|
User #84875 638 posts
Whirlpool Enthusiast
|
Hi All, I've found some previous posts on the above issue but they were quite old so I thought I'd start a new post... Yesterday afternoon and this morning I've received into my organisation a stack (~10) of emails all originating from optusnet servers... I'm not having any issues with my system so I'm putting the question out there if anyone else has had delays? Here are the headers for you to have a look at. Microsoft Mail Internet Headers Version 2.0 All delayed messages are getting resent from fallbackmx9.syd.optusnet.com.au and fallbackmx10.syd.optusnet.com.au plus it's only been from messages send it the last 2 weeks... My net conneciton is with Telstra Any help would be appreciated... GT :) edit – removed details I missed to remove in the first attempt. |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 8am AEST
edited 2008-Sep-5, 9am AEST
|
|
User #5536 9176 posts
Whirlpool Forums Addict
|
It looks as if mail.srs.com.au is deferring delivery, as part of a greylisting strategy. THough it's not aware that optusnet use multiple servers and it's deferring again each time it sees a different IP address. The administrator of mail.srs.com.au needs to update their whitelists it they're going to use greylisting. You may want to edit out the IP addresses and other personal details from your post as well. |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 9am AEST
|
|
User #84875 638 posts
Whirlpool Enthusiast
|
Thanks Jack.Daniels I'll get that looked at :) |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 9am AEST
|
|
User #84875 638 posts
Whirlpool Enthusiast
|
On further investigation... We use Trend Micro Internet Messaging Security Suite (IMSS) with the Spam Prevention Solution (SPS) module added on. By itself IMSS is fine, but the SPS module uses a suite of list services that is owned and maintained by Trend Micro. A description of the services and their purpose/function is detailed here: http://www.mail-abuse.com/enduserinfo.html The lists are IP address based as apposed to domain or specific address or mail content. To check IP's against the list go to here: http://www.mail-abuse.com/cgi-bin/lookup These two Optus addresses are on the QIL list: http://www.mail-abuse.com/cg I have requested the removal of these IP addresses from the list... |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 10am AEST
|
|
User #26587 379 posts
Forum Regular
|
Hi GreenTwig, I too have come across the exact same issue as you today. Headers are below: Microsoft Mail Internet Headers Version 2.0 ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C90144.75CEA290 ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C90144.75CEA290 ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C90144.75CEA290-- |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 12pm AEST
edited 2008-Sep-5, 12pm AEST
|
|
User #17638 8368 posts
Whirlpool Forums Addict
|
I also encountered the same problem today... an e-mail sent on Tuesday afternoon was delivered this morning, while one sent four minutes later from the same user – and numerous others since then – came straight through. Return-path: <user@optusnet.com.au> Then, sent a few minutes later: Return-path: <user@optusnet.com.au> |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 1pm AEST
|
|
User #5536 9176 posts
Whirlpool Forums Addict
|
while one sent four minutes later from the same user – and numerous others since then – came straight through. The fallback mail servers are used for queuing mail. If one of the mail servers either can't contact the destination MTA, or the destination MTA issues a deferral, the message is passed on to the fallback mail servers where it's placed in the mail queue for delivery to be attempted again later. In the O.P case it looks as if the initial delivery was deferred because the destination uses an RBL that had one of the Optusnet mail servers listed, then the fallback server finally delivered the message. in an age where more and more mail administrators are using greylisting and deferrals as a means of reducing the amount of spam that is allowed into their networks, it's luck that the SMTP RFC makes no promises about the promptness of message delivery. |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 3pm AEST
|
|
User #17638 8368 posts
Whirlpool Forums Addict
|
The fallback mail servers are used for queuing mail. If one of the mail servers either can't contact the destination MTA, or the destination MTA issues a deferral, the message is passed on to the fallback mail servers where it's placed in the mail queue for delivery to be attempted again later. Yeah I've kind of aware of that. |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 3pm AEST
|
|
User #84875 638 posts
Whirlpool Enthusiast
|
it's luck that the SMTP RFC makes no promises about the promptness of message delivery Yeah but it's not really an excuse end users like to hear ;) Still, glad I'm not the only one who's had the issue... GT :) |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 3pm AEST
|
|
User #5088 284 posts
Forum Regular
|
in an age where more and more mail administrators are using greylisting and deferrals as a means of reducing the amount of spam that is allowed into their networks, it's luck that the SMTP RFC makes no promises about the promptness of message delivery. In an age where more and more mail administrators are using any and/or every method to protect their networks from the torrents of UCE, of which greylisting provides one of the most effective methods, it's luck that the 2nd largest provider would actively attempt to be proactive about their impact on their clients. |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 4pm AEST
|
|
User #5536 9176 posts
Whirlpool Forums Addict
|
of which greylisting provides one of the most effective methods It's also one of the most effective methods of creating false positives, i.e blocking delivery of legitimate email, because of it has no way of handling farms of mail servers. |
posted 2008-Sep-5, 4pm AEST
|
|
User #5088 284 posts
Forum Regular
|
It's also one of the most effective methods of creating false positives, i.e blocking delivery of legitimate email, because of it has no way of handling farms of mail servers. Yes that is correct, but, and lets not get pedantic here because we could wish and want until the cows come home, the innovation stoped at greylists. It would appear that no one wants to take things to the next level, especially with an open standard. |
posted 2008-Sep-8, 9am AEST
|