On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:13:28AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The problem with "there is a delay in delivering the message"-type mails
> is that the average user never takes the time to read those messages, and
> thinks that they mean that the mail has bounced.
No, the problem is that whil
On 26 Jan 2001, James R Grinter wrote:
> On the subject of notifications, it's becoming more of a problem
> because of "similar" domains - you should have typed
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and instead type "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". The
> latter doesn't even accept mail deliveries, so it hangs around in the
"Rod... Whitworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:12:25 +0100, Markus Stumpf wrote:
> >However there is a addon module available at http://www.qmail.org/ that
> >IMHO does what you want. Search for delayed-mail notifier on qmails
> >website.
>
> Thanks for that pointer. I di
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:12:25 +0100, Markus Stumpf wrote:
>I personally *hate* those delay messages. Once I got one every hour for
>a whole week from a remote system telling me that it cannot contact the
>final delivery system. Really annoying and pretty useless, as there's
>nothing I could have d
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 10:33:18PM +1100, Rod... Whitworth wrote:
> Q1:
> I have learnt that qmail does not issue reply codes indicating permanent failure for
>invalid users/mailboxes.
> I know that these messages will eventually bounce but (apart from the issue of
>determining whether a recipie
