The "250 2.6.0 <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAFAAAAAAAAAAOKG7EAXlEBqhuwgAKypWwgAAUFNUUFJYLkRMTAAAAAAAAAAATklUQfm/uAEAqgA32W4AAABDOlxXSU5ET1dTXG91dGxvb2sucHN0 ABgAAAAAAAAAK6/1CQJD1hGG6ABA9BeMpKKAAAAYAAAAAAAAACuv9QkCQ9YRhugAQPQXjKTkFEIAGAAAAAAAAAArr/UJAkPWEYboAED0F4ykgogAABAAAABIbI2FUD/YEbLI AJAnHB9ZYAAAADIgT3JkZXJzIEF0dGFjaGVkLiAgUGxlYXNlIENoZWNrIHdoZW4gcHJpbnRlZCBvdXQgdG8gQ29uZmlybSB0aGV5IG Queued mail for delivery" is a response from the 'targetdomain.com' MTA. It's an unusual response (most 'message received' responses are around 50 characters), but it's not technically invalid. Why it's so long, only they can tell you. But, what you DO know is that their server accepted the message for ALL three recipients. Lack of delivery to the end-users mailbox is their problem, not yours. Unless their mail admin tells you it's because of your long message IDs, you can only guess. The 'Message-ID' header is generated by the sending mail client (Outlook Express, Thunderbird, etc). Only if the email was composed in Web Messaging (or IMail received a message without an RFC-required 'Message-ID' field, in which case, we would add one) would this field be created by IMail.
Have a good one, Christian -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Guluk Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 1:23 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Not able to send "some" emails Hello, Can anyone tell me if the problem with the following log is due to a corruption on my server or the clients email client is creating the extreme Message-ID length? If you look at this log it shows that the original email was targeted to multiple recipients at the domain I have replaced as "targetDomain.com". Some of the recipients got the email, others did not. This is a constant problem and short of a full reinstall of iMail 8.15 I am at a loss. Can anyone shed some light on this problem? I've even ran F-Prot on the server to see if it was virus related but nothing showed up. Help? 20050420 175907 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [161.58.93.69] connect 66.62.156.15 port 4031 20050420 175908 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [66.62.156.15] EHLO PC45 20050420 175908 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) Authenticated [EMAIL PROTECTED], session treated as local. 20050420 175908 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [66.62.156.15] MAIL FROM: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175908 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [66.62.156.15] RCPT TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175908 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [66.62.156.15] RCPT TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175908 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [66.62.156.15] RCPT TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175910 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (d0ab0b5800b85109) [66.62.156.15] C:\IMail\spool\Dd0ab0b5800b85109.SMD 65521 20050420 175910 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) processing C:\IMail\spool\Qd0ab0b5800b85109.SMD 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) Trying targetDomain.com (0) 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) Connect targetDomain.com [64.74.110.170:25] (1) 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 220 [64.74.110.170] SMTP service 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >EHLO Domain.com 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 500 5.5.1 Command unrecognized 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >HELO Domain.com 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 250 [64.74.110.170] talking to mail.sgdesign.net ([161.58.93.69]) 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 250 2.1.0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 250 2.1.5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 250 2.1.5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 250 2.1.5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >DATA 20050420 175915 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 354 Start mail input; end with <CRLF>.<CRLF> 20050420 175916 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >. 