Relaying denied?

[Darren New]

Any reason this would suddenly start happening persistantly with this
one address? Nothing looks especially baroque in the DNS MX setup, and
it's been going on for more than a week, so I'd expect if it was
affecting everyone's email to Clark County Nevada, they'd have noticed
and corrected it by now.

Remote server rejected mail for recipient - 550 Relaying denied
<***@ccgwgate.co.clark.nv.us>

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
Any reason this would suddenly start happening persistantly with this
one address? Nothing looks especially baroque in the DNS MX setup, and
it's been going on for more than a week, so I'd expect if it was
affecting everyone's email to Clark County Nevada, they'd have noticed
and corrected it by now.

If I were to guess the problem isn't on your end.

Have you tried sending to it from other addresses?

[Darren New]

Post by Scott Lindner
If I were to guess the problem isn't on your end.
Have you tried sending to it from other addresses?

No. I'll give it a go, tho.

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
No. I'll give it a go, tho.

I'm curious if they are using some sort of ruleset to treat different
sources of email differently. I do something similar on my server but it is
completely transparent to the world that it's being done. Maybe that's what
they tried, and screwed up?

Scott

[Darren New]

Post by Scott Lindner
completely transparent to the world that it's being done. Maybe that's what
they tried, and screwed up?

I'd expect a different error message, unless it's *very* screwed up, as
in never once tested. Since this is the government of Clark County, I'd
more expect RR to have screwed something up during their centralization
efforts than them. :-)

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
I'd expect a different error message, unless it's *very* screwed up, as
in never once tested. Since this is the government of Clark County, I'd
more expect RR to have screwed something up during their centralization
efforts than them. :-)

I agree, but how many times do we find deployment problems online where
someone didn't really test?

It's a simple thing for you to test. That's why I ask. Anything that you
try even if it has a low chance of producing a useful answer is still a good
test.

I would typically agree that RR would be the problem. In this case it feels
odd to me. Maybe I'll try sending to it as well. Would the recipient mind?
I'm not a mail expert but I do know a bit more than the typical person.
What got me thinking it might be on their end is the error stating that it
rejected mail for a specific user. From my experience (limited) that is
typically the destination causing it. Either by design or by fault. Does
this sound reasonable?

Scott

[Darren New]

Post by Scott Lindner
It's a simple thing for you to test. That's why I ask. Anything that you
try even if it has a low chance of producing a useful answer is still a good
test.

Well, since I already have a yahoo account set up, yes. Assuming Yahoo
doesn't throw away the bounce message for some reason.

Post by Scott Lindner
I would typically agree that RR would be the problem. In this case it feels
odd to me. Maybe I'll try sending to it as well. Would the recipient mind?

I think you should probably avoid that, much as it's a good idea. It's a
work computer, and he's not very computer sophisticated. Plus he reads
mail maybe once a week. :-) Plus he's paid to be suspicious.

Post by Scott Lindner
I'm not a mail expert but I do know a bit more than the typical person.
What got me thinking it might be on their end is the error stating that it
rejected mail for a specific user. From my experience (limited) that is
typically the destination causing it. Either by design or by fault. Does
this sound reasonable?

Yes, but since the error message is that relaying is disallowed, it
sounded more like some MX along the chain was claiming to be someone it
wasn't.

Anyway, I'll see if it worked. Or give the receipient a call and see if
he got the mail, or whatever.

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
Yes, but since the error message is that relaying is disallowed, it
sounded more like some MX along the chain was claiming to be someone it
wasn't.

Wouldn't that be a different error? The error message is confusing me now
that I look at it again. I've never seen mail rejected for a recipient that
is a relaying denied error before.

Post by Darren New
Anyway, I'll see if it worked. Or give the receipient a call and see if
he got the mail, or whatever.

Maybe you're right that it's related to something along the way. I'm
curious what your test results in.

I wonder if you'd get the same message for all addresses at that site? Do
you know a general address that is probably never checked that you could
ping?

Scott

[Darren New]

Post by Scott Lindner
Wouldn't that be a different error? The error message is confusing me now
that I look at it again. I've never seen mail rejected for a recipient that
is a relaying denied error before.

My understanding is that relaying denied means that you're receiving a
message with a MAIL FROM:<> that shouldn't be coming from the machine
it's coming from. E.g., a MAIL FROM:<***@yahoo.com> coming from an RR
machine to a Microsoft machine.

I'm guessing that perhaps Clark County is seeing a san.rr.com address
and seeing it come from mgw.rr.com or whatever, and it's rejecting it on
those grounds.

Post by Scott Lindner
I wonder if you'd get the same message for all addresses at that site? Do
you know a general address that is probably never checked that you could
ping?

Errr, no. If I don't get thru there and I don't get any answer from
anyone here, I'll see if their postmaster knows what's going on.

[Darren New]

Post by Darren New
Errr, no. If I don't get thru there and I don't get any answer from
anyone here, I'll see if their postmaster knows what's going on.

Mail from Yahoo bounced also, so I've let the postmaster know (assuming
*that* doesn't bounce).

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
Mail from Yahoo bounced also, so I've let the postmaster know (assuming
*that* doesn't bounce).

Would you conclude that the problem is on the receiving end and not RR?

[Darren New]

Post by Scott Lindner
Would you conclude that the problem is on the receiving end and not RR?

Sure seems likely, yes.

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
Sure seems likely, yes.

That's what I got out of it but wanted to ask your opinion since you had a
differening interpretation from the original error. I wanted to see if
there was another way to interpret it. Thanks.

If you get any correspondence regarding the nature of the error I'd be
interested in reading it.

Scott