On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 10:44:04AM +0100, Tore Anderson wrote:
> I'd like to see Exim be able to handle separate queues, without any
> hackery required from the user. ...
> One use case where I want this would be in a few Exim clusters owned
> by some major mobile operators in Norway, which relay MMS messages
> between most operators in Scandinavia and a few somewhere else. I'd
> very much be able to have one separate queue per peering operator.
> Why? Because if /one/ of the majors peers have troubles accepting, the
> queue fills with deferred messages to that operator, which ends up
> affecting traffic to all other peers as well. And because of the high
> volume passing trough the system, using hacks as mentioned above would
> affect overall performance too much.
> How about it? Is it doable without too much hassle?
> PS: If someone has another clever solution to the problem I
> described above, I'd be most interested in hearing about it.
Is it possible for you to use UUCP for the transport? I've been
using UUCP to queue mail for intermittently connected hosts since my
pre-internet, pre-exim, smail and FIDONet days.
If you can't deliver via SMTP right away, your router can fail over to
a UUCP router/transport. That takes messages out of Exim's queue and
hands them off to UUCP which queues them by host and was designed from
the beginning as a store-and-forward transport protocol.
Ideally, your peers would run UUCP and there'd be cron scripts to
periodically poll... Hmmm... I wonder if there's a way you can test
when the peer is up again, pickup that peer's UUCP queue yourself,
and reinject it back into Exim. You'd have to consider a possible,
local Exim <-> UUCP routing loop, but it might be doable...
> Tore Anderson
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven A. Reisman <sar@???> P.O. Box 409
Press Enter LLP 421 N 2nd Street
715-426-2100 or 651-436-5254 River Falls, WI 54022
----------------------------------------------------------------------
