Incoming email being rejected...

[gmlack]

---

@delwynh wrote:

@gmlack  I don't think the problem you mention with the MX records for dsl.pipex.com resolving to CNAME instead of A records is anything to do with the problem this thread is about.  The misconfiguration will increase DNS traffic by forcing an extra lookup, but clearly the sending domains whose mails are being rejected are able to connect to the TalkTalk server or they wouldn't be receiving bounce messages back.

---

There are multiple errors. This refers to one problem.

The error message is "No valid MX record found".

[delwynh]

---

@gmlack wrote:

---

There are multiple errors. This refers to one problem.

The error message is "No valid MX record found".

---

It does indeed appear there are multiple problems affecting the pipex mail service, but this thread was originally about the 503 error messages being received by 1and1 senders, a problem both teapot and myself are experiencing.  Maybe best to start a new thread to discuss other issues, just to keep the confusion levels down?  I know I'm slightly guilty myself by throwing in a mention of the intermittent TT512 problem that is being discussed on other threads.

[delwynh]

@gmlack since I posted my reply to you I see about half a dozen messages from you which were in spam have appeared.  Looks like you have good evidence that your issue is caused by the MX record misconfiguration.

TalkTalk should definitely sort this out - it is an obvious problem with a trivial fix, and it would certainly be good to eliminate it as a factor in any other issues.

@OCE_Ady Has a ticket been raised for this particular issue?

[teapot]

Hello Ady, another Wednesday with no news. It would be very helpful if we could have an update indicating current progress, if any. Not knowing is really a problem. If "chasing this daily is still the reply", then there is something wrong with the reporting structure inside TalkTalk. My time in customer service was always to keep the customer informed, no matter how difficult that information is to relay.

[OCE_Ady]

Hi Teapot, I know you don't want another apology from me about the delay in getting this sorted for you. I've sent a more urgent chaser for you as there's been no update on the ticket. This is way overdue and I'm unhappy at the lack of action taken when you and then I have chased this up so often. 

Ady

[gmlack]

---

@delwynh wrote:

@gmlack since I posted my reply to you I see about half a dozen messages from you which were in spam have appeared.  Looks like you have good evidence that your issue is caused by the MX record misconfiguration.

TalkTalk should definitely sort this out - it is an obvious problem with a trivial fix, and it would certainly be good to eliminate it as a factor in any other issues.

@OCE_Ady Has a ticket been raised for this particular issue?

---

If TalkTalk is looking for errors in  their logging system(?) for this they won't find any, as the intended sender never contacts TalkTalk (there being no valid entry to reach them by).

It's been over 3 working days since the evidence and information was available here and, so far, "Nothing happens".

Fixing it should take seconds to apply then a few hours to spread around the Internet (internally the records are valid for 5mns, but externally they seem to be valid for up to 2 hours).

[OCE_Ady]

Yes I've raised the ticket for the incoming mail issue for which you provided the details. If you've got another please let me know and if necessary I'll raise that too.

Ady

[delwynh]

---

@OCE_Ady wrote:

Yes I've raised the ticket for the incoming mail issue for which you provided the details. If you've got another please let me know and if necessary I'll raise that too.

@OCE_Ady I was referring to the issue @gmlack has raised in this thread concerning the incorrect MX server configuration for dsl.pipex.com.  Has a ticket been raised for that?

Is there any update at all on the tickets you've raised concerning the various pipex email delivery problems?  It is now well over a week since you told us the problems with the ticketing system had been sorted out, so presumably the email team are aware of the issues now?

[teapot]

Hi Ady, the error has now been in the system for a month, not something TalkTalk would be proud to have hanging around.

From my point of view, TalkTalk are unable to resolve what I see as a fairly basic error in the system, having seen other web sites with the same error and their possible error solutions.
What would happen within TalkTalk if they had a system down for a month?

When will TalkTalk fix the error?

Are TalkTalk working on the theory, the new email system will resolve the problem, so it doesn't matter about the old Pipex stuff?

Teapot

[OCE_Ady]

Hi Teapot, I've now been asked for the sender address as well as the date/timestamp the mail was sent so we can locate this example in our logs. I have already added the .fr address in the ticket so just the date and timestamp stuff will do please.

Ady

[gmlack]

---

@OCE_Ady wrote:

Hi Teapot, I've now been asked for the sender address as well as the date/timestamp the mail was sent so we can locate this example in our logs. I have already added the .fr address in the ticket so just the date and timestamp stuff will do please.

Ady

---

I've already sent you the complete message and headers from two bounces (and can send them again, as I've still got them).

This just sounds like an excuse for, "I have no idea".

[OCE_Ady]

Hi gmlack, my last message was to teapot who is the originator of the thread. 

Ady

[gmlack]

---

@OCE_Ady wrote:

Hi gmlack, my last message was to teapot who is the originator of the thread. 

Ady

---

And mine was to anyone who cares, wondering how many examples are needed.

