From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 09:52:57 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD06132C33B for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:52:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-87-180.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.87.180] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CPln4-0004iG-R3 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:52:55 -0500 Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-1, 03/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/1 X-Sequence-Number: 1810 hello everyone, I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+ zubscriber base workable. Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller lists) seems not to do this. So, is there a specific request I can send to the hosting support to get these mail delivery errors specifically directed to an admin address? ie, 'if a delivery error is generated when someone has originally mailed to xyzlist then forward to admin@xyz rather than the original sender' .... I'm asking here before contacting the host in case any of you have tried this before and found it definitely is / is not possible to set up. many thanks, Lee -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 12:01:28 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from ultra7.eskimo.com (ultra7.eskimo.com [204.122.16.70]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4AB32C450 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:01:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from big-dog.dogswood.com (dialport38.west.eskimo.net [67.136.137.135]) by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA4Jrl6p013431 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:53:49 -0800 Received: (from jimo@localhost) by big-dog.dogswood.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) id iA4JnDr17213 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:49:13 -0800 Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:49:12 -0800 From: Jim Osborn To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors Message-ID: <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Archive-Number: 200411/2 X-Sequence-Number: 1811 On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 5:53:11PM +0000, lee wrote: > I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for > outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+ > zubscriber base workable. > > Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail > delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or > over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller > lists) seems not to do this. Others here can probably quote the RFCs on this better than me, but I'll offer my limited opinion. First, those errors you mention should never go to the message author, but should instead go to the envelope sender, or return-path, which should be the MLM. I don't know if this is a sendmail/smtp issue or just an issue with your MLM. Then again, there are plenty of sites that misdirect DSNs even with the MLM set up right. > So, is there a specific request I can send to the hosting support to get > these mail delivery errors specifically directed to an admin address? > ie, 'if a delivery error is generated when someone has originally mailed > to xyzlist then forward to admin@xyz rather than the original sender' .... Here's a sampling of the headers this list, list-managers, emits: From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 10:00:21 2004 Return-Path: X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000 From: lee To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors Sender: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com A site would have to be really misconfigured to send DSNs to the From: address with all that info at hand. You might check to see what your current MLM is sending in the way of headers. > I'm asking here before contacting the host in case any of you have tried > this before and found it definitely is / is not possible to set up. I've never tried rolling my own MLM, but have used Majordomo, ListServe, and for the last ten years or so, SmartList. They've all been hosted by my ISP, so I haven't personally configured this aspect of a MLM; SmartList uses something called "flist" to deliver the mail; it may go through sendmail on its way, but I don't know, and I don't think that's relevant to your question. The ultimate answer to your last question is: yes, it is definitely possible to set up a MLM to encourage DSNs to go to the MLM, not the message author. Jim From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 12:30:50 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E9D32C455 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:30:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-87-180.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.87.180] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CPoFt-0006I4-1R for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:30:49 -0500 Message-ID: <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:31:06 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> In-Reply-To: <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-1, 03/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/3 X-Sequence-Number: 1812 Thanks very much Jim, yes, the MLM's developer (Mailgust) indeed knows about the issue and the need for better handling of bounces; I'm assuming the problem doesn't exist when using smtp because the mlm has been coded suitably. The mlm is still under development (Mailgust) so whilst waiting for more development (!) I'm fishing around for a fix ... In the meantime I've contacted my hosting support to see if they can help at all. Presumably of course, if my account is subject to a certain smtp restriction then i also shouldn't be able to use sendmail directly to get round this, but this 'bounce error' problem is the only apparent hurdle in the way. Lee Jim Osborn wrote: >On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 5:53:11PM +0000, lee wrote: > > >>I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for >>outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+ >>zubscriber base workable. >> >>Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail >>delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or >>over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller >>lists) seems not to do this. >> >> > >Others here can probably quote the RFCs on this better than me, but I'll >offer my limited opinion. First, those errors you mention should never >go to the message author, but should instead go to the envelope sender, >or return-path, which should be the MLM. I don't know if this is a >sendmail/smtp issue or just an issue with your MLM. Then again, there >are plenty of sites that misdirect DSNs even with the MLM set up right. > > > >>So, is there a specific request I can send to the hosting support to get >>these mail delivery errors specifically directed to an admin address? >>ie, 'if a delivery error is generated when someone has originally mailed >>to xyzlist then forward to admin@xyz rather than the original sender' .... >> >> > >Here's a sampling of the headers this list, list-managers, emits: > > From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 10:00:21 2004 > Return-Path: > X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com > Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> > Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000 > From: lee > To: list-managers@greatcircle.com > Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors > Sender: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com > >A site would have to be really misconfigured to send DSNs to the From: >address with all that info at hand. You might check to see what your >current MLM is sending in the way of headers. > > > >>I'm asking here before contacting the host in case any of you have tried >>this before and found it definitely is / is not possible to set up. >> >> > >I've never tried rolling my own MLM, but have used Majordomo, ListServe, >and for the last ten years or so, SmartList. They've all been hosted >by my ISP, so I haven't personally configured this aspect of a MLM; >SmartList uses something called "flist" to deliver the mail; it may >go through sendmail on its way, but I don't know, and I don't think >that's relevant