Those settings are speed related and do not address the allocation of port resources. When the buffer space issue surfaces in the logs a "netstat -a" verifies that all ports up to 5000 are in use, Imail will not attempt to use any ports higher. What happens is that when the messages start to build up in the queue destined for a down peer the port pool available for POP3, SMTP and Queuemanager gets used up and mail delivery fails due to the queuemanager stopping/hanging although the SMTP service still runs and recieves messages, the spool gets larger and larger which makes the times between failure grow shorter and shorter.
It looks like Hurricane Jeanne is going to give me the opportunity to test the reg settings I added to increase the application port allocation and the shorter TIME_WAIT setting.
Rick Davidson
National Systems Manager
North American Title Group
440-953-9346 - Office
440-953-0925 - Fax
440-487-7344 - Mobile
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Shanbrom [Ipswitch]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] D files with no Q files - Queuemanager crashes with unreachable peer (again)
I found this a while back and seems to help the No Buffer Space" error:
This is an error coming back from the TCP layer saying it doesn't have
enough room to work...I think we need to seriously think about distributing
the load a little more quickly
I have found some interesting articles that seem to address this issue in Windows
http://rdweb.cns.vt.edu/public/notes/win2k-tcpip.htm
http://www-didc.lbl.gov/TCP-tuning/
Eric S
----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Davidson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] D files with no Q files - Queuemanager crashes
with unreachable peer (again)
restarting the queuemanager reclaimed ports in the TIME_WAIT stateallowingwhenmessage delivery to resume. When the server starts generating no buffer space available errors in the smtp log the system still accepts mail but delivery stops completely. The "no buffer space available" error occurshttp://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/the last port is used up (5000 by default)
I am currently running a test to simulate a downed peer to see if the reg settings fix the problem, its a start to finding this problem that is killing me when a peer is down.
Rick Davidson
National Systems Manager
North American Title Group
-
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dmitri Elgin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 10:08 AM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] D files with no Q files - Queuemanager crashes
with unreachable peer (again)
> I'm not sure that stopping queuemanager will prevent deliver to remote
> peer. It's a smtpd32.exe service task. So if you just stop and restart
> the queuemanager you just claim to redeliver all spool to the intendent
> recipients. In fact, when peer-to-peer connection established and D > file
> being downloaded the Q file is already know by the server, since the
> connection filtering doing before downloading the mail content. But I
> don't know the reason why server create q file after downloading the
> appropriate d, so the situation is quite possible if the connection is
> broken.
>
> Regards,
> Dmitri Elgin,
> http://imailzip.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Davidson
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 10:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [IMail Forum] D files with no Q files - Queuemanager crashes
> with unreachable peer (again)
>
>
> Is there a way to send orphaned D files that have no associated Q file
> other
> than manually creating a Q file?
>
> Does anyone have a utility that will read through a directory of D > files
> and
> create the Q files? Sure would be handy.
>
> As I have posted many times in the past and submitted to Ipswitch, the
> problem with Imail Peering when a peer is unreachable (like during a
> hurricane) the master peer (the one behind the mail gateways) queue
> service
> will eventually fail with a buffer problem causing mail to not be
> delivered.
> A netstat reveals all the allocated ports in the TIME_WAIT state. I run
> seven peers across the country and occasionally an internet connection
> goes
> down making the peer unreachable. I was running a batch file to stop > and
>
> restart the queuemanager service once an hour (and recommended by
> Ipswitch
> support to work around the problem) I now realize that this is causing
> files
> to be orphaned due to the delivery process being stopped by my batch
> file,
> thus the D files without Q files.
>
> Ipswitch claims the fault is with the MS TCP/IP Stack, hopefully the
> following info can generate some answers and some ideas from the brains
> on
> this list and at Ipswitch.
>
> I found that the default application port allocation is from 1024 to
> 5000,
> when Imail attempts to reach a down peer and the queue is building up
> messages destined for the down peer these ports get used up sitting in
> the
> TIME_WAIT state. The busier the server the quicker the situation
> manifests
> itself.
>
> The MS default TIME_WAIT is four minutes and there are 4076 ports
> available
> for Imail SMTP and Queue processes. I found the following MSKB articles
> showing reg hacks to modify the TIME_WAIT length and the default
> application
> port allocation.
>
> I set the TIME_WAIT or Maximum Segment Life (MSL) (TcpTimedWaitDelay) > to
>
> half of the default time to two minutes.
>
> I set the port allocation to 65534 (MaxUserPort)
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;196271
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;149532
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;319504&Product=w
> in2000
>
> I haven't had the buffer problem since but we haven't had a lengthy
> downtime
> to really see what happens and of course the last thing I want to do is
> hope
> for another hurricane to hit Florida just to test this :-) I will > probly
>
> have to setup a dummy peer and see what happens and that if it isn't
> fixed I
> catch it before the phones light up.
>
> Any comments about these reg hacks would be welcomed especially if you
> know
> reasons why I should be doing this. Also it would seem to me that a > mail
>
> system should be able to grab more ports if it wants to be capable of
> extremely high loads without hitting a low port allocation wall and
> choking.
> It also makes me wonder if this is related to other queuemanager
> problems if
> the solution is to rake files out of the queue so it can catch up
> without
> stopping.
>
> Rick Davidson
> National Systems Manager
> North American Title Group
> -
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> List Archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
> Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> List Archive:> Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ >
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
