Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 01:25:09PM -0400, Bill Cole wrote: > From where I am, it looks like the Dyn server is answering fast. It's > the Microsoft server resolving the A record that is slow. The "nameservers" (if one can call these barely able to speak DNS systems that) for mail.protection.outloo

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On 2022-11-01 at 12:56:42 UTC-0400 (Tue, 1 Nov 2022 16:56:42 +) Linkcheck is rumored to have said: > On 01/11/2022 4:23 pm, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> Note that DNS for the recipient domain is provided by "dyn.com" > > Noted. I suppose that would explain the 1 second plus delay. From where

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 12:37:08PM -0400, Paul Kudla wrote: You really should not speculate nearly so much. > does ubound have a dns query timeout that could be set higher ??? Of course. > bcs.hants.sch.uk seems to be a sub, sub, domain thus going through > multiple dns lookups before it gets

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On 01/11/2022 4:23 pm, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > Note that DNS for the recipient domain is provided by "dyn.com" Noted. I suppose that would explain the 1 second plus delay. Unless you have a good reason to include "native", you probably should not. Thank you, Viktor. Now removed.

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

ok > (Host or domain name not > found. Name service error for name=bcs.hants.sch.uk type=MX: Host not > found, try again) ok again looking in from out side please note that i am in ontario canada host not found is exactly that, host not found which means no MX, no A records etc were returne

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 04:06:23PM +, Linkcheck wrote: > I could only find 3 lines of log for the transaction - it was part of a > bulk send. It appears the email was actually sent for this one; was it > really? Yes, the message was delivered on the second attempt. > Oct 31 12:54:37 BRISTO

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

Log and postconf as requested. I could only find 3 lines of log for the transaction - it was part of a bulk send. It appears the email was actually sent for this one; was it really? log entry Oct 31 12:54:37 BRISTOLWEB postfix/smtp[35040]: A123A320136: to=, relay=n

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

thanks for the info I learned something ! Happy Tuesday !!! Thanks - paul Paul Kudla Scom.ca Internet Services 004-1009 Byron Street South Whitby, Ontario - Canada L1N 4S3 Toronto 416.642.7266 Main 1.866.411.7266 Fax 1.888.892.7266 Email p...@scom.ca On 11/1/20

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

ok i replyed back on another post but thanbks for at least replying i think i will let everyone else figure this out you are right i was running on experience without any logging info the origional post indicated that mx records were not being returned? when i did a dig on my dns system and

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On 2022-11-01 at 10:16:15 UTC-0400 (Tue, 1 Nov 2022 10:16:15 -0400) Paul Kudla is rumored to have said: > well at lest this is starting to make total sense. > > i was unaware of unbound dns and not really sure that would ever work on a > mail server? > > even if it does elsewhere Unbound works

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:30:50AM -0400, Paul Kudla wrote: > > The OP, please ignore advice (such as the below) from eager but > > uninformed list contributors. > > if i can please get an explanition on what triggered this comment then > please advise - ie regarding unbound (i presume) Essen

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

ok i have been doing networking, dns, mail etc postfix for over 22 years mainly on freebsd running an isp. not saying i dont have anything further to learn (in fact that is an ongoing daily experience today) but would appreciate an explination ?? I am not eager - just trying to help based

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 10:16:15AM -0400, Paul Kudla wrote: The OP, please ignore advice (such as the below) from eager but uninformed list contributors. > I was unaware of unbound dns and not really sure that would ever work on > a mail server? > > even if it does elsewhere > > postfix 101 >

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

well at lest this is starting to make total sense. i was unaware of unbound dns and not really sure that would ever work on a mail server? even if it does elsewhere postfix 101 postfix will always look at the resolv.conf file on a unix system. if all you have is 127.0.0.1 (loopback) and a

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 01:55:37PM +, Linkcheck wrote: > As I said, I use unbound. resolv.conf only has 127.0.0.1. To ask a question on this list in a manner likely to elicit meaningful help follow the advice in: http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail -- Viktor.

Re: mail.protection.outlook.com rejections

As I said, I use unbound. resolv.conf only has 127.0.0.1. Windows - where does that come in? Haven't used that in years! :)