to your question. > >The ultimate answer to your last question is: yes, it is definitely >possible to set up a MLM to encourage DSNs to go to the MLM, not the >message author. > >Jim > > > -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Nov 5 06:29:37 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu (postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.22]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F53C32C1AA for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 06:29:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.253.64.63] (murmer.cit.cornell.edu [128.253.64.63]) by postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id iA5ETTUq028756 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:29:30 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: tco2@postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20041104175259.77B9832C3C9@mycroft.greatcircle.com> References: <20041104175259.77B9832C3C9@mycroft.greatcircle.com> Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:30:16 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Todd Olson Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archive-Number: 200411/4 X-Sequence-Number: 1813 Hi Lee >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000 >From: lee >To: list-managers@greatcircle.com >Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors >Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> > > >hello everyone, > >I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for >outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+ >zubscriber base workable. > >Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail >delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or >over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller >lists) seems not to do this. If you are refering to using entries in the sendmail aliases file to implement a mailing list, such as mylist-l: john@a.com, jim@b.com, .... Then to make sure the envelope address gets set correctly so that mail deamon errors go to the list owner you should add at least the following line to the aliases file owner-mylist-l: your@name.com For further details see p264 of 3rd ed of the book "Sendmail" by Costales & Allman (O'Reilly publisher) Many MLMs have three lines in the sendmail aliases file mylist-l: "| posting_handling_program" owner-mylist-l: "| error_handling_program" mylist-l-request: "| forwarding_to_human_for_assistance_program" Details vary depending on the MLM Regards, Todd Olson Cornell University From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 08:10:59 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [68.142.11.110]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF2832C1CA for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 08:10:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (nscifi.squawk.com [199.74.151.5]) by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AC7C25B2C0 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:10:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 75A3D55789; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:10:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors From: Nick Simicich To: List Managers In-Reply-To: <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:10:56 -0500 X-Archive-Number: 200411/5 X-Sequence-Number: 1814 On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 15:31, lee wrote: > Thanks very much Jim, > > yes, the MLM's developer (Mailgust) indeed knows about the issue and the > need for better handling of bounces; IOct 31 15:12:14 parrot postfix/smtp[17424]: 8017225B411: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=12, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2LUFVAE7DCG2) Oct 31 21:47:04 parrot postfix/smtp[22537]: 7D00825B42C: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=23, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2MJ7GANU9492) Nov 3 22:33:40 parrot postfix/smtp[16244]: 6414325B3BA: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=170, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2VJ2VAH4PK3A) Nov 4 08:22:43 parrot postfix/smtp[24274]: 5DAEE25B39D: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=11, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2WMKAA2RWXEA) Nov 4 08:23:52 parrot postfix/smtp[24277]: 1335A25B394: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=8, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2WMMGAB4GJ22) Nov 4 11:06:56 parrot postfix/smtp[26381]: BBE2125B3B2: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=30, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2WW68AMCD4FJ) Nov 4 15:26:57 parrot postfix/smtp[29978]: C42BB25B369: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=7, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XEESA5USSKJ) Nov 4 15:30:11 parrot postfix/smtp[29985]: F27CD25B3B6: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=33, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XELUAQTT6PS) Nov 4 15:33:00 parrot postfix/smtp[29974]: EA00C25B3B4: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=11, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XER3AR45HWA) Nov 4 15:38:15 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: 8A0AF25B3BB: from=, size=4025, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 4 15:38:22 parrot postfix/smtp[30198]: 8A0AF25B3BB: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=7, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XE35AS8BQYA) Nov 4 15:41:38 parrot postfix/smtp[30279]: D34E125B3B3: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=13, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XE98A59FUGS) Nov 4 15:48:44 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: 8491825B3C2: from=, size=2579, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 4 15:48:46 parrot postfix/smtp[30099]: 8491825B3C2: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=2, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XFPQAHKFST2) Nov 4 16:17:15 parrot postfix/smtp[30908]: 0EAA025B3D0: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=19, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XHC3AGG9Q3J) Nov 4 16:58:26 parrot postfix/smtp[31553]: 96C8725B3C3: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=8, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XKSBASRYEQJ) Nov 4 18:14:28 parrot postfix/smtp[32506]: 4D42325B3D2: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=41, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XP8VA2XLFZA) Nov 4 18:26:23 parrot postfix/smtp[32696]: 352C725B3DD: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=8, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XQW6AQ6MMDS) Nov 4 19:02:42 parrot postfix/smtp[855]: 9684A25B3E8: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=11, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XS29A4H6AHJ) Nov 4 19:03:03 parrot postfix/smtp[841]: CFF7625B3E5: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=21, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XS3VAU88UQ2) Nov 4 19:03:19 parrot postfix/smtp[828]: C958E25B3EA: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=27, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XS4FAMT4UB2) Nov 4 19:16:36 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: BE86E25B3EB: from=, size=2866, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 4 19:16:43 parrot postfix/smtp[1053]: BE86E25B3EB: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=7, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XTVJAJDP6FA) Nov 4 19:24:42 parrot postfix/smtp[1155]: 6CC2D25B479: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=21, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XUCHAANBW4J) Nov 4 19:32:34 parrot postfix/smtp[1381]: 8071F25B3E2: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=13, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XUS6AK7QCVA) Nov 4 19:36:54 parrot postfix/smtp[1510]: 9295725B3F7: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=9, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XU3FAF3CSSJ) Nov 4 21:42:55 parrot postfix/smtp[3215]: EDD1F25B3BB: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=12, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2X4FNAYHD2UJ) Nov 5 11:36:56 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: 0F28925B4B9: from=, size=4430, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 5 