Is one of my Email addresses blocked

[#1]

Kurian contacted me today and I have recently sent him a reply. There is a Service Status for JTN, it's here.
Having said that, I'm not sure an announcement is warranted just yet. Emails seem to be flowing without problem between the Plusnet relay servers and Fastmail, so this isn't simply a recurrence of the previous problem.
I have created a test mail forwarder on the JTN platform and will carry out some testing once DNS has had time to propagate.

[#2]

Quote from: vanessen

I raised 'tickets' with Just-the-name and with Fastmail on July 21.  Jon at JTN was helpful on the phone and I now have some feedback but absolutely no indication of timescales for a fix.  Kurian at FM is reponsive through the ticket and said that he was in contact with Bob Pullen.  Hence the post of this thread.  I told Kurian that there was no 'service status' board for JTN and that on the Service Status for Plusnet there is no indication of any problems.

I have just replied to Fastmail's latest message to me. The failed delivery notices they have forwarded to me have very little to do with us. They show a failure between an originating and forwarded domain name, neither of which are hosted by Plusnet or Just The Name.
You have misconfigured the MX records for the forwarded domain name though which is at least part of the reason the messages are bouncing:

;; ANSWER SECTION:
yourdomain.org.uk.             21600   IN      MX      10 mail.metronet.co.uk.
yourdomain.org.uk.             21600   IN      MX      20 mail1.metronet.co.uk.
yourdomain.org.uk.             21600   IN      MX      0 in1.smtp.messagingengine.com.
yourdomain.org.uk.             21600   IN      MX      1 in2.smtp.messagingengine.com.

Those Metronet MX records need removing. We do not host the email for this domain which is why our email servers are refusing the connection.

[#3]

Thanks Bob; as of today (Mon 28 July):
I am sending this message to Plusnet, JTN and Fastmail.
- test emails I sent from Plusnet webail account to Fastmail account to addresses at my JTN-hosted domains, on 22 and 23 July, have now been bounced, after 5 days.  I could send headers  - please ask if you want.
- same test emails sent on July 27 have not been delivered
- same test emails sent about 12:00 today have not been delivered
So I assume this problem is till there.
Meantime I do not know whether emails from other external people are getting through.  I am getting a lot of emails to my Fastmail account to one of my JTN-hosted domains, but obviously I do not see what I do not get.
This problem has been apparent since July 14 and was reported to JTN and Fastmail on July 21 and to you on July 24.
I read the instructions about the MX and DNS and I would like everyone to agree what I should put in the various boxes.  I know that one mistake here can ruin the whole set-up.  None of these has been changed by me for some years.  I am reluctant to carry out partial instructions.
Meantime my business use of these is seriously disrupted and while I can ask for emails to be sent to my PlusNet webmail account, and have done so,  this is a temporary work-round and not a solution.
Thanks for listening,
Christopher van Essen

[#4]

Hi Christopher,
I neglected to mention in my last reply that I had set up the JTN mail forwarding service to forward emails destined for a test domain we have hosted on the platform to my own personal Fastmail account. All attempts to email the JTN-hosted domain arrived in my Fastmail mailbox almost instantly.
I do not have access to the Just-The-Name support mailbox however feel free to send me a private message containing your latest response.
On reflection the example I last looked at did involve Just-The-Name. From what I can tell the bounces were generated from messages sent...
From: ar*****@***.cam.ac.uk (third party)
To: c.********@************ars.com (Just-The-Name)
Which redirects to c********@***.org.uk (Fastmail)
Email should therefore be getting routed like this:

*.csi.cam.ac.uk  > just-the-name.co.uk/mail.metronet.co.uk > in1.smtp.messagingengine.com

The failed delivery reports that I've seen though show attempts to deliver to the final address using the Metronet email servers rather than the Fastmail ones, e.g.

*.csi.cam.ac.uk  > just-the-name.co.uk/mail.metronet.co.uk > just-the-name.co.uk/mail.metronet.co.uk

If Fastmail host the email for the xvc.org.uk then you need delete the Metronet MX records. Whether this is contributing to the problem or not, it's making things a hell of a lot harder to diagnose and is definitely not helping.
Can you remove the Metronet records from the .org.uk address please so you're just left with the messagingengine.com ones?

