On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:36:40PM -0700, Tom Samplonius wrote:
> You can ignore bounced bounces, rather than freezing them.
Erm, I'm sorry!?!? Do you run anything even remotely approaching a reliable
mail service? do you claim to? A human should look at bounced bounces and
try and deal with them (which may be deleting them if they are spam, but
which may be misconfiguration errors, which can be fixed, if they are not)
Basically, this is why there is a postmaster. If you don't want to do a
postmaster job, then don't do it, but don't tell other people that you
can do it without understanding the implications of what you are doing.
> Why keep bounced bounces around for even 2 days? Do you even look at
> them? If not there is no need to keep them, just use
> "ignore_errmsg_errors". They are hard errors, and retries won't change
> that. You should only freeze them unless you intend to examine them.
I assume by "unless" you mean "if".
In a reliable mail system *NO* message gets dropped on the floor without
being delivered finally, delivering a bounce, or passing by a human
administrator. The '250' response in SMTP to the final '.' of the message
means that you take this responsibility seriously. If you are so deluged
with bounced bounces, then can I suggest that you enable the
receiver_verify option in exim3 or the appropriate ACL option in exim4.
> 218,000 deliveries yesterday. No frozen messages!
And reliable as a chocolate teapot.
It pains me to see the number of people who don't take mail delivery
seriously, and I wonder why the standards even exist when people flout
them so blatantly.
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@???> http://colondot.net/
