From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 25 18:12:46 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6352D106568B for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:12:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jeffrey@goldmark.org) Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com (out3.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 307C48FC1F for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:12:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jeffrey@goldmark.org) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F5D015B51E; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:12:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:12:45 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: prwQMZe7Yt//9WcA6vqVW9EapIBO7ltrwtKTc5UgdFZj 1219687965 Received: from hagrid.ewd.goldmark.org (n114.ewd.goldmark.org [72.64.118.114]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E055CA7FB; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:12:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: From: Jeffrey Goldberg To: Matthew Seaman In-Reply-To: <48B24804.9080807@infracaninophile.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:12:43 -0500 References: <20080824140625.txre8xer6s0ggwww@webmail.secureserverdot.com> <60071053-118B-47FD-A988-40A18A88D576@goldmark.org> <48B24804.9080807@infracaninophile.co.uk> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) Cc: pete , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MTA advice ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:12:46 -0000 On Aug 25, 2008, at 12:49 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > >> In the old days, if one MTA couldn't reach another it would hold >> stuff in its queue for four or five days. Now, most MTAs appear to >> be configured to give up after 24 hours. > > In which case those mail systems are not in compliance with the RFCs. > RFC 2821 Section 4.5.4.1 says: > > Retries continue until the message is transmitted or the sender gives > up; the give-up time generally needs to be at least 4-5 days. The > parameters to the retry algorithm MUST be configurable. Thanks for that. I will point that out to the appropriate postmasters the next time I see delivery attempts give up before this. Not that it will do much good, but I will try. I wonder whether rfc-ignorant.org has a category for this. Hold on ... Nope. They don't have this category of (2)821 violation. The original poster may wish to take a look at rfc-ignorant.org to make sure that they feel confident that they can run an Internet- friendly mailserver. Cheers, -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/