[#5]

Hello Bob,
Thanks for your efforts.  I still feel abit 'in the middle' as I don't know if anyone's responses to my query to all of you (ie Fastmail, JTN and Plusnet) are being copied to the others - but I suspect not.  So, do I have to forward or copy everyone's messages  to all the others? 
Your responses are on a generally-visible forum
JTN's are on emails to me
Fastmails are on privately-accessible 'tickets'
FYI, all of 'my' domains, including *****sen.co.uk, **c.org.uk, ***********sars.com, *****sens.com and ****nne.eu are hosted with JTN.
So this includes the adddress (the first) which forwards to my Plusnet webmail inbox and another (the last) which forwards to my wife's Plusnet webmail inbox.  The other three forward to my Fastmail inbox.
So Fastmail does not host the domain **c.org.uk.  Do you still recommend removing the Metronet records?
Do JTN and Fastmail agree?
And if so, how do I do that?  The JTN control panel for **c.org.uk does NOT show the Metronet entries you quote, only the two messagingengine.com ones.
Tearing out my hair,
Christopher

[#6]

Hello Bob:
Here is this morning's exchange with Kurian at Fastmail (latest first).
I'm forwarding it to you and to JTN.
JTN have another issue, in that something in the forwarding system has been flagged up as a 'security issue' and need to be 'released' otherwise some emails are getting blocked.  Can you contact Daniel or Jon at JTN?
This mroining's test emails from my Plusnet webmail to my Fastmail email have not arrived.
So things are definitely not right yet.
- Christopher -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tue, 29 Jul 7:35 AM (2 minutes 26 seconds ago) +0000 User : chrisvanessen@fastmail.fm  to: Kurian
Thanks for your analysis.
BUT - I don't know where Metronet comes into this.
I buy services from
-  Fastmail
- Just-The-Name
- and Plusnet
Who are Metronet and where do they fit in?
- Christopher -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To user : chrisvanessen@fastmail.fm
Cc user : chris@vanessen.co.uk

Tue, 29 Jul 7:28 AM (9 minutes 38 seconds ago) +0000 Admin : Kurian
Hi Christopher
Yes, Bob contacted me and told me that this was not a problem at their end.
In your first update, you mentioned
-------
Emails direct to any name@xvc.org.uk (the main one I use with Fastmail) do not seem to have been affected at all and have come in normally throughout.
-------
I don't see anything particular wrong with your DNS records(though there are some warnings there):
http://intodns.com/xvc.org.uk
Checking the MX records for your domain xvc.org.uk, I see:
xvc.org.uk.            21600  IN      MX      20 mail1.metronet.co.uk.
xvc.org.uk.            21600  IN      MX      0 in1.smtp.messagingengine.com.
xvc.org.uk.            21600  IN      MX      1 in2.smtp.messagingengine.com.
xvc.org.uk.            21600  IN      MX      10 mail.metronet.co.uk.
Now, in your original report, you mentioned a problem with only forwarded emails. The error message included in the first update:
<c.vanessen@xvc.org.uk>: connect to mail.metronet.co.uk[212.159.9.85]:
    Connection timed out
Means the forwarding server is trying to connect to mail.metronet.co.uk[212.159.9.85] to deliver emails to your xvc.org.uk domain. In fact, they should be trying our servers which are at a higher priority(0 and 1), and I am not sure why they are trying the lower priority records. My suggestion would be to remove the metronet entries. Also, I would recommend avoiding using zero as a priority field. I've found in the past that some systems have trouble with 0 as a priority field. So, I would suggest you use 10 and 20, or even 1 and 2 respectively for in1 and in2 servers.
I would suggest you let metronet guys know that the problem is ongoing. Also, can you please copy this update to them..
Sorry, I know this is difficult you being in the middle of multiple providers..
Kurian

[#7]

Quote from: vanessen

Thanks for your efforts.  I still feel abit 'in the middle' as I don't know if anyone's responses to my query to all of you (ie Fastmail, JTN and Plusnet) are being copied to the others - but I suspect not.  So, do I have to forward or copy everyone's messages  to all the others?

I will get in touch with the JTN guys.

