cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Delayed e-mails

Tigger
Grafter
Posts: 201
Registered: 12-06-2007

Delayed e-mails

Sigh!!

Thought e-mail was working again, but I have just received an e-mail from e-bay - a bid confirmation - which had been delayed in Plusnet for 2 days.

Any explanation??

Headers:

Envelope-to: XXXXXXX
Delivery-date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:11:16 +0000
Received: from [212.159.14.235] (helo=ptb-mxcore21.plus.net)
by fhw-sunmxcore05.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H670u-0002aP-2s
for XXXXXXXXX; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:11:16 +0000
Received: from ptn-mxlast05.plus.net ([212.159.7.115])
by ptb-mxcore21.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H670t-0005cX-Q7
for XXXXXXXXX; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:11:15 +0000
Received: from mxpool21.ebay.com ([66.135.197.27] helo=mx51.sjc.ebay.com)
by ptn-mxlast05.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1H5MyJ-00079x-Dn
for XXXXXXXXXX; Fri, 12 Jan 2007 14:01:32 +0000
24 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,339
Thanks: 595
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

It went via one of the mxlast servers which have got large queues. Most of the mail that comes through those servers is spam.

The puzzle is why some valid mail is getting diverted to mxlast when the queues on the main servers are minimal. It implies they are not always replying in a timely fashion.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

It's a shame that the header doesn't show whether it tried to connect to mxcore first and failed or just went straight to mxlast.

I can imagine one mail failing on mxcore and retrying mxlast and then possibly the DNS? records get cached and it keeps sending mail to mxlast rather than mxcorew or maybe for some reason certain mail servers are set to send mail to the secondary MX rather than primary (just an idea).
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,339
Thanks: 595
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

Agree about the headers - having that extra information would be very useful.

I'm not sure about the cached DNS. As this email is from ebay I'd have thought we would be seeing more complaints if that were happening.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

I've had one from ebay as well that's been delayed on mxlast, no legit mail I've received in the past 48 hours or so apart from this one have gone through mxlast (not checked the spam) including two other emails from ebay:

Envelope-to: dave@xxx.xxx
Delivery-date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:26:47 +0000
Received: by pih-sunmxcore16.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H66Jn-0006Pi-0t
for dave@xxx.xxx; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:26:47 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=pih-sunmxcore16.plus.net)
by pih-sunmxcore16.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H66Jm-0006Oc-BP
for dave@xxx.xxx; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:26:42 +0000
Received: from pih-mxcore06.plus.net ([212.159.14.220])
by pih-sunmxcore16.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H66Jj-0006NX-Sk
for dave@xxx.xxx; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:26:40 +0000
Received: from ptn-mxlast05.plus.net ([212.159.7.115])
by pih-mxcore06.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H66GK-00054E-7I
for dave@xxx.xxx; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:23:08 +0000
Received: from mxsmfpool13.ebay.com ([66.135.209.210] helo=mx28.smf.ebay.com)
by ptn-mxlast05.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1H5jbq-0000Fa-1X
for dave@xxx.xxx; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 14:11:50 +0000
Received: from qsxbat05.den.ebay.com (qsxbat05.den.ebay.com [10.4.59.15])
by mx28.smf.ebay.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id l0DEAQAn020712
for <dave@xxx.xxx>; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 06:11:36 -0800
X-eBay-MailTracker: 10008.494.3.0
To: dave@xxx.xxx
From: eBay <savedsearches@ebay.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=28384473.1168697300555.JavaMail.ebba.qsxbat05
Subject: eBay Favourite Search: eclipse
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 07:08:20 GMT-07:00
Message-ID: <25517437.1168697300575.JavaMail.ebba@qsxbat05>
X-PN-VirusFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00)
X-PN-DSpam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v3.00)
X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent
X-DSPAM-Processed: Sun Jan 14 14:26:42 2007
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9992
X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 119091 chance of being spam
X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000
X-DSPAM-Factors: 27,
Url*uk/ws/eBayISAPI, 0.00055,
Url*uk/ws/eBayISAPI, 0.00055,
Url*dll?ViewItem&, 0.00058,
Url*dll?ViewItem&, 0.00058,
{margin+top, 0.00060,
{margin+top, 0.00060,
eBay+notice, 0.00063,
eBay+notice, 0.00063,
Url*//cgi4, 0.00064,
Url*//cgi4, 0.00064,
This+eBay, 0.00064,
FooterSeparator+{, 0.00067,
FooterSeparator, 0.00067,
BodyFont, 0.00067,
SmallPara, 0.00067,
SmallParap, 0.00067,
}+SmallTitle, 0.00067,
SectionBody, 0.00067,
Separator+{, 0.00067,
}+SectionBody, 0.00067,
SectionTitle, 0.00067,
HighlightedSeparator, 0.00067,
BodyFontStrong, 0.00067,
SmallTitle, 0.00067,
DetailTable, 0.00067,
DetailTable, 0.00067,
SmallBody, 0.00067
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-PN-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v3.00)
mhi
Grafter
Posts: 32
Registered: 20-06-2007

