> On Feb 5, 2018, at 3:00 PM, Niclas Rautenhaus > <rautenh...@team-datentechnik.de> wrote: > > I did not change anything that I am not able to revert back to it's original > settings. > I am not "blindly trying random changes" but implementing suggestions being > made in this > thread and / or I found elsewhere online when I searched for keywords like > "postfix", > "always_bcc", "content_filter" etc.
Sadly, none of those things are immediately plausible work-arounds or get you closer to isolating the problem. At this time just collect sufficient logs and network captures to distinguish between the failure and success cases. > For the sake of keeping this mail readable, please refer to this link > (https://pastebin.com/nUz5BEdB) , there you will find an excerpt of the > maillog from two mails stuck in the queue. One thing that is interesting is that the message generates two BCC copies with the *same* recipient address: Feb 5 17:28:51 mail postfix/smtp[22771]: 363BD601EE: to=<maildepot@mailappliance.local>, relay=192.168.1.23[192.168.1.23]:1025, delay=0.1, delays=0.01/0/0.04/0.04, dsn=4.4.2, status=deferred (lost connection with 192.168.1.23[192.168.1.23] while sending end of data -- message may be sent more than once) Feb 5 17:28:51 mail postfix/smtp[22771]: 363BD601EE: to=<maildepot@mailappliance.local>, relay=192.168.1.23[192.168.1.23]:1025, delay=0.1, delays=0.01/0/0.04/0.04, dsn=4.4.2, status=deferred (lost connection with 192.168.1.23[192.168.1.23] while sending end of data -- message may be sent more than once) Feb 5 17:28:52 mail postfix/smtp[22773]: 363BD601EE: to=<user@external_domain.tld>, relay=smtp.ext-hoster.tld[XX.XXX.XXX.XXX]:25, delay=1.1, delays=0.01/0/0.24/0.8, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 queued as V03a1fu15GSpL0R) Perhaps the appliance mishandles messages with duplicate recipient addresses? Is there any correlation between messages that repeatedly fail and messages that have a duplicate recipient? Is the same feature observed in successful archive deliveries? Note also that for this to be a meaningful mail archive, you should lose the original envelope recipient addresses (which happens with always_bcc) and instead use a recipe based on "recipient_bcc_maps" with regular expression mappings that capture each unique recipient as a unique archive recipient address. -- Viktor.
