E-mail delays

[#1]

Am I alone in experiencing e-mail delays as illustrated by these (partial) headers?
_____________________________________________________
Received:  by fhw-sunmxcore01.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISZg2-00026S-NG
          for user@user.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:46:54 +0000
X-Daemon-Classification: INNOCENT
Received: from smtp2.uk2.net ([83.170.81.182])
          by fhw-sunmxcore01.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISWiD-0003bF-CP
          for user@user.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 11:36:53 +0000
_____________________________________________________

[#2]

I shall have somebody take a look at this. The queues don't suggest a widespread problem.

[#3]

Thank you.
A subsequent test message did not exhibit the problem; on the other hand I know of other messages that appear to be delayed.

[#4]

I've been seeing similar symptoms today.
Am planning a bulk-email send to customers where I work.  Was sending to test PlusNet accounts to see how they displayed in SquirrelMail.  However, whilst the first one came through immediately - subsequent tries took some time and still not all of them have arrived.
This was sending via relay.  Sending to other addresses seemed fine and the emails arrived pretty much instantly.

[#5]

Headers would be appreciated Liam if you have them. Couple of examples and I can oepn a problem and get some weight behind this. Russ is taking a quick look at things now on my behalf to see if he can spot anything obvious.
Edit:  Found the following in the logs (sanitised to preserve privacy):

2007-09-04 11:36:53 1ISWiD-0003bF-CP <= me@privacy.net H=smtp2.uk2.net [83.170.81.182] P=esmtp S=27346 id=126201c7eee7$b9c63820$9200a8c0@privacy.net
2007-09-04 11:38:01 1ISWiD-0003bF-CP <user@user.plus.com>: local_virusspamfolder transport output: An error was detected while processing a file of BSMTP input.
2007-09-04 11:38:01 1ISWiD-0003bF-CP == user@user.plus.com R=mysql_virusspamfolder T=local_virusspamfolder defer (-24): Transport filter process failed (255)
2007-09-04 14:46:55 1ISWiD-0003bF-CP => user@user.plus.com R=mysql_virusspamfolder T=local_virusspamfolder H=127.0.0.1
2007-09-04 14:46:55 1ISWiD-0003bF-CP Completed

Transport filter process failed (255) - That's slightly concerning and has been seen before when the Clam process that runs on the server is busy. We'll continue investigating.

[#6]

Not massive delays, but 20 minutes and a couple shortly under 10 mins.

Quote

Envelope-to: test@originalorganics.plus.com Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:52:23 +0000 Received: from pih-relay06.plus.net ([212.159.14.133])     by fhw-sunmxcore20.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISYnk-0006zN-Ct     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:50:44 +0000 Received: from [80.229.43.7] (helo=LiamDell)     by pih-relay06.plus.net with smtp (Exim) id 1ISYTw-000856-Af     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:30:16 +0100 Message-ID: <ed1b5fae4ad2a679ff38682300174213@waterbuttsdirect.co.uk>

Quote

Envelope-to: test@originalorganics.plus.com Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:38:56 +0000 Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net ([212.159.14.214])     by pih-sunmxcore19.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISYbB-0006Pr-LZ     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:37:46 +0000 Received: from [80.229.43.7] (helo=LiamDell)     by ptb-relay03.plus.net with smtp (Exim) id 1ISYSk-0006uX-Dg     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:29:03 +0100 Message-ID: <6cea7ed686ba07e4dfc8a3a500141a92@waterbuttsdirect.co.uk>

Quote

Envelope-to: test@originalorganics.plus.com Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:37:46 +0000 Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net ([212.159.14.214])     by pih-sunmxcore09.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISYbB-0004qt-Sm     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:37:46 +0000 Received: from [80.229.43.7] (helo=LiamDell)     by ptb-relay03.plus.net with smtp (Exim) id 1ISYRv-0004sd-6t     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:28:11 +0100 Message-ID: <9ed92ed2bc896892b520b11e00165e41@waterbuttsdirect.co.uk>

Quote

Envelope-to: test@originalorganics.plus.com Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:37:09 +0000 Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net ([212.159.14.214])     by pih-sunmxcore10.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISYaa-0001Ji-98     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:37:09 +0000 Received: from [80.229.43.7] (helo=LiamDell)     by ptb-relay03.plus.net with smtp (Exim) id 1ISYWk-00014v-Cm     for test@originalorganics.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:33:10 +0100 Message-ID: <a96629f576db767bfba6749b00142624@waterbuttsdirect.co.uk>

Not sure if there is any importance of 13:37 but thats when those got through.  relay03 have a hiccup around then?
Also, are the times wrong on the mxcores (i.e. not forward by an hour?)

[#7]

Quote

Also, are the times wrong on the mxcores (i.e. not forward by an hour?)

I've raised this too.

[#8]

Some emails come through 'instantly' but others are delayed.
I just had one which took 39 minutes.

Quote

received by pih-sunmxcore19.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISe8O-0004tX-7N at 19:32

then after spam scanning

Quote

received by pih-sunmxcore19.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISekC-0005IZ-5c at 20:11

It seems that the spam scanning might have taken the 39 minutes
I also had an email which came through 3 minutes earlier and was delivered immediately but this was handled by pih-sunmxcore15.plus.net

[#9]

Here's another that has just come in and which I suspected was awol:

Quote

Received:  by pih-sunmxcore18.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISeeo-0004q7-O3           for user@user.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:06:02 +0000 X-Daemon-Classification: INNOCENT Received: from pih-criticalpath01.plus.net ([84.92.7.52] helo=cp3a.criticalpath.priv)           by pih-sunmxcore18.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISeOS-00051j-RV           for user@user.plus.com; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:49:01 +0000 Received: from smtp3.uk2.net (83.170.81.183) by cp3a.criticalpath.priv (7.3.118.13)         id 46CC7536000AAA1B for user@user.plus.com; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 14:08:04 +0100

A little under 7 hours seems excessive

[#10]

Hmm... that's a bit worrying.  You have criticalpath in your headers... I thought that was out of service following the events of last week!

[#11]

Hi,
I'll flag this up to the network guys and see what's happening, in the meantime could you raise us a ticket with the full header please?

[#12]

Cheers for the reply, Dave.  It's canford who posted the limited header above.
If he doesn't come back with raising a ticket fairly quick, I think it would be prudent to get in touch with him (i.e. PlusNet raise him a ticket / give him a call) asking for the further information.

[#13]

Just got up. I have raised the ticket as requested.
#22770671
Chris

[#14]

I send myself a test message yesterday at about 1pm and it still has not arrived (nearly 20 hours later).  (It's not in the spam folder).
Is there a general problem?

[#15]

Hi,
I just received an email which appears to have been delayed for around 11 hours, headers below.
Regards
Greg
Delivery-date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:43:24 +0000
Received:  by pih-sunmxcore18.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISizL-0003FP-DI
  for *******; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:43:24 +0000
X-Daemon-Classification: INNOCENT
Received: from pih-criticalpath01.plus.net ([84.92.7.52] helo=cp3a.criticalpath.priv)
  by pih-sunmxcore18.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1ISizL-0003EW-2O
  for ********; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:43:23 +0000
Received: from C2bthomr05.btconnect.com (213.123.20.137) by cp3a.criticalpath.priv (7.3.118.13)
        id 46CC7536000BA108 for ******; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 14:35:57 +0100
Received: from DANSDESK
by C2bthomr05.btconnect.com
with ESMTP id GSP52431;
Tue, 4 Sep 2007 14:45:03 +0100 (BST)