From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 1 20:15:22 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03263; Fri, 1 Jan 93 20:15:22 PST Received: from emory.mathcs.emory.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03256; Fri, 1 Jan 93 20:15:14 PST Received: from uumind.UUCP by emory.mathcs.emory.edu (5.65/Emory_mathcs.3.4.3) via UUCP id AA16869 ; Fri, 1 Jan 93 23:15:10 -0500 Received: by mind.ORG (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Fri, 01 Jan 93 21:52:16 -0500 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by knex.via.mind.ORG (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Fri, 01 Jan 93 19:07:33 EST for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: rick@vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca (Rick Vandenberg) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Posts by non-members From: Gess Shankar Reply-To: (Gess Shankar) Message-Id: <7X3PwB2w165w@knex.via.mind.ORG> Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 18:54:53 EST In-Reply-To: <2e2NwB1w165w@vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca> Organization: |<><>| Knowledge Exchange, GA, USA |<><>| Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk emory!vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca!rick (Rick Vandenberg) writes: > I've written a file- and list-server, and have a question about > how I can have it handle the following situation: > > On one particular list, posts are allowed by non-members; that is, the > poster does not need to be subscribed. The reason for this is that one > of the addresses on the list points to a mail<->news gateway on another > system. Messages may come from any of a thousand users on this > system. > > Normal operation of the mailing list is to have Reply-To: point back to > the mailing list. Sender: is set to MAILER-DAEMON, so bounces don't go > back to the list. > > The difficulty occurs where a non-member posts from another site. The > Reply-To: points back to the list, therefore all replies will usually go > back to the list. Because the original poster is not subscribed to the > list, it's doubtful that he/she will ever get a response. > Well, if the poster posted from side of the list, won't the responses also float back to the news gateway and appear as news? Or how about adding a Cc: header pointing to the poster's email address, when the list-server senses a post from a non-subscriber? I don't know how various readers respond in this case. But I should think responses will also generate a Cc: to the poster. GeSS -- Gess Shankar |<><>|Internet: gess@knex.via.mind.ORG |<><>| Mmos2-L Admin. |<><>|{rutgers,ogicse,gatech}!emory!uumind!knex!gess |<><>| From List-Managers-Owner Sat Jan 2 10:50:56 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04057; Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:50:56 PST Received: from van-bc.wimsey.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04048; Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:50:31 PST Received: from vsystem by van-bc.wimsey.com with uucp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0n8DvD-0000dDC; Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:50 PST Received: by vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Sat, 02 Jan 93 10:44:56 PST for list-managers@GreatCircle.Com To: (Gess Shankar) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Posts by non-members From: rick@vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca (Rick Vandenberg) Message-Id: Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 10:14:56 PST In-Reply-To: <7X3PwB2w165w@knex.via.mind.ORG> Organization: Vandenberg Systems Research, Vancouver BC Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Gess Shankar writes: > emory!vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca!rick (Rick Vandenberg) writes: > > > I've written a file- and list-server, and have a question about > > how I can have it handle the following situation: > > [...] > > > > The difficulty occurs where a non-member posts from another site. The > > Reply-To: points back to the list, therefore all replies will usually go > > back to the list. Because the original poster is not subscribed to the > > list, it's doubtful that he/she will ever get a response. > > > > Well, if the poster posted from side of the list, won't the responses > also float back to the news gateway and appear as news? Yes, they do. The trouble is with non-members that are not situated at the gateway site. Oh, I forgot to mention that it's a local-news gateway, so it's distributed outside of the gateway site. > Or how about adding a Cc: header pointing to the poster's email address, > when the list-server senses a post from a non-subscriber? I don't know > how various readers respond in this case. But I should think responses > will also generate a Cc: to the poster. I solved the problem by using the built-in scripting langauge to create a script that checks if the user is from the gateway site, or if they are already subscribed. If neither of these is true, they are auto-subscribed to the list, and a copious supply of help is sent to them, included how to get off the list. Whether or not this is the ultimate solution is yet to be seen. All I had to do was add one command to the scripting language to allow address comparisons. About 15 lines of 'C'. Rick. -- Rick Vandenberg rick@vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca Vandenberg Systems Research For more information about V-MailServer 204 - 2255 West 5th Ave. send a blank e-mail to Vancouver, BC V6K 4K1 vmail-info-request@vsystem.wimsey.bc.ca From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 14 04:54:01 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00270; Thu, 14 Jan 93 04:54:01 PST Received: from gacvx1.gac.