I've looked through the log files section of the 1.8d manual and have been
unable to find a description of why a certain problem we are having here keeps
occurring....

It's unfortunately a longish explanation:

One of our list owners here received a Daily Error Monitoring Report which
stated that the enclosed message had been identified as a possible delivery
error notice for the following reason: "Message/Delivery-Status" body part
found in the message body.

Its probably much easier to include the text here rather than re-type out
header information...

------------------------ Message in error (164 lines) -------------------------
Received: from ourserver (ourserver [###.###.###.###])
        by our server (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA09969
        for <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 24 May 1999 17:44:58 +1000 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost)
        by our server (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with internal id RAA09830;
        Mon, 24 May 1999 17:44:56 +1000 (EST)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 17:44:56 +1000 (EST)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON>
Message-Id: <199905240744.RAA09830@our server>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
        boundary="RAA09830.927531896/our server"
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure)
X-Report-Type: Nondelivery; boundary="> Error description:"

An error was detected while processing the enclosed message. A list of
the affected recipients follows. This list is in a special format that
allows software like LISTSERV to automatically take action on incorrect
addresses.

--> Error description:
Error-For:  sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Error-Code: 3
Error-Text: User unknown

Error-End:  One error reported.


This is a MIME-encapsulated message

--RAA09830.927531896/our server

The original message was received at Mon, 24 May 1999 17:39:36 +1000 (EST)
from vogon [148.145.12.1]

   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<problem@address>

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
someone@smtpgwy,<[log in to unmask]>,
<another.one@SMTPG W Y . A G R IC.NSW.GOV....AGRIC.NSW.GOV.AU>,
<[log in to unmask]>,
<[log in to unmask]>
>> RCPT To:<problem address> <<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of
allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
550 <problem address>... User unknown
<--RAA09830.927531896/ourserver
Content-Type: message/delivery-status

Reporting-MTA: dns; our.agric.domain
Received-From-MTA: DNS; mailserver
Arrival-Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 17:39:36 +1000 (EST)

Final-Recipient: RFC822; problem.address@ again
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.mcmedia.com.au
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 17:44:41 +1000 (EST)

The original message did not contain any header information or message status
in it when it was posted to the list. The two replies that were made to it
ended up generating these headers and error status in the messages and Listserv
stopped them with the first error message about Mesage status being in the
message body.
--------------------------------------------------------------

found the mailserver name for the problem address... logged into their SMTP
port and sent some test mail to both their postmaster and to the problem
address, both went through fine, also got the list owner to contact the problem
address with test mail and it was received and returned fine.... so as far as I
can tell this may have been just a temporary hiccup at their end for this
particular user.... also checked their MX records and there is a entry for the
problem domain to route mail to there.....

what I dont get is that it seems that the error status was attached to the
reply to the original message in both cases....... and Listserv has not
delivered either reply because of the error message status it attached to the
replies..

is this usual practice?...... or am I missing something here?. and why would it
stop subscribers unrelated in any way to the problem address from being able to
post their replies to the original message to the list...

Any ideas....... anyone........ ?

Debra