On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:17:27AM +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Dec 17 08:35:28, gil...@poolp.org wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:08:17PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> > > I am using smtpd as my mail server on a network
> > > where the relay server often replies with
> > > 
> > >    4.5.3 Too many recipients
> > > 
> > > Indeed, I was sending messages with a lot of recipients
> > > (a group of students).
> > > 
> > > Is there a way in the smtpd configuration
> > > to specify that a message with >N recipients
> > > should be broken into N individual messages?
> > > 
> > 
> > Why so ?
> 
> Because if not, the message is rejected with 4.5.3.
> Messages with certain number of recipients just
> cannot be sent through this relay.
> 

Oh, the entire message is rejected ?
That's kind of violent...

There's a tweak to limit the number of recipients but if we
could avoid it, it would benefit everyone.


> > Does it prevent OpenSMTPD from sending
> > to the recipients it has submitted already ?
> 
> The relay disables my mailserver for some fixed time.
> No messages from me will be accepted during that time.
> 

The relay disabling code has been removed, this should no longer
happen to you with last snapshot.

We will release 5.4.2 in a few days to fix the first shortcomings
we experienced from 5.4.1 and this will be part of it.


> > It should fail the ones after 4.5.3 and mark them as tempfail
> > which will cause them to be retried a few seconds later while
> > the ones before the error will be submitted. Isn't that what
> > is happening ?
> 
> smtpd tries to resend the failed ones,
> only to be told again that there are
> "too many recipients".
>

So not a single recipient is ever accepted ?
If that's the case, I'll tell you in private how to fix this and we will
have to find a way that works for everyone...


> > > If so, will smtpd create a new smtp connection
> > > for each of the messages? That could also be a problem.
> > 
> > No, smtpd will always try to group and reuse connections,
> 


-- 
Gilles Chehade

https://www.poolp.org                                          @poolpOrg

Reply via email to