11:37:01 parrot postfix/smtp[14689]: 0F28925B4B9: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=5, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2ZMBMAM72TYA) Nov 5 15:15:40 parrot postfix/smtp[17613]: ED35A25B4C1: to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=6, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2ZZ5LAEYA85S) Nov 5 20:03:45 parrot postfix/smtp[21566]: B409725B4DB: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=9, status=sent (250 OK id AABA22JZSAFE2L5A) Nov 6 16:19:18 parrot postfix/smtp[6114]: 7373C25B4E1: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=7, status=sent (250 OK id AABA24R8XAY5DXEJ) Nov 6 17:23:49 parrot postfix/smtp[7060]: 204E625B4DB: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=8, status=sent (250 OK id AABA24VZXAEH22HJ) > 'm assuming the problem doesn't > exist when using smtp because the mlm has been coded suitably. > > The mlm is still under development (Mailgust) so whilst waiting for more > development (!) I'm fishing around for a fix ... The fix is to use the proper options on sendmail. There is the "From" header in the mail and the envelope sender. Are you using the "-t" option to tell sendmail to read the headers? If so, it might be putting the original author as the envelope sender. That would be your problem, then. If you are invoking sendmail directly, you can set the envelope sender with the -f command line option. So, -f list-bounces-go-here@example.com more or less as the first thing that is past your sendmail command should work. The other alternative is that you think that the original message author should go in -f and you have parsed it out and put it there. No, that is the envelope sender. What is it you could not do with smtp? I presume that this is a delivery program that mailgust uses and not some other program. > In the meantime I've contacted my hosting support to see if they can > help at all. > > Presumably of course, if my account is subject to a certain smtp > restriction then i also shouldn't be able to use sendmail directly to > get round this, but this 'bounce error' problem is the only apparent > hurdle in the way. If they are running real sendmail, then the mail program may refuse to allow you to set an envelope user unless you are a "trusted sendmail user". This is stupid since it is simply obfuscatory and not any real security - if they let you script (and they must if they are letting you install beta software) then it doesn't matter - with the right scripting you can do anything with the smtp port directly - I see that from my sendmail man page (which is installed as man 8 sendmail in Fedora, even when you run postfix), it takes the option, but adds a "X-Authentication-warning" header. You probably don't care about that. If you are going to do your bounces yourself, you might be interested in something I did a while back - I modified the old majordomo bulk mailer program to do verp. http://majordomo.squawk.com/majordomo/bulk-mailer/ - the userid and password needed are both majordomo. -- Blog: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/blogger.html Atom: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.xml RSS: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.rdf From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 12:56:10 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A394032C150 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 12:56:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CQu52-0007nR-La for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:56:09 -0500 Message-ID: <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 20:56:09 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> In-Reply-To: <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/6 X-Sequence-Number: 1815 Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far; You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ... Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been 'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area, including my issues with the sendmail sending. I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being remailed out through the list. Anyway ... he wasn't implying the software was otherwise fine in this area; he was simply questioning the effort i was putting into an apparent train of logic. I also understand from what I have learnt here and elsewhere that the From header in the eventual mail envelope may be the crux of the issue, rather than my understanding of the visible Return-Path header. So .... the easiest thing for me to do here is just show you (below) the latest mail I have sent to the mailgust support list. If you understand php and have the time and interest, it shows the current state of my 'efforts' and limits of understanding! In case it's relevant, I don't have command line / Unix / shell access to set up or configure anything such as sendmail; all I have is cPanel type access to my hosting. Many thanks here everyone ! Lee _The mail referred to above_ : - Thanks again! I appreciate your replies. I actually did some coding yesterday on a test install of mailgust, bearing in mind I have no grasp of php whatsoever ... I basically decided to copy all the coding I could find from the 'Set Reply-To' list function to make a new setting called 'Set Return-Path'. I was 'partly' successful in this and my aim is to offer 2 options where the Return-Path is left alone, or it can be set to the main list-admin email address. This is already defined (?) in gorum/lang/lang_en.php as $lll["settings_adminEmail"]="Admin email"; The files I changed were sendcron.php, maillist.php, digestcron.php, gorum/zmail.php and lang/lang_en.php At one point I had something 'different' to previously working, where the Return-Path was certainly changed but not under my control (!) and it had become (generic here) mydomain@www.myhost'smaildaemon.com Using a filter to forward any error mails to the list-admin address this did indeed appear to be working, although not as planned as described above. I then did further adjustments to gorum/zmail.php where I feel any further coding is needed, and I lost my way. I am out of my depth now due to not understanding what I am doing. Kjell, the things you are mentioning appear to be in the gorum/zmail.php file, so I would be hugely grateful if you or anyone else could have a look at mine at (txt file version) http://www.incelsite.com/mg3/gorum/zmail.txt which is currently (I think) still in the standard mailgust coding. I am also offering txt files at relevant url's of all the other files mentioned above. Many, many thanks for any help with my experiment! I appreciate it may be pointless but I feel it's important to at least get control over the Return-Path to see what difference it may make. Lee ------------------------------------------ Nick Simicich wrote: > The fix is to use the proper options on sendmail. There is the "From" > >header in the mail and the envelope sender. Are you using the "-t" >option to tell sendmail to read the headers? If so, it might be putting >the original author as the envelope sender. That would be your problem, >then. If you are invoking sendmail directly, you can set the envelope >sender with the -f command line option. So, > >-f list-bounces-go-here@example.com > >more or less as the first thing that is past your sendmail command >should work. The other alternative is that you think that the original >message author should go in -f and you have parsed it out and put it >there. No, that is the envelope sender. > >What is it you could not do with smtp? I presume that this is a >delivery program that mailgust uses and not some other program. > > > >>In the meantime I've contacted my hosting support to see if they can >>help at all. >> >>Presumably of course, if my account is subject to a certain smtp >>restriction then i also shouldn't be able to use sendmail directly to >>get round this, but this 'bounce error' problem is the only apparent >>hurdle in the way. >> >> > >If they are running real sendmail, then the mail program may refuse to >allow you to set an envelope user unless you are a "trusted sendmail >user". This is stupid since it is simply obfuscatory and not any real >security - if they let you script (and they must if they are letting you >install beta software) then it doesn't matter - with the right scripting >you can do anything with the smtp port directly - I see that from my >sendmail man page (which is installed as man 8 sendmail in Fedora, even >when you run postfix), it takes the option, but adds a >"X-Authentication-warning" header. You probably don't care about that. > >If you are going to do your bounces yourself, you might be interested in >something I did a while back - I modified the old majordomo bulk mailer >program to do verp. > >http://majordomo.squawk.com/majordomo/bulk-mailer/ - the userid and >password needed are both majordomo. > -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 14:17:32 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from shuttlex.radparker.com (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BBF632C18D for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:17:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78]) by shuttlex.radparker.