Delayed e-mails

I received an email delayed for 2 days, too. I raised a ticket about it to ask PlusNet to investigate. In my case it went to ptn-mxlast01 on Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:22:30 +0000 and didn't get passed on until the middle of today.
Saturn
Grafter
Posts: 732
Registered: 30-07-2007

Delayed e-mails

How about this:

Source Destination Hop Delay Total Delay
outbound.earth.public.mod.uk outbound.public.mod.uk 0 secs 0 secs
dh203.public.mod.uk
82.110.109.203 Spam Check six.mx.123-reg.co.uk 30 secs 30 secs
six.mx.123-reg.co.uk
195.224.48.121 Spam Check pte-mxlast04.plus.net 49 secs 1 mins 19 secs
pte-mxlast04.plus.net
212.159.7.98 Spam Check pih-mxcore07.plus.net 5 days 8 hours 23 mins 1 secs 5 days 8 hours 24 mins 20 secs
pih-mxcore07.plus.net
212.159.14.221 Spam Check pih-sunmxcore11.plus.net 3 mins 46 secs 5 days 8 hours 28 mins 6 secs
familycolvin
Grafter
Posts: 46
Registered: 23-06-2007

is this a record?

I doubt it since last year I recall receiving emails that were a month or more old, and this one received this morning is only 11 days old Smiley However, this is meant to be a new, improved email system so I had hoped such delays were a thing of the past..

I have read the various comments about MXLAST e.g.
Quote
It went via one of the MXLAST servers which have got large queues. Most of the mail that comes through those servers is spam.

The puzzle is why some valid mail is getting diverted to MXLAST when the queues on the main servers are minimal. It implies they are not always replying in a timely fashion.


But what does it all mean?
How come some emails end up being routed to MXLAST and staying there for an eternity (about a million seconds in this case as opposed to the few seconds they are meant to take)?

Is it the luck of the draw?
Or is there some predetermination that it is probably spam that routes it there?
And if there is why doesn’t PN kill the spam there and then instead of letting it clutter up the system and delay legitimate emails?

I wouldn’t mind so much if I really got less spam but the spam I receive grows day by day, so whatever action PN is taking does not appear to me to be having any significant impact.

Mike

_____________________________________________________________


Envelope-to: mike@xxxxxx.co.uk
Delivery-date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:55:59 +0000
Received: from pih-mxcore12.plus.net ([212.159.14.226])
by pih-sunmxcore12.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H6l2s-0003If-Ha
for mike@xxxxxx.co.uk; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:55:59 +0000
Received: from pte-mxlast03.plus.net ([212.159.7.97])
by pih-mxcore12.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H6kzo-0003uR-Vu
for mike@xxxxxx.co.uk; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:52:49 +0000
Received: from mail.maplin.co.uk ([62.189.239.66])
by pte-mxlast03.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1H2qoJ-0005Ih-Vy
for mike@xxxxxx.co.uk; Fri, 05 Jan 2007 15:16:48 +0000
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1])
by mail.maplin.co.uk (mail.maplin.co.uk) with ESMTP id E578C962CF
for <mike@xxxxxx.co.uk>; Fri, 5 Jan 2007 15:16:38 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail.maplin.co.uk ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (mail.maplin.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 01886-08 for <mike@xxxxxx.co.uk>;
Fri, 5 Jan 2007 15:16:29 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by mail.maplin.co.uk (mail.maplin.co.uk, from userid 745)
id 8DE6F97F22; Fri, 5 Jan 2007 15:16:28 +0000 (GMT)
To: mike@xxxxxx.co.uk
Subject: Re: Locating interference
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

X-Loop: milter@maplin.co.uk
Precedence: junk
Message-Id: <20070105151628.8DE6F97F22@mail.maplin.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 15:16:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: milter1@maplin.co.uk (Maplin Electronics)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at maplin.co.uk
X-MSK: BYS=0.000000,HRC=0.426313
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

Hi

A lot of spam is sent directly to mxlast by spammers. Legitimate mail may also be routed there if there is a problem with the mxcores.

We're currently working on a SPAM project, which will bring a lot of benefit and will actively reduce the amount of spam we handle, as well as managing it better when we do.

With regards to the current state of the mxlast servers, we have located the problem (a config issue) and will be resolving this today. We will then take action to deliver the queued mails as quickly as possible.
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,339
Thanks: 595
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

A heads up...

