| Title: | DEC TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS |
| Notice: | Note 2-SSB Kits, 3-FT Kits, 4-Patch Info, 7-QAR System |
| Moderator: | ucxaxp.ucx.lkg.dec.com::TIBBERT |
| Created: | Thu Nov 17 1994 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 5568 |
| Total number of notes: | 21492 |
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4821.1 | UMEJNK::JOHANSSON | Lars Johansson | Fri Oct 25 1996 08:05 | 41 | |
| 4821.2 | seems to work ok | UTRTSC::KNOPPERS | Oswald Knoppers | Fri Oct 25 1996 10:10 | 17 |
| 4821.3 | UMEJNK::JOHANSSON | Lars Johansson | Fri Oct 25 1996 11:31 | 45 | |
| 4821.4 | UMEJNK::JOHANSSON | Lars Johansson | Mon Oct 28 1996 06:32 | 5 | |
| 4821.5 | EXperimental feature I added should help | UCXAXP::ZIELONKO | Thu Nov 07 1996 09:59 | 127 | |
| 4821.6 | Thanks | UMEJNK::JOHANSSON | Lars Johansson | Thu Nov 07 1996 16:27 | 4 |
| 4821.7 | Trying to FORWARD to DELIVER protocol | STAR::BLAKE | OpenVMS Engineering | Thu Mar 06 1997 07:37 | 29 |
I have a similar problem. I have an account, call it FOO, that uses DELIVER
to process its incoming mail. So I have to have a forward on the
account as follows:
MAIL> sho forw /user=foo
FOO has mail forwarded to DELIVER%FOO
This has worked for years with VMSmail coming in over DECnet. But if I
try to send mail to FOO via SMTP, it fails. Here's the non-delivery that
comes back:
---- Transcript of session follows ----
%UCX-E-SMTP_SNDERROR, Error detected while sending mail to DELIVER%FOO
-MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user !AS
---- Recipients of this delivery ----
<[email protected]>(sent)
DELIVER%FOO (bounced)
This seems to be the same problem as was discussed in this note. But in
my case I can't use the logical to fix the problem as DELIVER% is NOT a
synonym for SMTP%.
How can I get SMTP to invoke an alternate protocol?
Colin.
| |||||
| 4821.8 | Fixed | UCXAXP::ZIELONKO | Fri Mar 07 1997 06:36 | 8 | |
Colin, In your case you're trying t forward to a non-SMTP foreign transport. The .0 function was a lack of a feature (which we aded with the foriegn transport synonyms logical). Your probelm here is a bug. It's fixed in ECO 3 for V4.1. SinceECO 4 is the current shipping ECO you should grab that one. Karol | |||||