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E32E9616D; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:22:02 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 16:17:36 -0600 From: Al Iverson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> In-Reply-To: <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200411/7 X-Sequence-Number: 1816 lee wrote: > > Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far; > > You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best > to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my > understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ... > > Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been > 'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to > the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area, > including my issues with the sendmail sending. > > I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to > paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have > considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail > delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the > current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address > appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that > the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being > remailed out through the list. Lee, could you put an example of a message posted to your list on a website somewhere? With full headers, saved as a text file? All received lines/from lines/return path/etc. visible. Curious to see what this might reveal. Regards, Al Iverson From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 15:48:12 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E652E32C188 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 15:48:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CQwlY-000Cng-1b for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:48:12 -0500 Message-ID: <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 23:48:16 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> In-Reply-To: <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/8 X-Sequence-Number: 1817 Thanks for your interest Al; Sorry about the wonky line wrap in my last mail to this list. Sure, below is a url showing the message source as shown in Mozilla Thunderbird on a mailgust mail sent out using the sendmail binary. The mail was originally emailed into the list by me from Thunderbird. The particular list is set to make the Reply-To header show the list address, although that's not relevant here. The Mailgust install used here is the standard latest release, free from my current 'experimental coding'. I might also add here that Thunderbird shows the same form of From header at the top of all message sources I look at, irrespective of any mailing list or individual emailer, but from what I understand this isn't the From header I / we have referred to earlier ?? ... anyway, here's the url of the message source: http://www.incelsite.com/fullheaders.txt Many thanks, Lee Al Iverson wrote: > Lee, could you put an example of a message posted to your list on a > website somewhere? With full headers, saved as a text file? All > received lines/from lines/return path/etc. visible. Curious to see > what this might reveal. > > Regards, > Al Iverson -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 16:06:07 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from shuttlex.radparker.com (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 862B432C18F for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:06:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78]) by shuttlex.radparker.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED29616D; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 18:10:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com> Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:06:12 -0600 From: Al Iverson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> In-Reply-To: <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200411/9 X-Sequence-Number: 1818 lee wrote: > > Thanks for your interest Al; > > Sorry about the wonky line wrap in my last mail to this list. > > Sure, below is a url showing the message source as shown in Mozilla > Thunderbird on a mailgust mail sent out using the sendmail binary. The > mail was originally emailed into the list by me from Thunderbird. The > particular list is set to make the Reply-To header show the list > address, although that's not relevant here. The Mailgust install used > here is the standard latest release, free from my current 'experimental > coding'. > > I might also add here that Thunderbird shows the same form of > From > header at the top of all message sources I look at, irrespective of any > mailing list or individual emailer, but from what I understand this > isn't the > From > header I / we have referred to earlier ?? ... Yeah, same on Mozilla for me, for any message I check, so I don't think it's having an impact on the issue. > anyway, here's the url of the message source: > > http://www.incelsite.com/fullheaders.txt If I understand correctly, the issue is bounces being distributed to list members, yes? Is the list locked so that only members can post? Verified by email address? Can you post one of those bounces to a text file, just like you did with the example post? My thoughts would be to change the return path as to not be the list posting address, or to change the list so that only members may post. If you're still seeing the issues after that happens, then it feels like you have some list members with a wonky MTA or MUA that is doing some bad stuff. I see that often enough on our mailings (avg 1-2 mil a day) that we had to put some extensive automation in place to handle misdirected bounces, as well as the usual other garbage like out of office replies. It could also be caused by some poorly-designed spam filter, that's helpfully trying to bounce perceived spam, but is parsing the headers wrong and sending it to the wrong person (though in a situation like that, there's really not a right person to send it to; a spam filter like that does little more than pound innocents with misdirected spam and bounces). In a situation like this your only recourse may be to hunt down and remove the offending list members. Regards, Al Iverson From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 16:21:04 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B5232C19D for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:20:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CQxHA-000DDb-Da for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:20:53 -0500 Message-ID: <418EBBE8.50904@btinternet.com> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:20:56 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com> In-Reply-To: <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/10 X-Sequence-Number: 1819 hello again Al and everyone, (see * below for my replies) Al Iverson wrote: > > If I understand correctly, the issue is bounces being distributed to > list members, yes? > * Yes, that's right. > Is the list locked so that only members can post? Verified by email > address? * Yes, indeed so. > > > Can you post one of those bounces to a text file, just like you did > with the example post? * I don't have one to hand at present, but could generate one. They appear to be the same kind of mail delivery failure notifications that you would receive from a personal mail to a dead or over quota address, for example. The majority of the error