Internal Bounces

[dreyerretief]

I see that the following bounce is getting classified as an internal bounce:

smtp; 550 rejected because recipient verify failed -- user not found
smtp; 550 rejected because recipient verify failed -- user not found


Should this not be a hard bounce as the user is not found? I checked the email to another recipient to the same domain delivered so it looks like it invalid mailbox...

Same with this one that is a full mailbox?

INTERNAL smtp; 550 Mailbox is full / Blocks limit exceeded / Inode limit exceeded

Thanks in advance.

 

[twisted1919]

smtp; 550 rejected because recipient verify failed -- user not found
smtp; 550 rejected because recipient verify failed -- user not found

These are the rules it hit, in this order:

Array
(
    [0] => Array
        (
            [/smtp;(\s*)?(554|550) (Denied|Rejected)/i] => internal
        )

    [1] => Array
        (
            [/(?:alias|account|recipient|address|email|mailbox|user).*NOT FOUND/i] => hard
        )

    [2] => Array
        (
            [/user not found/i] => hard
        )

)

So it seems we hit the internal rule before the hard rule. We could remove that rule and it would fall in to the hard bounces rule. But I don't know if that's the right behavior tbh.

INTERNAL smtp; 550 Mailbox is full / Blocks limit exceeded / Inode limit exceeded

This is an internal bounce, and it is correct to be like so.

 

[dreyerretief]

These are the rules it hit, in this order:

Array
(
    [0] => Array
        (
            [/smtp;(\s*)?(554|550) (Denied|Rejected)/i] => internal
        )

    [1] => Array
        (
            [/(?:alias|account|recipient|address|email|mailbox|user).*NOT FOUND/i] => hard
        )

    [2] => Array
        (
            [/user not found/i] => hard
        )

)

So it seems we hit the internal rule before the hard rule. We could remove that rule and it would fall in to the hard bounces rule. But I don't know if that's the right behavior tbh.


This is an internal bounce, and it is correct to be like so.

Hi,

If I just switch the array around it should solve the issue maybe process the error codes last?

 

[dreyerretief]

Hi,

If I just switch the array around it should solve the issue maybe process the error codes last?

I mean you will need to do it in your code base otherwise my change won't survive is there any issue with doing that?

 

[twisted1919]

It's okay, I have disabled the rule because it seems to be too broad. So next release will automatically handle this for you.