[ale] Getting mail through to Verizon

[J. D. Pearson]

Hey thanks for the response.

The receiver is not a cell phone number in this case but that
is a good thought. Thanks Jim for the response about greylisting.

If they were greylisting us the mail should eventually get through
shouldn't it?

Thanks again,

J. D.


Jeff Lightner wrote:
> Is the receiver a cell phone?  (That is: are you trying to send a text
> message via email?)
>
> A lot of the phone vendors are blocking mail if they can't verify the
> sender to prevent spam.   We had an issue here with Cingular because we
> do this.   If you run into this you can either create a user with no
> mail box so that on the check it finds the user or you can have the user
> go to whatever site they have for administration of the cell phone as it
> usually allows them to specify which senders they'll accept.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of J.
> D. Pearson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:05 PM
> To: ale at ale.org
> Subject: [ale] Getting mail through to Verizon
>
> Hey all,
>
>      I have a user we are trying to email and as of today
> we are no longer able to reach. If I send from a gmail
> account it works fine but not our actual domain.
> Upon looking at the mail logs
> on the server here is what I see:
>
> Feb 13 13:58:57 Mailsvr sendmail[19259]: l1BGBuGW021934: 
> to=<receiversaddress at verizon.net>, ctladdr=<sender at domain.com> 
> (563/563), delay=2+02:47:01, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=esmtp, pri=4894952,
>
> relay=relay.verizon.net., dsn=4.0.0, stat=Deferred: Bad file descriptor
>
> and
>
> Feb 13 13:58:57 Mailsrv sendmail[19259]: l1BGA6qU021899: 
> to=<receiversaddress at verizon.net>, ctladdr=<sender at domain.com> 
> (563/563), delay=2+02:48:50, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=esmtp, pri=4890772,
>
> relay=relay.verizon.net., dsn=4.0.0, stat=Deferred: 450 Requested mail 
> action not taken-Try later:sv23pub.verizon.net
>
> It appears to possibly be an issue with Verizon, and we have
> restarted named to ensure there are no stale records hanging.
> Any thoughts on this one?
>
> Thanks a million,
>
>