[teapot]

email address is ******@thejames.fr,

X-Originating-IP: [****.252.245]
X-Spam: 0
X-OAuthority: v=2.3 cv=cuTlbGwi c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=ApNL4bMDVYA/9aOwXY5Guw==:117
a=ApNL4bMDVYA/9aOwXY5Guw==:17 a=DAwyPP_o2Byb1YXLmDAA:9
a=1FzqG5ILVBdwvA7Y_sMA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8
a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10
From: "*****" <***@dsl.pipex.com>
To: "****" <*****@thejames.fr>
Subject: test
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 21:02:37 -0000
Message-ID: <001601d5e5d5$96ced5f0$c46c81d0$@dsl.pipex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_01D5E5D5.96CF2410"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdXl1ZM6fxb+JPu6QT6M928dA6lWCw==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 200217-0, 02/17/2020), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfMP1b4UF4dvGwK97yZReFeNbUK+Vn/UDpODcWI0NcDcSKrbYIGz+Yf9mXiLOijAj3xZVcakTwWwiMf7tDmZiPaoyUKtbAvXyYbphCmqmOgbQTj+u73Hm
caseuDUMdi5nJ1sX29GLYbwH25QA6L56FKUj26a57M6XivzMOqVFnirE

Reporting-MTA: dns; cmout2mk [212.74.114.24]
Received-From-MTA: dns; ****** [**.75.252.245]
Arrival-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 20:30:49 +0000

Final-recipient: rfc822; *****@thejames.fr
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable

Last-attempt-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 20:30:49 +0000

Please note the error message is now 550 etc. Error 503 was deleted some time ago, sorry.

[gmlack]

---

@teapot wrote:

From: "*****" <***@dsl.pipex.com>
To: "****" <*****@thejames.fr>
.....
Final-recipient: rfc822; *****@thejames.fr
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable

Last-attempt-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 20:30:49 +0000

---

That appears to be an outgoing message that has been rejected by the remote ISP (in France?) rather than by TalkTalk.

[teapot]

Hope this is the information required?

Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.
Subject: test submission Tues 18 feb 2020
Sent: 18/02/2020 08:47
The following recipient(s) cannot be reached:
'*****@dsl.pipex.com' on 18/02/2020 08:47
503 Bad sequence of commands

Teapot

[Anonymous]

I have had exactly the same problems as you have regarding rejected emails, over the years (we too started with Pipex in the 1980's). In January, both my bank and credit card provider refused to use email to contact us as the emails were continually being rejected and have now reverted back to paper contact.  TalkTalk blamed 1&1, 1&1 blamed TalkTalk.  After 2 weeks I changed broadband provider and instantly emails started to arrive.  TalkTalk are now trying to charge me for a broken contract, when it was themselves that failed to provide a cogent service.  In this day and age of online banking, etc. we cannot do without emails for weeks at a time.  Have complained and written letters in Jan and Feb, not had a single reply from TalkTalk other than adding more money to their bills.

[annie30]

Hi we've been having problems with incoming emails on our two pipex addresses since the middle of January.  Talktalk have been no help whatsoever and I have wasted hours online chatting and on the phone with no resolution.  They keep saying they are looking into it but never get back to me.  I can't find a spam folder on their legacy website so can't find what emails are not coming through.  They keep telling me there is a settings on the site that I can access to look at the spam folder but it must be invisible because it is not there. Like others I have found my bank and credit card providers are reverting to snail mail because they are being blocked.   I am on the verge of leaving this company because after many years of being a customer I have reached the end of my patience. Is anything actually getting sorted out because I now realise that I am not an isolated incident.

[gmlack]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

I have had exactly the same problems as you have regarding rejected emails, over the years (we too started with Pipex in the 1980's). In January, both my bank and credit card provider refused to use email to contact us as the emails were continually being rejected and have now reverted back to paper contact.  TalkTalk blamed 1&1, 1&1 blamed TalkTalk.  After 2 weeks I changed broadband provider and instantly emails started to arrive.  TalkTalk are now trying to charge me for a broken contract, when it was themselves that failed to provide a cogent service.  In this day and age of online banking, etc. we cannot do without emails for weeks at a time.  Have complained and written letters in Jan and Feb, not had a single reply from TalkTalk other than adding more money to their bills.

---

Well, the MX record for dsl.pipex.com is invalid and this is affecting mails from (and to?) 1and1 accounts (and related domains, such as gmx.com/gmx.de).

This is easy for anyone to test - just query the MX record for dsl.pipex.com and you'll find it points to CNAME records, which it should not.

It's now ten days since I pointed this out here. Ten days of complete inactivity by TalkTalk support.

They should be thoroughly ashamed. This is not a service, neither is it support. It is a total lack of responsibility.

[teapot]

Hi Ady,
No reply isn't a good reply.
This error has been on going long enough, the Pipex users within this call, frustrated, angry and definately feeling that we are waiting for a solution that may never happen. A working and complete update would be useful.
Should the call/incident/error be raised to a higher level? Would Trista Harrison be able to give the users a more succinct relpy? How much more information do you need to resolve the error?
Teapot