Did you found solution for Exchange 2013?

didnt find the options for the ndr on the group , is it available in exchange 2013 ?

I doubt you’ll be able to work out who was in the other companies’ distribution lists.

But if your company wants to open a Microsoft case about it then I would just do that.

Scenario is as below

– Automated job sends a mail to a DL, all internal recipients, and one recipients mailbox is full.
– The DL was set to send delivery reports to group owner, and the NDR was sent to one of the group managers.
– The group manager was confused as the NDR said “person X mailbox is full” and we clarified it why.

The DL doesnt have any external recipients bu the automated mail comes from an address that is non-existent, will changing the setting to send delivery reports to message orginator create NDR between the non-existent sender and the recipient whose mailbox is full.
We can test this, just wanted to hear it from the master 🙂

Thanks
Gopinath T

Yes I believe Exchange 2003 did not adhere to that RFC (or it didn’t exist at the time).

An external contact sent a message to a distribution group, which has a large number of external recipients. And this resulted in the out-of-office messages from those external recipients to be sent back to the distribution list which in turn distributed it to everyone else. I am seeing the same behavior in the message tracking as you described above in that when the message is “TRANSFER” the return path is changed from the external sender to the address of the distribution group and causing this behavior.

You mention above the following which is where my confusion starts.

“If the group is configured to send no delivery reports, the ReturnPath is not modified by Exchange and a loop would not occur. Suppressing delivery reports in this way only impacts NDRs, but not other auto-replies such as “out of office”.”

My understanding from the above is that clicking the button for “Do not send delivery reports” will not prevent Out-of-Office replies but in my case that is the only thing I am seeing. Am I misunderstanding this or do you think that my situation is unique to the one you described?

And lastly, do you know why this behavior would start now? I am only about 1 week into my co-existence period between 2003 and 2010. My guess is that the RFC you mentioned above was put into effect with the installation of Exchange 2010 but I cannot find anything specific to confirm that assumption.