shreff Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 ALL OF THE SUDDEN I CAN'T MAIL TO THE latinmail ADDRESS I HAVE BEEN DOING FOR 3 WEEKS. found out later MY ADDRESSBOOK IS ADDING JUNK TO THE ADDRESS, RENDERING IT ILLLEGIBLE. so this is no longer a mystery it was the RECENT CHANGES I MADE TO MY CONTACTS I JUST SENT A VCARD FILE THERE. IT HAD SAME RECIPIENT WITH ANOTHER IDENTITY NAME OUTSIDE THE xxxx<at>latinmail.com PART. BUT BOTH VERSION FAILED TO GO THRU PICKING OFF ADDRESSBOOK. I DOUBT THE IDENTITY MATTERS. IT'S THE ADDRESS INSIDE THE <> THAT REALLY IS SENT. HERE IS THEIR ERROR REPORT: Final-Recipient: rfc822;garciapetra<at>latinmail.com Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 (permanent failure) Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 5.1.0 - Unknown address error 550-'Error: 550: spam is not allowed in this site#body#142#' (delivery attempts: 0) Reporting-MTA: dns; c60.cesmail.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 *NOTE* I have modified the email addresses within your post to protect them from harvesting. 1. The error message seems to be conflicting about the actual error occured. The error number shows 5.1.0 and the description mentions 550. Both error codes from the RFC are listed below. X.1.0 Other address status Something about the address specified in the message caused this DSN. X.5.0 Other or undefined protocol status Something was wrong with the protocol necessary to deliver the message to the next hop and the problem cannot be well expressed with any of the other provided detail codes. 2. Have you confirmed using an older sent or received message that the current address is the same as used previously? Perhaps the VCard info was wrong. Perhaps the information (if it changed) is not active of the server yet (the information was sent prematurely). Perhaps he has been let go because he sent new VCard info to people who reported it as spam and that was the company response. 3. Have you tried sending from another system (yahoo webmail for instance) to see if the same message happens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 There is also the possibility that the file included in your description "I JUST SENT A VCARD FILE" could be the reason. There are many ISPs out there that now refuse to deal with many file types coming attached to an e-mail. But agreeing with Steven, the error message only suggests that something happened .. not the typical "you typed the address in wrong" error ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shreff Posted February 13, 2005 Author Share Posted February 13, 2005 There is also the possibility that the file included in your description "I JUST SENT A VCARD FILE" could be the reason. ..... 24292[/snapback] No, No, not they got a Vcard. I imported one independently to my Spamcop addressbook. Every address in my Palm went there, as an online access to its information should I not have my Palm on me somewhere. But there's a lot of blank entries at the top. So after this imported data showed there where now 2 identities to pick from for the same ID <email> I figured it didn't matter. But both failed. 1)the ID outside <email> doesn't matter right? abc <x[at]go.com> = cba <x[at]go.com> 2)seems picking from TO: failed after system asked to resolve multiple match to expanded name. But replying to an old message worked. But need more time to test. I am just concerned about the addressbooks usefullness with Palm imported data! It looks the same but? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 1) correct. 2)Forget the 2 address book entries. Was the address you replied to different than the addresses in the address book? I have received VCards that had an internal only resolvable address but that would not work over the internet. For example: user[at]server.domain was on the VCard but from the internet, server.domain was not reachable and the address should have been user[at]domain (and the server was figured out internally to determine where it should go). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 You started this with "e-mail couldn't be succssfully sent" .... now it seems as if you have changed this to "I tried to import an address book and things are all screwed up" .... that's quite a leap ... from this side of the screen, I'd say only you would have access to the data, applications, and results to verify your address database contents. What would appear to be critical are the actual addresses involved and your application's ability to actually read/use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shreff Posted February 14, 2005 Author Share Posted February 14, 2005 1) correct. 2)Forget the 2 address book entries. Was the address you replied to different than the addresses in the address book? CLIPPED.... 