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

Sam Varshavchik wrote:

> Rodrigo Severo writes:
>
>> Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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?
>
>
> Right. And if Courier cannot contact the primary MX, it will then try
> to contact one randomly-chosen next priority MX.

Sam, you mention several times ""

>
>> 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.
>
>
> Then you have your answer. Their mail servers are broken.

No dispute here. I agree with you.

> There's nothing that Courier can do here. Courier will not disconnect
> and reconnect to some other MX. Courier will only try to contact the
> next MX if it didn't connect at all to the first MX.

Why? If Courier contacted a MX and the connection times out at the
middle of the smtp conversation, why can't Courier wait the same amount
of time is already does and then try to connect to another MX server?
Where is the abuse here?

> Once a working MX is contacted, it is expected to be able to receive
> and deliver a message. If any error occurs, Courier will try again at
> some later point in time.

This is perfect. I am only suggesting that at this same "later point in
time" you mentioned Courier tries a different MX.

> To do anything else would be viewed as abusive behavior, by many places.

I'm sorry but if we don't change the current delivery retry schedule
there isn't any abuse. Could you please clarify why making the second
delivery try at a different MX be considered abuse?


Thanks again for your attention,

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