smtp, randomize recipient domains
in [Postfix]
|
From: Per olof Ljungmark on 26 May 2010 09:53 Hi, We host a few mailing lists and I noted that when the messages are cued, it is done so in recipient-domain alphabetical order. We already implemented restrictions on concurrency and number of recipients per message not to trigger various filters at the receiving end, and now I thought that maybe it would work even better if the recieving domains were randomized instead of cued alphabetically. Any thoughts from the list? Would it be easy to implement? Thanks!
From: Wietse Venema on 26 May 2010 10:04 Per olof Ljungmark: > Hi, > > We host a few mailing lists and I noted that when the messages are cued, > it is done so in recipient-domain alphabetical order. No, this is inaccurate. In reality, Postfix writes recipients to the queue file in the order that it received them. At DELIVERY TIME, the queue manager sorts recipients so that it can group multiple recipients in one email transaction (remember, SMTP is a multi-recipient protocol). This sorting at DELIVERY TIME is done in batches of up to $qmgr_message_recipient_limit. At DELIVERY TIME, the queue manager implements ROUND-ROBIN destination selection, and it enforces concurrency limits such that it will not deliver all recipients for the same domain at the same time (unlike some MTAs) even when those recipients are sorted together. This provides better load distribution than naive random destination selection. Wietse > We already implemented restrictions on concurrency and number of > recipients per message not to trigger various filters at the receiving > end, and now I thought that maybe it would work even better if the > recieving domains were randomized instead of cued alphabetically. > > Any thoughts from the list? Would it be easy to implement? > > Thanks! > >
From: Per olof Ljungmark on 26 May 2010 10:34 Wietse Venema wrote: > Per olof Ljungmark: >> Hi, >> >> We host a few mailing lists and I noted that when the messages are cued, >> it is done so in recipient-domain alphabetical order. > > No, this is inaccurate. > > In reality, Postfix writes recipients to the queue file in the > order that it received them. > > At DELIVERY TIME, the queue manager sorts recipients so that it > can group multiple recipients in one email transaction (remember, > SMTP is a multi-recipient protocol). > > This sorting at DELIVERY TIME is done in batches of up to > $qmgr_message_recipient_limit. > > At DELIVERY TIME, the queue manager implements ROUND-ROBIN destination > selection, and it enforces concurrency limits such that it will > not deliver all recipients for the same domain at the same time > (unlike some MTAs) even when those recipients are sorted together. > > This provides better load distribution than naive random destination > selection. > > Wietse Yes, thanks, agree on load distribution. In this case the problem is not the load, I was just contemplating ways not to trigger various (sometimes inaccurate) methods of spam filtering to complement what we already have, but what we already have should probably be enough. -- per >> We already implemented restrictions on concurrency and number of >> recipients per message not to trigger various filters at the receiving >> end, and now I thought that maybe it would work even better if the >> recieving domains were randomized instead of cued alphabetically. >> >> Any thoughts from the list? Would it be easy to implement? >> >> Thanks! >> >> >
From: Wietse Venema on 26 May 2010 10:53 Per olof Ljungmark: > Yes, thanks, agree on load distribution. In this case the problem is not > the load, I was just contemplating ways not to trigger various > (sometimes inaccurate) methods of spam filtering to complement what we > already have, but what we already have should probably be enough. Postfix can enforce delays between deliveries to the same domain, but the implementation is targeted at users with "consumer-grade" service. Wietse
|
Pages: 1 Prev: postgrey migration when moving physical server Next: smtpd_recipient_limit |