Hi I’ve been seeing some strange messages in my qmail send log and I was hoping I could get some input on it. Let me start off saying one of my customers complained that a few of their clients were having a problem sending them email… server response was as follows:
Connected to [my.ip.add.rss] but connection died. (#4.4.2)
I’m not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long.
After doing some digging, I found several messages in the remote queue all some of which originated from this customer. Here is the log entry for one of those messages.
I also noticed today that Yahoo mail is having problems receiving my emails.
Bounce message:
67.195.168.31 failed after I sent the message.
Remote host said: 451 Message temporarily deferred - [270]
I’m not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long.
I’m not sure if this helps. I was recently having the same problem with Yahoo. I was also having problems sending to AT&T/SBCGlobal accounts. AT&T had blocked my server for some reason. I had to get the Received-SPF header in outgoing emails to “pass”. It was at “neutral” when I was having problems. Since I’ve changed some things and got it to “pass” mail has been flowing smoothly:
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of root@mx1.mydomain.net designates my.ip.ad.dr as permitted sender) client-ip=my.ip.ad.dr;
rDNS could also create an issue. Some mail servers get a bit strict as to who can connect to deliver mail. The rDNS for your mail server IP should match your mail server hostname.
I’m not sure about the sender_address_rejected issue. Could they be trying to send a file that is too big? The default is 20MB. The setting is in /var/qmail/control/databytes.
EDITED TO ADD: Wow cool. Your message was posted today at exactly 11AM and mine today at exactly 11PM.
Well, I figured out why my customers are not receiving some of the emails from their clients. It appears the bl.spamcop.net has become a little too aggressive as of late. I removed the list from my rbls and emails started pouring in.
The question was right, I guess my answer would be no. I was just point out that I think this would be a more known issue by now since I believe (not 100%) that InterWorx has spamcop on by default.