Nigel Metheringham wrote:
> [I'm tempted not to answer because I am reinforcing the bad behaviour of
> resubmitting queries to the list]
Understood -- with the large volume of this list though, sometimes you
have to be a little squeaky to be heard (having posted questions in the
past and never gotten an answer). Thanks for responding, appreciated.
> Places I would look:-
> * The passed over message is a bounce. Have you got any special
> handling for null senders?
No, no special rules. This is happening with non-bounce messages as
well, I just happened to have chosen one which was a (fake?) bounce. The
actual type of email getting skipped doesn't seem to have a pattern.
> * Is NFS involved? Could the forward file not be accessible
> temporarily.
Yes! -- all homedirs (Maildir) are located on a NFS mounted NetApp. I
had also thought this could be the case, but didn't know how to approach
it. Shouldn't exim defer mail delivery to the user if the forward file
is locked or something?
Any ideas what I can do to debug/alleviate this, assuming it's the
cause? Ie, defer delivery to the user if forwardfile is locked, much in
the same way it's deferred if there are syntax errors inside of it.
> * Are you detecting on subject (or other) headers? If so could
> there be multiple headers (which might be collapsed on
> delivery).
Both/multiple. The actual ruleset looks like:
# SPAM filter
if
$header_subject: contains "[*SPAM*]" or
$message_body: contains "^Subject:(.*)iso-8859-1" or
$header_X-Spam-Status: contains "Yes," or
$header_X-DSPAM-Result: contains "Spam"
then
save $home/Maildir/.Junk/
finish
endif
This ruleset does work (for multiple users), and if you pass the
offending email through it by hand with exim, it matches. Which is
leading me to believe the forward file is being skipped.
> Additionally you appear to be doing scan and reinjection spam handling.
> Are you sure thats a good idea?
It's been working for a looooong time (I posted a SpamAssassin + DSPAM
howto a long time ago actually). AFAIK, other solutions like exiscan and
whatnot aren't as non-intrusive as a scan/tag/reinject scenario. At our
place, the user is responsible for the actual spam handling, it's all
delivered to them with subject and/or header tags.
I can post the routers/transports if need be?
-te
--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid, Inc |
http://www.fluid.com