24310[/snapback] DANG w/o a quote, I don't follow 100% what 1&2 in your 19:13 reply go to. I cannot talk either so we are delayed a little in following the thread of thought. So, hey the replies are really appreciated. It's only been 5-6 hours since I began the thread of doom and already got 2 guys pitching in to help. Thanks. Now for 1), that must answer my original:QUESTION: IS IT SOMEHOW RELATED TO THE RECENT CHANGES I MADE TO MY CONTACTS? I JUST SENT As for 2) I think the 2 addresses (of latinmail) now in contacts of Spamcop's webmailer should be forgotton. I do think that the address I replied succesfully to from my inbox was the same latinmail.com>]<STUFF[at]latinmail.com> as the 2 to forget. Just the ID to Left changed i.e. the real persons name. Spamcop is seemingly prepared for a ninconpoop to have various named human ID's match to a singular <email>. That's why I saw a pulldown in "To" that prompted, and I quote this chopped attempt at english "Please select or edit right next:". What the hell was he on when he proofread that! IF 1) IS TRUE, VCARD TRANSFER FROM PALM 4.1 DESKTOP ON A MACINTOSH 10.3 IS CRAP. SPAMCOP DESTROYED IT OR...MACINTOSH FILE IS CRAP. I WILL NEVER KNOW. But geeze, it took many hours of practice in order to get 4 addresS sources all compiled into 1 sensible unduplicated file on Palms' database. You'd hope the Vcard capabiliy of Spamcop's mailer would read (IMPORT) the week's worth of effort flawlessly. That's where I'm at. p.s. if you're the guy who reduced risk of spam harvesting, thanks. I didn't know you could do all that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 IF 1) IS TRUE, VCARD TRANSFER FROM PALM 4.1 DESKTOP ON A MACINTOSH 10.3 IS CRAP. SPAMCOP DESTROYED IT OR...MACINTOSH FILE IS CRAP. I WILL NEVER KNOW. But geeze, it took many hours of practice in order to get 4 addresS sources all compiled into 1 sensible unduplicated file on Palms' database. You'd hope the Vcard capabiliy of Spamcop's mailer would read (IMPORT) the week's worth of effort flawlessly. That's where I'm at. That is pretty rough assessment. You are using proprietary software running on a Mac that is supposed to 'emulate' one of many Palm models (something either decided when the package was downloaed or came with the Palm) ... My guess is that the "vCard" export option (one of several options, by the way) probably works great when transferring the data to a Palm or to another Mac running the Palm DeskTop software. Then one could note that Mac files have this tendency to have data and resource forks involved, which also tend to cause problems for almost every other operating system out there (unless running some extra translation package) .... There's a lot of software stuff out there (some of which is very expensive) that is advertised as being simply the conduit to get data to/from a Mac and some other Operating System. In my opinion at this point (spending not more than a few minutes looking at the Palm app I'd placed on an iBook [no, I don't have a Palm]) .. you are bashing the SpamCop system for your apparently failed experiment at moving data with application software written for a different scenario. Someone else may come along and say it can be done, but at this point in time .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shreff Posted February 14, 2005 Author Share Posted February 14, 2005 You started this with "e-mail couldn't be succssfully sent" .... now it seems as if you have changed ...... 24316[/snapback] I know, sorry. But I really didn't change. It scared me when I came back to webmail after having sent out email to a previously working recipient and got a "WE DON'T ACCEPT spam" message. SPAMCOP IS NOT spam!! Since that warning signal, I've been doning my best to share what I think caused it. Could be totally wrong. I'm very inexperienced with Vcard files. Would not really know how to verify it. Just put it into Mac Address, Spamcop Contacts, or back into Palm where it was created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shreff Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 That is pretty rough assessment. You are using proprietary software running on a Mac that is supposed to 'emulate' one of many Palm models (something either decided when the package was downloaed or came with the Palm) ... My guess is that the "vCard" export option (one of several options, by the way) probably works great when transferring the data to a Palm or to another Mac... 24320[/snapback] Closure! I for now will put up with "noisy" contacts data imported into Spamcop Webmail. Now I know my mail was NOT being blocked. Just some weirdness in Spamcop's Webmail and how it handles multiple matches for a recipient address in contacts. I solved it by clicking on Expand Names twice. Mail cannot be sent out while the "unresolved" message is at top of screen. That ought to be mentioned in the somewhat sparse help file. Maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.