bounce 550 message- invalid recipient

POP Peeper: Tech support, suggestions, discussion, etc.
Post Reply
hime3
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:21 am

bounce 550 message- invalid recipient

Post by hime3 »

Can PP produce a bounce 550 message- invalid recipient to sender?
This is a recurring problem my IP Cox Communications has researched.
Cox did not initiate the bounce 550 message- invalid recipient.
If PP generates this bounce 550 message- invalid recipient, how can I prevent it recurring?
I have never manually initiated any PP filtering.
thanks
hime
User avatar
mjs
Moderator
Posts: 2216
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: bounce 550 message- invalid recipient

Post by mjs »

The "550 invalid address" error message is generated by the Email Server and indicates that the email address the message was sent to does not exist. In general this means that the receiving server does not have an account registered to that email address. This can be due to a number of things i.e. there was a recent change in DNS records or the email address was deleted.

Is this a recurring problem for one specific Email account?

I'm assuming this does not occur for all Email accounts.

Please provide us with more specific details regarding this issue.

Note: Pete (spc3rd) has posted an announcement topic regarding COX Email platform upgrade status & issues [UPDATE: 05/24/17], so if your problem is impacting all accounts in a persistent manner then I'm inclined to think that the issue is due to these changes and will likely be resolved at some point by Cox Communications.
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers
User avatar
Jeff
Admin / Developer
Posts: 9234
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2001 9:46 pm

Re: bounce 550 message- invalid recipient

Post by Jeff »

If you're asking if POP Peeper sends fake bounces to pretend that your email address does not exist, then the answer is absolutely not.

Not only is this generally illegal (forging headers to pretend to be from a system/admin account) but it is ineffective 99% of the time and a nuisance if the bounces go back to an innocent victim.
Post Reply