On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
Incidentally, the last was also sent to mailop-ow...@mailop.org because that
was what was listed on the web page. For future reference who is on the
admin team?
The team is listed here:
https://www.mailop.org/about/
In case others are wondering
Well, it is good to know the cause of the problem.
The reposting wasn't random. I am new to the list and had difficulty
sending my first few emails, so I thought I had done something wrong again
the first two times. When those two hadn't processed but others were
hitting the archive my initial ass
[admin hat on]
On 15 Jul 2020, at 15:55, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
> Sorry for spamming the list guys.
> Take a look at the header information.
> The four copies were sent over a couple of days and you got them when?
>
> Mon Jul 13 16:58:47 BST 2020
> Mon Jul 13 19:08:50 BST 2020
> Mon Jul
Sorry for spamming the list guys.
Take a look at the header information.
The four copies were sent over a couple of days and you got them when?
*Mon Jul 13 16:58:47 BST 2020*
*Mon Jul 13 19:08:50 BST 2020*
*Mon Jul 13 23:36:35 BST 2020*
*Tue Jul 14 19:02:47 BST 2020*
If you only received them on
Dnia 14.07.2020 o godz. 11:02:47 Job Cacka via mailop pisze:
> Perhaps this original message is still stuck in some queue? I wrote it
> yesterday and it never made it through to the list. At least it isn't in
> the archive so try again.
I got all (is that all?) four copies you sent.
--
Regards,
Hi, Job,
I’ve seen 4 copies of this message this morning. Things are working here.
laura
> On 13 Jul 2020, at 23:36, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
>
>
> I am re-submitting thr because it doesn't seem to be showing in the
> newsgroup.
>
> So I spoke a bit too soon on the firewall.This morn
Perhaps this original message is still stuck in some queue? I wrote it
yesterday and it never made it through to the list. At least it isn't in
the archive so try again.
So I spoke a bit too soon on the firewall last week. Monday morning I had
time to look at it from a physical and configuration s
Probably because of the reply all gmail requires. It wasn't hitting
mailop@mailop.org.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 11:15 AM Luis E. Muñoz wrote:
>
>
> On 13 Jul 2020, at 11:08, Job Cacka wrote:
>
> > This didn't go through two hours ago from my gmail account.
>
> I saw it two hours ago.
>
> Best reg
This didn't go through two hours ago from my gmail account.
So I spoke a bit too soon on the firewall.This morning I had time to look
at it from a physical and configuration sense. It is a pfSense firewall
that has multiple WAN ports enabled for multiple ISP. The path from the WAN
that contains t
So I spoke a bit too soon on the firewall.This morning I had time to look
at it from a physical and configuration sense. It is a pfSense firewall
that has multiple WAN ports enabled for multiple ISP. The path from the WAN
that contains the MX IPs does not load balance or failover to the other WAN
On 2020-07-10 at 14:36 -0700, Job Cacka wrote:
> There is PAT firewall that load balances multiple networks.
> A Barracuda spam filter
> And then the MX server.
>
>
> It was working well until about 6-8 weeks ago when we began to notice
> the intermittent issue.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Job
I would ha
On 10 Jul 2020, at 14:36, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
There is PAT firewall that load balances multiple networks.
Hopefully not a descendant of a PIX. I've never have had happy stories
involving [NP]AT and SMTP servers.
I tend to go with what others have said: The fw might be trying to
r
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 23:36, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
>
> There is PAT firewall that load balances multiple networks.
Maybe one of those destination networks is unreachable, while others
are reachable, so when the load-balancing decision points to the
unreachable network, the TCP session will
I checked my ISP and they wrap it in a vlan and hand it off to us, so that
is fine.
On the firewall I noticed several high volume rules that were logging since
2018 and turned them off in case it was causing an issue.
Looking at PAT/NAT we are translating in bound and outbound traffic so that
sho
On 7/10/20 14:36, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
There is PAT firewall that load balances multiple networks.
This is a possibility, especially if the load-balancing is pushing some
incoming traffic to the wrong internal network.
A Barracuda spam filter
If this is configured to drop traffic b
There is PAT firewall that load balances multiple networks.
A Barracuda spam filter
And then the MX server.
It was working well until about 6-8 weeks ago when we began to notice the
intermittent issue.
Thanks,
Job
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 12:30 PM Luis E. Muñoz via mailop
wrote:
> On 10 Jul 2020,
Right. So where should I begin?
Firewall says it passes all traffic.
Next would be Barracuda it doesn't show any drops.
I suppose on the server I could look at tcpdump.
Thanks!
Job
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 11:26 AM Jay Hennigan via mailop
wrote:
> On 7/10/20 11:06, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
On 10 Jul 2020, at 9:47, Adam D. Barratt via mailop wrote:
On Fri, 2020-07-10 at 09:22 -0700, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
slowmailtest...@ccbox.com
slowmailtest...@ccbox.com
slowmailtest...@p-r-c.com
slowmailtest...@p-r-c.com
From a quick test, at least half of connections get immediately
On 7/10/20 11:06, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
"Senders will tend to back off, and retry at increasingly long
intervals, until they get a successful connection."
Thanks for the test Adam. I do agree with your Analysis. The interesting
thing is I am not seeing this refusal at my end logged. Perha
"Senders will tend to back off, and retry at increasingly long
intervals, until they get a successful connection."
Thanks for the test Adam. I do agree with your Analysis. The interesting
thing is I am not seeing this refusal at my end logged. Perhaps it never
made it to the maillog and that is ho
On Fri, 2020-07-10 at 09:22 -0700, Job Cacka via mailop wrote:
> slowmailtest...@ccbox.com
> slowmailtest...@ccbox.com
>
> slowmailtest...@p-r-c.com
> slowmailtest...@p-r-c.com
From a quick test, at least half of connections get immediately
rejected, which probably isn't helping:
adam@kotick:$
Hmmm, for some reason I need to "Reply All" in Gmail to reply to the list.
Try two.
"You have no logs, and provide little to no detail."
Correct, and if it wasn’t a problem I wouldn’t even see the issue. I only
have a few message headers to go off of because the sender is experiencing
the “temp
On 2020-07-09 at 12:46 -0700, Job Cacka wrote:
> If you work with one of these relays and can shed light on the delay I
> would love to know how to get it fixed.
You have no logs, and provide little to no detail. You tried to contact
with those organizations, but you were fruitless. It's almost i
For the last several weeks I have been tracking slow email from several
sources. When it is easiest to see is when an outside source will send an
email to two or more of our employees at the same time. One email copy to
one person will show up right away and the other might be several hours
later.
For the last several weeks I have been tracking slow email from several
sources. When it is easiest to see is when an outside source will send an
email to two or more of our employees at the same time. One email copy to
one person will show up right away and the other might be several hours
later.
25 matches
Mail list logo
