I'm a bit confused here. If I understand you correctly, your server is running spamdyke. Your MUA delivers a (large) message to your server, which accepts it without errors. Then your server attempts to deliver it to a remote server that is not running spamdyke. The remote server times out (repeatedly) and the message (eventually) bounces.
I'm confused because the outbound connections from your server don't pass through spamdyke. Unless the remote server is also running spamdyke, I don't see how spamdyke could be at fault. -- Sam Clippinger Felix Buenemann wrote: > Hi Sam, > > Sam Clippinger schrieb: > >> The last timeout bug (that I know of) was fixed in 3.1.8. I haven't >> received any reports of timeout problems in 4.0 (yet). If you can >> trigger this problem with 4.0, please try to capture a full log and >> let's arrange some way to get it to me (my server won't accept 50 MB >> emails, sorry). >> > > The problem occured with spamdyke 4.0.3, I'm currently running 4.0.4. > > It happened when sending to a specific target mail server, but this > should be irrelevant because the mail gets accepted into the qmail-queue > first, so timeouts cannot be triggered by a destination mailserver, right? > > I'll check if I can arrange a test with full-log enabled during the next > few days, when it doesn't hurt productive use of the mta and will report > back once I got the data. > > >> -- Sam Clippinger >> > > -- Felix Buenemann > > >> Eric Shubert wrote: >> >>> Felix Buenemann wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I'd like to ask about your opinion on a good value for idle-timeout-secs >>>> – I've started with a value of 60 seconds, which strangely caused >>>> TIMEOUTs during mail delivery of large mails (over 10MB) from clinet >>>> MTAs with SMTP AUTH (specifically the mail path was: Client MS Exchange >>>> (DSL upstream 512 kbps) -> Spamdyke SMTP AUTH -> qmail -> target MTA). >>>> >>>> I have now raised the idle timeout value to 180 secs, which seems to fix >>>> the problem for now, but I wonder what happens with eg. 50 or 100 MB mails. >>>> >>>> The strange thing is that the idle and not the connection timeout got >>>> triggered, because supposedly there is never such a long period of no >>>> traffic during sending a large mail. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Felix Buenemann >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> What version are you running? There was a bug in most 3.x versions that >>> would timeout on large emails when there was no interruption. Check the >>> documentation's change log to verify which version it was fixed in. There >>> haven't been any reports of this problem with 4.x TTBOMK. Of course, Sam >>> would know for sure. >>> >>> >>> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
