems_open_tracking.cfm?indi d=14072172&cmpid=1105&r=1720290&rundate=22-APR-2008+11%3a52%3a55> &z=67129618CF0844A786F0E0A6C20C49CD > >> > <https://www.mysurvey.com/gems/gems_open_tracking.cfm?indid=14 072172&cmpid=1105&r=1720290&rundate=22-APR-2008+11%3a52%3a55&z=> 67129618CF0844A786F0E0A6C20C49CD>"border="0" > >> width="1" height="1"> > >> > >> ------=_Layout_Part_DC7E1BB5_1105_4DB3_BAE3_2A6208EB099A-- > >> > >> > >> Any idea why this would timeout (consistently, like > >> clockwork) with > >> spamdyke, but not without it? This message timed > out all day > >> long with > >> spamdyke, but was received successfully on the > first attempt > >> without > >> spamdyke. Did spamdyke somehow choke on the last bit? > >> > >> FWIW, it appears that the entire email was a bit hosed, as > >> the html did not > >> render properly in the client view (mac mail) once > the entire > >> message was > >> received. > >> > >> -- > >> -Eric 'shubes' > >> _______________________________________________ > >> spamdyke-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > >> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Paulo Henrique Fonseca > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> --- > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> spamdyke-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users > >> > > ___ > > > > .mdEmail and .mdSecureIM allow tramsmission of PHI in > compliance with HIPAA. > > Each is included when you register a .md Domain Name. > > http://www.max.md/register.php?affid=footer1 > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > spamdyke-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users > > > _______________________________________________ > spamdyke-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users > _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
