On 6/8/05, Tim Wilde <twilde@???> wrote:
>[ Replying off-list because this is probably off-topic for exim-dev
at this point ]
>
> auto_thaw deals with more than just bounces. Failed bounces are only one
> thing that can be frozen in Exim and need to be subsequently thawed. If
> some other factor is causing messages to become frozen, it might be
> desirable to auto thaw it, though I don't use that option personally.
> Yes, pretty much regardless of the ignore_bounce_errors_after setting, an
> auto_thaw of 2 hours would probably cause the behavior you're seeing.
At this point I would like to suggest that
a) auto_thaw shouldn't apply to bounces
or that
b) auto_thaw should mandate ignore_bounce_errors_after be evaluated at
the same time (but first) and work as designed (deleting the bounce
after a second failure) -- (so auto_thaw 2h should imply
ignore_bounce_errors_after 2h).
That suggestion should be on topic?
The multi-bounce situation may not be a bug, but perhaps it can be fixed?
Actually, I'm pretty much about done here. We've found that Exim can
easily do this with an auto_thaw parameter set (nothing to do with
ignore_bounce_errors_after, which if it was also used would actually
fix this problem). -- no cron jobs or anything else as complicated or
calculated needed.
I would like to thank both Tim's for the insight and the patience.
Actually, I would like to thank everyone for the patience and the
help.
I hope some of you see this as an actual problem despite being obscure
(and not uncommon), and consider either of my suggestions above or
develop one of your own to help curb all those humans out there. Like
I said, it certainly doesn't reflect well on Exim.
auto_thaw and bounces don't mix, as presumably that is what
ignore_bounce_errors_after is for.
Signed.
