cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
710
Views
0
Helpful
1
Replies
Highlighted
Beginner

Incoming Mail Policy is not working - SPAM quarantine

I have configured a Mail Policy that has the Antispam disabled. I have done this because of an specific mail user that wants to receive all the emails, including the ones the ESA consider spam.

I usually works fine but now I have 4 emails in the spam quarantine.  All of them are from the same sender. I have the details and there is this one line that "explains" why the email is send to quarantine:

 

"Remote procedure call connection (RCID 13) started for message 65161521 to local Spam Quarantine.".

 

Can you please give me some advice in order to know what causes this Remote call procedure connection?

 

Thanks!!

 

 MAIL POLICY "No-spam-check" MATCHED THESE RECIPIENTS: dlemor@perulng.com
19 Nov 2014 09:52:21 (GMT +05:00)Protocol SMTP interface in.perulng (IP 129.39.179.38) on incoming connection (ICID 59143385) from sender IP 104.200.16.96. Reverse DNS host mta11.avanzaperu.pe verified yes.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:21 (GMT +05:00)(ICID 59143385) ACCEPT sender group UNKNOWNLIST match sbrs[none] SBRS unable to retrieve
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Start message 65161521 on incoming connection (ICID 59143385).
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 enqueued on incoming connection (ICID 59143385) from aaguilarramirez@seminariosytalleresenperu.com.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 on incoming connection (ICID 59143385) added recipient (dlemor@perulng.com).
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 contains message ID header '<6C67A08179394CEA891EBF61D105B938@User-PC>'.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 original subject on injection: Envasado y Empaque de Alimentos y Bebidas
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 (29275 bytes) from aaguilarramirez@seminariosytalleresenperu.com ready.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 matched per-recipient policy No-spam-check for inbound mail policies.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Spam engine: SLBL. Interim verdict: Positive
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Spam engine: SLBL. Final verdict: Positive
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Virus engine Sophos. Interim verdict: CLEAN
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Virus engine. Final verdict: Negative
19 Nov 2014 09:52:25 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Outbreak Filters. Verdict: Negative
19 Nov 2014 09:52:25 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 queued for delivery.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:27 (GMT +05:00)Remote procedure call connection (RCID 13) started for message 65161521 to local Spam Quarantine.
19 Nov 2014 09:52:28 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 quarantined in Spam Quarantine.
Everyone's tags (2)
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Highlighted
Engager

That message got spam checked

That message got spam checked, was declared spam, so the RPC call happens to put it in the Quarantine.

19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Spam engine: SLBL. Interim verdict: Positive
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Spam engine: SLBL. Final verdict: Positive

 

If you want to deliver this, either don't scan it by setting the Anti-Spam scanning to disabled, or set the action to Deliver, and maybe add something to the subject?

 

View solution in original post

1 REPLY 1
Highlighted
Engager

That message got spam checked

That message got spam checked, was declared spam, so the RPC call happens to put it in the Quarantine.

19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Spam engine: SLBL. Interim verdict: Positive
19 Nov 2014 09:52:24 (GMT +05:00)Message 65161521 scanned by Anti-Spam engine: SLBL. Final verdict: Positive

 

If you want to deliver this, either don't scan it by setting the Anti-Spam scanning to disabled, or set the action to Deliver, and maybe add something to the subject?

 

View solution in original post