Re: Outgoing queue....

[Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@trolltech.com>]

"David L. Potter" <potter@chebucto.ns.ca>
> Thanks for pointing this out... I must admit I'd forgotten about some of 
> these utilities.
> 
> While I'm not familiar with the term 'quinche' it appears from the context 
> that it means 'quiet'.

I suspect the author meant to write quench, but should have written kill.

> I would assume that means that along with the 
> scheduler, all transport agents and router processes must also be 
> stopped? Am I right in assuming that smtpserver processes could possibly
> continue...?

Stop the scheduler. You can let the routers and smtpservers go on.

If you run it while the scheduler is running, nothing terribly bad's going
to happen, I suspect. Matti?

> And while this looks like it will work, with the increasing amount of 
> spam we face, I was hoping for a method that could be used 'on the fly' 
> and would cover a longer time period.
> 
> At one point I though about an `expirer ` type program that would search 
> messages down and simply (mv) remove them from the queue... however

That's effectively what that program does... except that it does it the
right way, by writing the "I'm done with this recipient" byte in the file.

> Neither  `expirer ` or my idea work as well as I would like because, in 
> part, I'm seeing spam being relayed off of several sites (which makes it 
> difficult to block) but then end up with a common 'channel/host', stuck 
> for several days in the outbound queue and with new arrivals appearing 
> (possibly from new relay sites) over several days... yuck!

Yeah... anything that tries to deal with spam seems to be yucky :(

--Arnt