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00263; Thu, 14 Jan 93 04:53:38 PST Received: from spinner.gac.edu by gacvx1.gac.edu with PMDF#10127; Thu, 14 Jan 1993 06:55 CST Received: by spinner.gac.edu (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/GACnet-2.0-NeXT) id AA18139; Thu, 14 Jan 93 06:51:45 CST Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 06:51:44 (CST) From: paul@nic.gac.edu (Paul Kleeberg) Subject: CompuServe <=> MCIMail e-mail To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: <9301141251.AA18139@spinner.gac.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 765 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I moderate a list which has members from several commercial services. One member on CompuServe discovered that she was missing half the discussion on a topic. It became apparent after questioning that CompuServe blocks mail exchange with competing services (such as MCIMail) unless the CompuServe subscriber is willing to pay $1 per message to send (and I assume an another surcharge to receive). We are currently running on a VAX Mailserv, but are switching to a UNIX box. Any workarounds? Is this common? Paul -- Paul Kleeberg, M.D. | PGY3, Family Practice, University of Minnesota 604 North 3rd St. | Listowner: Fam-Med@GAC.Edu or Fam-Med@GACVAX1 St. Peter, MN 56082 | EMail: Paul@GAC.Edu or Paul@GACVAX1 Voice: 507-931-6721 | Fax: 507-931-6752 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 14 07:06:45 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00420; Thu, 14 Jan 93 07:06:45 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00413; Thu, 14 Jan 93 07:06:36 PST Received: by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA23481; Thu, 14 Jan 93 09:54:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 14:11:42 GMT From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Received: by ssg.com (4.0/3.2.083191-System Support Group) id AA14828; Thu, 14 Jan 93 14:11:42 GMT Message-Id: <9301141411.AA14828@ssg.com> To: paul@nic.gac.edu Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Paul Kleeberg's message of Thu, 14 Jan 1993 06:51:44 (CST) <9301141251.AA18139@spinner.gac.edu> Subject: CompuServe <=> MCIMail e-mail Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 06:51:44 (CST) From: paul@nic.gac.edu (Paul Kleeberg) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 765 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I moderate a list which has members from several commercial services. One member on CompuServe discovered that she was missing half the discussion on a topic. It became apparent after questioning that CompuServe blocks mail exchange with competing services (such as MCIMail) unless the CompuServe subscriber is willing to pay $1 per message to send (and I assume an another surcharge to receive). We are currently running on a VAX Mailserv, but are switching to a UNIX box. Any workarounds? Is this common? Paul -- Paul Kleeberg, M.D. | PGY3, Family Practice, University of Minnesota 604 North 3rd St. | Listowner: Fam-Med@GAC.Edu or Fam-Med@GACVAX1 St. Peter, MN 56082 | EMail: Paul@GAC.Edu or Paul@GACVAX1 Voice: 507-931-6721 | Fax: 507-931-6752 I'm confused. If your list originates from Internet as indicated by your list owner address, then I don't see where the MCIMail to CIS link occurs. If you're saying that a list subscriber on MCIMail is unable to send a message to your Internet list and CIS refuses it, then I'm truely astounded as that means CIS is scanning the mail content to figure out where the (now processed through Internet) message originated. I have two lists that deal with both MCI and CIS. So far the only two restrictions I've encountered are a) CIS refuses to confirm who owns an address (e.g., who owns 12345,678) and b) any message 50BK or greater is blocked unless the subscriber pays a surcharge. Otherwise, I have no problems with mailing to MCI or CIS and this is something I do daily. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "When you ski, you dance with the mountain -- | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | and the mountain always leads." | From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 14 08:01:51 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00479; Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:01:51 PST Received: from geomag.gly.fsu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00472; Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:01:41 PST Received: by geomag.gly.fsu.edu (5.65/31geomag) id AA09177; Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:02:43 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:02:43 -0500 From: Ted Zateslo Message-Id: <9301141602.AA09177@geomag.gly.fsu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: CompuServe <=> MCIMail e-mail Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rick@ssg.com writes: > In-Reply-To: Paul Kleeberg's message of Thu, 14 Jan 1993 06:51:44 (CST) <9301141251.AA18139@spinner.gac.edu> > > I'm confused. If your list originates from Internet as indicated by > your list owner address, then I don't see where the MCIMail to CIS > link occurs. If you're saying that a list subscriber on MCIMail is > unable to send a message to your Internet list and CIS refuses it, > then I'm truely astounded as that means CIS is scanning the mail > content to figure out where the (now processed through Internet) > message originated. > > I have