Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: deferred mail expire limit

Expand Messages
  • Sandy Drobic
    ... Probably because the server that was contacted was so hasty it disconnected immediately: telnet mx0.gmx.net 25 554-{mx028} Your address is listed as
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Magnus Bäck wrote:

      >>from the log:
      >>postfix/smtp[7610]: E1477490: to=<_address_>, relay=_host_[_ip_], delay=
      >>435490, status=deferred (host _host_[_ip_] refused to talk to me: 554-{mx049}
      >>Your address is listed as dynamic ...
      >>postfix/qmgr[452]: E1477490: from=<leva@...>, status=expired, returned
      >>to sender
      >
      >
      > The server gives a permanent error code. Why would Postfix defer this
      > for days instead of bouncing it right away?

      Probably because the server that was contacted was so hasty it
      disconnected immediately:

      telnet mx0.gmx.net 25

      554-{mx028} Your address is listed as dynamic on SORBS (dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net)
      554 We are currently not accepting connections from such hosts.

      Connection to host lost.


      And so Postfix tries again and again and again...
      until max_queue_lifetime is reached. :((

      Sandy
    • Deim Ágoston
      ... He says that your server doesn t work as expected. Postfix should bounce the message immediately as it gets the permanent error code. That s why it is
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        >> The server gives a permanent error code. Why would Postfix defer this
        >> for days instead of bouncing it right away?
        > I don't know, please tell me. My mail.log is filled with that message
        > (deferred), the first message's timestamp is dec. 27, and it got expired
        > today (jan. 01).
        > So if I understand you correctly, I must adjust the maximal_queue_lifetime
        > for
        > this kind of error?
        He says that your server doesn't work as expected. Postfix should bounce
        the message immediately as it gets the permanent error code. That's why it
        is permanent. Deferred mails are deferred because there is a temporary
        error which should go away.

        bye,
        Ago
        ps.: and I would change the email address as it's offensive to christian
        people and stuck-up. You're not God, as your email address suggests. I
        don't find ifunny personally.
      • /dev/rob0
        ... This wasn t what you were asking, but perhaps is ultimately your best solution: postconf.5.html#relayhost -- mail to this address is discarded unless
        Message 3 of 10 , Jan 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sunday 2006-January-01 16:15, LeVA wrote:
          > postfix/smtp[7610]: E1477490: to=<_address_>, relay=_host_[_ip_],
          > delay= 435490, status=deferred (host _host_[_ip_] refused to talk to
          > me: 554-{mx049} Your address is listed as dynamic ...

          This wasn't what you were asking, but perhaps is ultimately your best
          solution: postconf.5.html#relayhost
          --
          mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0"
          or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
        • Sandy Drobic
          ... I decided to use a transport to a relay host for the troublesome servers that blocked dynamic ips in suche an abrasive way. It works for the few domains
          Message 4 of 10 , Jan 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            /dev/rob0 wrote:
            > On Sunday 2006-January-01 16:15, LeVA wrote:
            >
            >>postfix/smtp[7610]: E1477490: to=<_address_>, relay=_host_[_ip_],
            >>delay= 435490, status=deferred (host _host_[_ip_] refused to talk to
            >>me: 554-{mx049} Your address is listed as dynamic ...
            >
            >
            > This wasn't what you were asking, but perhaps is ultimately your best
            > solution: postconf.5.html#relayhost

            I decided to use a transport to a relay host for the troublesome servers
            that blocked dynamic ips in suche an abrasive way. It works for the few
            domains that I encountered so far.

            Sandy
          • mouss
            ... Note that some people use block lists for dynamic IPs that have their own definition of what a dynamic IP is. In particular, MAPS RBL (now acquired by
            Message 5 of 10 , Jan 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Sandy Drobic a écrit :
              >
              > I decided to use a transport to a relay host for the troublesome servers
              > that blocked dynamic ips in suche an abrasive way. It works for the few
              > domains that I encountered so far.

              Note that some people use block lists for dynamic IPs that have their
              own definition of what a dynamic IP is. In particular, MAPS RBL (now
              acquired by trend micro...) and SORBS are known to "abuse the system"
              (do they deserve being called power hungry weenies?). unfortunately,
              many people use sorbs. Of course, most missed the fact that sorbs have
              blocked the postfix ML (at least) twice last year (I mean 2005). M.S. (I
              respect his goal) explained that it was a human error, but I don't rely
              on "human errors". as the Chinese saying goes: if someone beats you
              once, it's his fault. If he beats you twice, it's yours.

              best wishes for everybody on list, net and/or earth, even the bad ones
              (including myself;-p).
            • Wietse Venema
              ... Because people expect this, the RFC notwithstanding. http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_skip_5xx_greeting Wietse
              Message 6 of 10 , Jan 1, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Magnus B?ck:
                > > postfix/smtp[7610]: E1477490: to=<_address_>, relay=_host_[_ip_], delay=
                > > 435490, status=deferred (host _host_[_ip_] refused to talk to me: 554-{mx049}
                > > Your address is listed as dynamic ...
                > > postfix/qmgr[452]: E1477490: from=<leva@...>, status=expired, returned
                > > to sender
                >
                > The server gives a permanent error code. Why would Postfix defer this
                > for days instead of bouncing it right away?

                Because people expect this, the RFC notwithstanding.

                http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_skip_5xx_greeting

                Wietse
              • LeVA
                2006. január 2. 02:43, Wietse Venema ... Thanks, this solved it. Daniel -- LeVA
                Message 7 of 10 , Jan 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  2006. január 2. 02:43,
                  Wietse Venema <wietse@...>
                  -> Postfix users <postfix-users@...>,:
                  > > The server gives a permanent error code. Why would Postfix defer this
                  > > for days instead of bouncing it right away?
                  >
                  > Because people expect this, the RFC notwithstanding.
                  >
                  > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_skip_5xx_greeting
                  >
                  Thanks, this solved it.

                  Daniel

                  --
                  LeVA
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.