On Tue, 2002-03-26 at 10:05, Patrick von der Hagen wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 06:39:04AM +0100, ?ukasz Grochal wrote:
> [...]
> > 2) It's possible that such scanning will introduce duplicate messages,
> > as described in RFC1047. <ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1047.txt>
> > I don't believe this is likely to happen unless - again - the
> > system is under high load and can't scan the messages fast enough.
> Hmmm, I wonder....
> First, this RFC advises to use a timeout of five minutes when waiting
> for a 250-message. It should happen very rarely to hit such a timeout
> with a reasonable local_scan-function. But of course, if there is a
> high load and e. g. a virus-scanner is scanning a 30MB-mail, it may
> happen.
I have certainly seen this happen on other mailers - specifically
MimeSweeper on windows boxes. This used to scan messages between
end-of-DATA and returning a status reply - and the process could take
many minutes. There was one instance of this where our MTA (exim)
flattened one into the ground over a long weekend of continually
resending a multi-megabyte message to it.
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
