Hi,
I've found that on occasion tcpserver/qmail-smtpd takes
10 seconds to give an "ok" to an smtpd connection attempt.
Typically, the time I've seen will running my server has been 0 sec
(i.e. the log entries for the "pid" and "ok" have the same time stamp)
At the time of the occurrences, the se
- James DeMong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| I've found that on occasion tcpserver/qmail-smtpd takes
| 10 seconds to give an "ok" to an smtpd connection attempt.
That could be the time taken by tcpserver to do various DNS lookups
and possibly also an ident lookup against the client. Perfectly
normal.
James DeMong writes:
> I've found that on occasion tcpserver/qmail-smtpd takes
> 10 seconds to give an "ok" to an smtpd connection attempt.
Typically that's a DNS or indentd timeout. Can't be the latter since
you're using the -R switch. If you're concerned that it might not be,
run a syscall
Russell Nelson wrote:
> James DeMong writes:
> > I've found that on occasion tcpserver/qmail-smtpd takes
> > 10 seconds to give an "ok" to an smtpd connection attempt.
>
> Typically that's a DNS or indentd timeout. Can't be the latter since
> you're using the -R switch. If you're concerned th
James DeMong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I've found that on occasion tcpserver/qmail-smtpd takes
| 10 seconds to give an "ok" to an smtpd connection attempt.
Make sure you invoke it with the "-R" option, to tell it not to bother
wasting time on ``ident'' lookups.
James,
>(I am trying to build a business case for my boss that qmail (on
>Linux/PC) is _better_ than sendmail (on HP/PA) and I would like to have
>every possible eveidence to back it up.)
I find these 2 URLs very convincing regarding sendmail security,
http://email.miningco.com/library/week