Problem raised 50965, this is to reference the whilte/black listing issue, and jelv's suggestion so you can set what address quarantine notification emails to.

Customers have always had the option to move spam to the spam folder ?

Baically, existing settings haven't changed. If the customer has opted to deliver spam to their mailbox they are happy with that. Customers who arn't bothered about spam, it would have defaulted to the spam folder ages and ages ago, this will continue for them. They did have the option to deliver to spam folder, and still do.

So it really is the customers who have been shouting up for these extra changes, which is bsb, deliver to mailbox etc.

But dont worry, we'll try to get this to other customers via the communication channels we have

Blatantly obvious RFC non-compliance sailing straight through postini.



Message bypassing postini and coming in via mx-last


Re deferred: I though Bob said earlier that some mail was being deferred ? Maybe I misunderstood what he meant but 'deferred' to me means a temporary refusal to accept a message with the expectation that the sender will try again some time later.  However, I think that it's been stated several times before now that postini do not store mail that they cannot deliver immediately. Therefore if mail from postini is not being accepted immediately, then there is perhaps some problem here (or some duff information) is there not ?

I've had no spam from postini since before midday and whilst this should be something to jump up and down and be very happy about,  it just can't be right.  I'm currently predicting at least 100 spams per day at the mo from my long-term stats and they rarely if ever come in all together. 

Not enough spam ... bet ya don't hear that complaint very often !!!!!!!!!

I'll pass those headers on to be looked at..



Oh yea fair point, they wont be delivered if deferred, however it was a very limited time that this happened it wasn't a long time issue, dont quote me on that though Maybe Bob can confirm when hes back on.

I certainly hope that is not the case. That is not what Bob said. I am still not receiving emails and if you are telling me, that as they are still being deferred, they will not be delivered at all, that is inexcusable. Why has this problem not been resolved?

Mail bypassing Postini and coming in direct to mxlast was problem 50955. Bob posted to say this was fixed just before 5pm.

http://community.plus.net....msg508917.html#msg508917

That is exactly my point. It is still not fixed despite Bob's assurances, but nobody appears to be on the case. Surely it isn't just my domain that isn't receiving emails.

Can you post the headers please.

Yes, this was fixed and closed. Gimme 10 mins i'll just check if the fix was applied to your account.

Update:

Checked your settings and they are correct. What are you receiving back when you try to send a test email to your address?

Update again:

Just sent a test email and yes, i see the 500 blocked by owner error.. interesting, this should have been fixed.

Jelv, are you asking me to post the headers? I am not receiving any emails so I cannot do that. If it's not me you are asking then just ignore me. 

Now I'm confused!

I posted to point out that the problem of mail bypassing Postini and coming in direct to mxlast was fixed (see Mikeb's post for an example).

You responded "That is exactly my point. It is still not fixed despite Bob's assurances, but nobody appears to be on the case."

Then after I'd posted asking for the headers you added "Surely it isn't just my domain that isn't receiving emails."

It has all got very confusing  . Bob posted to say the problem was resolved. However I am still not receiving any emails for some reason. It may well be that my domain got overlooked, which is what Dan is kindly looking in to.

As clear as mud 

It would help if you referred to the problem id number. They are listed in Bob's post here

In my post I said "Mail bypassing Postini and coming in direct to mxlast was problem 50955. Bob posted to say this was fixed just before 5pm."

I'm guessing you may be talking about 50961 - is that right?

Yes, the quote above (reply #96) is what I have been referring to. Apologies if things have got confused.

Stuart

OK - you had me totally baffled for a bit!

Now for a new one, how do I whitelist?

Edit: It's not quite the same as 50965 - I'd seen that and had put one newline in. However after a couple of tries fiddling about with adding/deleting new lines in both boxes I got it to take.

Problem 50961 now reopened for you, its being looked into by our networks engineer.