mails I'm referring to appear to be posted by the mail daemon on the list hosting's site. A smaller amount appear to come directly from the mail daemon of the failing address. > > My thoughts would be to change the return path as to not be the list > posting address, or to change the list so that only members may post. * Yes, I'm trying to create the option to change the Return-Path (or at least force in an overall specific one for all lists) with my previously described efforts. It's these coding efforts I've reached a dead end with because I have taken my non-knowledge of php to the utmost limit ! > If you're still seeing the issues after that happens, then it feels > like you have some list members with a wonky MTA or MUA that is doing > some bad stuff. I see that often enough on our mailings (avg 1-2 mil a > day) that we had to put some extensive automation in place to handle > misdirected bounces, as well as the usual other garbage like out of > office replies. * Absolutely, once I've achieved my aims above I can assess the issue (I'm already aware of) where some mail servers don't acknowledge the actual desired Return-Path. > > It could also be caused by some poorly-designed spam filter, that's > helpfully trying to bounce perceived spam, but is parsing the headers > wrong and sending it to the wrong person (though in a situation like > that, there's really not a right person to send it to; a spam filter > like that does little more than pound innocents with misdirected spam > and bounces). * Sure, presumably a real possibility. * Many thanks again for anything further, * Lee -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 16:54:19 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from imo-m27.mx.aol.com (imo-m27.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.8]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A47B32C1EB for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:54:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from Drcoz@aol.com by imo-m27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id 8.9f.516f6782 (15887); Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:54:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from dc-ink2 (wbar6.wdc2-4.16.161.253.wdc2.dsl-verizon.net [4.16.161.253]) by air-id08.mx.aol.com (v103.7) with ESMTP id MAILINID82-3e0f418ec3b499; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:54:12 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:54:50 -0500 From: "Derek Cosby" Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors To: "Al Iverson" Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com> Message-ID: <418EC3DA.503@aol.com> References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com> X-Mailer: AOL Communicator (20030919.3 Win) Organization: Home MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii X-AOL-IP: 4.16.161.253 X-Archive-Number: 200411/11 X-Sequence-Number: 1820 He how to I get out of this group... Al Iverson wrote on 11/7/2004, 7:06 PM: > lee wrote: > > > > > Thanks for your interest Al; > > > > Sorry about the wonky line wrap in my last mail to this list. > > > > Sure, below is a url showing the message source as shown in Mozilla > > Thunderbird on a mailgust mail sent out using the sendmail binary. The > > mail was originally emailed into the list by me from Thunderbird. The > > particular list is set to make the Reply-To header show the list > > address, although that's not relevant here. The Mailgust install used > > here is the standard latest release, free from my current 'experimental > > coding'. > > > > I might also add here that Thunderbird shows the same form of > > From > > header at the top of all message sources I look at, irrespective of any > > mailing list or individual emailer, but from what I understand this > > isn't the > > From > > header I / we have referred to earlier ?? ... > > Yeah, same on Mozilla for me, for any message I check, so I don't think > it's having an impact on the issue. > > > anyway, here's the url of the message source: > > > > http://www.incelsite.com/fullheaders.txt > > If I understand correctly, the issue is bounces being distributed to > list members, yes? > > Is the list locked so that only members can post? Verified by email > address? > > Can you post one of those bounces to a text file, just like you did with > the example post? > > My thoughts would be to change the return path as to not be the list > posting address, or to change the list so that only members may post. > > If you're still seeing the issues after that happens, then it feels like > you have some list members with a wonky MTA or MUA that is doing some > bad stuff. I see that often enough on our mailings (avg 1-2 mil a day) > that we had to put some extensive automation in place to handle > misdirected bounces, as well as the usual other garbage like out of > office replies. > > It could also be caused by some poorly-designed spam filter, that's > helpfully trying to bounce perceived spam, but is parsing the headers > wrong and sending it to the wrong person (though in a situation like > that, there's really not a right person to send it to; a spam filter > like that does little more than pound innocents with misdirected spam > and bounces). > > In a situation like this your only recourse may be to hunt down and > remove the offending list members. > > Regards, > Al Iverson > From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 17:13:34 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED33F32C34C for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:13:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CQy68-000Esf-F1 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 20:13:33 -0500 Message-ID: <418EC841.8000205@btinternet.com> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 01:13:37 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: How to leave a list here Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/12 X-Sequence-Number: 1821 Derek or anyone else, You should be able to leave any list on this majordomo installation by visiting the link below and using the options accordingly : http://www.greatcircle.com/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=greatcircle.com?user=&passw=&func=login Lee -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 19:37:51 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [68.142.11.110]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E4B32C1C0 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:37:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from scifi.squawk.com (nscifi.squawk.com [199.74.151.5]) by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B823625B305 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 22:37:23 -0500 (EST) Received: by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id A749E55794; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 22:37:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors From: Nick Simicich To: List Managers In-Reply-To: <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 22:37:23 -0500 X-Archive-Number: 200411/13 X-Sequence-Number: 1822 On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 15:56, lee wrote: > Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far; > > You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best > to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my > understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ... Um, you need to get a basic understanding of sendmail before you do this stuff. Return-path is a header that is set by the MTA (i.e., sendmail) as part of the final delivery and it is simply a conventional way to preserve the RFC821 envelope address. Setting it before you resend something is likely useless. It is a way to make this visible to the mail recipient and will otherwise likely be ignored. > Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been > 'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to > the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area, > including my issues with the sendmail sending. So the answer is that "smtp" is, in fact, mailgust code? But, for some reason, you have decided to call sendmail directly. > I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to > paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have > considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail > delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the > current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address > appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that > the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being > remailed out through the list. Did you understand what I wrote? Please read RFC821 - there are newer ones, but that one is on point here. When you understand that there is a MAIL FROM and a RCPT TO address, then consider that what you put in the mail header has nothing to do with the delivery of the mail. (With the exception of using the -t option to sendmail - when you do that, sendmail parses the header, once, and fills in the envelope.) > Anyway ... he wasn't implying the software was otherwise fine in this > area; he was simply questioning the effort i was putting into an > apparent train of logic. > I also understand from what I have learnt here and elsewhere that the > From > header in the eventual mail envelope may be the crux of the issue, > rather than my understanding of the visible Return-Path header. No, unless the mail recipient's system is badly broken, the From header has nothing to do with anything. I'll try again: 1. There is an envelope. The envelope is how one sendmail talks to another - the "MAIL FROM:" "RCPT TO: address, and not to anything in the headers. There are exceptions, but these mostly occur when people who think that they understand e-mail but don't (like Lotus or Microsoft) write products. Good MTAs (sendmail, postfix, qmail) send their bounces to the RFC821 envelope (although more and more people are simply sucking up bounces because of rampant origin forgeries). > So .... the easiest thing for me to do here is just show you (below) the > latest mail I have sent to the mailgust support list. If you understand > php and have the time and interest, it shows the current state of my > 'efforts' and limits of understanding! I've read it, and I think you are manipulating the "Return-Path:" header. You are wasting your time. Return-Path might be parsed by -t from sendmail, (I have no way of testing this) but it seems wrong headed to do that. If you read RFC822 (obsolete but still on point for this) 4.3.1, it talks about making a route path available here - this is the older mindset where sendmail and RFC822 would gateway from addressing domain to addressing domain - say from a uunet gateway to the external world to a private mail system - and the Return-Path would record this, so that the final recipient would have a fighting chance of replying. This is broken in today's world, but there is one point: > This field is added by the final transport system that > delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended > to contain definitive information about the address and route > back to the message's originator. Since the RFC821 address would have to be massaged at any gateway to allow a bounce, simply copying the envelope origin to this header is the way it works. But putting it into mail that you are sending is meaningless - expect it to be ignored by the final delivery MTA. > In case it's relevant, I don't have command line / Unix / shell access > to set up or configure anything such as sendmail; all I have is cPanel > type access to my hosting. If you have the ability to set up scripting, you have the ability to get an interactive shell on your web host. You just don't know how. :-) If you are calling sendmail directly to forward the e-mail that is being generated or forwarded by mailgust, you need to override the origin. Using the owner- magic might work. Specifying what you want as an argument to sendmail is more likely to work. >From the sendmail man page: > -fname Sets the name of the ``from'' person (i.e., the envelope sender > of the mail). This address may also be used in the From: header > if that header is missing during initial submission. The enve- > lope sender address is used as the recipient for delivery status > notifications and may also appear in a Return-Path: header. -f > should only be used by ``trusted'' users (normally root, daemon, > and network) or if the person you are trying to become is the > same as the person you are. Otherwise, an X-Authentication- > Warning header will be added to the message. I want to point out that whereas the envelope sender might be put into Return-Path, this does not imply that Return-Path will be copied into the envelope sender. I could be wrong. Again, the simple answer is that if you specify the address you want the bounces to go to, then you don't need to worry. -- Blog: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/blogger.html Atom: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.xml RSS: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.rdf From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 19:49:48 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FD6832C178 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:49:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-80-244.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.80.244] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CR0XL-000HuJ-FH for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 22:49:48 -0500 Message-ID: <418EECDC.9080605@btinternet.com> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 03:49:48 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> In-Reply-To: <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/14 X-Sequence-Number: 1823 thanks Nick, All noted and I will look into all of it. As for the smtp thing; mailgust offers mail sending either by entering a chosen smtp server in the settings (with authentication if needed) or by selecting another option to use the sendmail binary (if available) on the actual host machine. Mailgust apparently 'absorbs' the bounces when using smtp, but not when using the sendmail binary. lee Nick Simicich wrote: >On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 15:56, lee wrote: > > >>Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far; >> >>You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best >>to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my >>understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ... >> >> > >Um, you need to get a basic understanding of sendmail before you do this >stuff. Return-path is a header that is set by the MTA (i.e., sendmail) >as part of the final delivery and it is simply a conventional way to >preserve the RFC821 envelope address. Setting it before you resend >something is likely useless. It is a way to make this visible to the >mail recipient and will otherwise likely be ignored. > > > >>Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been >>'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to >>the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area, >>including my issues with the sendmail sending. >> >> > >So the answer is that "smtp" is, in fact, mailgust code? But, for some >reason, you have decided to call sendmail directly. > > > >>I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to >>paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have >>considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail >>delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the >>current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address >>appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that >>the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being >>remailed out through the list. >> >> > >Did you understand what I wrote? Please read RFC821 - there are newer >ones, but that one is on point here. When you understand that there is >a MAIL FROM and a RCPT TO address, then consider that what you put in >the mail header has nothing to do with the delivery of the mail. > >(With the exception of using the -t option to sendmail - when you do >that, sendmail parses the header, once, and fills in the envelope.) > > > >>Anyway ... he wasn't implying the software was otherwise fine in this >>area; he was simply questioning the effort i was putting into an >>apparent train of logic. >>I also understand from what I have learnt here and elsewhere that the >>From >>header in the eventual mail envelope may be the crux of the issue, >>rather than my understanding of the visible Return-Path header. >> >> > >No, unless the mail recipient's system is badly broken, the From header >has nothing to do with