can anybody match these smtp response codes to these labels

i'm trying to duplicate a report generated by another compnay i know nothing
of. they give their client a email audit log on a daily basis with the
following response info:

Sent 29, Errors 1, Cancelled 0
Blocked 0, Suppressed 0

i've looked throught the smtp logs and there's nothing in there that
directly matches these labels, so it must be based on the 250, 551, etc stmp
response codes. problem is, how do i match these codes to the labels used
here?

anybody recognize these labels and know how to map them to smtp response
codes?

tks

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Dica wrote:

> i'm trying to duplicate a report generated by another compnay i know nothing
> of. they give their client a email audit log on a daily basis with the
> following response info:
>
> Sent 29, Errors 1, Cancelled 0
> Blocked 0, Suppressed 0
>
> i've looked throught the smtp logs and there's nothing in there that
> directly matches these labels, so it must be based on the 250, 551, etc stmp
> response codes. problem is, how do i match these codes to the labels used
> here?
>
> anybody recognize these labels and know how to map them to smtp response
> codes?

Will they all *have* response codes? "Cancelled" could be due to a lost
connection before the entire message is sent rather than due to a response
code. I'm also not sure what the distinction is between "Blocked" and
"Suppressed" in this context.

These RFCs may be relevant:

rfc821 - Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP)
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc821.html
rfc1846 - SMTP 521 Reply Code
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1846.html
rfc1891 - SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status Notification
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1891.html
rfc1893 - Enhanced Mail System Status Codes
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1893.html
rfc1894 - An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status Notification
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1894.html
rfc2821 - Simple Mail Transfer Protocol.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2821.html

Links to selected RFCs and lookup and download links for *all* of them
(be the first on your block to collect the whole set) (plus FAQs) are on
my Computer Tips page:
http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~af380/Tips.html#Tip018

--
``Why don't you find a more appropiate newsgroup to post this tripe into?
This is a meeting place for a totally differnt kind of "vision impairment".
Catch my drift?'' -- "jim" in alt.disability.blind.social regarding an
off-topic religious/political post, March 28, 2005

"Norman L. DeForest" <af380@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.1051020035822.22367C-100000@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca...
>
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Dica wrote:
>
> > i'm trying to duplicate a report generated by another compnay i know
nothing
> > of. they give their client a email audit log on a daily basis with the
> > following response info:
> >
> > Sent 29, Errors 1, Cancelled 0
> > Blocked 0, Suppressed 0
> >
> > i've looked throught the smtp logs and there's nothing in there that
> > directly matches these labels, so it must be based on the 250, 551, etc
stmp
> > response codes. problem is, how do i match these codes to the labels
used
> > here?
> >
> > anybody recognize these labels and know how to map them to smtp response
> > codes?
>
> Will they all *have* response codes? "Cancelled" could be due to a lost
> connection before the entire message is sent rather than due to a response
> code. I'm also not sure what the distinction is between "Blocked" and
> "Suppressed" in this context.

yes, that's just the problem. i suspect these labels like "Blocked" and
"Suppressed" have been defined by the original coders (the ones i know
nothing about and have no contact info for). that or these labels are part
of some commercially available smtp log processing application. either way,
the project manager wants me to process the logs and generate the same info,
which is a little hard to do when i have no idea what "Suppressed" means.

tks anyhow.

>
> These RFCs may be relevant:
>
> rfc821 - Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP)
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc821.html
> rfc1846 - SMTP 521 Reply Code
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1846.html
> rfc1891 - SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status Notification
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1891.html
> rfc1893 - Enhanced Mail System Status Codes
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1893.html
> rfc1894 - An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status Notification
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1894.html
> rfc2821 - Simple Mail Transfer Protocol.
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2821.html
>
> Links to selected RFCs and lookup and download links for *all* of them
> (be the first on your block to collect the whole set) (plus FAQs) are on
> my Computer Tips page:
> http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~af380/Tips.html#Tip018
>
> --
> ``Why don't you find a more appropiate newsgroup to post this tripe into?
> This is a meeting place for a totally differnt kind of "vision
impairment".
> Catch my drift?'' -- "jim" in alt.disability.blind.social regarding an
> off-topic religious/political post, March 28, 2005
>

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Dica wrote:

> "Norman L. DeForest" <af380@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
> news:Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.1051020035822.22367C-100000@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca...
> >
> > On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Dica wrote:
> >
> > > i'm trying to duplicate a report generated by another compnay i know nothing
> > > of. they give their client a email audit log on a daily basis with the
> > > following response info:
> > >
> > > Sent 29, Errors 1, Cancelled 0
> > > Blocked 0, Suppressed 0
> > >
> > > i've looked throught the smtp logs and there's nothing in there that
> > > directly matches these labels, so it must be based on the 250, 551, etc stmp
> > > response codes. problem is, how do i match these codes to the labels used
> > > here?
> > >
> > > anybody recognize these labels and know how to map them to smtp response
> > > codes?
> >
> > Will they all *have* response codes? "Cancelled" could be due to a lost
> > connection before the entire message is sent rather than due to a response
> > code. I'm also not sure what the distinction is between "Blocked" and
> > "Suppressed" in this context.
>
> yes, that's just the problem. i suspect these labels like "Blocked" and
> "Suppressed" have been defined by the original coders (the ones i know
> nothing about and have no contact info for). that or these labels are part
> of some commercially available smtp log processing application. either way,
> the project manager wants me to process the logs and generate the same info,
> which is a little hard to do when i have no idea what "Suppressed" means.
>
> tks anyhow.
[snip]

