ilug-admin at linux.ie wrote:
>> > Well, this one took around 5 minutes to arrive back from the list, and
>> That's not an unreasonable time for processing of a list with > 100
> subscribers. Good list managers, and good MTAs, will work through the
> list sequentially, or with a small number of sequential processes, rather
> than instantly forking a Sendmail for every subscriber on the list (which
> is just bad neighbourliness, even if your server can stand it).
>> If you come behind one or two people whose primary MX always times out,
> this can delay mail by up to five or ten minutes, depending on what your
> timeouts are set to.
>> If anyone is using unreachable MX's as a brain-dead substitute for
> mailertables or UUCP, please consider the trouble you are causing ;-)
Hmmm... would it make sense to sort the subscriber list by friendliness of
the server, and put the troublesome people at the end of the list?
That way most people get served fastest, and the people who are going to
be delayed *anyway* will still be reached pretty quickly because all of
the people in front of them will be guaranteed to be quick.
Any MTA's that do this sort of QoS sorting?
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!