You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-user@james.apache.org by "John G. Norman" <jo...@7fff.com> on 2005/03/25 04:40:33 UTC
15 second delay on closed system
I've set up a small closed network. I'm using this little network for a
demo. I'm observing 15 second delays in sending -- can't seem to see why
there would be any appreciable delay.
The config is:
The network IP addresses are 192.168.50.*
All systems are running Windows XP Pro SP 2.
A DNS server (SANS -- a scaled-down version of Posadis --
http://www.posadis.com/news/050108-sans?DokuWiki=a77bd42d2aea0d787b15fbd85e76fdc4)
runs on 192.168.50.10.
Other machines have IPs 192.168.50.20, .30, .40. Each has a name.
The names are:
.10 sysa.com
.20 sysb.com
.30 sysc.com
.40 sysd.com
Each runs James.
The James config.xml on each is the one shipped with James (with host names
set appropriately -- I am using SMTP AUTH).
The good news: Mail moves between systems.
The bad news: There is a sending delay. The delay is very similar for
e-mail sent between all systems.
Here's an example header of a mail send to john@sysa.com from
marialopez321@sysd.com:
Return-Path: <ma...@sysd.com>
Received: from 192.168.50.40 ([192.168.50.40])
by sysa.com (JAMES SMTP Server 2.2.0) with SMTP ID 199
for <jo...@sysa.com>;
Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:23:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from h3qual40 ([192.168.50.40])
by sysd.com (JAMES SMTP Server 2.2.0) with SMTP ID 273
for <jo...@sysa.com>;
Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:23:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <00...@h3qual40>
From: "Maria Lopez" <ma...@sysd.com>
To: "John G. Norman" <jo...@sysa.com>
References: <00...@h3qual40>
<00...@h3qual10>
<00...@h3qual40>
<00...@h3qual10>
Subject: Re: test
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:23:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0078_01C530A6.F5E950A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Delivered-To: john@sysa.com
I'm stumped. Also not 100% sure of what log should show me what the problem
is -- I don't see any obvious "hang" in any of the logs.
John N.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: 15 second delay on closed system
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:32:52 -0500
"John G. Norman" <jo...@7fff.com> wrote:
> So . . . Why would the reachability of non-authoritative
>secondary DNS make a difference either way?
My guess (very much so) is that James is trying the DNS
servers in reverse order. This is a total guess, but I
can't be sure how it's loading the DNS configurations... I
don't think we've ever talked about what might happen if
you had one good and one bad DNS server.
Anyway, that does explain a 15 second timeout since you
see no CPU crunching and a 15 second delay, and most
importantly, it disappears when you remove the secondary
DNS.
I would confirm that the server can reach the secondary
DNS server (at the network level... use a tool like
nslookup).
--
Serge Knystautas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: 15 second delay on closed system [P.S.]
Posted by "John G. Norman" <jo...@7fff.com>.
[P.S.] In the James config.xml, specifying the DNS as authoritative or not
doesn't have an impact on this particular issue. So it's something about
the specification of the secondary DNS resources, and their availability.
At 01:32 PM 3/25/2005 -0500, John G. Norman wrote:
>Noel (and anyone else . . .),
>
>Thank you very, very much for offering to probe a bit into my problem.
>
>I think I have a solution but I don't understand it. Without the solution,
>here is what I see in the spool log w/ DEBUG:
>
>On the sending machine:
>--The e-mail is sent. The log goes quiet.
>
>On the receiving machine:
>--Nothing.
>--Then some 15 seconds later, the mail comes in.
>
>Now here's the thing:
>
>I am running a DNS server on .10. On all machines, the primary DNS is
>given as this machine. I also have a couple of external DNS's listed, but
>typically the router is unplugged from the outside internet.
>
>First, in the James config.xml, I changed the DNS listing (to
>192.168.50.10) to authoritative=true. This seemed to make no difference.
>
>Then--and this is the interesting bit--I removed the two external DNS
>servers. Now there's no delay.
>
>Also, when I *did* have the two external secondary DNS servers, if I
>plugged my router in so that those two were reachable: No delay.
>
>So . . . Why would the reachability of non-authoritative secondary DNS
>make a difference either way?
>
> John
>
>At 12:36 AM 3/25/2005 -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> > I'm stumped. Also not 100% sure of what log should show me
>> > what the problem is
>>
>>Turn on debug for the spoolmanager, and check to see if there are any delays
>>between steps.
>>
>> --- Noel
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: 15 second delay on closed system
Posted by "John G. Norman" <jo...@7fff.com>.
Noel (and anyone else . . .),
Thank you very, very much for offering to probe a bit into my problem.
I think I have a solution but I don't understand it. Without the solution,
here is what I see in the spool log w/ DEBUG:
On the sending machine:
--The e-mail is sent. The log goes quiet.
On the receiving machine:
--Nothing.
--Then some 15 seconds later, the mail comes in.
Now here's the thing:
I am running a DNS server on .10. On all machines, the primary DNS is given
as this machine. I also have a couple of external DNS's listed, but
typically the router is unplugged from the outside internet.
First, in the James config.xml, I changed the DNS listing (to
192.168.50.10) to authoritative=true. This seemed to make no difference.
Then--and this is the interesting bit--I removed the two external DNS
servers. Now there's no delay.
Also, when I *did* have the two external secondary DNS servers, if I
plugged my router in so that those two were reachable: No delay.
So . . . Why would the reachability of non-authoritative secondary DNS make
a difference either way?
John
At 12:36 AM 3/25/2005 -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > I'm stumped. Also not 100% sure of what log should show me
> > what the problem is
>
>Turn on debug for the spoolmanager, and check to see if there are any delays
>between steps.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: 15 second delay on closed system
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> I'm stumped. Also not 100% sure of what log should show me
> what the problem is
Turn on debug for the spoolmanager, and check to see if there are any delays
between steps.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org