> Re: [exim] suspected mail loop - Not.eml
>
> Subject:
> Re: [exim] suspected mail loop - Not
> From:
> Viktor Dukhovni <exim-users@???>
> Date:
> 17/02/2023, 16:18
>
> To:
> graeme vetterlein via Exim-users <exim-users@???>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 01:54:23PM +0000, graeme vetterlein via
> Exim-users wrote:
>
>> However, tracking the original message down, it was from IBM and
>> contains e.g.
>>
>> *29 matches for "Received" in buffer:
>> 1670514307.H745399P3100673.ybox.xxx *
>>
>> and they all appear legitimate** , it really did pass through 29
>> servers !
> An impressive hop count, did it go through mailing lists and then get
> forwarded from a user's portable email address (an alumni alias or
> similar) to their current actual mailbox?
It was an "office admin post" (Office closed, water leak) I guess it
started on somebody's laptop, then to his incoming gateway, hence to
a central(ish) mail server, out to some group server, hence to mail
automation, then a "mailing list" sender, couple more virus checks etc,
finally my MX record, which is a relay/rewriter , to my ISP and finally
my mail server.
..problem being , it will likely always follow this route (so I'll use
the advice from Heiko [below]). Just wondering if the current default is
OK for recent usecases (maybe this is is unusual ? or Maybe it's getting
common?)
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 10:13:28AM +0100, Heiko Schlichting via
> Exim-users wrote:
>
>> That's hard to answer. The following is set on our servers:
>>
>> $ exim -bP received_headers_max
>> received_headers_max = 50
> FWIW, this (50) matches the Postfix default:
>
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#hopcount_limit
>
> -- Viktor.
# exim -bP received_headers_max
received_headers_max = 30
OK, looks like I'll go to 50 too. Thanks Heiko & Viktor.