two lists that deal with both MCI and CIS. So far the only two > restrictions I've encountered are a) CIS refuses to confirm who owns > an address (e.g., who owns 12345,678) and b) any message 50BK or > greater is blocked unless the subscriber pays a surcharge. Otherwise, > I have no problems with mailing to MCI or CIS and this is something I > do daily. > > Rick > > I think the problem is that Compuserve looks at the "From:" header, and if it specifies an MCIMail address, the message is bounced. My list is run with a simple sendmail-alias deal, and the "From:" header shows the address of the original sender, not the list address. I suspect Dr. Kleeberg's situation is similar. (I'll fix that problem one of these days...) Ted Zateslo zateslo@geomag.gly.fsu.edu From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 14 08:12:38 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00504; Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:12:38 PST Received: from CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00497; Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:12:30 PST Received: from rex.Graphics.Cornell.edu by CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:13:26 EST Received: by rex.Graphics.Cornell.edu (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA20766; Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:12:19 -0500 Message-Id: <9301141612.AA20766@rex.Graphics.Cornell.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: mkc@Graphics.Cornell.edu Subject: Re: CompuServe <=> MCIMail e-mail In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:02:43 -0500. <9301141602.AA09177@geomag.gly.fsu.edu> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:12:18 EST From: mkc@Graphics.Cornell.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I think the problem is that Compuserve looks at the "From:" header, >and if it specifies an MCIMail address, the message is bounced. >My list is run with a simple sendmail-alias deal, and the "From:" >header shows the address of the original sender, not the list >address. I suspect Dr. Kleeberg's situation is similar. >(I'll fix that problem one of these days...) Is this not the "right" way? (The From: header on your message from list-managers that I received says " From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 14 08:19:17 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00527; Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:19:17 PST Received: from CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00520; Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:19:08 PST Received: from rex.Graphics.Cornell.edu by CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:20:36 EST Received: by rex.Graphics.Cornell.edu (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA20787; Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:19:31 -0500 Message-Id: <9301141619.AA20787@rex.Graphics.Cornell.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: mkc@Graphics.Cornell.edu Subject: Re: CompuServe <=> MCIMail e-mail In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:02:43 -0500. <9301141602.AA09177@geomag.gly.fsu.edu> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:19:30 EST From: mkc@Graphics.Cornell.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Oops, apologies for the last half-message. I missed with the mouse and managed to click the SEND button by mistake. Here's the full message. >I think the problem is that Compuserve looks at the "From:" header, >and if it specifies an MCIMail address, the message is bounced. >My list is run with a simple sendmail-alias deal, and the "From:" >header shows the address of the original sender, not the list >address. I suspect Dr. Kleeberg's situation is similar. >(I'll fix that problem one of these days...) Is this not the "right" way? (The From: header on your message from list-managers that I received says "From: Ted Zateslo " My lists, while also using simple sendmail aliases do the same thing. Anyhow, I would appreciate if someone could inject some facts into this discussion. Does CIS "bounce" rejected messages? or just drop them in the bit bucket? I also have subscribers on both CIS and MCI, as well as something called America On-line. I haven't yet heard complaints about missing messages, but that can sometimes be hard to detect, other times not. I would really like to know the facts about this so that I can alert my subscribers to them if necessary. Thanks. -Mitch Collinsworth mitch@graphics.cornell.edu From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 04:45:24 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02870; Fri, 15 Jan 93 04:45:24 PST Received: from gacvx1.gac.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02861; Fri, 15 Jan 93 04:45:03 PST Received: from spinner.gac.edu by gacvx1.gac.edu with PMDF#10127; Fri, 15 Jan 1993 06:47 CST Received: by spinner.gac.edu (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/GACnet-2.0-NeXT) id AA19908; Fri, 15 Jan 93 06:43:27 CST Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 06:43:26 (CST) From: paul@nic.gac.edu (Paul Kleeberg) Subject: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: <9301151243.AA19908@spinner.gac.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2026 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Here is some additional information I received after my message was forwarded to another list. It does not directly address the issue of a distribution list but it may shed some light on the issue and the possible foundation of CI$'s policy. Paul Forwarded message: > From ehs@camis.stanford.edu Thu Jan 14 10:46:22 1993 > Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:46:48 -0800 > From: Ted Shortliffe > Subject: Compuserve-MCIMail email > To: Paul@gac.edu, 70404.166@compuserve.com > Cc: DFP10%ALBNYDH2.