On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> wrote:
> Robert Lopez:
>> This college has a contract with Rave Messaging to deliver high volume
>> (ex campus emergency) communications via many vectors including email.
>>
>> In their requirements document, in the portion on email, they write:
>>
>> "IMPORTANT NOTE: When an emergency alert is sent by your institution,
>> Rave will open multiple SMTP connections and attempt to send a large
>> number of emails in a short period of time.  Please ensure that there
>> are no throttling or spam rules that would slow or prevent the
>> delivery of these emails from Rave."
>
> If the system opens an insane number of SMTP connections to the
> same SMTP server, then that will definitely be a problem.
>
> Postfix enforces concurrency controls when it sends out mail, to
> avoid such problems.
>
>> "reject_unauth_pipelining
>>     Reject the request when the client sends SMTP commands ahead of
>>     time WHERE IT IS NOT ALLOWED, or when the client sends SMTP
>>     commands ahead of time WITHOUT KNOWING THAT POSTFIX ACTUALLY
>>     SUPPORTS ESMTP COMMAND PIPELINING.
>
> a) the system sends commands together where it is not allowed by
> RFC 2920, even after prior negotiation, or b) the system sends
> commands together without prior negotiation as per RFC 2920.
>
>        Wietse
>

Thank you. Prior to reading RFC 2920 I was assuming that pipelining was
a bad thing done by spammers. I never comprehended it could be a good thing
if managed by both ends correctly.

At a web meeting today I was told they will use 40 concurrent connections.
With the default max connection limit (given no other server resource limits)
 I suppose that is not blasting an insane number of SMTP connections.

Would this situation be better if I moved reject_unauth_pipelining from
smtpd_client_restrictions to smtpd_data_restrictions, taking it out completely,
or leaving it as it is?


-- 
Robert Lopez
Unix Systems Administrator
Central New Mexico Community College (CNM)
525 Buena Vista SE
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87106

Reply via email to