Re: SMTP problem solved
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ."_)~~ ~( __ _"o Was another beautiful day, Wed, 4 May 2005, @ @ at 12:41:19 +0200, when Vili wrote: > I reflected the _tone_ of Peter's email. Read it again: "Well, if > server is OK and address is OK and server moans about address, either > one must be not OK. Quite obvious, isn't it?" > "Quite obvious, isn't it?" Do you feel the tone? I reflected to this > _tone_... Not your first sentence. Ah there, days of "hypersensitivity" ride again. No please, please no. [By the voice of Eddie Murphy.] I can stand a hammer breaking my leg but cannot stand a whining. It really ruins and tortures me. Please stop it. Vili, beware of "nice" tone delivering bad information. (-; Peter delivered a *good* one, stimulating you to think straightly. I really do not see any..."tone" in it, being very "special". It indeed is quite obvious and that's it. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 245 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OSs: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1, and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... ~~~ For PM please use my full address as it is *exactly* given in my "From|Reply To" field(s). ~~~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFCeL4J9q62QPd3XuIRAiAOAJ9JL3wcEiZGZdBl0EHVMWbOnWEI7ACdFzD/ cdIP5n3CGJ5GE7ZI5XPGNvk= =CBXf -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SMTP problem solved
Hello The, On Wednesday, May 4, 2005 at 3:25:01 AM The [TBs] wrote: TBs> I did not change anything, the problem went away... Glad to hear, glad for you. TBs> So Peter (Palmreuther): it is not as obvious as you thought... Above cited sentence tells me: it is. Obviously the server had a problem in recognizing the recipients domain name as (syntactically) correct, and this issue was fixed by the servers admin (or healed itself if the cause was a lookup to a database and something modified the database accordingly). It *is* obvious something on either server side or in the recipients address was wrong. TBs> I am happy, that you also learnt something from this case :))) If TBs> nothing else, than this: if you don't have anything to say, TBs> please be quiet. *erm* OK. Guess you're the right one to distinguish if I've anything to say or not. Thanks for your advice, you might have prevented me from ending in a dead-end street because of me saying things albeit I haven't to say any ... -- Regards Peter Palmreuther (The Bat! v3.5 Return RC1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2) "I don't care who does the electing as long as I get to do the nominating" Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SMTP problem solved
Hello Vili & everyone else, on 04-Mai-2005 at 03:25 you (The Bat! support) wrote: > If nothing else, than this: if you don't have anything to say, please be > quiet With comments like this, I'd say you have to start with yourself. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Freedom is not an essential and basic condition for the growth of science; the care and diligence of government authorities are the most important conditions for this development. -- Vasili N. Tatishchev Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
