Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
This was just received a flood of bounces reporting delivery failuers on messages I sent to nanog@ a few days ago... Actually, I have just received a flood of about 15 messages just like this one around 9:00pm; from various nanog posts I had sent 2 to 5 days in the past...... Is that strange or what? I thought the mailing list software rewrote the return path to suppress bounces? On 8/4/13, MAILER-DAEMON@mx1.kdc.fujixerox.co.jp <MAILER-DAEMON@mx1.kdc.fujixerox.co.jp> wrote:
The original message was received at Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:37:12 +0900 (JST) from ms2.dc.fxis.co.jp [143.94.15.17]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp> (reason: 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table)
----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp.:
DATA <<< 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>... User unknown <<< 554 5.5.1 Error: no valid recipients
-- -JH
I got hit the same. Sent from my Mobile Device. -------- Original message -------- From: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com> Date: 08/04/2013 9:09 PM (GMT-08:00) To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details This was just received a flood of bounces reporting delivery failuers on messages I sent to nanog@ a few days ago... Actually, I have just received a flood of about 15 messages just like this one around 9:00pm; from various nanog posts I had sent 2 to 5 days in the past...... Is that strange or what? I thought the mailing list software rewrote the return path to suppress bounces? On 8/4/13, MAILER-DAEMON@mx1.kdc.fujixerox.co.jp <MAILER-DAEMON@mx1.kdc.fujixerox.co.jp> wrote:
The original message was received at Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:37:12 +0900 (JST) from ms2.dc.fxis.co.jp [143.94.15.17]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp> (reason: 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table)
----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp.:
DATA <<< 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>... User unknown <<< 554 5.5.1 Error: no valid recipients
-- -JH
On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 23:07:59 -0500, Jimmy Hess said:
I thought the mailing list software rewrote the return path to suppress bounces?
Yeah, but every once in a while you'll come across a mail server hosted at Billy Bob's Bait, Tackle, and E-mail, or Klooful Joe's Bargain Hosting, that doesn't understand that bounces go to the RFC821 MAIL FROM and instead insist on sending to the RFC822 From:. In this case, it appears to be an end user with a badly misconfigured Fetchmail 6.3.21 that isn't handling bounces sanely.
On Aug 4, 2013, at 23:07, Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com> wrote:
This was just received a flood of bounces reporting delivery failuers on messages I sent to nanog@ a few days ago... Actually, I have just received a flood of about 15 messages just
like this one around 9:00pm; from various nanog posts I had sent 2 to 5 days in the past...... Is that strange or what?
I thought the mailing list software rewrote the return path to suppress bounces?
On 8/4/13, MAILER-DAEMON@mx1.kdc.fujixerox.co.jp <MAILER-DAEMON@mx1.kdc.fujixerox.co.jp> wrote:
The original message was received at Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:37:12 +0900 (JST) from ms2.dc.fxis.co.jp [143.94.15.17]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp> (reason: 550 5.1.1 <toshiya@de-anza.rdh.fujixerox.co.jp>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table)
The mailing list does try to receive and process bounce messages. I cannot find this address in the NANOG mailing list as a subscriber. It appears that a subscriber is forwarding messages to this mailbox. Best Regards, Andrew Koch on behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 09:10:38 -0500, Andrew Koch said:
The mailing list does try to receive and process bounce messages.
If it had caught these, I'd have been amazed - the offending site sent the bounces directly to the address in the From: so the NANOG mail server never saw the bounce.
I cannot find this address in the NANOG mailing list as a subscriber. It appears that a subscriber is forwarding messages to this mailbox.
The bounces that you didn't see contained a Received: header that ID'ed the subscriber. I've sent you an off-list note..
----- Original Message -----
From: "Valdis Kletnieks" <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
The mailing list does try to receive and process bounce messages.
If it had caught these, I'd have been amazed - the offending site sent the bounces directly to the address in the From: so the NANOG mail server never saw the bounce.
The problem with that theory, Valdis, is that *I* saw half a dozen or so of them as well. So I'm guessing the list server did see at least some of them. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
as it so happens, i could still use a decent contact over at AS3209. noc channels are unresponsive. even tried this one listed in radb: noc@adm.arcor.net. they are doing something really funky with their cg-nat setup for mobile subs. like, frag mapping gone wrong, therefore crazy retries or acks never received, etc. for us, it is breaking SSL.
participants (6)
-
Andrew Koch -
Jay Ashworth -
Jimmy Hess -
ryanL -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
Warren Bailey