deferral: TLS_unable_to_load_control/tlshosts//_

Hi all,

We seem to have an issue with delivery of email being deferred for a small number of email addresses.

I’m unsure how long this has been going on for, but I suspect it may be since the qmail update on 2019-02-06.

For each deferral, the send-current log states:

delivery 418: deferral: TLS_unable_to_load_control/tlshosts//_

The messages will then remain in the mail queue until they expire.

A Google search for the above error message doesn’t give anything useful. Has anyone else seen this before, or can hazard a guess as to the cause?

Hi sim79

I have not seen that error before sorry

What distro and IW version are you using

Does tlshosts file exist

Have you restarted qmail and if not resolved, have you restarted server

It could be because TLSv1 has been stopped in latest version, and if host your connecting to requires TLSv1 then I guess it would fail (not on all email sending though, as there will be a mix of v1 v1.1 and v1.2)

This is a quick fix though, as you need to create a file called TLSCiphers I think but I will look up the exact thread and post for you

If all fails, I would open a support ticket with your license provider

Many thanks


Hi sim79

Sorry here?s the thread

Many thanks


Issues with Outlook 2010 Sending Mail following RHEL7 QMail update…

Hi John,

Hope you are well, and thanks for responding.

I might have resolved the issue (though time will tell).

I updated /var/qmail/control/tlsserverciphers and /var/qmail/control/tlsclientciphers to the following and restarted SMTP:


(This list of ciphers was obtained from

Since I did that, no messages have been deferred and the obscure “TLS_unable_to_load_control/tlshosts//_” message no longer appears in the logs. Naturally, I’ll need to monitor it for a longer period before I can say whether the issue is permanently fixed.

However, I don’t really understand why the above apparently fixed the issue and what other (if any) consequences changing the ciphers to those shown above would have, which makes me a little bit cautious.

I’ll update this thread in a day or two to let you know if the issue returns or not.

Hi sim79

Excellent news and look forward to your update

It could be the TfL?s protocol or looks more likely to tight ciphers. It looks like you relaxed them but RC4 ciphers I thought we?re not meant to be used any longer. Sorry maybe thinking of something else

Many thanks


Seems to have held up fine over the weekend, so I guess we can file this under “resolved”.