Re: Mail Queue timeouts

2003-10-23 Thread Tomasz Papszun
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 at 15:12:55 +1100, Lauchlin Wilkinson wrote: Hi, what are peoples thoughts on the length of time mail should sit in the mail queue? Due to the rise in the amount of spam and viruses that seems to be going around lately I throttled back the delivery warning back to 30

Re: Mail Queue timeouts

2003-10-23 Thread Jernej Horvat
Thursday 23 October 2003 06:12, Lauchlin Wilkinson What are other people doing? sticking to RFCs. O:-) i would not lower it under 3daysjust in case the remote mail server brakes on weekend. -- Only a fool fights in a burning house. -- Kank the Klingon, Day of the

Mail Queue timeouts

2003-10-23 Thread Lauchlin Wilkinson
Hi, what are peoples thoughts on the length of time mail should sit in the mail queue? Due to the rise in the amount of spam and viruses that seems to be going around lately I throttled back the delivery warning back to 30 minutes and the delivery failure back to 12 hours. My logic is that

Re: Mail Queue timeouts

2003-10-23 Thread Tomasz Papszun
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 at 15:12:55 +1100, Lauchlin Wilkinson wrote: Hi, what are peoples thoughts on the length of time mail should sit in the mail queue? Due to the rise in the amount of spam and viruses that seems to be going around lately I throttled back the delivery warning back to 30

Re: Mail Queue timeouts

2003-10-23 Thread Jernej Horvat
Thursday 23 October 2003 06:12, Lauchlin Wilkinson What are other people doing? sticking to RFCs. O:-) i would not lower it under 3daysjust in case the remote mail server brakes on weekend. -- Only a fool fights in a burning house. -- Kank the Klingon, Day of the