anything. > >I'll try again: > >1. There is an envelope. The envelope is how one sendmail talks to >another - the "MAIL FROM:" "RCPT TO:getting your list mail." > >Then there is the header of the mail, which is mostly secondary to >everything. It contains hints and clues about how a mail user agent is >to flag the mail, some trace information, and some other stuff. Pretty >much nothing there matters to either the mail delivery, or to the bounce >of non-deliverable mail. > >Good mail transfer agents return bounces to the MAIL FROM:<> address, >and not to anything in the headers. There are exceptions, but these >mostly occur when people who think that they understand e-mail but don't >(like Lotus or Microsoft) write products. Good MTAs (sendmail, postfix, >qmail) send their bounces to the RFC821 envelope (although more and more >people are simply sucking up bounces because of rampant origin >forgeries). > > > >>So .... the easiest thing for me to do here is just show you (below) the >>latest mail I have sent to the mailgust support list. If you understand >>php and have the time and interest, it shows the current state of my >>'efforts' and limits of understanding! >> >> > >I've read it, and I think you are manipulating the "Return-Path:" >header. You are wasting your time. Return-Path might be parsed by -t >from sendmail, (I have no way of testing this) but it seems wrong headed >to do that. If you read RFC822 (obsolete but still on point for this) >4.3.1, it talks about making a route path available here - this is the >older mindset where sendmail and RFC822 would gateway from addressing >domain to addressing domain - say from a uunet gateway to the external >world to a private mail system - and the Return-Path would record this, >so that the final recipient would have a fighting chance of replying. > >This is broken in today's world, but there is one point: > > > > >> This field is added by the final transport system that >> delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended >> to contain definitive information about the address and route >> back to the message's originator. >> >> > >Since the RFC821 address would have to be massaged at any gateway to >allow a bounce, simply copying the envelope origin to this header is the >way it works. But putting it into mail that you are sending is >meaningless - expect it to be ignored by the final delivery MTA. > > > >>In case it's relevant, I don't have command line / Unix / shell access >>to set up or configure anything such as sendmail; all I have is cPanel >>type access to my hosting. >> >> > >If you have the ability to set up scripting, you have the ability to get >an interactive shell on your web host. You just don't know how. :-) > >If you are calling sendmail directly to forward the e-mail that is being >generated or forwarded by mailgust, you need to override the origin. >Using the owner- magic might work. Specifying what you want as an >argument to sendmail is more likely to work. > >>From the sendmail man page: > > > >> -fname Sets the name of the ``from'' person (i.e., the envelope sender >> of the mail). This address may also be used in the From: header >> if that header is missing during initial submission. The enve- >> lope sender address is used as the recipient for delivery status >> notifications and may also appear in a Return-Path: header. -f >> should only be used by ``trusted'' users (normally root, daemon, >> and network) or if the person you are trying to become is the >> same as the person you are. Otherwise, an X-Authentication- >> Warning header will be added to the message. >> >> > >I want to point out that whereas the envelope sender might be put into >Return-Path, this does not imply that Return-Path will be copied into >the envelope sender. I could be wrong. > >Again, the simple answer is that if you specify the address you want the >bounces to go to, then you don't need to worry. > > > -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Nov 8 00:55:51 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC41B32C40A for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 00:55:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-80-67.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.80.67] helo=defaulttg3zjxw) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CR5Jj-000Lzr-1H for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 03:56:03 -0500 Message-ID: <418F34A6.8010507@btinternet.com> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:56:06 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> In-Reply-To: <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/15 X-Sequence-Number: 1824 Just a few more thoughts on this, as I move increasingly towards giving up. I need someone who understands php and sendmail, and is willing to look at the 2 unmodified mailgust (mlm) files below with reference to all this. http://www.incelsite.com/mgtest/sendcron.txt (normally a php file) http://www.incelsite.com/mgtest/gorum/zmail.txt ( " " " ) Please see * below for my comments. Nick Simicich wrote: >Return-path is a header that is set by the MTA (i.e., sendmail) >as part of the final delivery and it is simply a conventional way to >preserve the RFC821 envelope address. Setting it before you resend >something is likely useless. It is a way to make this visible to the >mail recipient and will otherwise likely be ignored. > > * Ok, I understand and appreciate this. I have abandoned my blind coding attempts to change the return-path header within mailgust. > >Did you understand what I wrote? Please read RFC821 - there are newer >ones, but that one is on point here. When you understand that there is >a MAIL FROM and a RCPT TO address, then consider that what you put in >the mail header has nothing to do with the delivery of the mail. > > * I've tried to read up in some relevant places, but I fail to understand much of it. >(With the exception of using the -t option to sendmail - when you do >that, sendmail parses the header, once, and fills in the envelope.) > > * Are things like -f and -t sendmail arguments which I have read quite a lot about? Presumably these would be / are coded somewhere in the mailgust php code. If you mean instead that I have to set something up in sendmail I don't understand anyway how that would work for a specific address or program. It sounds to me like an action to impact on how sendmail works generally. >There is an envelope. The envelope is how one sendmail talks to >another - the "MAIL FROM:" "RCPT TO:getting your list mail." > >* Ok; It is this 'list bounce address' I am trying and wanting / needing to set. > > >Return-Path might be parsed by -t from sendmail, (I have no way of testing this) but it seems wrong headed to do that. > > * Would this be due to the mlm coding or a sendmail options setting? Looking through the mailgust sendcron.php and gorum/zmail.php files shows things like -f but not -t. Please bear in mind again I have no understanding of php and very little understanding of unix commands. > >If you have the ability to set up scripting, you have the ability to get >an interactive shell on your web host. You just don't know how. :-) > > * I still believe I don't have shell access to my hosting without specifically asking for it or getting my host to do it. If you are calling sendmail directly to forward the e-mail that is being generated or forwarded by mailgust, you need to override the origin. Using the owner- magic might work. Specifying what you want as an argument to sendmail is more likely to work. * ok sure; by owner- magic do you mean including an alias of the form: list-owner: xyz@abc.com ? From what I have read, the style of my aliases will not work with this. The info I have read implies this works with an 'include' alias and a file of addresses. My aliases follow either the form: list@abc.com: path_to_mlm_cron_file or list@abc.com: list_mailbox, path_to_mlm_cron_file > <> -fname Sets the name of the ``from'' person (i.e., the envelope sender > of the mail). This address may also be used in the From: header > if that header is missing during initial submission. The enve- > lope sender address is used as the recipient for delivery status > notifications and may also appear in a Return-Path: header. -f > should only be used by ``trusted'' users (normally root, daemon, > and network) or if the person you are trying to become is the > same as the person you are. Otherwise, an X-Authentication- > Warning header will be added to the message. > >* ok sure, but again, where and how to do this? In 1 or more mlm files? > > Again, the simple answer is that if you specify the address you want the bounces to go to, then you don't need to worry. * yes, that's totally what I want to do !! Thanks again, Lee -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 14 04:30:23 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0DA32C362 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 04:30:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-85-118.