cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Delayed emails

DavidHH
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 03-08-2007

Delayed emails

Messages sent on the 20th to 22nd December have arrived on 25th and 26th December. Service status reports no known issues. Does (a) anyone know why and (b) what is being done to prevent further delays of this kind.
12 REPLIES
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Delayed emails

Hi there,

Can you give me the headers so I can take a look please?

The only place we have real queues at the moment is mxlast, and that keeps mostly spam queued.
N/A

Delayed emails

I had an email from Support take from 23rd 'till 25th. Header as follows:

Envelope-to: postmaster@username.plus.com
Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:55:49 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=pih-sunmxcore12.plus.net)
by pih-sunmxcore12.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Gyu3B-00022e-7l
for postmaster@username.plus.com; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:55:49 +0000
Received: from pih-mxcore09.plus.net ([212.159.14.223])
by pih-sunmxcore12.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Gyu3A-00020g-Tg
for postmaster@username.plus.com; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:55:48 +0000
Received: from ptn-mxlast01.plus.net ([212.159.7.113])
by pih-mxcore09.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Gyu01-0000VU-3T
for postmaster@username.plus.com; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:52:33 +0000
Received: from workplace03.servers.plus.net ([212.159.14.79] helo=pih-workplace07.plus.net)
by ptn-mxlast01.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1GxvJt-0002fi-Jw
for postmaster@username.plus.com; Sat, 23 Dec 2006 01:05:01 +0000
Received: from www-data by pih-workplace07.plus.net with local (Exim 4.63)
(envelope-from <support@plus.net>)
id 1GxvJl-0004k6-4r
for postmaster@username.plus.com; Sat, 23 Dec 2006 01:04:53 +0000
To: postmaster@username.plus.com
Subject: PlusNet - A Question has been raised on your account
From: support@plus.net
Reply-To:support@plus.net
Message-Id: <E1GxvJl-0004k6-4r@pih-workplace07.plus.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 01:04:53 +0000
X-PN-VirusFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Delayed emails

Hi

Support emails, along with portal emails such as topic notifications and the like, are queued on mxlast, which also handles the majority of spam emails.

As this is the only area of the platform which has substantial queues still we would expect a delay. However I would not expect it to be as large as the one you have experienced here. I have passed the information to our networks team to take further action.
Saturn
Grafter
Posts: 732
Registered: 30-07-2007

Delayed emails

I too have had a number of emails delayed by days. Here's an example that didn't originate within PN:

Envelope-to: account@username.plus.com
Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 14:58:51 +0000
Received: from ptb-mxcore14.plus.net ([212.159.14.228])
by fhw-sunmxcore04.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1GyrHu-00013c-H6
for account@username.plus.com; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 14:58:50 +0000
Received: from ptn-mxlast02.plus.net ([212.159.7.114])
by ptb-mxcore14.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1GyrHt-00085c-QH
for account@username.plus.com; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 14:58:50 +0000
Received: from twelve.mx.123-reg.co.uk ([195.224.48.115])
by ptn-mxlast02.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1GxOAx-0000lq-S3
for account@username.plus.com; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:41:36 +0000
Received: from mailhost.domainname.com ([194.42.242.73] helo=SSFGB8002.domainname.com)
by twelve.mx.123-reg.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63)
(envelope-from <sender@domainname.com>)
id 1GxOAw-0005iQ-9N
for account@domainname.co.uk; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:41:34 +0000
Received: from EXCHANGESRV.domainname.com (EXCHANGESRV) by SSFGB8002.domainname.com
(Clearswift SMTPRS 5.1.4) with ESMTP id
<T7cb1abd6aeac191e99d90@SSFGB8002.domainname.com> for
<account@domainname.co.uk>; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:46:13 +0000
Received: by exchangesrv.ukfs.sub with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id
<VQ66GMB0>; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:46:12 -0000
Message-ID: <29A11E1A3FA35046B712FF113C7F50FE0E6B0264@exchangesrv.ukfs.sub>
From: sender@domainname.com
To: account@domainname.co.uk
Subject: FW: ADT
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:46:11 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=
"----_=_NextPart_000_01C72506.5B10AF00"

BTW How does this square against the Service Status notification Liam issued at 22/12/2006 @ 15:44. I think he was given duff gen Cry
DavidHH
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 03-08-2007

Delayed emails

Here are two headers from delayed emails.

Envelope-to: xxx@yyyyy.plus.com
X-Originating-IP: [83.67.132.184]
X-Originating-Email: [zzz@hotmail.co.uk]
X-Sender: zzz@hotmail.co.uk
From: "Lu Alulu" <zzz@hotmail.co.uk>
To: xxx@yyyyy.plus.com
Bcc:
Subject: Re:Christmas etc.,
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 09:23:24 +0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2006 09:23:28.0459 (UTC) FILETIME=[D6F7F1B0:01C725AA]
X-PN-VirusFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00)
X-PN-DSpam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v3.00)
X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent
X-DSPAM-Processed: Tue Dec 26 03:20:06 2006


