drew at themarshalls.co.uk
Wed Mar 29 19:26:28 IST 2006
On 29 Mar 2006, at 17:04, Glenn Steen wrote:
> I don't think we have to go back to the logs, just use some
> logic(:-)... We see two separate (by 20 minutes!) messages, possibly
> containing the exact same message, being handled by smtpd/the header
> checks... and then passed on to the hold queue. This is a very strong
> indicator that it isn't your system that is having the problem
> (although it has to handle the effects of the error), since this, in
> all likelihood, couldn't happen unless those messages were handled in
> two separate SMTP-conversations.
That's kinda what I meant :-)
> If you do happen to look at the logs, take just one of teh messages,
> the first one, and look through the whole chain... is there _any_
> errors indicated? Like a dropped connection? If you have logs split,
> remember to look in the error and warning file too.
> Are all the duplicates from the same sender/sending domain? If so,
> call them... and inform them (in a nice manner:-) that they have a
> problem to solve.
> If not... Well, we'll get to that eventually:-).
Indeed, and we haven't even got to the replying to self level yet.
That's reserved for when things start looking a little more complex ;-)
In line with our policy, this message has
been scanned for viruses and dangerous
content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
More information about the MailScanner