Quote from: vanessen

FYI, all of 'my' domains, including *****sen.co.uk, **c.org.uk, ***********sars.com, *****sens.com and ****nne.eu are hosted with JTN.

The DNS looks to be hosted with us, but the mail for at least the .org.uk is pointed (primarily) to Fastmail using MX records. In instances like this you would say that the email is hosted with Fastmail. Apologies if I've confused matters.

Quote from: vanessen

Do you still recommend removing the Metronet records? Do JTN and Fastmail agree? And if so, how do I do that?  The JTN control panel for **c.org.uk does NOT show the Metronet entries you quote, only the two messagingengine.com ones.

Looking at Fastmail's last response, yes we do both agree. I was afraid you'd say that about the Metronet mail records though (see more about this below).

Quote from: vanessen

JTN have another issue, in that something in the forwarding system has been flagged up as a 'security issue' and need to be 'released' otherwise some emails are getting blocked.  Can you contact Daniel or Jon at JTN?

I'll go one better and speak to our security engineers directly. I suspect I know what's happened. At the moment we can't access fastmail.fm from the corporate network. This is because the fix for the original Plusnet > Fastmail problem was only applied to the external network. Because your forwards are being sent from one Just The Name hosted domain to another, I bet the traffic's being seen as internal and is still getting denied.

Quote from: vanessen

BUT - I don't know where Metronet comes into this. I buy services from -  Fastmail - Just-The-Name - and Plusnet

Metronet are the ISP we acquired some years ago who originally looked after the Just-The-Name brand/service. This is where we seem to have a second problem. The Just-The-Name platform seems to add a two lower priority MX records to domains in certain circumstances, e.g.

ztest.me.uk.            21600   IN      MX      10 mail.metronet.co.uk.
ztest.me.uk.            21600   IN      MX      20 mail1.metronet.co.uk.

The first of these doesn't even respond to traffic on port 25 so there's no merit in it being there at all.
The second (whilst it responds) is pointless in a situation where you're using JTN's forwarding service too.
I'll be raising an internal problem to get this issue looked into (ref: 82284).

Quote from: vanessen

Means the forwarding server is trying to connect to mail.metronet.co.uk[212.159.9.85] to deliver emails to your xvc.org.uk domain. In fact, they should be trying our servers which are at a higher priority(0 and 1), and I am not sure why they are trying the lower priority records.

This is exactly what I was getting at in my last reply to this thread. Whilst it may come across as confusing, both ourselves and Fastmail are essentially advising you the same thing
The reason they're probably trying the lower priority records is because of the network block mentioned above I suspect.

Quote from: vanessen

My suggestion would be to remove the metronet entries. Also, I would recommend avoiding using zero as a priority field. I've found in the past that some systems have trouble with 0 as a priority field. So, I would suggest you use 10 and 20, or even 1 and 2 respectively for in1 and in2 servers.

I would suggest against using 10 and 20 until we can sort out what to do with those metronet MX records. Try using 1 and 5 in the interim.
I'll be report back shortly once I've had the chance to take a walk round the office and stick an elbow in the sides of the relevant people
Edit: ref:82249

[#8]

Bob, thanks for the very comprehensive response.
And I am very pleased that you are now in contact both with Kurian at Fastmail and Jon (Jonathan Cohen) at JTN.
We should be getting somewhere.
You and Kurian both recommend that I change some MX records, eg "try using 1 and 5 in the interim".  I do not know how to do this.  The JTN control panel (for customer use) doesn't have anything like that.  It might be possible in the Fastmail 'settings' but if so it is in a part marked for advanced users, saying, "Note: Custom DNS mode is designed for advanced users only who understand how DNS works. Use with caution and only if you understand the implications of what you're doing."
I do not want to mess with this!
If changes are needed, then the three or four parties (FM, PN, JTN and maybe Metronet) need to agree, and then one of you implement them.
I haven't heard back from JTN on progress or otherwise with the security issue, so I hope your "going one better" approach is good.
Still a puzzle that the forwarding between the various domains and webmail providers was working perfectly for 3 years and then in early July this year, fails.
Thanks again, and hoping for success,
Christopher

[#9]

