Re: [iMS] Retry Bounces question

[Howie Hamlin]

iMs did not exhibit this behavior initially.  A user asked that the behavior be changed to the current behavior and we agreed since it made sense.  Although the reportpoststatus information is based on the response from the remote server it does not have to be the same.  When an email is being abandoned due to the max delivery time being exceeded it made sense to flag the email addresses as being permanent failures.  Since we also give you the response from the remote server then you can make your own determination.  If the first character of the response is a "4" then you can consider the mail to be a temp failure even though iMS has tagged it as permanent.   Basically, we a re providing you with all the information that you need in order to make a decision as to what you want to do.  You may not agree with the way that the email address gets tagged but you can easily account for that.   Regards,   Howie ----- Original Message ----- From: David D Droddy To: inFusion Support List Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [iMS] Retry Bounces question I don't mean to imply that there is some huge compliance isssue here. But it does seem odd that if a receiving server reports something "temporary" that iMS would report otherwise.   When a message fails for ANY reason on an attempt less than max attempts, iMS reports this as accurately as possible (. . .I'm assuming based on the receiving server's response). However, once MaxAttempts has been reached, iMS changes this logic--instead of giving a failure "type", transient or fatal, it reports "fatal. . .because I'm giving up. . .not because the server I tried to send to advised that further attempts would be futile, but because I'm not going to try again."   What I'm wondering is why iMS changes it's reporting logic at MaxAttempts. Why is this necessary? So far, the answer is that it's a logical conclusion, or maybe the debate is one of semantics. I think the latter is true, in which case, perhaps iMS should not make it's own conclusion but rather leave that up to me. In my case, I don't need iMS to tell me that it won't be trying again, but rather what type of failure this is so I can give my paying users an accurate depiction of what happened.   Keith Ivey states "Even if an error is "temporary", the server isn't supposed to keep trying to deliver it forever, so it seems that iMS is following the spec." Does iMS need to report a permanent failure in order to quit trying?     I hope I'm not being terribly annoying. I appreciate you humoring me and giving good debate.   --David  This list server is Powered by iMS "The Swiss Army Knife of Mail Servers" This list is provided as a free service. Although we will try to address issues in a timely manner, support via this list is not guaranteed. If you require expedited support then a support contract is required. Support may be purchased from http://www.coolfusion.com/commerce. Details regarding support options may be reviewed at: http://www.coolfusion.com/SupportOptions.cfm. To leave this list please complete the form at http://www.coolfusion.com/Support/ Need an iMS Developer license? Sign up for a free license here: http://www.coolfusion.com/Developers/ List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/infusion-email%40eoscape.com/ Note: You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]