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu > Message-Id: > Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I sat on the Federal Networking Advisory Council for a couple of years > and learned there that there is actually an Internet prohibition of use of the > Internet to send email between different commercial email services. As far as I > know, that is still the case. The Internet filters and rejects incoming email > from CompuServe or MCIMail if it is headed for a recipient in a different > commercial system. The gateways to commercial carriers were approved with the > understanding that they would be used to carry mail to or from individuals who > were on Internet/Bitnet machines. > I don't know how Compuserve handles email that is sent to MCIMail, but > they may need to handle it separately (and handle the costs accordingly -- hence > the $1 fee). > Bottom line: the problem may be with federal internet policy rather > than some wrong-headedness on the part of Compuserve. I wouldn't promulgate > this interpretation (or this message) without checking this out further, but I > did want to point out that Compuserve may have no choice in the matter. > Ted Shortliffe Paul -- Paul Kleeberg, M.D. | PGY3, Family Practice, University of Minnesota 604 North 3rd St. | Listowner: Fam-Med@GAC.Edu or Fam-Med@GACVAX1 St. Peter, MN 56082 | EMail: Paul@GAC.Edu or Paul@GACVAX1 Voice: 507-931-6721 | Fax: 507-931-6752 From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 06:47:42 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02950; Fri, 15 Jan 93 06:47:42 PST Received: from uu7.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02943; Fri, 15 Jan 93 06:47:34 PST Received: by uu7.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA25471; Fri, 15 Jan 93 09:39:26 -0500 Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 13:21:01 GMT From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Received: by ssg.com (4.0/3.2.083191-System Support Group) id AA00792; Fri, 15 Jan 93 13:21:01 GMT Message-Id: <9301151321.AA00792@ssg.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk It's one thing to act as a gateway from MCI to CI$ or GEnie, etc. but I no reason to feel squeamish about "broadcasting" a message from a CI$ subscriber to the world at large (including MCIMail, etc.). If, in fact, there is a filter that looks for non-Internet to non_Internet transfers, then it's time to write a filter (I recommend perl) that "adjusts" the From: and credits the author in the text. Having written, in perl, daemons to imitate BSMTP, I know this is not a difficult task. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "When you ski, you dance with the mountain -- | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | and the mountain always leads." | From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 07:34:59 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03011; Fri, 15 Jan 93 07:34:59 PST Received: from oak.cc.swarthmore.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03004; Fri, 15 Jan 93 07:34:52 PST Received: by oak.cc.swarthmore.edu (sendmail 5.57/oak05-20-92) id AA23550; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:34:47 -0500 Received: by gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu (sendmail 5.57/client04-17-92) id AA02928; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:34:44 -0500 Message-Id: <9301151534.AA02928@gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu> From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 10:34:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: paul@nic.gac.edu (Paul Kleeberg) "Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd)" (Jan 15, 6:43am) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pgp: finger hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu for my PGP 2.1 public key. X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk : there is actually an Internet prohibition of use of the : Internet to send email between different commercial email services. For a look at this policy, you can ftp the following file: nis.nsf.net:/acceptable.use.policies/nsfnet.txt which you have to follow if you send packets through any NSFnet routers. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 10:29:52 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03405; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:29:52 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03398; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:29:46 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA04874; Fri, 15 Jan 93 12:30:05 CST Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 12:30:05 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9301151830.AA04874@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Problems delivering to CI$ and MCI Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) sez: > I have two lists that deal with both MCI and CIS. So far the only two > restrictions I've encountered are a) CIS refuses to confirm who owns > an address (e.g., who owns 12345,678) and b) any message 50BK or > greater is blocked unless the subscriber pays a surcharge. Otherwise, > I have no problems with mailing to MCI or CIS and this is something I > do daily. I have come across one additional problem with MCI. Sendmail likes to collect up addresses going to the same host so that it only has to deliver one copy of the