|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: Interesting observations...
From: Brad Knowles (blk
skynet.be)Date: Tue Aug 29 2000 - 02:01:26 CDT
- Next message: Ralf Hildebrandt: "Re: OT: August DNS Health survey: 80% of .com's are broken!!"
- Previous message: Jim Holthaus: "Re: "real" virtual (was :accepting mails for domains (aka relay))"
- In reply to: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Next in thread: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Next in thread: Russ Allbery: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Reply: Brad Knowles: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Reply: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At 7:29 PM +0200 2000/8/28, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
> IIRC, they exit after serving 100 requests or if a certain amount of
> time has passed or if they detect that a lookup table has changed.
If that's the case, then there's something else going on that is
causing the number of smtpd processes to be continuously kept at the
limit specified in our /etc/postfix/master.conf.
> How about the per-transport delivery concurrency controls combined with
> an alternate (in terms of name) smtp transport to your backend machines and
> transport map entries to route mail to your backend machines through the
> alternate smtp transport? Something along the lines of what I asked about a
> few days ago.
Something like that would help, but I'd rather not have to try to
teach the outbound mail relay machines about all the thousands of
domains that we host and one which system they are hosted. I could
do that, since I have to do it for the front-end machines anyway, but
I'd rather not.
> (That's right, no "connect from xxx" message for hosts which are greeted
> with 5xx. You better count "disconnect from xxx" lines instead).
I'll look at "disconnect from" lines and see how many connections
I'm getting from certain machines. That might be very interesting to
look at....
Thanks!
> Does that mean that your servers reject hosts without reverse DNS?
Yup, they do indeed.
-- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, <blkskynet.be> || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
- Next message: Ralf Hildebrandt: "Re: OT: August DNS Health survey: 80% of .com's are broken!!"
- Previous message: Jim Holthaus: "Re: "real" virtual (was :accepting mails for domains (aka relay))"
- In reply to: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Next in thread: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Next in thread: Russ Allbery: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Reply: Brad Knowles: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Reply: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: Interesting observations..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]