Does the script that Tim Aranki posted not cause these problems?
- Original Message -
From: Davide Libenzi
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 6:57 PM
Subject: [xmail] Re: Mailbox size
Two problems. First, you don't know if the message is gonna hit the
ma
Ignore me, it was right in the first place... Damn this caffeine!
-t
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Aranki
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [xmail] Re: Mailbox size
Er, change the line
;)
Thanks to Achim for pointing this out...
-tim
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Aranki
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 12:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [xmail] Re: Mailbox size
This is quick an dirty, and I have not tested it
@@RRCPT "Max mailbox size in Mb".
Example:
"cscript.exe"[tab]"VerifyMailboxSize.vbs"[tab]@@File[tab]@@RRCPT[tab]"20"
This would verify that the mailbox would be less than 20Mb after delivery,
or bounce the msg.
Enjoy,
-tim
-Original Message-
F
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Shiloh Jennings wrote:
> That makes sense. Mabye we could address this issue from a different =
> angle.
> Would it be possible to extend the functionality of the MaxMessageSize =
> to
> automatically block messages that were larger than the mailbox quota? =
> You
> already h
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Tracy wrote:
> At 09:50 6/2/2004, you wrote:
> >Doing this in online SMTP is impossible. The step that goes from the SMTP
> >session to the message delivery is definitely not atomic. It'd be possible
> >to reject the message at mailbox delivery time, by sending a notification
>
That makes sense. Mabye we could address this issue from a different =
angle.
Would it be possible to extend the functionality of the MaxMessageSize =
to
automatically block messages that were larger than the mailbox quota? =
You
already have a server level MaxMessageSize, but end users also expe
At 09:50 6/2/2004, you wrote:
>Doing this in online SMTP is impossible. The step that goes from the SMTP
>session to the message delivery is definitely not atomic. It'd be possible
>to reject the message at mailbox delivery time, by sending a notification
>message to the sender. Considering everyth
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Orion Productions wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm sure this has been brought up before, but I searched the list from 2001 onwards
> and couldn't find anything.
>
> If you configure a mailbox with a size of, let's say, 1MB, and then send a message
> to it of, let's say, 5MB, it is stil
You can use mailbox size together with "MaxMessageSize" server.tab=20
property. If your problem is in dimensions 1 MB mailbox / 5 MB e-mail,=20
setting MaxMessageSize to 1 MB would cause the mailbox to have 2 MB in the=
=20
worth case (instead of 6 MB in your case). Just keep in mind MaxMessageSize
Rob Arends wrote:
> The problem here is that not all SMTP servers tell the receiving server how
> big the email will be before sending.
>
> 1. If the xmail switch you mentioned could enable xmail to drop the
> connection once the quote was reached, then the sending MTA would just try
> again becau
bject: [xmail] Re: Mailbox size
As I understand it, XMail is checking to see the mailbox is already over
quota before deciding whether or not to accept the new email. It does = not
consider whether or not the new email will put the mailbox over. I have
received some complaints from end users about
As I understand it, XMail is checking to see the mailbox is already over
quota before deciding whether or not to accept the new email. It does =
not
consider whether or not the new email will put the mailbox over. I have
received some complaints from end users about this, because they expect =
th
1. Set the size to a very large number
2. The space available on your hard drive.
Bill
>--
>From: Michael Harrington[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 11:18 AM
>To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: [xmail] Mailbox Size
>
>
>Two very simple questions, and I can n
14 matches
Mail list logo
