Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
From: Geert Hendrickx (ghentelenet.be)
Date: Sun May 11 2008 - 05:04:05 CDT
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 11:05:53PM -0300, Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> Terry Allen wrote:
> | Hi again,
> | I would have to agree with Wietse - in the years my systems have
> Me too. Wietse is right. If some component dies or fails for any reason, I
> want to know
> immediatelly. Via sanity checks, preemptive procedures and/or users
> complaining. Whatever happens first.
> If the system's components are healthy, that'd never happen anyway :)
Why do people always insist to link "unavailable" to "crappy software" ?
This could just as well be about a network problem, or a greylisting daemon
being upgraded, or whatever. For example in the case of greylisting via a
policy daemon, a failure is anything but critical and e-mail could just as
well be accepted instead of deferred. Any greylisting implementation has a
similar "bypass" option for when its database is unavailable.