Missing initial email for exclusive sender

[AS.Igel]

I generated a new address for an exclusive sender. In the list of addresses I saw that it was created on 2006-01-20 05:01. However I never received this email on my G***** Mail account until now. Neither in my inbox nor in the spam section.

I received other emails for other exclusive sender via SG to my G***** Mail account in parallel.

Furthermore I created on of my PM as a trusted sender for the above mentioned SG to check it. It's working.

Any ideas what's going wrong?

[SysKoll]

send Josh or me a private message with the name of your sg account and we can look up the logs.

[AS.Igel]

One thing I've noticed is the following fact. The exclusive sender noticed in advanced mode mode contains a normal domain and an alias put in parentheses for the case with lost initial sender email.

All other exclusive senders listed there are only addresses or domains without any alias. These other ones have always worked perfectly for me.

Reason or coincidence?

[josh]

The exclusive sender match will require all the text that's specified to match the incoming address (but not the other way around) -- if the specified exclusive sender contains special characters, like a square bracket, this would probably impact the matching as well. Care to post the syntax of the exclusive sender (modified to use dummy names, of course).

[AS.Igel]

The exclusive sender match will require all the text that's specified to match the incoming address

It wasn't me how specified the exclusive sender domain but SG itself (automaticly while receiving the first, initial response). The entry shown in advanced mode looked like this:
domainname.tld (some alias)

Could it be that there's room for improvement? Maybe SG should ignore any kind of alias while determing and registering the domain name out of the first email.
Is it possible that this special exclusive sender name (containing an alias) was the reason why the initial sender email didn't come thorugh, also -as mentioned above- the domain name was determined by SG itself?

[josh]

It should have only grabbed the email address (or domain, as the case may be). Can you PM me the actual text so I can debug it?