And here are the latest headers for a test message I sent on 24/7 and bounced back today, but tell me if you don't want any more of these:
Return-path: <>
Envelope-to: <snip>
Delivery-date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:10:47 +0100
Received: from [212.159.8.109] (helo=avasin05.plus.net)
 by inmx19.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1XC2Uh-0002BP-7Y
 for <snip> Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:10:47 +0100
Received: from mail1.metronet.co.uk ([213.162.97.76])
by avasin05.plus.net with Plusnet Cloudmark Gateway
id Y8Al1o0011esj4t018Anap; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:10:47 +0100
X-CM-Score: 0.00
X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=JcQyrC6V c=1 sm=1 tr=0
a=ak7C+6n8YwzeBpfYw05R7Q==:117 a=BkN7WlOJAAAA:8 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8
a=cwja1q-NuFgA:10 a=QdXZeKcbOBAA:10 a=R04vTFLdptsA:10
a=vX-N2HuyvEP-EhXdXtwA:9 a=J7xOIHlrhHQA:10 a=uhDkK5BfXLUA:10 a=ifDyHWunAAAA:8
a=gQdiS5xVOjBdX2W0PzQA:9 a=WSBFxVLe9_66OkDg:21 a=avcQG6_24jzJITQN:21
a=vdPFA7nWhV0nHzjBDpkA:9 a=yrQ1cUBHy0yCDOJ1:21 a=-cRhol4nO3t6_jDb:21
a=hrRdMfAC4lMA:10 a=j2KI4XHimUkA:10 a=Dxbwxng8qZcA:10 a=igCm7Cr_LW4A:10
a=0rGr4R2NTqG16xLK3KoA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=mBDlQ-Jub-0A:10
a=UP6vBT5VSwoA:10 a=RcApyi00Zp8A:10 a=a3tYz2Pga38A:10 a=74OzTZpJZ7QA:10
a=m36ahhzp0YnU8EqyjIAA:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=z_jHxJrIvfgA:10
a=uA08ujabYgQA:10 a=jBPzSI-FvhgA:10
Received: by mail1.metronet.co.uk (MetroNet Mail)
id E0C41F8545; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:10:44 +0100 (BST)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:10:44 +0100 (BST)
From: MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery System)
To: <snip>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
boundary="040D2F85CD.1406621444/mail1.metronet.co.uk"
Message-Id: <20140729081044.E0C41F8545@mail1.metronet.co.uk>
X-PN-Virus-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v5.00)
X-PN-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v5.00)
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
This is a MIME-encapsulated message.
--040D2F85CD.1406621444/mail1.metronet.co.uk
Content-Description: Notification
Content-Type: text/plain
This is the MetroNet Mail program at host mail1.metronet.co.uk.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned
below could not be delivered to one or more destinations.
For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster@mail1.metronet.co.uk>
If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
delete your own text from the message returned below.
The MetroNet Mail program
<<snip>>: connect to mail.metronet.co.uk[212.159.8.85]:
   Connection timed out
--040D2F85CD.1406621444/mail1.metronet.co.uk
Content-Description: Delivery error report
Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Reporting-MTA: dns; mail1.metronet.co.uk
Arrival-Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:04:05 +0100 (BST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; <snip>
Action: failed
Status: 4.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; connect to mail.metronet.co.uk[212.159.8.85]:
   Connection timed out
--040D2F85CD.1406621444/mail1.metronet.co.uk
Content-Description: Undelivered Message
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Received: from <snip>
by mail1.metronet.co.uk (MetroNet Mail) with ESMTP id 040D2F85CD
for <<snip>>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:04:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mail.just-the-name.co.uk ([213.162.97.161])
by avasout05 with smtp
id W81o1o0083UurnZ0181pNa; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:01:49 +0100
X-CM-Score: 0.00
X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=DIIB4k9b c=1 sm=1 tr=0
a=ub1ZW+Sf4HKBpzZNKCdTEQ==:117 a=jSQgp9IWXRf89EXR5FPwJg==:17 a=eCi8ZTWhAAAA:8
a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=dYCPD3cKDi0A:10 a=-mr5bZf52m8A:10 a=aCBucsKyuzUA:10
a=gncdoxYVgm4A:10 a=KQkLydf1AAAA:8 a=0rGr4R2NTqG16xLK3KoA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
a=mBDlQ-Jub-0A:10 a=UP6vBT5VSwoA:10 a=RcApyi00Zp8A:10 a=a3tYz2Pga38A:10
a=74OzTZpJZ7QA:10 a=m36ahhzp0YnU8EqyjIAA:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10
a=z_jHxJrIvfgA:10 a=uA08ujabYgQA:10 a=jBPzSI-FvhgA:10
Received: from avasout03.plus.net (avasout03.plus.net [84.93.230.244])
by mail.just-the-name.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7803E1F5103
for <<snip>>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:01:48 +0100 (BST)
Received: from webmail.plus.net ([84.93.228.147])
by avasout03 with smtp
id W81o1o0033BT6uC0181o6D; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:01:48 +0100
X-CM-Score: 0.00
X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=aY3vnHYt c=1 sm=1 tr=0
a=jSQgp9IWXRf89EXR5FPwJg==:117 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=dYCPD3cKDi0A:10
a=-mr5bZf52m8A:10 a=aCBucsKyuzUA:10 a=gncdoxYVgm4A:10 a=KQkLydf1AAAA:8
a=0rGr4R2NTqG16xLK3KoA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=mBDlQ-Jub-0A:10
a=UP6vBT5VSwoA:10 a=RcApyi00Zp8A:10 a=a3tYz2Pga38A:10 a=74OzTZpJZ7QA:10
a=m36ahhzp0YnU8EqyjIAA:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=z_jHxJrIvfgA:10
a=uA08ujabYgQA:10 a=jBPzSI-FvhgA:10
X-AUTH:<snip>
Received: from 181.245.200.146.dyn.plus.net ([146.200.181.245])
by webmail.plus.net
with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:01:48 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_cc2b5265819d6c1b116e3454ed1a166e"
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:01:48 +0100
From: <snip>
To: <<snip>
Subject: Test of 24 July for OPS
Reply-To: <snip>
Mail-Reply-To: <snip>
Message-ID: <75c17f03cb3fe0e58c5eb5af6c2fe0fb@imap.plus.net>
X-Sender: <snip>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.7.4
X-Originating-IP: [146.200.181.245]
--=_cc2b5265819d6c1b116e3454ed1a166e
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

