Re: [courier-users] Re: Automatically use secondary MX host if primary

Sam Varshavchik wrote:

> Rodrigo Severo writes:
>
>> 1. Courier gets some 4xx error. There are other MXs available but as
>> far as I can Courier tries the same MX several times if not all the
>> time so message delivery is unnecessarily delayed or delivery even
>> fails. Wouldn't it be better to try other MXs (same or different
>> weights) in a round robin or similar fashion in every delivery
>> attempt (obviously respecting weight precedence)?
>
>
> No. This is abusive behavior. If I see someone banging on all of my
> MXes despite being told to go away, they get firewalled as a likely
> spam spew source.

I'm sorry but there is cleary some confusion here Sam. There is no abuse
on what I'm suggesting. I'm not defending changes to the schedule with
which Courier tries to deliver each message. I have not mentioned nor
implied such a thing. Retryalpha, retrybeta, retrygamma and retrydelta
keep their meanings and effects. What I am suggesting is that when time
comes to give another try to deliver the same message, a different
server is used. No abuse at all just a more robust use of an already
available resource: the pool of MXs.

>
>> 2. Courier's connection to the other server times out so it defferes
>> message delivery. There are other MXs available but as far as I can
>> Courier tries the same MX several times if not all the time so
>> message delivery is unnecessarily delayed or delivery even fails.
>> Wouldn't it be better to try other MXs (same or different weights) in
>> a round robin or similar fashion in every delivery attempt (obviously
>> respecting weight precedence)?
>
>
> If there are equal priority MXes each attempt should go to a random MX.

As I already said, if this is the current behaviour of Courier that's
good. What I am suggesting here is that, if all top priority MXs were
already tried, why not step to the next priority level and try to
deliver the message to them? After all that's why they exist isn't it?

>
>>
>> scorsese Maildir # dnsmx br.abnamro.com
>> 30 plum03ap.abnamro.com
>> 30 walnut001ap.abnamro.com
>> 10 brsmtp02.br.abnamro.com
>> 10 brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com
>> 15 naxpf001.abnamro.com
>> 15 naxpf002.abnamro.com
>> 15 naxpf003.abnamro.com
>> 15 naxpf011.abnamro.com
>> 15 naxpf012.abnamro.com
>> 15 naxpf013.abnamro.com
>
>
> I don't have any issues connecting to these MXes. Sounds to me like
> you have a networking problems.


Have you just tried to connect to the server or have you gone all the
way sending a message? I have just tried to send a message using telnet
to brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com with the following result:

scorsese rodrigo # telnet brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com 25
Trying 200.208.15.131...
Connected to brsmtp04.br.abnamro.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 Welcome
ehlo scorsese.fabricadeideias.com
250-br.abnamro.com
250-SIZE 6291456
250-ETRN
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-DSN
250-VRFY
250-AUTH
250 8BITMIME
mail from: <FAKE1@fabricadeideias.com>

and here the connection hangs.

Right now I'm reaching this server from an entirely different connection
than the one I was using when I sent my first message.


Rodrigo Severo



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
courier-users mailing list
courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/.../courier-users