John Jetmore wrote:
>
> (please keep on list)
>
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Neil Sproston wrote:
>
>> I don't think that is the cause in this case. Exim receives SMTP
>> connections and places them into the /var/spool/exim4_incoming
>> directory. Mailscanner then does its stuff and uses exim with the flag
>> "-DOUTGOING" to place it into the /var/spool/exim4 SPOOLDIR for onward
>> delivery to local users mailbox's or remote servers.
>>
>> This is done by this in exim's config file:
>>
>> .ifdef OUTGOING
>> SPOOLDIR=/var/spool/exim4
>> .else
>> SPOOLDIR=/var/spool/exim4_incoming
>> queue_only = true
>> queue_only_override = false
>> .endif
>>
>> And here is a sample pulled from mainlog where a mail is delivered twice
>> to a local user:
>>
>> 2007-10-03 02:00:34 1IcsbK-0004f1-Np <= misterx@???
>> H=machinex.tuppence.com (application.tuppence.com)
>> [111.111.111.111]:8711 I=[101.101.101.101]:25 P=esmtp S=1554
>> id=14361554.1191373229689.automail.application@???
>> from <misterx@???> for mistery@???
>> 2007-10-03 02:01:28 1IcsbK-0004f1-Np => mistery <mistery@???>
>> F=<misterx@???> P=<misterx@???> R=localuser
>> T=maildir_home S=1674 QT=54s DT=0s
>> 2007-10-03 02:01:28 1IcsbK-0004f1-Np Completed QT=54s
>> 2007-10-03 02:01:34 1IcsbK-0004f1-Np => mistery <mistery@???>
>> F=<misterx@???> P=<misterx@???> R=localuser
>> T=maildir_home S=1780 QT=1m DT=0s
>> 2007-10-03 02:01:34 1IcsbK-0004f1-Np Completed QT=1m
>>
>> NOTE: Names have been changed to protect the innocent.
>
> I have zero explanation for the same message to be delivered with the
> same exim_message_id (1IcsbK-0004f1-Np) to be delivered to the initial
> address (mistery@???) and then the same local user (mistery).
> with different message sizes (S=1674, S=1780) with nothing else being
> logged. I generally think people are too harsh in their responses
> about not obfuscating logs, but in this case it seems possible that
> you obfuscated into uselessness
>
> If you hadn't posted those logs my advice to you would have been to
> look at the headers of the two messages and see where they diverge,
> especially the Received headers. That may still be good advice.
>
> Please read http://wiki.exim.org/DontObfuscate and consider posting
> your logs again without obfuscation.
>
> All of the above still stands, but after rereading your email, it
> seems that the above situation could only be caused by MailScanner
> placing two copies of the mail into your outgoing queue. If
> MailScanner has logs I'd look there to see if it lists it twice.
>
> --John
>
>
First of all my sincerest apologies for misdirecting my reply to
yourself. A simple but stupid mistake on my part.
I would love not to have to obfuscate but unfortunately I am forced too
(or loose my job and maybe liberty) however I can appreciate how
frustrating it can be.
However thanks for your comments they have given me a lead. I had
already checked the MailScanner logs and they only show a single
delivery however that may be for another list.
Again thanks for all your time it is greatly appreciated.
yours,
Neil S.