Well, a Google search for:
"smtp logs" Sent Errors Cancelled Blocked Suppressed
got me a few hits including some LISTSERV manuals:

(Large, about two and a half megabytes)
"Site Manager's Operations Manual for LISTSERV Version 14.4"
http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8e/sitemgr/sitemgr.html

(Not so large, about half a megabyte)
"Site Manager's Operations Manual for LISTSERV Version 1.8c"
http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/sitemgr/sitemgr.html

I can't find "Blocked" in either of them but they refer to "Suppressed" as
removing duplicate messages before sending them to the same address if a
message is sent to more than one list (a "super-list") and a given address
is subscribed to two or more of the lists in the super-list. That
recipient will only get one copy of the message instead of one copy for
each list he/she is subscribed to.

Whether this is the same usage as used by the authors of the reports
you are trying to duplicate is something only they know.

Perhaps you should ask the project manager to tell you *his*
interpretation of those terms. After all, if *his* idea of the meaning
doesn't correspond with that of the original report authors then the
reports he has been receiving were actually misleading him. If he has no
idea how to interpret those terms, then the original reports were useless
to him.

--
Norman De Forest http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~af380/Profile.html
"> Is there anything Spamazon DOESN'T sell?
Clues. The market's too small to justify the effort."
-- Stuart Lamble in the scary devil monastery, Fri, 13 May 2005

"Norman L. DeForest" <af380@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.1051020113209.5713A-100000@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca...
>
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Dica wrote:
>
> > "Norman L. DeForest" <af380@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
> >
news:Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.1051020035822.22367C-100000@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca...
> > >
> > > On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Dica wrote:
> > >
> > > > i'm trying to duplicate a report generated by another compnay i know
nothing
> > > > of. they give their client a email audit log on a daily basis with
the
> > > > following response info:
> > > >
> > > > Sent 29, Errors 1, Cancelled 0
> > > > Blocked 0, Suppressed 0
> > > >
> > > > i've looked throught the smtp logs and there's nothing in there that
> > > > directly matches these labels, so it must be based on the 250, 551,
etc stmp
> > > > response codes. problem is, how do i match these codes to the labels
used
> > > > here?
> > > >
> > > > anybody recognize these labels and know how to map them to smtp
response
> > > > codes?
> > >
> > > Will they all *have* response codes? "Cancelled" could be due to a
lost
> > > connection before the entire message is sent rather than due to a
response
> > > code. I'm also not sure what the distinction is between "Blocked" and
> > > "Suppressed" in this context.
> >
> > yes, that's just the problem. i suspect these labels like "Blocked" and
> > "Suppressed" have been defined by the original coders (the ones i know
> > nothing about and have no contact info for). that or these labels are
part
> > of some commercially available smtp log processing application. either
way,
> > the project manager wants me to process the logs and generate the same
info,
> > which is a little hard to do when i have no idea what "Suppressed"
means.
> >
> > tks anyhow.
> [snip]
>
> Well, a Google search for:
> "smtp logs" Sent Errors Cancelled Blocked Suppressed
> got me a few hits including some LISTSERV manuals:

ah, crap. i swear i did try googling almost that exact search phrase
yesterday, but didn't get anything that looked as close as what you've
turned up for me. many tks.

poking through some of the manual pages does seem to indicate that this is
where these labels are coming from.

so, if it is a listManager generating these lables/reports, and i need to
give the client a similar report, then that means i need to find a way to
either have the listManager parse my smtp logs or call the listManager
directly from within my ASP pages when sending email. does anybody have any
experience with this? know if i can call a listManager app from within ASP
when sending email or have it parse my logs?



>
> (Large, about two and a half megabytes)
> "Site Manager's Operations Manual for LISTSERV Version 14.4"
> http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8e/sitemgr/sitemgr.html
>
> (Not so large, about half a megabyte)
> "Site Manager's Operations Manual for LISTSERV Version 1.8c"
> http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/sitemgr/sitemgr.html
>
> I can't find "Blocked" in either of them but they refer to "Suppressed" as
> removing duplicate messages before sending them to the same address if a
> message is sent to more than one list (a "super-list") and a given address
> is subscribed to two or more of the lists in the super-list. That
> recipient will only get one copy of the message instead of one copy for
> each list he/she is subscribed to.
>
> Whether this is the same usage as used by the authors of the reports
> you are trying to duplicate is something only they know.
>
> Perhaps you should ask the project manager to tell you *his*
> interpretation of those terms. After all, if *his* idea of the meaning
> doesn't correspond with that of the original report authors then the
> reports he has been receiving were actually misleading him. If he has no
> idea how to interpret those terms, then the original reports were useless
> to him.
>
> --
> Norman De Forest http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~af380/Profile.html
> "> Is there anything Spamazon DOESN'T sell?
> Clues. The market's too small to justify the effort."
> -- Stuart Lamble in the scary devil monastery, Fri, 13 May 2005
>