Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551
Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Fri, 14 February 2020 17:42 UTC
Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B68E12080F for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:42:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.32
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.32 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Ue6bIkyq-4O for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:42:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF58F120074 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:42:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1581702174; bh=XGrAO0gMC0ZPLuy8nV6M0SaZXs06QSRL2lAIYnofQY4=; l=1752; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=BuS5sPx06OVlY2pe6uK2D8c6PyngGA8udyIiIRidYTMw/Q/nkpzkLG7c1lxA7jJBE KKTRDpmtdkIDZbFWlXi/Umy6RiD6hTebQjSMuZyhgd3gGX0nBZc8+HEK17uPRTUbQe 8c7d5lf7XFk98vCuhGt/E4bAY5kWK+RgTAoT1/8hSs5QredLCRCNOTSejahGc
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.2, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC073.000000005E46DC1E.000047D6; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:42:54 +0100
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20200211024558.C17841408245@ary.qy> <071b63b5-1c89-4b01-b903-7162acbc021b@tana.it> <A6CDD65C-61E4-4181-941D-0856234BC13D@dukhovni.org>
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Message-ID: <260aaf07-a713-711d-e435-143efb1e9626@tana.it>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:42:54 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <A6CDD65C-61E4-4181-941D-0856234BC13D@dukhovni.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/243R9_SWQpMsMcxXZGLf0hBYKAw>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 17:43:00 -0000
On Fri 14/Feb/2020 16:32:52 +0100 Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > Postfix supports a "relocated_maps" feature, which aims to refer the > bounce recipient to a more appropriate address: > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#relocated_maps > > When a RCPT TO hits a listed address it looks like the response will be: > > 550 5.1.6 User has moved to <lookup result> That would look like a perfect 551 candidate, wouldn't it? > The 5.1.6 is determined in the mailer triple resolution code, which is > is SMTP independent, and 3-digit SMTP reply code is determined in the > SMTP engine, which maps replies with 550 for all addresses that > resolve to the error channel. > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3463#section-3.2 > > X.1.6 Destination mailbox has moved, No forwarding address I'm not familiar with extended status codes, but "No forwarding address" seems to mean that there is no <lookup result>. Curiously, looking in the IANA page: https://www.iana.org/assignments/smtp-enhanced-status-codes/smtp-enhanced-status-codes.xhtml One can find other uses of 251 and 551, not related to forwarding for address correction. OTOH, no extended status code provides for address correction. Is that the reason why Postfix relocated maps reply 550 rather than 551, perhaps? > But the result is correct, Postfix is not returning a machine-readable > 551 referral, it is returning a human readable[1] 550 reject. > > [1] By humans who can read and understand a short English phrase. I'm sure most people on this list can read NDN. However, generic users who have no idea of the SMTP dialogue find them difficult to grasp, especially backscatter. Maybe we're not so human, after all... Best Ale --
- [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 John R Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 John R. Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 George Schlossnagle
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 John Levine
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Sebastian Hagedorn
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Jeremy Harris
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP status codes 251 and 551 Alessandro Vesely