Yesterday afternoon one of our List Owners reported receiving bounces for
all hotmail.com e-mail addresses with a 550 error and explanation that the
mail was considered SPAM.  Unfortunately, he deleted the error (and all
his hotmail.com subscribers), so I didn't see it.  He also reported the
following:

------
as a side note, on another list i'm on, someone who was a hotmail user
contacted them and apparently they're having some problems with mail that
has a different time/date on it than the sending time -- which to me
suggests that all mail should have problems, but what do i know.
Ae.
------

It would be great if you could post the response you get from them,
Marty. Thanks.

--Trish

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Marty Hoag wrote:

>    The last couple days we've been seeing wholesale HOTMAIL error
> e-mail bounces with a 5.0.0 code (should be syntax error if I read
> the docs right).  This is a bit different than the previous 554 error
> in that it occurs AFTER the e-mail has been accepted by HOTMAIL.
> Below is an example.
>
>    The ironic thing is that one listowner is a hotmail user herself
> and got the error message back ok (via owner-listname) but the mail
> to the hotmail subscribers was rejected!  She claimed she'd tried
> a couple times and got bounces but I'm not sure of the sequence.
>
>    I was told before (9/27/02) by Hotmail escalation that the
> 554 was their problem (I think they were running out of threads
> or something on their servers).  But again, this seems a bit
> different in that the rejection is coming after the e-mail has
> been accepted from LISTSERV(tm).
>
>    What I am concerned about is that HOTMAIL has set some sort
> of arbitrary limit within their system that is not enforced
> coming in (e.g. number of RCPT TOs).  That seems dumb because
> if we lowered the max number of RCPT TOs it would just mean more
> e-mail they'd have to handle.
>
>    I'm about to try calling them again on this but wondered if
> any of you had noticed this trend in the last few days and had
> an answer.  But maybe this is their error of the week.  After
> the spate of 554s I seem to recall they changed to something else
> for a while.
>
>    Thanks.  Marty
>
> ...
> >From: [log in to unmask]
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> ...
> >--9B095B5ADSN=_01C2717286D0D7720036C1A9mc4?s8.law16.hot
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unicode-1-1-utf-7
> >
> >This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.
> >
> >Delivery to the following recipients failed.
> >
> >        [log in to unmask]
> >        [log in to unmask]
> ... about 20 more...
> >
> >
> >
> >--9B095B5ADSN=_01C2717286D0D7720036C1A9mc4?s8.law16.hot
> >Content-Type: message/delivery-status
> >
> >Reporting-MTA: dns;mc4-s8.law16.hotmail.com
> >Received-From-MTA: dns;mc4-f39.law16.hotmail.com
> >Arrival-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 20:13:07 -0700
> >
> >Original-Recipient:
> >Final-Recipient: rfc822;[log in to unmask]
> >Action: failed
> >Status: 5.0.0
> >
> >Original-Recipient:
> >Final-Recipient: rfc822;[log in to unmask]
> >Action: failed
> >Status: 5.0.0
> >
> ... about 20 more...
> ...
>