In the weekend of 16/may/2009 we have had a big server migration, to make an exact backup we suspend the users, make a backup, then restore and unsuspend them. But I have noticed this problem:
When I user is suspended he can't receive any email, this is normal because he is suspended. But a big problem is that the email is rejected instead of putted in the queue, so when the user is unsuspended the email received while he was suspended are lost.
This is from the exim/mainlog file
2009-05-16 18:56:01 H=mailrelay007.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.173] F=<[email protected]> rejected RCPT <[email protected]>: Unrouteable address
2009-05-16 18:56:02 H=mailrelay007.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.173] incomplete transaction (RSET) from <[email protected]>
I think it would be better to queue the emails until the user is unsuspended. I also though to maybe make 2 suspension-states "suspend" and "disable / hard suspend". In "suspend"-mode the email are queued, in "disable"-mode they are rejected.
How does other people think about this problem?
Kind regards,
Maarten
When I user is suspended he can't receive any email, this is normal because he is suspended. But a big problem is that the email is rejected instead of putted in the queue, so when the user is unsuspended the email received while he was suspended are lost.
This is from the exim/mainlog file
2009-05-16 18:56:01 H=mailrelay007.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.173] F=<[email protected]> rejected RCPT <[email protected]>: Unrouteable address
2009-05-16 18:56:02 H=mailrelay007.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.173] incomplete transaction (RSET) from <[email protected]>
I think it would be better to queue the emails until the user is unsuspended. I also though to maybe make 2 suspension-states "suspend" and "disable / hard suspend". In "suspend"-mode the email are queued, in "disable"-mode they are rejected.
How does other people think about this problem?
Kind regards,
Maarten