On 5 Dec, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Looks like we have the rare case of an MTA which advertises pipelining
> and doesn't implement it properly, or maybe it took exception to the
> contents of your bounce message for some reason?
Obviously Exims error reporting was fooled by the pipelining. When
trying the delivery manually using telnet (without pipelining) I
get this:
$ telnet mx13.nameplanet.com 25
Trying 62.70.3.43...
Connected to mx13.nameplanet.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mx13.nameplanet.com ESMTP
EHLO mail.mitt-eget.com
250-mx13.nameplanet.com
250-AUTH=LOGIN
250-PIPELINING
250 8BITMIME
MAIL FROM:<>
250 ok
RCPT TO:<user@???>
553 listed as badmail
Connection closed by foreign host.
$
RFC 821 says that 553 is "Requested action not taken: mailbox name not allowed"
but what do nameplanet.com mean when they say "listed as badmail"? Do they
object to me sending to that user, or do they dislike the user?
Back to Exim. Exim did not notice the 553 wich should have stopped it from
trying furter deliveries. Instead it saw the 250 and continues the fruitless
delivery attempts. Isn't this a serious bug in Exim?
--
Göran Larsson hoh AT mitt-eget DOT com
