it's written here and it seems that 80.3 percent are following it: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3463 updated by: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4468
so 552 seems the correct way to handle it despite the user is not in the grace time anymore, no idea how long that should be... however, IIRC there was also a M3AAWG BCP covering this questions. cheers, Stefan On 06/20/2016 09:44 AM, David Hofstee wrote: > We talked about bounces earlier too. These are the codes, that are later > identified as 'over quota', I get back: > > (smtp/cnt/percentage) > 552 64635 80.3 > 550 4994 6.2 > 452 4927 6.1 > 554 4508 5.6 > 451 535 0.7 > 450 488 0.6 > 422 174 0.2 > 522 142 0.2 > 553 56 0.1 > 500 6 0.0 > 551 4 0.0 > 421 3 0.0 > > > About 93% are 5xy. Funny how email cannot effectively standardize on > return codes in such simple cases. Yours, > > > David Hofstee > > Deliverability Management > MailPlus B.V. Netherlands (ESP) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Van: *"Brandon Long via mailop" <[email protected]> > *Aan: *"Vick Khera" <[email protected]> > *Cc: *"mailop" <[email protected]> > *Verzonden: *Vrijdag 17 juni 2016 21:11:59 > *Onderwerp: *Re: [mailop] GMail 421 is sometimes a permanent failure? > > The error message is a temporary error message, it's due to throttling > of some of the contents of the message. > If enough other people are trying to send messages with that content, > your chances of being the one let through may be low. > > As for user space quotas, they are typically considered temp failures > unless the user has been inactive for long enough that we don't expect > them to clean their mailbox any time soon. We have experimented with > this, and people really dislike having their mail rejected for out of > quota failures, even if they don't seem to notice our warnings or take > care of it. > > Brandon > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 6:35 AM, Vick Khera <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:45 AM, Rolf E. Sonneveld > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > It is unlikely that the verdict will be different when the > message is presented to the Gmail servers during the next queue run. > > > But not impossible, thus the only conclusion is that they want you > to retry. If they did not, they'd have given you a 5xx code. > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop > > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > [email protected] > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > [email protected] > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop > _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
