On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, John W Baxter wrote:
> At 17:11 +0100 10/11/2000, Philip Hazel wrote:
> > timeout_frozen_after = 5d
> >
> >This would operate like this: if a queue runner found a frozen messsage
> >that was that old, it would get rid of it, in one of two ways:
> >
> > (a) If the message is not a bounce message, it will generate a bounce,
> > exactly as if the -Mg option had been used to force Exim to give
> > up.
> >
> > (b) If the message is a bounce message, it will just discard it.
> >
> >Anybody like to comment?
>
> Although I haven't run into the problem since early in our Exim experience,
> I think the above makes good sense. It's possible that case (a) will
> create a frozen bounce in exchange for the message which was dealt with,
> but that will eventually go away...and it's also possible that the give up
> message will go through and be helpful to the original sender.
Deja vu! I couldn't remember posting that, until I read the date of my
posting. A whole year ago! Things have moved on: timeout_frozen_after
was implemented for release 3.20 (Nov 25 2000).
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
