On 11/13/20 1:22 PM, John Fawcett wrote: > On 13/11/2020 07:38, li...@lazygranch.com wrote: >> My server bounced a message. Here is the server log (sanitized). >> ----------------------------- >> Nov 13 02:07:52 myserver postfix/smtpd[27706]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT >> from sonic302-23.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com[98.137.68.149]: 554 5.7.1 >> Service unavailable; Client host [98.137.68.149] blocked using >> cbl.abuseat.org; Blocked - see >> http://www.abuseat.org/lookup.cgi?ip=98.137.68.149; >> from=<per...@sbcglobal.net> to=<m...@myserver.com> proto=ESMTP >> helo=<sbcglobal.net> >> ----------------------------------------------- >> Here is what the sender received: >> >> -------------------------------------------- >>> From: mailer-dae...@yahoo.com >>> Date: November 12, 2020 at 6:07:55 PM PST >>> To: per...@sbcglobal.net >>> Subject: Failure Notice >>> >>> Sorry, we were unable to deliver your message to the following address. >>> >>> <m...@myserver.com>: >>> 554: 5.7.1 Service unavailable >>> >>> --- Below this line is a copy of the message. >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> So did the Oath server swallow the useful link to abuseat.org? Can this >> be improved? > missing NOT makes all the difference: > > > Your server rejected that message, so your server was NOT responsible for > > generating the bounce message. That was generated by yahoo.
I think what the OP is asking here is, can Yahoo/Oath be compelled to provide a more useful failure message relaying the informative response provided by OP's Postfix instance. And the answer to that, unfortunately, is no. -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.org Landline: +1.603.293.8485 Mobile: +1.603.998.6958
