Slow queue configuration

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Slow queue configuration

Gary Smith-19
Hello,
 
I'm trying to implement a custom queue for lycos.  For some off the wall reason they have our IP randomly listed as being in spamhaus.  That is, lycos does.  spamhaus had it listed when we received the range 60 days ago, but that was fixed 60 days ago...
 
Because we have a lot of random mail being believered to a couple lycos users, I figured I'd implement a seperate queue for them (as well as AOL while I was at it).  Following the troubleshooting methods from http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html, I did the following
 
Added to master.cf
 
lycoscom               unix - - n - 10 smtpd
aolcom                 unix - - n - 10 smtpd
Added to main.cf
 
transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport_queues
lycoscom_destination_concurrency_failed_cohort_limit = 100
lysoccom_destination_concurrency_limit = 20
aolcom_destination_concurrency_failed_cohort_limit = 100
aolcom_destination_concurrency_limit = 20
Added to transport_queues (and postmap'd it as well)
 
aol.com                         aolcom:
lycos.com                       lycoscom:
But I still seem to be getting all of the mail in the deferred queue anyway.
 
                               T  5 10 20 40 80 160 320 640 1280 1280+
                        TOTAL 46  0  6  0  0  2   0   0   1    2    35
                    lycos.com 36  0  0  0  0  0   0   0   0    1    35
                      aol.com  6  0  2  0  0  2   0   0   1    1     0

Is this the expected result or should I see the mail fall into their own queues.  The queue was implemented two days ago, so all of the email for AOL should have been in the new queues.

Any suggestions?

 

 

 


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Slow queue configuration

Gary Smith-19
Re: Slow queue configuration

> Added to master.cf

> lycoscom               unix - - n - 10 smtpd
> aolcom                 unix - - n - 10 smtpd

Should bed without the "d" in smtpd. You are trying to deliver mail to
AOL and Lycos right ? Then you should not deliver using a smtp SERVER,
but client.

Jesper,
 
It's that second set of eye's that I'm missing.  I didn't even notice that I had the "d" and the end.  I'll give it a try and see if that fixes the problem.  If it doesn't, I'll be back for more...
 
Thanks,
 
Gary
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Slow queue configuration

Noel Jones-2
In reply to this post by Gary Smith-19
Gary W. Smith wrote:

> Hello,
>  
> I'm trying to implement a custom queue for lycos.  For some off the wall
> reason they have our IP randomly listed as being in spamhaus.  That is,
> lycos does.  spamhaus had it listed when we received the range 60 days
> ago, but that was fixed 60 days ago...
>  
> Because we have a lot of random mail being believered to a couple lycos
> users, I figured I'd implement a seperate queue for them (as well as AOL
> while I was at it).  Following the troubleshooting methods from
> http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html, I did the following
>  
> Added to master.cf
>  
> lycoscom               unix - - n - 10 smtpd
> aolcom                 unix - - n - 10 smtpd

smtpd?  Typo in your config or just this message?  Should be
smtp, no "d".


> Added to main.cf
>  
> transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport_queues
> lycoscom_destination_concurrency_failed_cohort_limit = 100
> lysoccom_destination_concurrency_limit = 20
> aolcom_destination_concurrency_failed_cohort_limit = 100
> aolcom_destination_concurrency_limit = 20
> Added to transport_queues (and postmap'd it as well)
>  
> aol.com                         aolcom:
> lycos.com                       lycoscom:
> But I still seem to be getting all of the mail in the deferred queue anyway.
>  
>                                T  5 10 20 40 80 160 320 640 1280 1280+
>                         TOTAL 46  0  6  0  0  2   0   0   1    2    35
>                     lycos.com 36  0  0  0  0  0   0   0   0    1    35
>                       aol.com  6  0  2  0  0  2   0   0   1    1     0
>
> Is this the expected result or should I see the mail fall into their own
> queues.  The queue was implemented two days ago, so all of the email for
> AOL should have been in the new queues.
>

Yes, this is the expected result.  Postfix queues are logical
entities used for scheduling, not physically separate as in
some other mailers.  All deferred mail will show up in deferred.

If they have you blacklisted adding a separate queue is
unlikely to make much difference.  If they do accept some mail
but rate-limit what they will accept, the new
*_destination_rate_delay parameters in the 2.6 snapshots might
help.  (Postfix snapshots are stable server-quality software,
but user interfaces and features may change before final release).

If you are unable to send _any_ mail to lycos and aol
directly, use your transport_maps to route their mail through
your ISP or some third party.

And attempt to contact postmaster at those sites.
http://postmaster.aol.com/  don't know about lycos, but they
probably have something similar.

