Franck Martin <Franck@sopac.org> writes: > Can someone clarify the following? Sure. The person with whom you're corresponding hasn't read the standards that they're appealing to. > From: SYSTEM@usp.ac.fj [mailto:SYSTEM@usp.ac.fj] > Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2002 3:32 > To: Franck Martin > Cc: SYSTEM@usp.ac.fj > Subject: Re: FW: Postfix SMTP server: errors from > maya.usp.ac.fj[144.120.8.5] > Hi Frank, > Well it all depends where the 552 code is issued and from my > understanding this is somewhat of a bug in the original RFC 821 > specifictaion. > Sometimes 552 code means its a temporary failure and other time its a > permanent failure. Wrong. 5yz Permanent Negative Completion reply The command was not accepted and the requested action did not occur. The SMTP client is discouraged from repeating the exact request (in the same sequence). Even some "permanent" error conditions can be corrected, so the human user may want to direct the SMTP client to reinitiate the command sequence by direct action at some point in the future (e.g., after the spelling has been changed, or the user has altered the account status). If it were a temporary code, it would be 4xx. > As you can see below, the "250 Ok" is issue and that is the reason the > mail is requeued after the it has failed because 552 code was issue > later on. An earlier command succeeded and a later command failed. That doesn't mean the message should be retried as if it were a temporary error. This sentence basically makes no sense. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>