20050420 175916 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 250 2.6.0 <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAFAAAAAAAAAAOKG7EAXlEBqhuwgAKypWwgAAUFNUUFJYLkRMTAAAAAAAAAAATklUQfm/uAEAqgA32W4AAABDOlxXSU5ET1dTXG91dGxvb2sucHN0 ABgAAAAAAAAAK6/1CQJD1hGG6ABA9BeMpKKAAAAYAAAAAAAAACuv9QkCQ9YRhugAQPQXjKTkFEIAGAAAAAAAAAArr/UJAkPWEYboAED0F4ykgogAABAAAABIbI2FUD/YEbLI AJAnHB9ZYAAAADIgT3JkZXJzIEF0dGFjaGVkLiAgUGxlYXNlIENoZWNrIHdoZW4gcHJpbnRlZCBvdXQgdG8gQ29uZmlybSB0aGV5IG Queued mail for delivery 20050420 175916 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) rdeliver targetDomain.com multiple (3) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 65521 20050420 175916 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) >QUIT 20050420 175916 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) 221 2.0.0 [64.74.110.170] Service closing transmission channel 20050420 175916 127.0.0.1 SMTP (d0ab0b5800b85109) finished C:\IMail\spool\Qd0ab0b5800b85109.SMD status=1 Regards, Steve Guluk SGDesign (949) 661-9333 ICQ: 7230769 On Apr 19, 2005, at 12:21 PM, Stephen Guluk wrote: Hello, No one has had any problems with Message-ID length? Regards, Steve Guluk SGDesign (949) 661-9333 ICQ: 7230769 On Apr 18, 2005, at 12:30 PM, Stephen Guluk wrote: Hello, Does anyone have any information or has encountered similar problems with message IDs that are too long? I have a customer that can send mail but "some" are rejected in their attempt to send. The only thing that looks different in their emails, is that the ones that fail have unusually long Message -IDs Example: Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAFAAAAAAAAAAOKG7EAXlEBqhuwgAKypWwgAAUFNUUFJYLkRMTAAAAAAAAAAATklUQfm/uAEAqgA32W4AAABDOlxXSU5ET1dTXG91dGxvb2sucHN0 ABgAAAAAAAAAK6/1CQJD1hGG6ABA9BeMpKKAAAAYAAAAAAAAACuv9QkCQ9YRhugAQPQXjKSEpUIAGAAAAAAAAAArr/UJAkPWEYboAED0F4ykgogAABAAAACYufHlZVHYEbLJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]> I have iMail 8.14 Does iMail create the Message-ID or does their local client (Outlook)? Would it be a problem with some spam configuration I may have set? Regards, Steve Guluk SGDesign (949) 661-9333 ICQ: 7230769 On Mar 11, 2005, at 11:58 AM, Norman J. Nolasco wrote: Darin, We're doing the same/similar thing. We have a newsletter subscription application for an elected official. Question for you: Out of about 10K addresses, we're getting about 1,000 bouncing. After checking those addresses individually, there are less than maybe 10 that are actually bad addresses. 1) Addresses are good. 2) Mail comes from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3) Mail bounces to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4) If I login as [EMAIL PROTECTED] and send a message to the destination email, it goes through just fine. 5) If I use ASP CDO to login as [EMAIL PROTECTED] and send the message to destination email, it gets bounced. Header for bounced email using CDO (domains, ips, and emails changed): =================================================================== Delivery failed 3 attempts: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Original message follows. Received: from app1 [64.9.1.1] by mail.domainA.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A43C1D20170; Mon, 07 Mar 2005 17:31:08 -0600 thread-index: AcUjbZ560LN/BRdiT9mnrhllJIxIcA== Thread-Topic: Fundraising Invitation, March 15 From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Fundraising Invitation, March 15 Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 17:31:07 -0600 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 =================================================================== Header for accepted email using Outlook (domains, ips, and email changed): =================================================================== Received: from RASPBERRY1 [67.10.1.1] by mail.domainA.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A1A125F013C; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:13:05 -0600 Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "Source User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dest User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Fundraising Invitation, March 15 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:30:02 -0600 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 =================================================================== Do some SPAM filters require a "Reply-To" header? It's definitely not the content of the email. We can send those individually without any problems. Any ideas or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Incidentally, for us, it takes roughly 2 hours to go through the first 7K-8K of the recipients. For some reason (I'm guessing bounces), the last 2K-3K take about 4 hours to clear the queue. 1GHz/512MB RAM - bandwidth for email throttled to 256kbps avg email size 17K Thanks, Norm -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 1:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] IMail List Server No, it's a unique message body to every recipient...separate SMTP sessions for each recipient...it's a true newsletter subscription system. However, it is multi-threaded....usually runs about 10 simultaneous threads. Even at that, it's still 10 times faster on average than the benchmark of 10 seconds per. I think total message throughput answers the original question more completely. Darin. --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