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.85.118] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CTJVP-000BNo-4q; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 07:29:19 -0500 Message-ID: <41974F9F.6050809@btinternet.com> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 12:29:19 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, Mailgust Subject: user unknown ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0446-2, 11/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/16 X-Sequence-Number: 1825 hello everyone, In your experience is it ok to treat a bounce error as shown below as 'user unknown' or does it literally imply a temporary problem with an otherwise active address ? 550 [SUSPEND] Mailbox currently suspended - Please contact correspondent directly Thanks, Lee -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 14 05:41:26 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB7232C2C0 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 05:41:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-157-85-118.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.85.118] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1CTKdA-000CRG-1b for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 08:41:24 -0500 Message-ID: <4197608A.9090702@btinternet.com> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:41:30 +0000 From: lee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: using sendmail / SMTP / errors Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0446-2, 11/11/2004), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archive-Number: 200411/17 X-Sequence-Number: 1826 hello again Todd and everyone who has recently helped and advised me, Just a little update for you to consider/react to where relevant. My new replies here are prefixed with *: Todd Olson wrote: >> >>BTW if you manually send mail to list-admin@incelsite.com >from your personal account, does it get there? >> >>* Yes, that's fine; it's a genuine mailbox address which I can and do access. >>------------------------------------------ >> > >>>>He (Mailgust developer) has confirmed that the current mailgust 'bodge' in SMTP is indeed to return bounces to the list address. > >> >> >>so no more guessing needd on this one. >> * Further, I have discovered from him that the same thing happens regardless of whether mailgust is set to send using SMTP or the sendmail binary. This would still not explain my original problem though, where using sendmail on a colleague's domain was causing bounces to go to the original email poster. Along the lines that you and others have tried to tell me, I think Chuck (developer) has said this depends on whether the host's mail server is set to recognise use of the -f option as included / offered in the Mailgust coding. We are currently trying to get the host to answer this question: "Is it allowed to call sendmail from a PHP script using the following format: /usr/sbin/sendmail -i -f sender@address.com ?" (I am currently unclear as to what -i does) Good news though; Chuck has told me/us how to change Mailgust's zmail.php file to successfully allow the Return-Path: to be defined as a desired address other than the list address, which indeed appears to work and appear in the headers, presumably subject to whether -f is allowed on the specific mail server: from zmail.php: (** used here to highlight the new line, apologies for some line wrap corruption) function gmail($from,$to,$subject,$body,$html=0,$att=0,$vfrom="",$vto="",$vcc="",$vdate="",$mid="",$retpath="",$repto="",$addhead="", $host="localhost",$port="25",$client="",$smtpu="",$smtpp="",$rewrite_head="") { global $zmailOk,$zmailHost,$zmailUser,$zmailPass,$zmailMailer; if ($vdate=="") $vdate=date('D, j M Y H:i:s O'); **$retpath= "list-owner@domain.com";** if ($retpath) { $vfrom=$from; $from=$retpath; } if (!$vfrom) $vfrom=$from; $message=""; $eol="\r\n"; //Mail header ----------------------------------- My understanding is this SMTP is the protocol. Stands for Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. Sendmail is a program. It speaks SMTP amoung other things and can route mail from one place to another. Similar programs are postfix, qmail, exim I'm quite confused about what you are calling 'SMTP' ... since you indicate you are not talking about the protocol. Have you any pointers to what you are talking about so we can get on the same page? * yes, this is my lack of understanding here. I think these are my current beliefs: 1) When Mailgust sends mail using its setting to use the sendmail/postfix/qmail/exim binary, mailgust is calling that binary on the host machine by means of a php file. This may or may not be subject to remailing restrictions dependent on how the host has set things up. The binary is indeed part of the outgoing mail server itself, which then sends the mail(s) on to the recipient using an SMTP protocol connection. 2) When Mailgust sends mail using its setting to use an available SMTP server, mailgust is using an SMTP protocol to reach that mail server much like an email client would. This may or may not be subject to remailing restrictions dependent on how that host has set up the mail server. That server then sends the mail(s) on to the recipient using an SMTP protocol connection. As far as I currently understand, the possible advantages of 1) over 2) above may be: a) A faster connection resulting in swifter mail delivery. I appreciate that any ultimate mail delivery is dependent on the processing performance of the recipient POP server. b) It may be a way to avoid SMTP remailing restrictions imposed by a mail server's host. Lee -- *The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION *means even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before* From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 14 07:22:46 2004 X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C64932C33B for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 07:22:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [24.147.79.192] (h000a278f559e.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.147.79.192]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <20041114152231011006vp7te>; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:22:31 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: simsoc@simsoc.org Message-Id: Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 10:22:25 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: John Watkins Subject: Re: user unknown ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archive-Number: 200411/18 X-Sequence-Number: 1827 At 12:29 PM +0000 11/14/04, lee wrote: >In your experience is it ok to treat a bounce error as shown below as 'user unknown' or does it literally imply a temporary problem with an otherwise active address ? > >550 [SUSPEND] Mailbox currently suspended - Please contact correspondent directly I publish an Ezine so the problem is probably different with than with an open-ended list serv. With the Ezine, I file these replies and periodically check to see if they occur for consecutive issues. If they do, the name is either dropped or some other action is taken to confirm continued interest by the individual. With an interactive listserv, it seems the problem would identify itself more quickly because each message would or would not produce the same bounce error. If it's a person you want to "keep," your choice of follow-up will be different than if you don't care about losing them. -- There ARE simple SOLUTIONS to major public problems For proof, take advantage of our FREE trial membership email your name and zip code to trial@simsoc.org. John Watkins Founder and Creative Director The Simple Society Alliance for Human Empowerment 379 Amherst Street #234, Nashua, NH 03063 http://simsoc.org