Mark Sapiro wrote: > John wrote: > >> answers inline... >> >> Mark Sapiro wrote: >>> John wrote: >>> >>>> What hasn't worked: >>>> * My service provider claimed the info in disable messages was >>>> insufficient for >>>> debug!? >>> >>> And can you post one? >> This was around the time my provider changed the smart host pool... The >> 64.202.189.86 IP address was in the pool & on at least 2 RBLs. The >> 208.109.80.54 IP is in the new pool and apparently still on 1 RBL list :-(. >> They >> claim they did not bounce back to my server... > > > They aren't bouncing to your server. They are refusing to accept the > message from your server. The fact that those IPs may be in RBLs is > not relevant, because that would only affect delivery from them to the > destination, and they aren't accepting the mail from you in the first > place. > > >> I haven't seen this since 11/10, >> but the rx7 list email is not being delivered. I don't understand why my >> other >> lists seem to be unaffected... > > > If it's only one list, it might have something to do with the smarthost > not liking the particular rx7-boun...@... envelope sender. That's > about the only thing that's list specific except maybe list size. > > >> ---------------------------------------- >> List: rx7 >> Member: usern...@aol.com >> Action: Subscription disabled. >> Reason: Excessive or fatal bounces. >> >> >> The triggering bounce notice is attached below. >> >> Questions? Contact the Mailman site administrator at >> mail...@rx7-world.net. > > > You have not included the headers of this notification message part , > but presumably it came from your own MTA. > > >> <usern...@sc.rr.com>: >> 64.202.189.86 failed after I sent the message. >> Remote host said: 554 Message refused. >> >> long list of similar msgs removed... >> >> <usern...@aol.com>: >> 208.109.80.54 failed after I sent the message. >> Remote host said: 554 Message refused. >> ----------------------------------------
I found a detailed bounce in my collection from before I entered a support ticket about RBLs at the beginning of Oct. ========================================= k2smtpout05-01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <u...@takas.lt>: 212.59.31.115 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [64.202.189.56] blocked using dnsbl-1.uceprotect.net; IP 64.202.189.56 is UCEPROTECT-Level 1 listed. See http://www.uceprotect.net/rblcheck.php?ipr=64.202.189.56 Giving up on 212.59.31.115. ========================================= Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I smell a cover-up... Soon after the support ticket, I started receiving the summarized failures and bounces from the smart host... :-/ It's a lot easier to deny an email delivery problem if you return a vague bounce message instead of the real thing... > And as you know, those IPs are servers in the secureserver.net domain > which presumably are the smarthost through which you're relaying and > it is these servers that are refusing to accept the message from you. > > How do you authenticate to these servers? Why should they accept and > relay your mail? hmmm ... 'cause they accept and relay everything else from the server? :-P (ya gotta have some fun when things go wrong or else you'll go nuts. ;-) ) >> >>> Does the smtp log say it delivered the post to the appropriate number >>> of recipients? >> it's hard to say... there is no single entry for the problem list that has >> the >> correct number (446 less a few nomail). > > > What are the recipient numbers in the entry(s) for the message-id of a > post? If VERP is on won't there only be 1 recipient/message-id, but multiple message-ids/post to Non-digest members? I also can't find a match to the received message IDs. It looks like digest is different, 2 entries totaling 262 "recips"... For now, I'm going to assume (ouch) that it's my provider's problem. Thanks for all for the patience and answers. If nothing else, I learned more about the workings of Mailman & qmail. :-D I may try shutting off the RFC headers on the lists and see if that changes anything... John ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
