On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, Ian wrote:
> > Yeah, it would be nice to have an option called
> > remote_max_parallel.
>
> ;-) This option only deals with parallel to deliveries to one host not to
> many.
Not true. I think the documentation is clear, isn't it?
"if a message has to be delivered to more than one remote host,
or if several copies have to be sent to the same remote host, then up to
remote_max_parallel deliveries are done simultaneously"
> Nearly all mailing list programs rely on the :include: syntax present in MTAs
> to some degree or other. The behaviour I was referring to is where one
> address out of say 200 fails slowly and causes every other delivery to wait
> there until it does fail.
remote_max_parallel should get round that.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
