on 4/2/04 2:05 PM, Kurt Bigler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > on 4/2/04 1:53 PM, X-Istence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Kurt Bigler wrote:
>>> Thanks for any thoughts, and sorry to be so lacking in info. I did do a >>> quick ps when I discovered the problem and I'm pretty sure that the >>> tcpserver process involving qmail-smtpd was probably not there. I only >>> remembered it should have been there after rebooting and doing another ps. >>> Is there some default mode for smtp connections that takes over under such a >>> circumstance? >> >> Well, if your SMTP service was not there, your server could not be >> accepting mail, thus there would be nothing to bounce. Thus it would not >> be able to create 5.7.1 bounces in the first place. > > I was wondering whether tcpserver on its own would start handling them if > qmail-smtpd disappeared. It seems to me tcpserver can do quite a few things > on its own. It would be very unfriendly if it were to do 5.7.1's rather > than indicating a temporary failure though. Oops sorry, I was thinking of inetd when I said "tcpserver" above. Maybe inetd provides some sort of default coverage for a port that no other process is watching? -Kurt > > Thanks, > Kurt Bigler > >