Of course a last ditch solution is to get a different IP from
your ISP.  Most ISP's don't seem to like this though - you'll
have to go through several people who say they can't before
hopefully you find someone who says they can.

--
Noel Jones
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Slow queue configuration

Gary Smith-19
Re: Slow queue configuration
If they have you blacklisted adding a separate queue is
unlikely to make much difference.  If they do accept some mail
but rate-limit what they will accept, the new
*_destination_rate_delay parameters in the 2.6 snapshots might
help.  (Postfix snapshots are stable server-quality software,
but user interfaces and features may change before final release).
Noel,
 
AOL is fine.  We're sending about 6000/day to about 50 AOL people.  Sometimes they are in bursts so I wanted to rate limit those. 
 
Lycos on the otherhand doesn't have us blacklisted but theire servers show us in spamhaus, though we have verified the IP time and time again.  We're in dialog with them.  It's a slow process.  Ironically, some mails do sneak through to Lycos and we're only sending to 5 specific users.  For some odd reason though we might have a couple hundred in the deferred queue for Lycos while new ones are still hitting the active queue and timing out after about 2 minutes.  So when a rush of mail comes though this seems to have a negative effect.  Note that this is an outgoing only mail server (it's actually from phpbb forum software for topic update notifications).
 
I'll definitely consider the changes in 2.6. 
 
Thanks,
 
Gary

 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Slow queue configuration

mouss-2
In reply to this post by Gary Smith-19
Gary W. Smith wrote:

> Hello,
>  
> I'm trying to implement a custom queue for lycos.  For some off the wall reason they have our IP randomly listed as being in spamhaus.  That is, lycos does.  spamhaus had it listed when we received the range 60 days ago, but that was fixed 60 days ago...
>  
> Because we have a lot of random mail being believered to a couple lycos users, I figured I'd implement a seperate queue for them (as well as AOL while I was at it).  Following the troubleshooting methods from http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html <http://www.postfix.org/QSHAPE_README.html> , I did the following
>  
> Added to master.cf
>  
> lycoscom               unix - - n - 10 smtpd
> aolcom                 unix - - n - 10 smtpd
>
> Added to main.cf
>  
> transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport_queues
> lycoscom_destination_concurrency_failed_cohort_limit = 100
> lysoccom_destination_concurrency_limit = 20
> aolcom_destination_concurrency_failed_cohort_limit = 100
> aolcom_destination_concurrency_limit = 20
>
> Added to transport_queues (and postmap'd it as well)
>  
> aol.com                         aolcom:
> lycos.com                       lycoscom:
>
> But I still seem to be getting all of the mail in the deferred queue anyway.
>  
>                                T  5 10 20 40 80 160 320 640 1280 1280+
>                         TOTAL 46  0  6  0  0  2   0   0   1    2    35
>                     lycos.com 36  0  0  0  0  0   0   0   0    1    35
>                       aol.com  6  0  2  0  0  2   0   0   1    1     0
>
> Is this the expected result or should I see the mail fall into their own queues.  The queue was implemented two days ago, so all of the email for AOL should have been in the new queues.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>  

do you send via the same MTA as you do here? If so:

your IP has a generic rDNS:
$ host 209.209.83.2
2.83.209.209.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
209-209-83-2.static.oak.inreach.net.

and your helo does not resolve:
$ host pxtoakiis01.pxt.primeexalia.com
Host pxtoakiis01.pxt.primeexalia.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)


These are enough to get you blocked/discarded/quarantined/tagged whether
listed in a DNSBL or not.











Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Slow queue configuration

Wietse Venema
In reply to this post by Gary Smith-19
> If they have you blacklisted adding a separate queue is
> unlikely to make much difference.  If they do accept some mail
> but rate-limit what they will accept, the new
> *_destination_rate_delay parameters in the 2.6 snapshots might
> help.  (Postfix snapshots are stable server-quality software,
> but user interfaces and features may change before final release).

*_destination_rate_delay is also available in the stable release (version 2.5).

        Wietse
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Slow queue configuration

Gary Smith-19
In reply to this post by mouss-2
Re: Slow queue configuration

do you send via the same MTA as you do here? If so:

your IP has a generic rDNS:
$ host 209.209.83.2
2.83.209.209.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
209-209-83-2.static.oak.inreach.net.

and your helo does not resolve:
$ host pxtoakiis01.pxt.primeexalia.com
Host pxtoakiis01.pxt.primeexalia.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)


These are enough to get you blocked/discarded/quarantined/tagged whether
listed in a DNSBL or not.


No.  It's a client server and the RDNS maps back perfectly as well.