----------------


Envelope-to: xxx@yyyy.plus.com
Subject: RE: your garden photos
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:01:43 -0000
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: your garden photos
thread-index: AcckYuoXHKZU0bmWR92XBIrBBY/NHAAg+Edg
From: "qqqq" <aaa@sam-culture.com>
To: "ddd" <xxx@yyyyy.plus.com>
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 Dec 24 23:29:23 2006
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9949
X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 19492 chance of being spam
X
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-PN-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v3.00)
gm4jjj
Rising Star
Posts: 670
Thanks: 5
Fixes: 1
Registered: 30-07-2007

Another example

from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fhw-sunmxcore04.plus.net) by fhw-sunmxcore04.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1GytzB-0005eO-4e for xxx; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:51:41 +0000
Received: from ptb-mxcore02.plus.net ([212.159.14.216]) by fhw-sunmxcore04.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Gytz0-0005WG-FW for xxx; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:51:30 +0000
Received: from ptn-mxlast01.plus.net ([212.159.7.113]) by ptb-mxcore02.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1GytyV-00082D-OJ for xxx; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:50:59 +0000
Received: from mail.lauder.ac.uk ([212.219.195.4]) by ptn-mxlast01.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1GxRDW-0006d2-MB for xxx; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:56:26 +0000
In-Reply-To: <774F268B-9DB8-4495-A719-0190A087A0EB@xxx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5 September 26, 2003
Message-Id: <OF683A8149.4D0AFB53-ON8025724B.005C4A01-8025724B.005C6610@lauder.ac.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 005C660E8025724B_="
X-Pn-Virusfiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Saturn
Grafter
Posts: 732
Registered: 30-07-2007

Delayed emails

Anyone at PN have an answer to this?
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Delayed emails

Hi

There is a problem open with our networks team to reduce the queues, and to see why so much email is being queued on mxlast in the first place.
TheFixer
Dabbler
Posts: 20
Registered: 05-08-2007

Delayed emails

In case this helps - 10 days!


From - Sun Dec 31 18:38:46 2006
X-Account-Key: account4
X-UIDL: UID10933-1118879724
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Envelope-to: x@y.plus.com
Delivery-date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:04:42 +0000
Received: from [212.159.14.234] (helo=ptb-mxcore20.plus.net)
by fhw-sunmxcore07.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H146z-0006Kq-Ot
for x@y.plus.com; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:04:41 +0000
Received: from pte-mxlast06.plus.net ([212.159.7.99] helo=ptn-mxlast05.plus.net)
by ptb-mxcore20.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1H146y-0007G1-UO
for x@y.plus.com; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:04:41 +0000
Received: from coumta04.netbenefit.co.uk ([212.53.64.79])
by ptn-mxlast05.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXLast v2.00) id 1GxM3e-0006Uw-I3
for x@y.plus.com; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:25:54 +0000
Received: from z.email-bureau.co.uk ([212.188.132.48]:1352Cool
by coumta04.netbenefit.co.uk with esmtp (NBT 4.61 23)
id 1GxM2K-0004tu-SF
for x@z.co.uk; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:24:33 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (coumta04.netbenefit.co.uk: domain of x.email-bureau.co.uk designates 212.188.132.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.188.132.48; envelope-from=z@x.email-bureau.co.uk; helo=x.email-bureau.co.uk;
DomainKey-Signature: s=email-bureau; d=email-bureau.co.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; b=iT6ovPaSYbpsXLJwbdDaZMpbR9jG+8RfHpVXl+k+ZceZWElkXR1gFFszXrj/jAClNiWL8MxBYFuqdhKhXobHyfiaHi08uSbGaAu+GRWa1Qx0LSV31xC71zwHbp2GUGAy;
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:16:13 +0000
Message-Id: <1166699773.7266420.7921722MSOSI422484513:2Oz@x.email-bureau.co.uk>
From: "x@y.email-bureau.co.uk>
Reply-To: x@y.email-bureau.co.uk
To: x@y
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Richer_Soun?=
=?iso-8859-1?q?ds_-_VIP_Cl?=
=?iso-8859-1?q?ub_=96_Import?=
=?iso-8859-1?q?ant_Notice!?=
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: eBizmailer3.6
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-NB-Virus-Scan: virus-free
X-Originally-To: x@y
X-Originally-To: x@z
X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 7.5.432 [268.16.1/611]
DavidHH
Grafter
Posts: 68
Registered: 03-08-2007

Delayed emails

Quote
In case this helps - 10 days!


By which time you have at least one of the following:
1. Missed the funeral.
2. Missed the party.
3. Missed paying your overdue account.
4. Failed to meet your significant other.
5. Failed to stay at home when Huh? came for a service call.
6. Lost your last chance to accept a wonderful bargain.
7. Any one of several other vital things.

Unreliable email delivery is almost as bad (and sometimes worse) than not having any email at all.
N/A

Delayed emails

hmm, where are the slas for timely mail delivery published exactly, or is it just a best efforts service?
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Delayed emails

Hi

Our mxlast servers regularly have 100,000 (mostly spam) mails queued on them which doesn't represent a problem as it is usually delivered very quickly.

However a couple of weeks ago when we had a surge of incoming mail the mxlast servers obviously had to handle a lot more mail, and the queues were not reducing as quickly as we would like.

Our networks engineer had a look at this issue, and could not find any specific issue. The queues have come down considerably over the last few days, the largest queue now been approximately 75,000.

Because the queues are reducing, and the mail is now being delivered it is likely that more delayed email will filter through over the next 48 hours, but I wouldn't expect too many 10 day delays to be honest.