North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Blocking mail from bad places

  • From: Matthew Black
  • Date: Thu Apr 05 18:56:04 2007

On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 14:01:10 -0700 Ken Simpson <[email protected]> wrote:
James R. Cutler [05/04/07 16:30 -0400]:
Todd makes my point exactly. As he notes, the rejection message tells me that the message was rejected by some system. It does not tell my why it was rejected. Thus, just like this message, it adds more to the noise to signal ratio!

Has anyone ever thought of standardizing the 500-responses from the DATA phase? For instance, maybe 571 could always mean "rejected because of the spam filter".

If there was a standard for these response codes then maybe clients
like Microsoft Outlook could do something useful with the error


I had a good chuckle after reading your message. It's a great
suggestion BUT... Microsoft products already ignore 5xx responses.
From what I've seen, Outlook and Exchange will indefinitely retry
a message after receiving a 5xx error. Outlook keeps the message in
the user's PersonalFolders/Outbox for subsequent delivery attempts
when you hit Send/Receive. We've seen lots of clients here attempt
to send the same message every minute for weeks when the message
exceeds our message size restrictions.

Have they recently fixed this or released patches for all
older product versions?

Best regards,

matthew black
network services
california state university, long beach
1250 bellflower boulevard
long beach, ca  90840-0101