[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Please ignore mail bounces for tytso-mit@thunk.org

Hi all, some of you may have noticed have received mail bounces from
mail that you sent me from MAILER-DAEMON@mit.edu that referenced failure
to deliver mail to tytso-mit@thunk.org, for example:

  <tytso-mit@thunk.org>... Deferred: Connection timed out with thunk.org.
  Message could not be delivered for 3 days
  Message will be deleted from queue

Some of you may have also noticed that mail sent to tytso@thunk.org may
have also started bouncing in a similar fashion.  

My apologies.  Unfortunately thunk.org failed on December 23rd, and
because I and other people who might have been able to gain physical
access to the colo facility (where the server is located) have been
travelling for the holidays, I haven't been able to get the machine back
up as quickly as I would like.  Please rest assured that mail sent to
tytso@mit.edu is being read, despite the bounce messages.
tytso-mit@thunk.org was a backup copy of mail sent to tytso@mit.edu that
I established a while back as a backup way of reading my mit.edu mail
after my mit.edu IMAP server was down for 4 days.[1]

In any case, mail service to tytso@mit.edu has not been interrupted; I
am reading mail sent there, and it is the primary way that I should be
contacted for any Linux/Open Source related matters.

Mail to tytso@thunk.org is currently being held in mail queues, and
depending on how SMTP mailers have been configured, may have started
getting returned to sender.  A few debian mailing lists are set to feed
tytso@thunk.org, and some people use it to contact me, although I
generally have not published it as a contact address.

I'm hopeful that I will get thunk.org restored fairly quickly, and
apologize for any inconvenience/confusion this may have prompted.


						- Ted

[1] An interesting story, which involved the MIT I/T staff waiting 36+
hours for a Solaris ufs fsck to finish on a 1TB filesystem, before
aborting it in frustration and using other methods to restore service,
but for another day.

Reply to: