Internet mail transmission rejects
John Balster
I'm having difficulty sending mail using either
Outlook97 or Outlook98 in conjunction with
Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5.
Mail reception works fine and mail to other users
on the same server work. It's only outgoing mail
to other systems I'm having problems with. Also,
sending with Outlook Express works too but I don't
believe it routes mail through Exchange.
I have the mail address jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu
on another system. When I try sending mail to it
using either Outlook98 on my NT system or Outlook97
on my Mac, with WindowsNT Server system with
Exchange 5.5, the message comes back with the error:
---------------------------------------------------
A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients.
The
following address(es) failed:
IMCEASMTP-john+40eng...@mail.engr.ucsb.edu:
unknown local-part "c" in domain "mail.engr.ucsb.edu"
---------------------------------------------------
The change from engineering.ucsb.edu to
mail.engr.ucsb.edu is expected.
I've been all through the configuration pages for
Outlook and Exchange Server many times and haven't
found anything that can explain why the account
name section is being changed from "john" to
"IMCEASMTP-john+40engineering+2Eucsb+2Eedu".
I'd guess it to be some type of encapsulation that's
inappropriate for SMTP. Question is how do you
get it to send without the encapsulation if this
is what's happening?
If anyone can shed some light on this problem I'd
appreciate it. I've been chasing after it for
several weeks now.
John Balster
<jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu>
Rich Matheisen
John Balster <jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu> wrote:
[ snip ]
>I have the mail address jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu
>on another system. When I try sending mail to it
>using either Outlook98 on my NT system or Outlook97
>on my Mac, with WindowsNT Server system with
>Exchange 5.5, the message comes back with the error:
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients.
>The
>following address(es) failed:
>IMCEASMTP-john+40eng...@mail.engr.ucsb.edu:
>unknown local-part "c" in domain "mail.engr.ucsb.edu"
>---------------------------------------------------
>
>The change from engineering.ucsb.edu to
>mail.engr.ucsb.edu is expected.
>
>I've been all through the configuration pages for
>Outlook and Exchange Server many times and haven't
>found anything that can explain why the account
>name section is being changed from "john" to
>"IMCEASMTP-john+40engineering+2Eucsb+2Eedu".
Tell me about the contents of the IMS "Address Space" tab. Select it
and click the "Edit..." button. Tell me the contents of the "General"
and "Routing Address" tabs.
If there's anything on the "Routing Address" tab, clear the edit boxes
(they should be empty), recalculate the routing on the server's
Message Transfer Agent and the Site Addressing object (use the
"Routing" tab). Then try resending the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Matheisen Wang Laboratories
Microsoft Certified System Engineer Tewksbury, MA USA
mailto:richard....@wang.com http://www.wang.com
John Balster
I don't remember what I did Thursday (don't ya love 3 day weekends?)
but now out going mail was vanishing rather than being returned with
the error I previously asked about.
In response to Rich Matheisen's question regarding the IMS
"Address Space" tab, I know I didn't make any changes there.
Under "General" there is:
Email Domain *
Cost 1
Under "Routing" there is:
Type SMTP
Address smtp.engr.ucsb.edu
A response from "Identity Withheld" may be the key to my problem.
He indicated "the IMS doesn't have an x.400 address". When I read
the Exchange manuals I didn't find X.400 mentioned in the IMS
section and the X.400 section sounded like it was only needed if
you have multiple Exchange servers. I tried adding a MTA stack
and setting up X.400 but now mail is bounding with a different
message:
-----------------------------------------------
The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
'jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu' on 7/7/98 1:36:00 PM
Unable to deliver the message due to a recipient problem
MSEXCH:MSExchangeIS:CE:BONITA
-----------------------------------------------
I'm trying to configure the system send from a single Exchange
server to a UNIX based mail server for non local addresses.
John
====================================================
Rich Matheisen wrote:
====================================================
Identity Withheld wrote:
> One of two things:
>
> Your administrator for the IMS doesn't have an x.400 address
> or
> you created a recipient in your PAB as type:general instead of
> type:smtp
>
> The latter is more likely
> ================================
> My Identity is Withheld to avoid
> conflict of interest.
> ================================
--
+--------------------------------+----------------------------+
| John Balster | jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu |
| University of California | |
| Chemical Engineering Dept | (805) 893-3686 |
| Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5080 | (805) 893-4731 (FAX) |
+--------------------------------+----------------------------+
Rich Matheisen
>In response to Rich Matheisen's question regarding the IMS
>"Address Space" tab, I know I didn't make any changes there.
>Under "General" there is:
> Email Domain *
> Cost 1
This is fine, except I don't see the value of "Type". I'll assume it's
SMTP.
>Under "Routing" there is:
> Type SMTP
> Address smtp.engr.ucsb.edu
REMOVE this information from the "Routing Address" tab on the Address
Space property. It should be empty unless you're sending the messages
to another Exchange server that understands the Encapsulated address.
What was your intention when you added this to the "Routing Address"
tab on this property page? Do you want all SMTP mail delivered to
<smtp.engr.ucsb.edu>? If so then put that address on the IMS
"Connections" tab in the edit box under the "Forward all messages to
host" radio button (and select that radio button, too).
>
>A response from "Identity Withheld" may be the key to my problem.
>He indicated "the IMS doesn't have an x.400 address". When I read
>the Exchange manuals I didn't find X.400 mentioned in the IMS
>section and the X.400 section sounded like it was only needed if
>you have multiple Exchange servers.
Nope. X.400 addresses are required by almost everything in Exchange.
Create an X.400 address for the site by using the Site Addressing
object's "Site Addressing" tab. The values you use should be:
c=US;a= ;p=<organization-name>;o=<site-name>;
The value after the "a=" is a space. And don't forget the trailing
semi-colon. When you finish, agree to have the system alter the
addresses.
>I tried adding a MTA stack
>and setting up X.400 but now mail is bounding with a different
>message:
>-----------------------------------------------
>The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
>
> 'jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu' on 7/7/98 1:36:00 PM
> Unable to deliver the message due to a recipient problem
> MSEXCH:MSExchangeIS:CE:BONITA
>-----------------------------------------------
This is because one or more objects in your directory lack a X.400
address. It may be your mailbox, it may be the IMS administrator's
mailbox. When you get X.400 addresses on everything this should
disappear. And unless you have a need for it you can remove the MTA
transport stack.
>I'm trying to configure the system send from a single Exchange
>server to a UNIX based mail server for non local addresses.
When you finish making these modifications it should work just fine.
John Balster
> John Balster <jo...@engineering.ucsb.edu> wrote:
>
> >In response to Rich Matheisen's question regarding the IMS
> >"Address Space" tab, ......
> >Under "Routing" there is:
> > Type SMTP
> > Address smtp.engr.ucsb.edu
>
> REMOVE this information from the "Routing Address" tab on the Address
> Space property. It should be empty unless you're sending the messages
> to another Exchange server that understands the Encapsulated address.
THANK YOU!
This fixed the mail sending problem I was experiencing. The problem was
driving me crazy.
I still have some fine tuning to do but this solves a major stumbling
block.
John