In the same sequence means during the same session. That is, repeatedly hammering the server with retries. Exchange correctly backs off and retries later.
I encourage you to write and submit an RFC to amend 2821 if you think that it's important enough. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kennedy, Jim Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 9:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exhange 2003 and 550's Dunno on this one. It just does not feel right. "The SMTP client is discouraged from repeating the exact request (in the same sequence)." In this case, the sending blacklisted server is acting as the client. And right now it is repeating the exact request, and will do so for 48 hours. I realize discouraged does not mean give up. I think it's time for a new RFC that has a provision for a specific code that say 'Go away, do not retry'. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed > Crowley [MVP] > Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 12:13 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Exhange 2003 and 550's > > RFC 2821 says: > > 5yz Permanent Negative Completion reply > The command was not accepted and the requested action did not > occur. The SMTP client is discouraged from repeating the exact > request (in the same sequence). Even some "permanent" error > conditions can be corrected, so the human user may want to > direct > the SMTP client to reinitiate the command sequence by direct > action at some point in the future (e.g., after the spelling has > been changed, or the user has altered the account status). > > So, I would characterize Exchange's handling of this response as > appropriate. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Kennedy, Jim > Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 6:34 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Exhange 2003 and 550's > > > Ok, I had the sinking feeling that Exchange still does not handle 5XX > errors properly. So today I tested and confirmed. > Hoping I messed something up. > > I blacklisted my home email server at work. Home is also Exchange > 2003. > Sent a message to our work server, it was rejected with a 550. But my > home server is still retrying to send it, has been for awhile now. I > telneted into the work/receiving server from my blacklisted home > server. > As soon as I helo'd I got a 550. > > Isn't a 550 a fatal, and shouldn't Exchange stop trying upon the first > failure and return the NDR? _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/read/?forum=exchange To subscribe: http://e-newsletters.internet.com/discussionlists.html/ To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