--
<snip>

--=_cc2b5265819d6c1b116e3454ed1a166e
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN">
<html><body>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<pre>--=20
<snip>
<snip>
</div>
</body></html>
--=_cc2b5265819d6c1b116e3454ed1a166e--

--040D2F85CD.1406621444/mail1.metronet.co.uk--
Moderator's note by Jim (Oldjim)   Personal information removed - Bob has copied what he needs

[#10]

Quote from: vanessen

You and Kurian both recommend that I change some MX records, eg "try using 1 and 5 in the interim".  I do not know how to do this.  The JTN control panel (for customer use) doesn't have anything like that.  It might be possible in the Fastmail 'settings'...

You wouldn't touch the Fastmail settings because they don't look after the DNS for the domain. In the JTN control panel you should have something that looks like this:

I'm guessing you have the first two fields populated with the messagingengine.com MX records?
Move those two entries to Backup 1 and Backup 5 respectively and save the changes.
Although it's unlikely this will have any influence on your problem until the other issues are sorted.
Also, ensure that you only do this with the org.uk domain and not any of the others.

[#11]

Thanks very much Bob.  I have done that.
I have tried to attach a screenshot - hope it works
No update from JTN on the security problem.  Jon promised one in an hour - that was this morning.
Hope you have more success by "going one better".
- Christopher -

[#12]

Sorry Bob (and Jonathan), I did in fact get a response from Jonathan at 14:37 today, as follows:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Christopher,
Apologies I did not respond earlier, I understand Bob is dealing with this via the Plusnet community forums. Essentially as Plusnet provide the support for JTN as well, any response from myself will mirror any responses from Bob.
To confirm, Bob has raised a problem has been raised with our network team as it appears that we cannot access fastmail from our internal networks which is why emails are trying to be sent via the Metronet servers. This is a separate issue, which we are looking into, however this is not going to solve the issue with the fastmail servers.
To answer one of your points on the Community Forums, to change the priority of the mail servers to 1 and 5, you will need to change the mail records to Backup 1 and Backup 5. 
I am currently trying to see if I can get any further information from our networks team.
In the interim, one option to ‘pick up’ any emails that get rejected due to the security issue above, would be to add the mail.just-the-name.co.uk as a low priority record in the mail entries. This would then mean that emails would then be forwarded as per the Just the Name mail forward option (to this email address).
Regards,
Jonathan Cohen
------------------------------------------------------
The 'security issue' must be a worrying one, otherwise presumably what was done to stop Fastmail emails getting through, could easily be undone.  Everyone seems to be aware pof the problem, and I cannot believe I am the only one affected.  FM and PN are both popular email providers, so many people must have both, and like me must have had them for many years quite happily..
Hoping for a speedy resolution or perfect workround,
Christopher

