Koozali.org: home of the SME Server

Return to Sender Locked in Queue

SteveW

Return to Sender Locked in Queue
« on: April 02, 2005, 07:01:54 PM »
Greetings,

I have my SME 6.01 set up to return to sender any email sent to unknown addresses. However, these return to sender messages are getting trapped in the mail queue and never being sent out at all. I used the qmHandle tool to confirm that it's only the return to sender messages being trapped - example:
Quote
MESSAGE NUMBER 163953
 --------------
Received: (qmail 2150 invoked for bounce); 2 Apr 2005 16:39:47 -0000
Date: 2 Apr 2005 16:39:47 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@steve.net
To: hzo@mailtw.com
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at steve.net.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

:
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.


I'm running a p4-1.7-640ram, I have dungog's virtual domain email management and clamAV installed, and other than that it's straight outta the box SME. I'm unsure how long it's been happening, but I know I accumulated 150,000 messages in my queue.

Any help on how to get those messages sent would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.

-
Steve

Offline jackl

  • ****
  • 136
  • +0/-0
Return to Sender Locked in Queue
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2005, 09:44:35 PM »
Steve,

The reason they are stuck in the Q is that the destination smtp server is refusing to accept them from your server because it is not a valid email address at the destination or anti-spam measures are blocking it.
This is one of the reasons why it is best not to choose the return to sender option. It could get worse if the destination accepted your messages and the bounced them back to you.
Regards
Jack
......

Offline smeghead

  • *
  • 563
  • +0/-0
Return to Sender Locked in Queue
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2005, 07:34:00 AM »
Search for the delete double bounce mail mod & apply it.

However as has already been stated its best not to return to sender anyway.
..................