From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bob Proulx Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Mail posting in newsgroups in Gnus Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 12:23:42 -0600 Message-ID: <20160514121716201824669@bob.proulx.com> References: <20160513183937477161621@bob.proulx.com> <834ma183wh.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1463250262 25083 80.91.229.3 (14 May 2016 18:24:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 18:24:22 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 14 20:24:05 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1b1eEK-00052t-MF for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 May 2016 20:24:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38533 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b1eEJ-0005xE-NE for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 May 2016 14:23:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57118) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b1eEA-0005vf-2S for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 14 May 2016 14:23:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b1eE6-00030o-QY for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 14 May 2016 14:23:49 -0400 Original-Received: from havoc.proulx.com ([96.88.95.61]:58869) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b1eE6-00030h-KX for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 14 May 2016 14:23:46 -0400 Original-Received: from joseki.proulx.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by havoc.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C17377FA for ; Sat, 14 May 2016 12:23:45 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: from hysteria.proulx.com (hysteria.proulx.com [192.168.230.119]) by joseki.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49AE21257 for ; Sat, 14 May 2016 12:23:44 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: by hysteria.proulx.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 90DC42DC49; Sat, 14 May 2016 12:23:42 -0600 (MDT) Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <834ma183wh.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 96.88.95.61 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:109951 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Jude DaShiell wrote: > > The internet standard for email message delivery is to try for 240 hours > > or 10 days whichever comes first then return delivery error report to > > the sender if delivery has failed in those 240 hours or 10 days. It was > > designed that way since the internet's original purpose was to survive a > > nuclear attack. > > I never saw such long timeouts. Five days for the undeliverable bounce has been typical as commonly implemented. It needs to be long enough to survive a 3-day weekend failure so that admins can fix it upon return to work. But three days is also very common too. The shortest time possible to positively diagnose undeliverable mail is desired. Really long timeouts mean that undeliverable mail remains in the queue consuming resources upon retry for the entire time. And long timeouts mean the user doesn't get feedback of a problem for that entire time. As short as practical is best. > I generally get a soft error message after 1 hour, and a "hard" > delivery failure after 2 hours. Personally I hate those soft warning messages. I always disable them on my own mail servers. They only confuse people these days. I am always needing to explain them again and again to people when they receive them in their mail to random places on the net. "No your mail hasn't bounced. Not yet. It might eventually. But it will retry until then. It just wasn't delivered immediately." It is tiring. And worse is when it is part of backscatter spam. People are confused because they get those warning of non-delivery for a spam message that forged their From: address. Argh! Bob