From: "Geo" 

At a guess all he'll see is a timeout error in the server logs "client
timed out" or something like that. It won't explain much. Outlook is
not talking to the mail server, it's talking to norton.

Geo.

"Glenn Meadows"  wrote in message
news:43380ec1{at}w3.nls.net...
> The mail server logs should tell the tale.  Next time it happens, note the
> time, and then have the mail admins check the logs to see what happened at
> the server end.
>
> --
>
> Glenn M.
> "Geo"  wrote in message
news:4336fae9{at}w3.nls.net...
> You're wrong, it's not the mail server.
>
> Geo.
>   "Rich"  wrote in message news:4336cefc{at}w3.nls.net...
>      You are still describing a broken email server that accepted an email
> then lost it.  As you already noted your server is overloaded, maybe your
> upgrade to it will help you with your email server problems.  Maybe you
> should consider a higher quality email server like Exchange.
>
>   Rich
>
>     "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
> news:nj5dj1psfkmgmu48i6iij0d39hs6465m1p{at}4ax.com...
>     Outlook removed the message from Outlook's Outbox (indicating it was
>     sent), yet the message never made it to Outlook's Sent Items box.
>     Outlook lost the message somewhere inside of Outlook.  Gone, no trace
of
>     the message at all.  It's not in Outlook anywhere, and the server
>     doesn't have it.  These are messages to clients with quotes, and other
>     information.  If the email server was the culprit, the message should
>     still be in one of the Outlook boxes (most likely Outlook's Outbox
>     because it wasn't sent).
>
>     Postfix feeding the mail server has not had a problem at all, even
>     though a few people are now using it instead of having Outlook feed
the
>     main email server directly.  Only people who use Outlook have a
problem
>     with the message disappearing inside of Outlook.
>
>      /m
>
>
>     On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:17:24 -0700, "Rich"  wrote:
>
>     >   Other than your assertion, how did you determine that the message
> was never accepted by your overloaded SMTP server?  It sure appears that
> your server is accepting email and losing it not that you would ever be
> honest enough to admit that.
>     >
>     >Rich
>     >
>     >  "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
> news:ae1cj11en1g74dhk25h4bchng01uvlset0{at}4ax.com...
>     >
>     >  Man, that problem drives me crazy at work.  Our email server is
>     >  overloaded and will be upgraded in a couple of weeks (40% annual
> growth
>     >  in a company creates interesting problems...).  Until then, I am
> greeted
>     >  my POP3 and SMTP timeouts.  The SMTP timeouts are particularly
> egregious
>     >  with Outlook.  Outlook says the message is sent, but the message
was
>     >  never accepted by the email server.
>     >
>     >  One of the Software Engineers on my team sent me an email that he
was
>     >  taking a two days vacation.  Outlook said it was sent fine, but the
>     >  email server never accepted it.   Needless, I became *very*
concerned
>     >  when he didn't show up for two days....
>     >
>     >   /m for
>     >  email...>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5