From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 31 21:12:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F5EC16A480 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:12:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcus@blazingdot.com) Received: from marklar.blazingdot.com (marklar.blazingdot.com [207.154.84.83]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE05D13C491 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:12:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcus@blazingdot.com) Received: (qmail 49345 invoked by uid 503); 31 Oct 2007 20:45:07 -0000 Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:45:07 -0800 From: Marcus Reid To: "Jason C. Wells" Message-ID: <20071031204507.GA40071@blazingdot.com> References: <47282067.8070706@highperformance.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47282067.8070706@highperformance.net> X-Coffee-Level: nearly-fatal User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mailer Error Messages X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:12:13 -0000 On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:27:51PM -0700, Jason C. Wells wrote: > This is just a short little complaint. Could we please make mail > exchange error messages just a little more understandable? For the rare > occurrences where I actually get a legit non-spam induced bounce it > would be nice to be able to quickly discern what happened. > > 1 - Don't use pronouns. "This domain is is blacklisted." Oh I see it > was "THIS" domain that was blacklisted. That clears things up. Contact > the postmaster? Oh I see "THE" postmaster. That sounds like arbitrary text that came from a mail server that you tried to deliver mail to. It probably rejected your mail with a 550 and gave you a (admittedly vague) reason why. > 2 - Say what you mean to say. > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > > Actually, the address probably didn't have any errors. It was probably > some sort of anti-spam in play. If the comment on the last two lines was generated by some mail server, it looks like some message configured at that site. Again, this is site-specific configuration. You could ask them to clear it up ;) Just know that the mail failed with a permanent error like a 550. > 3 - Use complete sentences. Please include a subject and verb PLUS the > reason why there is an error. "server.foo.com rejected server.bar.com > for reason." "There is no mailbox suchandsuch at server.foo.com." Mail delivery fails in far too many different ways to have a real, descriptive and correct message for all of them. Lots of different software all speaking SMTP and spewing forth lots of messages that aren't defined by any standards. I think a good first step for you in your crusade is to get Microsoft to improve the messages that Exchange spews out -- those are especially unhelpful. > (now I must wonder what sort of default sillyness my server spews to > everyone else when every variety of spam malfeasance reflects of my MX) > > I used to think that running my own MX was neat. Now I am starting to > think that this is the realm of wizards. Can mere mortals use the > internet without ceaselessly battling with asshats? The fight is all > gone out of me. I think that is the feeling of a growing number of mail admins. It's a wonder it's all still working as well as it is out there. Marcus