SysAdmin EM:
> El mar., 4 de ago. de 2020 a la(s) 13:13, Viktor Dukhovni (
> postfix-us...@dukhovni.org) escribi?:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 12:26:03PM -0300, SysAdmin EM wrote:
> >
> > > I think I understand that the "queue_run_delay" parameter is used to
> > retry
> > > an email.
> > >
> > > Aug 4 12:19:26 smarthost03-ded postfix/smtp[14720]: 68E2A18001AF1:
> > > host mx8.webfaction.com[185.20.49.163] said:
> > > 450 4.2.0 <ism...@ilaviola.com.ar>: Recipient address rejected:
> > > Greylisted for 300 seconds (in reply to RCPT TO command)
> > > Aug 4 12:19:29 smarthost03-ded postfix/smtp[14720]: 68E2A18001AF1:
> > > to=< ism...@ilaviola.com.ar>, relay=mx7.webfaction.com
> > [185.20.49.162]:25,
> > > delay=5 .9, delays=0.5/0/4.2/1.2, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok:
> > > queued as 2B4C2209E59E8)
> > > Aug 4 12:19:29 smarthost03-ded postfix/qmgr[11588]: 68E2A18001AF1:
> > removed
> > >
> > > The first attempt was at 12:19:23 and then retry 12:19:29, I just wait 3
> > > seconds.
> >
> > That was not a "retry" of a deferred message, rather it was the same
> > delivery attempt via a second MX host after the primary temp-failed.
> >
> > ilaviola.com.ar. IN MX 10 mx7.webfaction.com.
> > ilaviola.com.ar. IN MX 10 mx8.webfaction.com.
> > ilaviola.com.ar. IN MX 10 mx9.webfaction.com.
> >
> > > Could it be that the retry value is not correctly set?
> >
> > No, the message never went back into the queue, since it was delivered
> > on the first attempt. The second MX host tried did not enforce
> > greylisting.
SysAdmin EM:
> Any recommendation to avoid retrying the second mx? in some cases when
> retrying the second mx we also represent the grey list error.
There is no second MX. Instead, there are three equal-preference
MX hosts, and Postfix selects one at random.
Wietse
