SMTP reply code
550 5.1.10 — recipient not found
A 550 5.1.10 reply means the receiving system looked the recipient up and did not find it. It is Microsoft 365’s usual form of a missing mailbox: a permanent failure, a hard bounce, and the address should be removed.
The facts
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Reply code | 550 |
| Enhanced status code | 5.1.10 |
| Class | 5 — permanent failure |
| Subject | 1 — addressing status |
| Detail | 10 — recipient address has null MX |
| Bounce type | Hard |
| Should the sender retry? | No |
| Representative wording | 550 5.1.10 RESOLVER.ADR.RecipientNotFound; Recipient not found by SMTP address lookup |
The representative wording is one real form of this reply. The exact string is set by the receiving server and varies between mail platforms — read the one in your own logs rather than matching on a string.
What VerifyInbox returns
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
emailStatus | undeliverable |
reason | mailbox_not_found |
mailboxStatus | invalid |
smtpCode / smtpEnhancedCode | 550 / 5.1.10 |
retryable | false |
| Charged | Yes, 0.5 credits — the mailbox was tested and answered definitively. |
A registered code used for something else
This one is worth getting right, because the registry and the practice disagree. In the IANA registry the enhanced code X.1.10 is "Recipient address has null MX" — it belongs to RFC 7505, which defines the null MX record a domain publishes to say it accepts no mail at all.
In practice, the overwhelming majority of 550 5.1.10 replies people actually see come from Microsoft 365, where it means the recipient was not found by an address lookup. Both are permanent and both mean "this will never be delivered", so the handling is the same. But if you are writing a bounce processor, the code alone does not tell you which of the two you got — the reply text does.
The three-digit reply code comes from RFC 5321: a 2yz is a success, a 4yz is a transient failure the sender should retry, and a 5yz is a permanent failure the sender should not repeat in the same form. The dotted code beside it comes from RFC 3463 and has three parts — class.subject.detail — where the class repeats 2, 4 or 5, the subject says which part of the system had the problem, and the detail says what it was. The full list is an IANA registry established by RFC 5248, which is the authoritative source and the one nothing else ranking for these queries cites.
How it differs from 550 5.1.1
Operationally, not at all: both are permanent, both mean the recipient does not exist there, both should be suppressed. Microsoft’s own documentation covers the whole 5.1.1 to 5.1.20 range in one article for exactly that reason.
Where Microsoft’s guidance is specific is on backscatter: it notes that a 5.1.10 bounce can arrive because a spammer forged your address as the sender of a message to a non-existent recipient. If you are receiving these for messages you did not send, the bounce is not about your list at all and can be ignored.
What each provider actually says
Quoted from each provider's own published documentation, with the date it was read. Not paraphrased into a claim about what a provider "always" returns.
“The recipient's email address doesn't exist or couldn't be found.”
What to do
If you sent the message
- Confirm the address, then suppress it — the recipient does not exist on that system.
- Check whether you actually sent the original message. If not, this is backscatter from a forged sender address and you can ignore it.
- Clear the address from any autocomplete cache. A stale cached entry can carry an internal identifier that no longer resolves.
If you own the receiving domain
- Verify the recipient exists and has a licence assigned. An unlicensed Microsoft 365 mailbox is not a deliverable one.
- Check accepted-domain configuration in a hybrid deployment: an authoritative domain stops looking after Exchange Online, where an internal relay would have handed the message on.
- Look for forwarding rules pointing at an address that no longer exists.
If you are a developer
- Treat it exactly as
550 5.1.1: permanent, suppress, never retry. - Do not branch on the enhanced code alone — the same
5.1.10is registered for a null MX, which is a different cause with the same outcome. - If you are seeing these for mail you never sent, look at your own SPF and DMARC before assuming a list problem.
To find out whether an address will return this before you send to it, run it through the free email verifier
Related codes
Related terms
Sources
- RFC 5321 — Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
- RFC 3463 — Enhanced Mail System Status Codes
- RFC 5248 — A Registry for SMTP Enhanced Mail System Status Codes
- IANA — SMTP Enhanced Status Codes registry
Primary sources checked 11 September 2026. If something here is out of date, tell us and we will correct it.