[#13]

Those MX record changes look to have gone through OK.

Quote from: vanessen

The 'security issue' must be a worrying one, otherwise presumably what was done to stop Fastmail emails getting through, could easily be undone.

Not at all. The routing issues are related to a device on our network whose job it is to block traffic to/from the source of suspected threats. Hosts under Fastmail's ownership have fallen foul of this automated platform which is what caused the widespread issues that were originally reported.
It's easy enough to relax/override such blocking, however we cannot do this blindly and need to look into things in a bit more detail before doing so.

Quote from: vanessen

Everyone seems to be aware pof the problem, and I cannot believe I am the only one affected.  FM and PN are both popular email providers, so many people must have both, and like me must have had them for many years quite happily.

Your situation is fairly unique if I'm honest. You have two domains, both pointing at the Just The Name name servers. You're then using the JTN email forwarding service to redirect emails sent to first address to the second address. The second address then has it's MX records pointed at/hosted with Fastmail. It could be questioned why you don't just elect to host the email for the first domain with Fastmail directly instead of messing about with email forwarding?
Anyway, I'd be interested to know whether or not there's been any noticeable change in behaviour at your side because we've made a few changes here that I'm hoping have helped?
If the same problem exists then I could do with another full failed delivery report.
Edit: Turns out I was mistaken and no changes have actually been made. Still looking into things, so no need for any further delivery reports.

[#14]

Hello Bob, and thanks again.
There's no change.  Test emails sent last night have not been delivered or bounced.
Your advice about simplifying the system sounds good.  What I had, worked perfectly for 3+ years until some link was disbaled for security reasons (?).
In fact I have 5 domains, as I said on July 28:
"FYI, all of 'my' domains, including *****sen.co.uk, **c.org.uk, ***********sars.com, *****sens.com and ****nne.eu are hosted with JTN.
So this includes the adddress (the first) which forwards to my Plusnet webmail inbox and another (the last) which forwards to my wife's Plusnet webmail inbox.  The other three forward to my Fastmail inbox."
I may be using the word 'hosted' wrongly here.  I 'buy' these domains through JTN.  They then offer a 'control panel' for web and mail forwarding.  At the same time Fastmail offer a 'settings' page where aliases and virtual aliases can be set up.  I asked what to do, and it all worked fine.
Now I am nervous about changing anything unless you (and that neams JTN I assume) and Kurian could agree what I should enter in the JTN and Fastmail setting pages for each of these domains to achieve what I want.  I suppose I should start by defining what I want, but before I attempt that, would you and Kurian be able and willing to advise me exactly what to set?
If so then you imply all will be well, I will be happy and you can resume dealing with the security issue and not with a customer (me) who has a unique problem, easily solved.  OK?
Thanks and regards,
Christopher

[#15]

Hello again Bob:
I copied your response of today and my post of today to Kurian and find that yesterday he said:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tue, 29 Jul 1:32 PM (1 day 0 hours ago) +0000 Admin : Kurian
Please don't make any changes in your fastmail account. Its working perfectly. The problem is elsewhere.
If I am reading this correctly, this is JTN's problem, or somewhere along the plusnet/jtn connection. I think Bob has some idea whats gone wrong(his explanation makes sense) and probably is talking to the people at JTN to have this resolved. I would suggest you also contact JTN guys.
Kurian
To user : chrisvanessen@fastmail.fm
Cc user : chris@vanessen.co.uk
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So far, it would seem that you and Kuian do not agree, but hopefully I am wrong there.
- Christopher -