message. But if you give mcimail.com a list of recipients and ONE of them is wrong, it will not deliver the message to any of the named recipients---even the valid ones. Correspondence with MCI has confirmed that this is the case. Unfortunately, those that run things at MCI see no reason to fix this in any sort of reasonable time frame. Their reaction was (paraphrased) "well, yeah, we do things differently. That's just how our internal mailer works. Maybe some day we'll fix it." William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 10:32:16 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03423; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:32:16 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03416; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:32:10 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA04878; Fri, 15 Jan 93 12:32:30 CST Date: Fri, 15 Jan 93 12:32:30 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9301151832.AA04878@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Eiji Hirai's message of Fri, 15 Jan 1993 10:34:44 -0500 <9301151534.AA02928@gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu> Subject: Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 10:34:44 -0500 : there is actually an Internet prohibition of use of the : Internet to send email between different commercial email services. For a look at this policy, you can ftp the following file: nis.nsf.net:/acceptable.use.policies/nsfnet.txt which you have to follow if you send packets through any NSFnet routers. Let's all remember that Internet != NSFnet. There can be no "Internet prohibition" since there is no one entity that governs the entire global Internet. Although where the US is concerned, NSFnet certainly controls the majority of the backbone infrastructure. William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 10:51:52 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03485; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:51:52 PST Received: from pi-chan.ucsb.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03478; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:51:43 PST Received: by pi-chan.ucsb.edu id AA01921 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for List-Managers@greatcircle.com); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 10:49:58 -0800 From: Jim Lick Message-Id: <199301151849.AA01921@pi-chan.ucsb.edu> Subject: Re: CompuServe <=> MCIMail e-mail To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 10:49:58 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL11] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5372 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Oh yes, those lovely commercial services... I had some trouble with MCImail a few months back. One subscriber on my mailing lists moved from Compuserve to MCImail. Normal mail to him worked fine. The "melrose-place" list mail to him worked fine. However mail from the "90210" list to him bounced back saying something like "90210: no such user here." As you may know, MCImail uses numeric userids, so my theory is that they looked at the "To:" line and if it was a number, they thought it was one of theirs. I wrote to postmaster there about it, and got no reply. Eventually the subscriber wrote to ask why he was getting no mail. I explained the problem, and that I had unsubscribed him because I received no answer from the postmaster there. Apparently he screamed at someone on his end and I get a note from some techie that they've never heard of the problem, and also denied receiving my problem report about it. He suggested I try it again. Lo and behold, it actually worked this time. I thought it was a little disgusting that they tried to deny that the problem existed when the customer complained though. I think a lot of problems, including this one and the current Compuserve one, stem from confusion of the "envelope" addresses and the ones actually listed in the header. As far as mail delivery goes, the addresses in the header don't mean a thing. (Unix systems make the envelope sender appear in the first line of the header, but this is not part of any standard from what I've heard.) The only thing the header addresses are used for is when a mail reader replies which should go to the "Reply-To:" address, or if that doesn't exist, to the "From:" address. (Pet peeve: some mail readers reply to the envelope sender address, which for most mailing lists is where bounces go.) I think we'd all have a lot less problems if all the mail systems followed the standard rules, but unfortunately they don't. Mitch Collinsworth asks what the "right" way is. According to my theory, this is the way things should work with mailing lists: Envelope sender is set to listname-owner. Envelope recipients are the list of subscribers. Everything else is left as-is, except some "Errors-To:" and "Precedence:" headers are added, but these should be optional. Now, the tricky part is how the mail delivery systems along the way handle the message. What they should do is look at the envelope recipients they recieve (which should be a subset of the original list) and attempt delivery to them. If it can't send to one or more recipients, it should bounce the message back to the envelope sender. ("Errors-To:" and "Precedence:" can alter this on some systems, but it is not universal, nor is it necessary that these be followed if the above rules are followed.) It would be really nice of them to tell me which subscribers failed, and return a verbatim copy of the bounced message as well so I can look at the headers in case the message was