Please keep the conversation on the list. I've partially obfuscated the
email addresses in your log extract.
--On 19 May 2009 15:20:23 -0500 schmerold2@??? wrote:
> Guess new server is not going to help:
> [root@mx0 ~]# grep 1M6Vfd-0000VR-Vl /var/log/exim/main.log
> 2009-05-19 15:13:16 1M6Vfd-0000VR-Vl <=
> ESC1102585670301_1102184301057_xxxx@???
> H=ccm32.constantcontact.com [208.75.123.228] P=esmtp S=29124
> id=1102585670301.1102184301057.xxxx.7.241610FF@scheduler
> 2009-05-19 15:13:17 1M6Vfd-0000VR-Vl => xxxx@??? R=internal
> T=remote_smtp H=mail.katy.com [216.86.147.164] X=TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256
> 2009-05-19 15:13:17 1M6Vfd-0000VR-Vl Completed
> [root@mx0 ~]#
>
> We are processing in under a minute.
This log entry doesn't prove that. The first line was logged when you
accepted the message. The question is, what was the period from their
making a connection to that point. To get that, you need to make your
logging more verbose. Check the documentation for log_selector (section
49.15 Reducing or increasing what is logged).
You probably want to add some of these: smtp_connection
smtp_incomplete_transaction smtp_no_mail smtp_protocol_error
smtp_syntax_error ident_timeout
> I am not sure best way to get a reliable mean, median, mode
>
>
>
>
> Ian Eiloart wrote:
>>
>>
>> --On 18 May 2009 12:32:30 -0500 schmerold2@??? wrote:
>>
>>> It does seem like we are going to need to beef up the Exim hardware and
>>> perhaps go to local RBL.
>>
>> Really? Check your logs to see if you can work out how long you're
>> taking to return OK. If it's less than five minutes, then this (a) isn't
>> your problem, and (b) is probably defending you from quite a lot of spam.
>>
>>>
>>> Lena@??? wrote:
>>>>> From: schmerold2@gmail
>>>>
>>>>> We are getting duplicate emails. It seems to be the same senders,
>>>>> however not every one of their emails duplicate. 5% of mails from
>>>>> Charter.net will duplicate, 10% of mails from Cox will duplicate, 100%
>>>>> of mails from Interfax.net will duplicate.
>>>>
>>>>> spamd_address = 127.0.0.1 783
>>>>
>>>> I guess that your spam-filter queries some RBL, and one or more of them
>>>> timeout because dead or for paying customers only.
>>>> Try switch spam-filtering via spamd off temporarily.
>>>> If that doesn't help then try to switch virus-filtering off
>>>> temporarily.
>>
>>
>>
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
