[ILUG] why the fsck...
vcunniff at arbgroup.com
Tue Jan 4 10:37:18 GMT 2000
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?
More information about the ILUG