forwarded. What actually happens in real life isn't so simple. Almost everything handles the recipients properly. MCImail was the only system I have encountered that had trouble here. There's a significant number of systems that don't bounce things right. Usually these systems will bounce to the "From:" or "Reply-To:" address. In this case, subscribers who post get the bounces. This confuses and/or annoys the poster, and I won't know that there is a problem until someone complains or I post something myself. One system actually managed to bounce to the mailing list itself. What's more, the bounce message was completely useless. It did not show who the message was supposed to be to, and didn't include a copy of the message, so there was no way to track down whose fault it was. The site that was bouncing things was not part of any address I had listed, nor was it an MX for any of the addresses listed, so I was stuck with no option but to yell at the offending site for a week until they turned it off. I think they finally did something when I not only blocked the bounce address from posting, but also bounced the bounce messages back to them. Fortunately this was caught early, and I was able to quickly write up a filter to block that address, but if I had been away at the time, subscribers would have received at least 250 bounce messages, plus however many more would have been generated by feedback. This would, to say the least, have been a BIG problem if it had not been caught right away. Even after blocking the address, I received close to 300 bounces. The affected list had at the time around 250 subscribers, so figure conservatively and thats 250x250 or 62,500 messages sent out if not caught. Even when the system bounces to the right address, what they bounce is also important. I received one bounce from a system that had three subscribers, but the bounce gave no clue which of them no longer existed. The system had finger disabled, and the VRFY and EXPN commands on the smtp port were also disabled. Since I couldn't figure it out, I just unsubscribed all three of them... Yes, I can be cold-hearted at times. --- jim@pi-chan.ucsb.edu --- Jim Lick --- jim@tcp.com --- jIngOrO@CaveMUCK --- --:):-- perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most -- |\| | |/| --:(:-- --- CaveMUCK is back! --- Telnet to cave.tcp.com (128.95.10.106) port 2283 --- From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 10:55:20 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03503; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:55:20 PST Received: from control.com (GATEWAY.CONTROL.COM) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03495; Fri, 15 Jan 93 10:55:09 PST Received: by control.com (4.1/Spike-2.0) id AA12739; Fri, 15 Jan 93 13:53:57 EST Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 13:52:52 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Raisch Reply-To: Rob Raisch Subject: Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd) To: Eiji Hirai Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301151534.AA02928@gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Someone, some other time, wrote: > : there is actually an Internet prohibition of use of the > : Internet to send email between different commercial email services. BZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTT..... Wrong! See below. On Fri, 15 Jan 1993, Eiji Hirai wrote: > For a look at this policy, you can ftp the following file: > > nis.nsf.net:/acceptable.use.policies/nsfnet.txt > > which you have to follow if you send packets through any NSFnet routers. Hey! When will people wake up and smell the coffee? Repeat after me.... The NSFnet is not the Internet. A. There are many ways to get a packet from me to thee. The NSFnet is not the only game in town, (They only want you to think they are.) B. Even if you are connected to the Internet via the NSFnet, you can pay ANS their pound of flesh which allows you to use the ANS.net to shuffle commercial traffic. It is left up to the reader to define the differences between the ANS.net and the NSF.net. (As far as I am aware, the difference is simply the name. It's the same hardware, software, and administration.) >From here, (Boston), MCIMail.COM is reachable via ANS.net. And iha.Compu$erve.COM is reachable via ALTER.net. If MCI wishes to pay ANS the proper tithe, they could receive email from anyone commercial or not. -- From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 11:01:48 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03531; Fri, 15 Jan 93 11:01:48 PST Received: from oak.cc.swarthmore.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03524; Fri, 15 Jan 93 11:01:42 PST Received: by oak.cc.swarthmore.edu (sendmail 5.57/oak05-20-92) id AA01054; Fri, 15 Jan 93 14:02:06 -0500 Received: by gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu (sendmail 5.57/client04-17-92) id AA04189; Fri, 15 Jan 93 14:02:05 -0500 Message-Id: <9301151902.AA04189@gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu> From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 14:02:04 -0500 In-Reply-To: Rob Raisch "Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd)" (Jan 15, 1:52pm) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pgp: finger hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu for my PGP 2.1 public key. X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Rob Raisch taps on the keyboard: : Repeat after me.... The NSFnet is not the Internet. I don't think I ever implied that. