Rennie deGraaf <rdegraaf@???> wrote:
>
>Some explanation of my mail system: one Exim process accepts incoming
>SMTP connections, delivers outbound messages, delivers inbound messages
>whose sender addresses are not in a particular list, and writes all
>other inbound messages to a queue (because not all inbound messages get
>queued, I can't use the queue_only=true option, and thus I get a "defer
>(-1)" error every time something is queued). MailScanner, a spam and
>virus filtering framework, reads messages from that queue, and writes
>them to another queue. A second Exim process reads from the second
>queue and delivers the inbound messages.
Oh dear, I really don't think that setup is a good idea. For a simple
example, if an outbound message is deferred then MailScanner will pick
it up and scan it, which is not what you intend.
It would be much better to have a more conventional MailScanner
setup and instead of using Exim's configuration to decide what
is scanned, use MailScanner's.
>It appears that all messages were handled properly by
>the first Exim process (PID 16300), but then the second process (PID
>16357), which should only deliver the message to user17@??? (as
>this is a local alias), actually delivered the message to most, but not
>all, of the other addresses as well.
Since MailScanner doesn't expect a spool file to contain addresses
that have already been delivered, I would expect you to see duplicate
deliveries like this or similar misbehaviour.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot@???>
http://dotat.at/
BERWICK ON TWEED TO WHITBY: SOUTH 3 OR 4 LOCALLY 5 VEERING WEST TO SOUTHWEST
LATER, STILL AT 3 OR 4 LOCALLY 5. RISK OF SHOWERS. GOOD LOCALLY MODERATE.
GENERALLY SLIGHT.
