Re: SPF problems too
ac <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.australia |
|---|---|
| Organization | acmain |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 23:04:45 +1100 Steve Walsh <[email protected]> wrote: > condensed email answering several complaints and addressing some > statements; > okay, you have reduced your lifetime? (or increased your max_mess?) we are now down to 15 minutes! - and much closer to fifo - or it is because everyone has gone to bed and the que is empty :) you are most welcome to send me the stats from say 30 days so that i can help you calculate the optimal _lock batch etc.? all your comments below noted and everyone here seems to know that you are doing a bang up job (i now know that as well) thank you :) > On 01/15/2016 09:16 PM, ac wrote: > > There seems to be a bug when the sendque is calculated > > On 01/15/2016 09:37 PM, Noel Butler wrote: > > > > AC, > > > > There is nothing to worry about, this list server has always been > > slow ass,taking 20-30 mins at times to send out, clearly an issue > > with the server itself > > Mailman's Qrunner doesn't process the queue FIFO. Instead, it opens > up the directory and processes the entries sequentially. As qrunner > processes stuff, it deletes those files. So as new stuff comes in, > they get stored as close to the start of the directory inode as > possible, so when qrunner reaches a timeout, quits and restarts, if > it hasn't processed everything in the directory, it starts over with > newer stuff, leaving older stuff deep into the inode -- and it'll > never GET to that stuff deep in the inode until the system quiets > down and it's given a change to catch up. > > As I've already indicated, we're working to fix this issue, but > that's why AC is seeing mail come in out of order. It's the way the > software unfortunately operates. It's a bit of a stretch to jump from > the way the software operates to indicate that people aren't doing > their job, or that the system is broken, and just being ignored, but, > congratulations, you made it. > > > On 01/15/2016 08:57 PM, Russell Coker wrote: > > Thanks for the vote of confidence in my abilities. I do make > > mistakes on occasion, and in retrospect just adding a DMARC entry > > and sending mail to lists was a mistake. But a correctly behaving > > list won't unsubscribe people because of a mistake made by one > > member. > > In all seriousness, how will the list server know what happened here? > You were experimenting with DMARC, there was a configuration error > made ( a mail server error? from RC? uh oh Brent, better find some > tightey whiteys), and a flurry of bounces came in. Mailman did what > mailman is programmed to do. > > > On 01/15/2016 09:06 PM, Russell Coker wrote: > > Also do we even have a problem that greylisting will solve? The > > server does SPF checks so anyone who has a SPF record with -ALL > > won't have their mail spoofed. The server will only accept mail > > from subscribers so we won't have a problem of spam from random > > addresses being sent. > > As you've probably seen in the mail headers, the host is called > "mailhost". > > "mailhost" does many things for LA, of which the mailman lists is > only a small thing. It does all the SMTP and IMAP for the LCA and > PyCon-AU teams, and, when we have the chance, it will do it all for > Linux Australia. It also does mail filtering for the various RT > instances that are in use by LA, LCA, PYCON and others. This means we > get a lot of spam. A lot. Any of the list admins will tell you how > much spam gets through the filters as it stands, even when we're > quite aggressive. > > Add to that the amount of time it takes a conference team to police > spam into RT queueus (hint - we spent at least 2.5 hours a week > clearing spam out of the queues for LCA2013 as the conference > approached and the addresses got wider and wider exposure. that's 2.5 > hours a week we're not prepping for the conference. After a while, > that adds up), and you'll probably start to understand why mailhost > is configured the way it is. > > I'm happy to discuss any aspect of this with people at LCA, which I'm > sure everyone here will be attending. > > regards > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus