Re: [exim] multi-stage fallback

2009/2/3 Nigel Metheringham <nigel.metheringham@???>:
> By definition this box is only getting the least deliverable messages.
>
> Which would make me wonder about the idea of very frequent queue
> runners (but feel free to show me this feeling is wrong).

You are correct - this server is full of mail to domains that are
currently not accepting mail, hosts that impose greylisting, or any
other reason for the mail not being immediately deliverable.

This isn't a problem I can break down by domain, as we're talking
about mail going from inside our network to outside.

The idea of breaking down the problem by time was to allow for a
fallback host to handle mail for the first 4 hours, where it might be
being greylisted - allowing for the queue runners to quickly deal with
such things, and not get bogged down with 10k's of older mail.

I'm welcome to suggestions that I'm potentially dealing with the issue
incorrectly, I'm certainly not set on the idea of multi-stage
fallbacks. I do remember this being demonstrated by Phil at a
conference I went to in Cambridge though....

> You do want to ensure that messages have been routed, so that when a
> delivery succeeds, another message can be attempted in the same session.

Sorry, can you expand on what you mean here?

> Tweaking of timeouts to avoid tarpits may be useful.

Any suggestions here would be very welcome.

Thanks for all those who have posted so far.