Box92 won't take BCC addresses

[Early Out]

In Outlook, if I attempt to send a message that has 43 addresses in the BCC field (and none or just one in the TO field), it is impossible to get the message to pass from the Outlook outbox to box92. Outlook tries to send, repeatedly, but just "hangs," without producing a specific error message, until the server timeout eventually kicks in.

This is not a "too many messages in an hour" problem. This was the only message I tried to send this morning through box92.

This is not a port 25 blocking problem - single messages go through without complaint.

This is not an address problem - the same message went out through my ISP's SMTP server without complaint, and without any bounce-backs.

I've put in a ticket about it, but wondered if anyone here has any good ideas.

Thanks!

[rando]

This is not a "too many messages in an hour" problem. This was the only message I tried to send this morning through box92.\

Just so you know, when you send a message with 43 BCCS, you're sending 44 messages through the server. All 44 count against your max emails total.

Can you send a message with less BCCs, like 10 or 20?

[Early Out]

Just so you know, when you send a message with 43 BCCS, you're sending 44 messages through the server. All 44 count against your max emails total.
Like I said, this was the only message I had sent all morning, so I shouldn't have been bumping up against the 50 limit.

Can you send a message with less BCCs, like 10 or 20?
Quick test - it took a message with 9 addressees (all secondary accounts of my own, on Comcast and Hotmail) without complaint, and they were all delivered within seconds.

This is a tough thing to test without annoying friends and family!

[rando]

Like I said, this was the only message I had sent all morning, so I shouldn't have been bumping up against the 50 limit.


I know, I was just making sure you were aware that that does count against you for all of the people. This isn't the problem, but it's something you should be aware of.

I don't have time to look into the ticket now, but it will be going through the support queue and it'll get to me if it has to. Please be patient if it does, I've got a ton of stuff on my plate right now. :)

In the meantime you could create a mailing list for this sort of thing.

[Early Out]

I don't have time to look into the ticket now, but it will be going through the support queue and it'll get to me if it has to. Please be patient if it does, I've got a ton of stuff on my plate right now. :)No problem - it's not a high priority, since I have my Comcast SMTP server to go through. I'm just trying to make sure I have options if I leave Comcast.In the meantime you could create a mailing list for this sort of thing.In Outlook, of course, it is a mailing list. I suppose I could create a mailing list in webmail - is that what you're referring to? Actually, since BCC addressees all count towards the 50/hour quota, it would be almost as easy for me to do a simple mail merge from Word, and crank out 43 separate messages, each individually addressed.

In the meantime, I'll try turning on Outlook's logging/troubleshooting function, and see if the log files reveal anything interesting.

Thanks!

[Early Out]

I have a partial answer. The message eventually goes through, but with 43 BCC addresses, it takes over 7 minutes! Check out the attached log file - look at the timestamps. (Actual addresses have been munged for privacy.)

[rando]

Oh, right. Yeah, we have that in place because putting BCCs in during the SMTP phase is a huge spamming technique. Both of the techniques you mentioned to get around this are valid.

There's one other solution, but I'm going to pm you about that because I don't want everybody doing it. (As I said, this is an intentional limitation)