On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 09:28:23AM -0500, KLaM Postmaster wrote: > I was thinking about something I wrote here a couple of days ago. A 450 > response from my server being delivered to the original sender is a > mistake - isn't it? > Everything I have read to date seems to indicate that 4xx codes are > temporary conditions between SMTP endpoints. But as I am new to this I > started to wondering if I was correct in asserting that such response > messages should not as a rule get back to the sender.
They certainly get back to the sender if the condition persists "long enough" and the sending system gives up. The choice of "long enough" is up to the sending system. > I came across this when I got a complaint that I had "bounced" > somebodies email with a 450 indicating the message was being delayed due > to greylisting. The sender received the following message in their inbox > "450 4.2.0 <he...@mumble.com>: Recipient address rejected: Greylisted, > see http://postgrey.schweikert.ch/help/mumble.com.html; from=<mumble> > to=<he...@mumble.com> proto=ESMTP helo=<smtp12.bis.na.blackberry.com>." > which seemed odd to me. This is perfectly fine. Now figure out how long they kept trying and why their system does not succeed in getting the mail through your greylisting system. -- Viktor. Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header. To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below: <mailto:majord...@postfix.org?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users> If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put "It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.
