🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1fea0qe.r8dcv815kvun0N%francis@pinza.demon.co.uk>,
francis@pinza.demon.co.uk (Francis Knight) wrote:

> I got this from someone who tried unsuccessfully to email me.
> Who caused the '550 Relay restricted' line, me or Demon? 

The last server which /successfully/ handled the message would
be the one which sent you the notice about the problem.  /It/
got the bounce when trying to hand the message on to the next
link.  You cut all the headers I'd look at to find out.

However, I do see some problems with the headers you quoted.
The most important one is the malformed 'Message-ID' one which
should have the full address of a computer on the right of the
'@' sign instead of just 'acc'.  Was that message actually
from someone using the account 'hk11' at nltworld ?

> (Could this answer differ depending on whether I was connected 
> at the time the message arrived at Demon?)

How do you collect email on your own computer from Demon ?
The headers you show suggests that it might have been your own
computer which rejected the message as unsolicited bulk email.

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

<slavins@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> You cut all the headers I'd look at to find out.

I did mis-read the data provided to me and left some out.
Here it is again, below, complete.
 
> However, I do see some problems with the headers you quoted.
> The most important one is the malformed 'Message-ID' one which
> should have the full address of a computer on the right of the
> '@' sign instead of just 'acc'.  Was that message actually
> from someone using the account 'hk11' at nltworld ?

As far as I can tell, yes. I had sent a mail to that account.

> How do you collect email on your own computer from Demon ?

I'm using EIMS behind an AirPort with port mapping on public 
Port 25 to private Port 25 on 10.0.1.201, the EIMS machine.
EIMS is set to only relay for local domains. Nothing about
this particular message appears in EIMS's logs.

I started using EIMS instead of AddMail after acquiring the
AirPort as it shows more detail of the SMTP handshaking. As
I mentioned, along with the AirPort came reduced reliability.
The following block is typical. I've heard talk of 
unacknowledged problems with AirPort port mapping.


Open Transport 2.5.1f1
Default domain: 
Looking up server name...
Remembered name: pinza.demon.co.uk
Server name is pinza.demon.co.uk
SMTP & POP3 ready
Server ready to go.
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:57:23 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection opened
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:57:34 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection from
punt-21.mail.demon.net (194.217.242.6)
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:58:44 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection closed
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:05:06 +0100 216.190.255.225 SMTP connection opened
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:05:17 +0100 216.190.255.225 SMTP connection from
acetronix.co.kr (216.190.255.225)
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:07:41 +0100 216.190.255.225 Not using <cr><lf> as
end of line
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:07:53 +0100 216.190.255.225 SMTP connection closed
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:17:13 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection opened
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:17:24 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection closed
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:17:25 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection opened
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:17:27 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection closed
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:17:49 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection opened
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:18:00 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection closed
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:18:40 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection opened
Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:18:49 +0100 194.217.242.6 SMTP connection closed



Cheers,
Francis K.


----- 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
>
> ----- Original Message Follows ------
>
>  Received: from punt-1.mail.demon.net by mailstore for
francis@pinza.demon.co.uk
>            id 1024833130:10:25536:3; Sun, 23 Jun 2002 11:52:10 GMT
>  Received: from mta02-svc.ntlworld.com ([62.253.162.42]) by
punt-1.mail.demon.net
>             id aa1127437; 23 Jun 2002 11:52 GMT
>  Received: from acc ([62.255.68.17]) by mta02-svc.ntlworld.com
>            (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with SMTP
>            id <20020623115210.GZLX4626.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@acc>
>            for <francis@pinza.demon.co.uk>; Sun, 23 Jun 2002 12:52:10 +0100
>  Message-ID: <000001c21aac$82b82b00$7200000a@acc>
>  Reply-To: "Keith" <hk11@ntlworld.com>
>  From: "Keith" <hk11@ntlworld.com>
>  To: "RealMe" <francis@pinza.demon.co.uk>
>  References: <1fe88wy.e9eyywgyx0z8M%francis@pinza.demon.co.uk>
>  Subject:  Old or new
>  Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 11:43:40 +0100
>  MIME-Version: 1.0
>  Content-Type: text/plain;
>   charset="iso-8859-1"
>  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>  X-Priority: 3
>  X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>  X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
>  Disposition-Notification-To: "Keith" <hk11@ntlworld.com>
>  X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200

-- 
[Remove Trailing'Z' from mail address to reply.]

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

<slavins@hearsay.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> 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.


I now think I know what's happening. Behind the AirPort, 
EIMS on startup tries DNS to discover its identity. Whether 
it decides it is pinza or not is not predictable, although I
have set pinza as its default. I have it set not to relay
except for the local domain, as Demon advise, so on this
occasion, and again once since, it bounced everything because
it thought it was not pinza.

Apple have released a firmware upgrade (v 4.0.4) for AirPort 
which solves the problem I was trying to monitor with EIMS,
so I have now reverted to AddMail, and all seems well.

Cheers,
Francis K.

-- 
[Remove Trailing'Z' from mail address to reply.]