Why do we need this? On 1/22/03 15:06, "Alverson, Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What we really need is a separate set of retry options for NDR's. Have it try an NDR once or twice and then give up without notifying your of its failure to deliver the NDR (instead of the normal retry sequence for real mail). TOm -----Original Message----- From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 3:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: No originator <> messages Charles, I think what Chris is trying to say is, that's what an NDR is...REFUSING to accept mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED], because it doesn't exist, and trying to deliver notification of that fact to the original recipient. Exchange sends those notifications back to the originator with <> as the sender. What she's asking for is a way to eliminate sending NDRs to nonexistant return addresses, which is why she sees e-mail backed up in the outbound Q, addressed to "[EMAIL PROTECTED], from <>. Many times, those SPAM e-mails are sent to what used to be legitimate SMTP addresses within the organization, but which have since been deleted, due to an employee leaving the company. Happens to me every day. So...Pete's initial suggestion to add the SMTP address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the Blackhole DL when the employee leaves the company, is a legitimate and very good suggestion. Jim Blunt -----Original Message----- From: Charles Marriott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 12:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: No originator <> messages and refuse [EMAIL PROTECTED] which is what I think she was accepting. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 1:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: No originator <> messages Exchange accepts mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 1/22/03 13:51, "Charles Marriott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: yes, am i missing something? I've been up all day. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 12:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: No originator <> messages Used Exchange much? On 1/22/03 13:13, "Charles Marriott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why are you accepting mail for nonexistent recipients? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Karon Miller Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: No originator <> mesages I know this has been talked about many times on here but is there any way to keep <> no orgininator messages from getting stuck in the outbound queue? I know that most of them are undeliverable messages usually all to Unknown Recipients but I see messages in the queue to people that haven't been here in 3 years. Is there anyway to block those or remove those before they can even get that far. I don't understand I guess why they're all going to no originator. I've tried to block them at the Trend server but no luck. Basically the Internet Mail Connector is just trying to notify the sender of these but can't. Any suggestions would be awesome. Thanks, Karon Miller E-Mail Administrator BSPMLAW [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
