From: Richard Kettlewell on
Peter Kemp <peterk13(a)nospam.ntlworld.com> writes:

> We've tried the telnet approach and it certainly seems that the SMTP
> server is accepting mail (ie the 'rcpt to:<...> line got a positive
> response), but then things didn't go quite as expected. We sent
> subject: and to: and short body text followed by <crlf>.<crlf> but
> instead of the expected "250 Queued mail for delivery" message, we got
> "250 x-plusnet-relay: " and a long string (message id?). Certainly, the
> e-mail didn't get to the designated recipient.

250 is the important bit; everything else is noise. 250 means the SMTP
server accepted the message. Why it didn't get any further is something
only plusnet could really tell you.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
From: Peter Kemp on
In article <87tyn912su.fsf(a)araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>, Richard
Kettlewell <rjk(a)greenend.org.uk> wrote:

<snip>
>
> 250 is the important bit; everything else is noise. 250 means the SMTP
> server accepted the message. Why it didn't get any further is something
> only plusnet could really tell you.

That's very interesting and most useful - thanks.

Current plan:

- re-install (what's to lose...?)
- configure Mail from scratch
- cross fingers.

And if that don't work, then we'll have another go at telnet and then
post the session log to Plusnet...


Regards
Peter
From: Paul Womar on
Richard Kettlewell <rjk(a)greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> Peter Kemp <peterk13(a)nospam.ntlworld.com> writes:
>
> > We've tried the telnet approach and it certainly seems that the SMTP
> > server is accepting mail (ie the 'rcpt to:<...> line got a positive
> > response), but then things didn't go quite as expected. We sent
> > subject: and to: and short body text followed by <crlf>.<crlf> but
> > instead of the expected "250 Queued mail for delivery" message, we got
> > "250 x-plusnet-relay: " and a long string (message id?). Certainly, the
> > e-mail didn't get to the designated recipient.
>
> 250 is the important bit; everything else is noise. 250 means the SMTP
> server accepted the message. Why it didn't get any further is something
> only plusnet could really tell you.

Some people are suspicious of mails with no (or limited) headers but I
would hope that's not the case here, can't really think what else it may
be though! It may be worth the original poster putting a blank line
after the "Subject:" when sending the message via telnet, as it was
origianlly written, the subject would end up as part of the body.
--
-> The email address used in this message *IS* valid <-
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: iP*d synchonising
Next: Mac Friendly Sat Navs