Delayed Emails: NTL or BT's Fault? - Page 2

Toto · 29-01-2005, 10:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by nostra

it is hard to know who indeed is at fault unfortunately

I agree.

I try to look at the "glass is half full" scenario in most things, so I'd like to think, just this once, its not a ntl problem, but then again I've been way off before

nostra · 29-01-2005, 10:19

well it could be that the bt server had it stuck in its mailq for a day or so, or it could be that the ntl mailserver was not responding to requests on port 25... or maybe the bt mailserver was on a blacklist...

there are ohhh so many possibilities of what happens
and we are blind without looking at mail logs

but we both know that no major isp will give you details of what is in it's mailq and what happened in its maillogs, ntl wouldnt and neither would bt

Toto · 29-01-2005, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by nostra

but we both know that no major isp will give you details of what is in it's mailq and what happened in its maillogs, ntl wouldnt and neither would bt

Well, not sure if that is entirely true, a well configured mail server may get send a message to the sender that there is a delay, I can't remember the message banner though, but as you say, we may never know

nostra · 29-01-2005, 10:34

i believe some mailservers only notify of permanent failures (e.g. mailbox full)

not temporary ones such as server not accepting connections

depends how the administrator sets the server up

29-01-2005, 11:45

I float this only as an idea but.... does anyone think it's worth me sending details to NTL Tech Supp for an opinion?

nostra · 29-01-2005, 11:47

honest answer, no they do not have access to mailserver logs to check this on an individual basis for you

Raistlin · 29-01-2005, 11:48

Umm, I may have missed a point here somewhere but, is it really that much of a big deal?

I'm assuming that this was a one-off, isolated, incident?

If it became increasingly common I might be tempted to look into it further (maybe contacting the ISPs for their input) but if this is just one occasion which is outside of the normal pattern of things I wouldn't waste any more time on it.....

29-01-2005, 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Umm, I may have missed a point here somewhere but, is it really that much of a big deal?

I'm assuming that this was a one-off, isolated, incident?

If it became increasingly common I might be tempted to look into it further (maybe contacting the ISPs for their input) but if this is just one occasion which is outside of the normal pattern of things I wouldn't waste any more time on it.....

Raistlin,

Sorry I should have said. This is just the latest time this has happened. Delays do seem to be isolated to exchanges between us as neither I or my friend are aware of delays with other messages sent elsewhere. It's peculiar but as a lot of mails we send are important and can be time sensitive it is an issue to me.

29-01-2005, 11:57

One thing you might do, is ask BT if their servers DO report temporary error conditions (see post 19). If so, and your friend got no delivery fail errors, it would point to it being a BT problem.

29-01-2005, 13:40

Plot is rapidly thickening. My mate just forwarded thhis delivery failure message:

This report relates to your message:
> Subject: Re: Tuesday Gourmets.doc - 2 more,
> Message-ID: <001501c4f423$1194be90$a0f28751@build.msft>,
> To: "Andy LXXXXXXX" <xcxxxxx@ntlworld.com>
>
> of Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:00:18 +0000
>
> Your message was not delivered to:
> XXXXXX@ntlworld.com
> for the following reason:
> Diagnostic was Unable to transfer, Message timed out Information
> Message timed out
>

AND..

Just had a message arrive (at 12.53) that was sent yesterday at 13.22 from a completely different address. AND it arrived again at 13.01.

Return-Path: <XXXXXX@oracle.com>
Received: from aamta07-winn.mailhost.ntl.com ([212.250.162.8])
by mta05-winn.mailhost.ntl.com with ESMTP
id <20050129125259.IGDQ1139.mta05-winn.mailhost.ntl.com@aamta07-winn.mailhost.ntl.com>;
Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:52:59 +0000
Received: from agminet04.oracle.com ([141.146.126.231])
by aamta07-winn.mailhost.ntl.com with ESMTP
id <20050129125257.ZGGH3971.aamta07-winn.mailhost.ntl.com@agminet04.oracle.com>;
Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:52:57 +0000
Received: from rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (rgmgw1.us.oracle.com [138.1.191.10])
by agminet04.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j0SD4xDs017951;
Fri, 28 Jan 2005 05:04:59 -0800
Received: from rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j0SD4tuF004631;
Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:04:55 -0700
Received: from oracle.com (ppp-dc-50-104.uk.oracle.com [138.3.50.104])
by rgmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.4/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j0SD3rON032229;
Fri, 28 Jan 2005 06:03:54 -0700
Message-ID: <41FA3C85.5F48702B@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:22:13 +0000
From: Farrell Scott <xxxxxxxxx@oracle.com>
Organization: Oracle Corporation
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alan H <xxxxxxx@baesystems.com>, Andy Lxxxx <xxxxxxx@ntlworld.com>,
Biddo <xxxxxxx@ntlworld.com>,
Davey P <dxxxxxx@lineone.net>,
Fiona Edmondson <xxxxx@yahoo.co.uk>,
Jim Murray <xxxxxx@muller.co.uk>,
Lardicus <xxxxx@computerland.co.uk>,
Neil Blackburn <xxxxxxx@ntlworld.com>,
Nick Garner <xxxxxxxxx@hotmail.com>,
Steve <xxxxx@redbrickcommunications.com>,
Michaela <xxxxx@hotmail.com>
Subject: [Fwd: Big mistake!.]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="------------478469F88A7C66CE1C39981D"
X-NAS-Classification: 0
X-NAS-MessageID: 8324
X-NAS-Validation: {F96A58C9-9C77-491E-A6E0-FE373539DCCE}

danielf · 29-01-2005, 13:43

Sounds like NTL's server is playing up then.

Toto · 29-01-2005, 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Sounds like NTL's server is playing up then.

Looks like indeed

29-01-2005, 14:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Looks like indeed

Cheers, I'll report it and see what happens.

nostra · 29-01-2005, 15:08

bear in mind that there was a reported issue with the mail server yesterday at the time this email was sent....

Code:

Service All 
Posted 28 Jan 13:25 
Resolved 28 Jan 14:20 
Last Update 28 Jan 13:25 
Duration 0d 0h 54m 
   Type Email 
Location Nationwide 
Status  Closed 
Start time 28 Jan 13:25 
End Time 28 Jan 14:20 
 
 
  
  Description 
Mail
 
 
  
  Detail 
ntl broadband internet customers may currently be unable to 
send or receive email at present this is due to a technical fault. 
Our engineers are aware and are working towards a resolution. 
Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.

this could have caused the email to not have been attempted to be resent from their smtp server till today

29-01-2005, 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by nostra

bear in mind that there was a reported issue with the mail server yesterday at the time this email was sent....

Code:

Service All 
Posted 28 Jan 13:25 
Resolved 28 Jan 14:20 
Last Update 28 Jan 13:25 
Duration 0d 0h 54m 
   Type Email 
Location Nationwide 
Status  Closed 
Start time 28 Jan 13:25 
End Time 28 Jan 14:20 
 
 
  
  Description 
Mail
 
 
  
  Detail 
ntl broadband internet customers may currently be unable to 
send or receive email at present this is due to a technical fault. 
Our engineers are aware and are working towards a resolution. 
Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.

this could have caused the email to not have been attempted to be resent from their smtp server till today

'

That may well have affected the mail sent yesterday but not the ones sent on Weds that didn't arrive till Friday (no server problem listed for Weds - Of course dare I suggest there may have been an issue that wasn't posted on the Service Status page?!)

I've mailed details to Tech Support so I'll see if I get a rersponse.

Cheers again everybody

Andy