Graphs of the mxlast mail queues are now on the portal here
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
Liam
Grafter
Posts: 2,083
Registered: 04-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

Do you want my job Mr Elvin? ;-)
MacOS10
Grafter
Posts: 172
Thanks: 1
Registered: 30-07-2007

Delayed e-mails

I sent two emails from home (PlusNet) to work last night. Both were sent at exactly the same time (well, within the same minute), but only one has arrived at work. It's not been bounced back to my PlusNet account, so I can only assume it's lost in the ether somewhere or stuck in a queue behind a backlog of spam.

Highly annoying.
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,339
Thanks: 595
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

The queues are for incoming emails - I've not seen reports of problems for emails sent outside of Plusnet.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
MacOS10
Grafter
Posts: 172
Thanks: 1
Registered: 30-07-2007

Delayed e-mails

Quote
I sent two emails from home (PlusNet) to work last night. Both were sent at exactly the same time (well, within the same minute), but only one has arrived at work. It's not been bounced back to my PlusNet account....

Further to this message, the second missing email was finally bounced back this evening (after a day). Why would one be bounced back and the other delivered - both were plain text emails, no attachments that could be mistaken for spam, so I can only assume it's PlusNet's servers at fault. The returned email's headers are listed below, if it makes sense to anyone. I'd be interested to know why it was bounced back to my PlusNet email address at home. I've edited out my email addresses and IP address for obvious reasons...

Quote
From: Mailer-Daemon@ptb-relay01.plus.net

Subject: Mail delivery failure: returning message to sender

Date: 17 January 2007 00:17:58 GMT

To: xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com

Envelope-To: xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com

Delivery-Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:18:02 +0000

Received: by fhw-sunmxcore03.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H6yV7-0005H3-QV for xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:18:02 +0000

Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fhw-sunmxcore03.plus.net) by fhw-sunmxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H6yV7-0005Gs-In for xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:18:01 +0000

Received: from pih-mxcore19.plus.net ([212.159.14.233] helo=ptb-mxcore19.plus.net) by fhw-sunmxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H6yV5-0005Gk-VU for xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:18:00 +0000

Received: from ptb-relay01.plus.net ([212.159.14.212]) by ptb-mxcore19.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H6yV4-0008DQ-In for xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:17:58 +0000

Received: by ptb-relay01.plus.net with local (Exim) id 1H6yV4-0005AS-7g for xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:17:58 +0000

X-Failed-Recipients: xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com

Auto-Submitted: auto-generated

Message-Id: <E1H6yV4-0005AS-7g@ptb-relay01.plus.net>

X-Pn-Virusfiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00)

X-Pn-Dspam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v3.00)

X-Dspam-Result: Innocent

X-Dspam-Processed: Wed Jan 17 00:18:01 2007

X-Dspam-Confidence: 0.8513

X-Dspam-Improbability: 1 in 574 chance of being spam

X-Dspam-Probability: 0.0000

X-Dspam-Factors: 27, Received*helo=ptb, 0.00109, (Exim), 0.00396, (Exim)+id, 0.00397, relay01, 0.00568, relay01+plus, 0.00568, ptb+relay01, 0.00570, 3232, 0.01000, 0+Your, 0.01000, 112+80, 0.01000, Received*Jan+2007, 0.01000, Received*Jan+2007, 0.01000, From*<Mailer, 0.01000, From*Daemon, 0.01000, From*Delivery+System, 0.01000, 3216, 0.01000, bye+This, 0.99000, From*System+<Mailer, 0.01000, From*<Mailer+Daemon, 0.01000, Wed+17, 0.01000, Wed+17, 0.01000, ASCII+format=flowed, 0.01000, Date*17+Jan, 0.01000, To+xxxxxx, 0.01000, Received*17+Jan, 0.01000, Received*17+Jan, 0.01000, To*xxxxx, 0.01000, for+xxxxx, 0.01000

X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-Pn-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v3.00)


This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.

A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:<xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com>:
host xxxxxxl.xxxxxx.com [XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX]: 550 5.7.0 Your server IP address is in the SORBS DNSBL database, bye

------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------

Return-path: <xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com>

Received: from [87.112.80.113] (helo=[XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX])

by ptb-relay01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1H6yV3-0005A2-9e
for xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:17:57 +0000

Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <8EAAC17B-DBC3-48DF-8471-FCCA091B5BEB@xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

To: xxxxxxxxxxxx <xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com>

From: xxxxxxxxxxxx <xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.plus.com>

Subject:

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:17:56 +0000

X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,339
Thanks: 595
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Delayed e-mails

The recipient's server bounced it

Quote
SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:<xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com>:
host xxxxxxl.xxxxxx.com [XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX]: 550 5.7.0 Your server IP address is in the SORBS DNSBL database, bye


This was over zealous use of the SORBS DNSBL by their server.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)