On 1/18/09, Sahil Tandon wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Gary V wrote: > > > On 1/17/09, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > > On Jan 17, 2009, at 2:36 PM, Gary V wrote: > > > > Then a bounce is created stating the mail was rejected: > > > > > > > > Your message to <t...@example.com> was automatically rejected: > > > > Quota exceeded (mailbox for user is full). > > > > > > > > Question: is it possible (without changing code) to alter this to > > > > where deliver would instead tempfail or something. Somehow it seems > > > > wrong to me to tell the MTA that everything is good, and then silently > > > > discard messages - regardless of the fact dovecot creates a bounce. > > > > This is not necessarily ideal either, but I _am_ wondering if this is > > > > configurable or not. > > > > > > > > > > a) deliver -e > > > > > > b) quota_full_tempfail=yes > > > > > > c) a+b > > > > > > > Just as a matter of interest. On my Postfix system: > > > > a) Using deliver -e, Postfix bounces the message immediately 5.7.0 -> > > Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender. Partial body: > > "<t...@example.com>: permission denied. Command output: Quota exceeded > > (mailbox for user is full)". Postfix does not retain the message. > > > > b) quota_full_tempfail=yes: defers the message with 4.3.0. If the user > > makes room for the message, then it will eventually be delivered. If > > they don't, then _eventually_ a bounce will be sent. In this case the > > bounce is less informative. Partial body: "<t...@example.com>: > > temporary failure". In the case where the message is not delivered, > > using default settings in Postfix, the sender will be notified 5 days > > after they sent the message. > > > > c) For over quota with a+b, it behaves the same way as b, but the > > bounce notice will be more informative: Partial body: > > "<t...@example.com>: temporary failure. Command output: Quota exceeded > > (mailbox for user is full)". > > > > I would say this is expected. > > > > Each of the four possibilites has advantages and disadvantages, and > > personally I think a) might be closest to "doing the right thing", but > > it would be cool to have the option of deferring the mail (using > > option a+b) and additionally have deliver immediately send a message > > to the sender notifying them that their mail has been delayed due to > > the recipient being over quota. Something like: > > I prefer a) because it does not involve backscatter in the case of spoofed > sender addresses. > > -- > Sahil Tandon <sa...@tandon.net> >
Hmm, in my test, mail is not rejected during smtp conversation, so as far as I can see, there is no prevention of backscatter. Posftix creates a bounce after the fact and sends it to whomever the sender is (or at least attempts to). As a side note: It looks like Couier/Maildrop uses the functional equivilent of a+b. At least when using Postfix, the message is deferred with a descriptive error: "temporary failure. Command output: maildrop: maildir over quota." I have not looked to see if this is configurable or not. I would assume it is, but have not checked into it. -- Gary V
