 | Start a set with this search |
 | Include this search in one of my sets |
 | Exclude this search from one of my sets |
 | Permalink to these results Paste this link in email or IM: |
 | Atom feed for tracking future search results Paste this URL into your reader: |
6 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRe: [courier-users] "Notice: mail del...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Greg Earle | Jul 26, 2005 8:26 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 27, 2005 3:49 am | |
| Sander Holthaus - Orange XL | Jul 27, 2005 4:11 am | |
| Flavio Stanchina | Jul 27, 2005 9:50 am | |
| Tim Hunter | Jul 27, 2005 10:20 am | |
| Greg Earle | Jul 28, 2005 6:54 am |
| Permalink for this message Paste this link in email or IM: |
| Permalink for this thread Paste this link in email or IM: |
| Atom feed for this thread Paste this URL into your reader: |
| Subject: | Re: [courier-users] "Notice: mail delivery status" messages sent to Postmaster on secondary MX delivery failures? | Actions... |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Greg Earle (ear...@isolar.DynDNS.ORG) | |
| Date: | Jul 28, 2005 6:54:03 am | |
| List: | net.sourceforge.lists.courier-users | |
On Jul 27, 2005, at 10:23 AM, "Tim Hunter" <ti...@brokenbits.com> wrote:
Flavio Stanchina said:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Is there any way to configure Courier to *not* generate DSNs for this kind of situation?
No. This is how SMTP is supposed to work.
You will have to either stop using a secondary MX, or reconfigure your spam filter to drop unwanted mail, instead of rejecting it.
That's fine, but how does one set up a backup MX without a secondary MX?
a backup MX is not really needed anymore, everyone on the Internet that is running a mailserver should have a good enough connection to recieve mail in a timely fashion. Even if your mailserver is not reachable for over a day, the sending mailserver will queue it up for typically many days before you will start losing mail.
I have my work mail server be a secondary (10) MX for my home mail server (5) because (a) it's convenient; and (b) it means I get to keep control over my own e-mail.
Here's an actual scenario where it came in handy: I went on a trip overseas for 2 1/2 weeks from Christmas 2001 into January 2002, and at some point during the trip, my home ISP kindly reconfigured their network and all of my hosts were given new IP addresses without me knowing what they were.
Because my mails piled up on my work mail server, I was not only able to see what they were from halfway across the world but I was also able to hold them in abeyance 'til I got back and prevent them from being auto-barfed back at the 4 or 5 day mark. I considered this extremely useful.
(As for rejecting SPAM at the front door, I only do it for blatantly high SpamAssassin scores, and I've spent enough time tuning my SpamAssassin rules that I don't get any FPs anymore. I don't like to accept and delete because that way there is no feedback that tells the spammer it was simply rejected outright. Perhaps I'm delusional, but I'm convinced that my total rate of incoming SPAM has lessened due to this reject-at-the-front-door policy.)
Anyway, I think I might have to take Sam's suggestion and drop the secondary MX'ing. The same scenario occurs when mail comes in that generates 550 User unknowns as well (i.e., usually mis-targeted SPAM that uses a bad address).
What baffles me however is why there's been this sudden increase in these DSNs since I moved my Courier server into full production use. The machine has been my secondary MX all along, for well over a year, and then I moved it into place as our "real" mail server and suddenly it's DSNing all over the place - it doesn't make sense. I did not change anything fundamental in the Courier setup that would impact this; just changed the machine name everywhere I could find it, with a few tweaks to the aliases. Surely I should've been getting them all along; not just now?
- Greg