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

Re: exim max emails?

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 09:46:47PM -0600, Lance Hoffmeyer wrote:
| I am doing some consulting work for a marketing company that wants me to
| perform some mass email using client supplied sample.  I grabbed the
| bulkmail.pm perl script and thought all was fine.  

I've heard that many versions of that script have vulnerabilities that
create an open relay out of your system.

| It doesn't seem like exim will mail more than 200 messages at a time.  
| I changed the exim.conf script to mail 1000.  When I look at
| /var/log/exim/mainlog is shows around 150-200 completed emails and
| then stops.

Are these mails all to the same server?  Are the mails all identical?
There are several possibilities for why exim will stop at a certain
point.  One is that the receiving side said "enough for now".  That is
what the
config options do (when exim is the receiving side).

The "remote_max_parallel" option may be relevant for your setup.  I
don't recall exactly which options are most helpful when attempting to
deliver a lot of messages, but it has come up on the exim-users list
several times.

The best thing, I think, if the messages are identical, would be to
give exim one message with a large recipient list.  Then it can
optimize handling of it.  For example, if multiple recipients are at
the same host, then exim can perform one SMTP connection with all
those users in the recipient list.

| Also, what does
| 2002-03-01 21:34:48 16h0IK-0000Vm-04 <= lance@augustmail.com
|               H=jakar (augustmail.com) [] U=lance P=smtp S=3239
| mean in the mainlog file?
It means that at 21:34:48 (time) on March 1st, a message with id
16h0IK-0000Vm-04 was received.  The sender is "lance@augustmail.com".
The protocol was "smtp".  The host reported itself as "jakar" in the
HELO line, but it's IP ( indicates the real name is
"augustmail.com" (via a reverse lookup).



It took the computational power of three Commodore 64s to fly to the moon.
It takes at least a 486 to run Windows 95.
Something is wrong here.

Reply to: