View Single Post
Old 10th February 2009, 21:54
wanabewired wanabewired is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Originally Posted by till View Post
Is your server located in a a datacenter or do you host it on a dynamic IP address?

I'm having this same problem after moving the virtual domains onto another identical etch set up as described in the howto but on another server on a different IP.

Most addresses have moved over okay but a couple of addresses are having UBE problems when they send. Is this a local configuration which is causing the problem?

One user uses microsoft outlook express and the other uses microsoft outlook 2003. Not sure if this has any impact but I thought I'd add it in.

Is there anything reported in the below code which might be a symptom of my mis-configuring anything in the howto?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [])
        by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D9E15199
        for <>; Wed,  4 Feb 2009 14:44:32 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Considered UNSOLICITED BULK EMAIL, apparently from you
Message-ID: <>
From: "Content-filter at" <>
To: <>
Date: Wed,  4 Feb 2009 14:44:32 +0000 (GMT)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

A message from <> to:

was considered unsolicited bulk e-mail (UBE).

Our internal reference code for your message is 15655-02/idKKN469WFto

The message carried your return address, so it was either a genuine mail
from you, or a sender address was faked and your e-mail address abused
by third party, in which case we apologize for undesired notification.

We do try to minimize backscatter for more prominent cases of UBE and
for infected mail, but for less obvious cases of UBE some balance
between losing genuine mail and sending undesired backscatter is sought,
and there can be some collateral damage on both sides.

First upstream SMTP client IP address: [] unknown
According to a 'Received:' trace, the message originated at:
  [], ParkwoodPC (unknown [])

Return-Path: <>
Subject: test

Delivery of the email was stopped!

Content-Type: message/delivery-status; name="dsn_status"
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="dsn_status"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Delivery error report

Reporting-MTA: dns;
Received-From-MTA: smtp; ([])
Arrival-Date: Wed,  4 Feb 2009 14:44:29 +0000 (GMT)

Original-Recipient: rfc822;
Final-Recipient: rfc822;
Action: failed
Status: 5.7.1
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554 5.7.1 Rejected, id=15655-02 - SPAM
Last-Attempt-Date: Wed,  4 Feb 2009 14:44:32 +0000 (GMT)

Content-Type: text/rfc822-headers; name="header"
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="header"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Message headers

Return-Path: <>
Received: from ParkwoodPC (unknown [])
        by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E7B150F0
        for <>; Wed,  4 Feb 2009 14:44:29 +0000 (GMT)
Return-Receipt-To: "Senders Name" <>
From: "Senders Name" <>
To: <>
Subject: test
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 14:44:21 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcmG1xB5HDi1RrI/QS+DebUcG1cRwA==
Content-Language: en-gb

Reply With Quote