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

Re: customizing qmail failure delivery

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 08:02:45PM +0100, Christian Jaeger wrote:
> - By default, qmail tries for a week to deliver a message before it 
> gives up. No warning whatsoever is sent to the sender before. Is 
> there no way to make it send a delay warning after 4 hours?

man qmailsend, look for "queuelifetime".

> - The failure notices include the original mail as unformatted 
> plaintext. 

Not true, see http://cr.yp.to/proto/qsbmf.txt

> Why doesn't it include it as a MIME entity (or as multiple entities) so
> that the user receiving the notice can easily reuse the contents to send
> the message again? (i.e. in qmails default way, attachments are only
> seen as base64 encoded text, non-ascii chars are mangled)

Because that would be a translation expense on the receiving server, an
easy DoS.

> - I want to set up a custom failure. For example, "Sorry, there are 
> several users with this first name on this domain, please use one of 
> the following full addresses instead: .....".  This should really be 
> a delivery failure message, not an autoreply, and it can be achieved 
> by putting a program into the dot.qmail file that exits with error 
> 100:
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> exit 100;

This is a DoS in the making.  Perl is really way too expensive for
something so trivial.  Maybe sh could echo your text and exit 100?

> *BUT* this still gives this ugly, non structured failure notice as 
> described above, in particular, if I print german umlauts from the 
> script, they are not sent correctly.
> (There is a program "bouncesaying" which has exactly the same drawbacks)

It's not all that, see http://cr.yp.to/proto/qsbmf.txt again.

> Is there any addon/patch for customizing qmail's automatic messages?

Dunno.  A few minutes of me Googling answered the rest of these questions,
why not give it a try yourself?  

Helpful Hint: Try searching for "control qmail bounce message patch".  The
top 6 are all what you're seeking but didn't really bother looking for.

Ted Deppner

Reply to: