🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1fedqbc.1u1t7j21ieme0oN%francis@pinza.demon.co.uk>,
francis@pinza.demon.co.uk (Francis Knight) wrote:

> ----- Original (Diagnostic) Message -----
> From: <root@punt-1.mail.demon.net>
> To: <hk11@ntlworld.com>
> Sent: 23 June 2002 14:47
> Subject: Mail Delivery failed: returning to sender.
> 
> 
> > Subject: Mail Delivery failed: returning to sender
> >
> > This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
> >
> > A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients.
> > The following address(es) failed:
> >
> >   pinza.demon.co.uk [158.152.22.215]:
> >
> > MAIL FROM:<hk11@ntlworld.com>
> > 250 Sender OK
> > RCPT TO:<francis@pinza.demon.co.uk>
> > 550 Relay restricted

Okay, then the error message there was from <root@punt-1.mail.demon.net>
which indicates that the message got to Demon with no problems
and that it was the /next/ step that had problems.  According to
that, it was your own email setup which rejected the mail with
the error code 550, having decided that it was being asked to
relay the message elsewhere.

I don't understand this: it looks like a glitch since the message
is actually addressed to a user on your machine.  There's only one
other legitimate possibility I can think of: that ntlworld's
email systems was incorrectly configured to send mail to a certain
machine at Demon's system.  This is a violation of the standards
but people sometimes do it because it saves time.  I find it hard
to imagine that ntlworld would configure their machines that way.

Simon.
-- 
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk | [One] thing that worries me about Bush and
No junk email please.          | Blair's "war on terrorism" is: how will they
                               | know when they've won it ? -- Terry Jones
                      THE FRENCH WAS THERE