Troubleshooting and codes

Microsoft is still in the process of rolling out new mail servers. One thing that is new about these is some new codes on their error messages. This has led to questions and speculations as to what is going on.

host outlook-com.olc.protection.outlook.com [104.47.9.33] said: 550 5.7.1 Unfortunately, messages from [10.10.01.01] weren’t sent. Please contact your Internet service provider since part of their network is on our block list (AS3150). You can also refer your provider to http://mail.live.com/mail/troubleshooting.aspx#errors.

This particular error code caused all sorts of confusion because AS#### is a way of identifying networks (autonomous system number). AS3150 identifies network space owned by NTT America and reading the error message seems to indicate that Microsoft is blocking all of NTT. They’re not.
AS means “Anti-Spam” and the numeric code is for Microsoft to troubleshoot things on their end.
Another example of one of the new error messages is:

451 4.7.500 Server busy. Please try again later from [<ip-address>]. (AS843) [<someserver>.prod.protection.outlook.com]

There appear to be a number of these codes. I’ve seen specific mention of codes like  AS3140, AS3160 and AS844.  All of these are intended for internal use at Microsoft. If you’re filling out the sender support form, absolutely include that number. I don’t know for sure that it will help speed things up, but it cannot hurt. Plus, you’ll look like you know what you’re talking about if/when you need to escalate things.
A number of senders have asked if MS will be sharing what the different codes are. I haven’t seen any answer other than “they’re for internal troubleshooting.” That doesn’t mean they won’t be listed specifically, but I expect updating the postmaster website documentation is low down the list of things to do during the transition.
In any case, I wouldn’t focus on the specific AS codes for delivery troubleshooting until and unless MS releases them to the public. Focus on the codes that are public on the Postmaster website.
In summary:

  • Hotmail / Outlook / Microsoft isn’t blocking NTT America / AS3150.
  • The new AS codes stand for AntiSpam
  • The numbers are intended for internal, not external, troubleshooting
  • Check the postmaster site for the codes intended for external troubleshooting.

Related Posts

Office365/EOP and Outlook.com/Hotmail will converge

Terry Zink posted two informative blog posts recently, the first being the change to unauthenticated mail sent over IPv6 to EOP and the second post about EOP (Office365 and Exchange Hosting) and Outlook.com/Hotmail infrastructure converging.
Exchange Online Protection (EOP) is the filtering system in place for Office 365 and hosted Exchange customers. Outlook.com/Hotmail utilized its own mail filtering system and provides SNDS/JMRP programs.  EOP is setup for redundancy, failover, provides geo-region servers to serve customers, and has supported TLS for over a decade.  Terry explains that Hotmail’s spam filtering technology is more advanced than EOP’s, but EOP’s backend platform is more advanced. The process to convert Outlook.com/Hotmail to use EOP’s filtering system started six months ago and is still a work in progress. Once completed, Outlook.com/Hotmail and Office365/EOP will share the same UX look and feel. The anti-spam technologies will be able to be shared between the two as they will share the same backend infrastructure.
Some of the challenges of merging the two systems include:

Read More

Mythbusting deliverability and engagement

Yesterday I published an article talking about an engagement webinar hosted by the EEC and DMA. I made a couple predictions about what would be said.

Read More

Email predictions for 2015

Welcome to a whole new year. It seems the changing of the year brings out people predicting what they think will happen in the coming year. It’s something I’ve indulged in a couple times over my years of blogging, but email is a generally stable technology and it’s kind of boring to predict a new interface or a minor tweak to filters. Of course, many bloggers will go way out on a limb and predict the death of email, but I think that’s been way over done.
ChangeConstant
Even major technical advancements, like authentication protocols and the rise of IPv6, are not usually sudden. They’re discussed and refined through the IETF process. While some of these changes may seem “all of a sudden” to some end users, they’re usually the result of years of work from dedicated volunteers. The internet really doesn’t do flag days.
One major change in 2014, that had significant implications for email as a whole, was a free mail provider abruptly publishing a DMARC p=reject policy. This caused a lot of issues for some small business senders and for many individual users. Mailing list maintainers are still dealing with some of the fallout, and there are ongoing discussions about how best to mitigate the problems DMARC causes non-commercial email.
Still, DMARC as a protocol has been in development for a few years. A number of large brands and commercial organizations were publishing p=reject policies. The big mail providers were implementing DMARC checking, and rejection, on their inbound mail. In fact, this rollout is one of the reasons that the publishing of p=reject was a problem. With the flip of a switch, mail that was once deliverable became undeliverable.
Looking back through any of the 2014 predictions, I don’t think anyone predicted that two major mailbox providers would implement p=reject policies, causing widespread delivery failures across the Internet. I certainly wouldn’t have predicted it, all of my discussions with people about DMARC centered around business using DMARC to protect their brand. No one mentioned ISPs using it to force their customers away from 3rd party services and discussion lists.
I think the only constant in the world of email is change, and most of the time that change isn’t that massive or sudden, 2014 and the DMARC upheaval notwithstanding.
But, still, I have some thoughts on what might happen in the coming year. Mostly more of the same as we’ve seen over the last few years. But there are a couple areas I think we’ll see some progress made.

Read More