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 15 13:05:44 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03607; Fri, 15 Jan 93 13:05:44 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03600; Fri, 15 Jan 93 13:05:37 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14476>; Fri, 15 Jan 1993 16:05:02 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA00413 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu); Fri, 15 Jan 93 16:03:14 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA09952 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Fri, 15 Jan 93 16:03:28 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9301152103.AA09952@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Compuserve-MCIMail email (fwd) To: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 16:03:27 -0500 Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301151534.AA02928@gingko.cc.swarthmore.edu> from "Eiji Hirai" at Jan 15, 93 10:34:44 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 451 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > which you have to follow if you send packets through any NSFnet routers. There's no longer any such thing as an NSFnet router. -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Tue Jan 19 15:06:29 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11032; Tue, 19 Jan 93 15:06:29 PST Received: from brazil.cambridge.apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11025; Tue, 19 Jan 93 15:06:23 PST Received: from ministry.cambridge.apple.com by brazil.cambridge.apple.com with SMTP (5.64/25-eef) id AA02953; Tue, 19 Jan 93 18:06:50 -0500 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by cambridge.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA15867; Tue, 19 Jan 93 18:06:22 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 18:06:22 -0500 From: Sean Brunnock Message-Id: <9301192306.AA15867@cambridge.apple.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: list of beginner's InterNet books Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A novice sent a subscription request to a mailing list that I manage, a common event for all of us I'm certain. I sent him my standard rebuke ("Please contact your systems administrator about how to properly subscribe to a mailing list"), but he replied that there was no one there who could answer his question. One would think that the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory could afford one guru. Rather than criticize the person any further, I'd like to give him a list of beginner's guides and tell him to buy one. I know of the following books: _The Whole Internet User's Guide & Catalog_, Ed Kroll, O'Reilly and Associates _Zen and the Art of the Internet_, Brendan Kehoe, Prentice Hall, ISBN: 0-13-010778-6 But do they discuss the proper way to subscribe to a mailing list? Does anyone have a list of other books? As the maintainers of mailing lists, we are the ones who have to deal with the mistakes of novices. I think we should have a list of these books in a file ready to be zipped off to early offenders. Sean Brunnock From List-Managers-Owner Tue Jan 19 15:36:29 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11132; Tue, 19 Jan 93 15:36:29 PST Received: from phoebus.nisc.sri.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11125; Tue, 19 Jan 93 15:36:23 PST Received: by phoebus.nisc.sri.com (5.64/SRI-NISC1.1) id AA18753; Tue, 19 Jan 93 15:36:30 -0800 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 15:36:30 PST From: Vivian Neou To: Sean Brunnock Cc: vivian@NISC.SRI.COM, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 19 Jan 93 18:06:22 -0500 Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Here's a list of some other books that would be helpful. As a warning, I do have a personal interest in the first two as I helped to put them together! "Internet: Mailing Lists", Hardie & Neou. This is a directory of over 800 mailing lists that are available on the Internet (it is a hardcopy version of the "List of Lists"). In addition to the listings, it also explains the most common methods for joining mailing lists, and also provides some "etiquette" guidelines for using lists. $29. Available now. "Internet: Getting Started", Marine, Kirkpatrick, Ward, Neou. Explains how to join the Internet, and has lists of resources. Also explains e-mail, ftp, etc. $29. It will be available from PH at the beginning of Feb. FYI 4 "FYI on Questions and Answers: Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet User" Questions". Available online via anonymous FTP in RFC/FYI repositories around the Internet. ftp.nisc.sri.com is one such location. FYI 7 "FYI on Questions and Answers: Answers to Commonly asked "Experienced Internet User" Questions". Available online via anonymous FTP in RFC/FYI repositories around the Internet. ftp.nisc.sri.com is one such location. FYI 10 "Ther's Gold in Them Thar Networks! or Searching for Treasure in All the Wrong Places". Available online via anonymous FTP in RFC/FYI repositories around the Internet. ftp.nisc.sri.com is one such location. "The Internet Companion: A Beginner's Guide to Global Networking", Tracy LaQuey; Addison-Wesley. I can't find my copy right now but I think it did have some information on the procedures for joining mailing lists. Vivian Neou From List-Managers-Owner Tue Jan 19 16:25:01 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11232; Tue, 19 Jan 93 16:25:01 PST Received: from tux.fa.asu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11225; Tue, 19 Jan 93 16:24:51 PST Received: by tux.fa.asu.edu (5.64/A/UX-3.00) id AA00637; Tue, 19 Jan 93 17:24:57 MST Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 17:19:56 -0700 (MST) From: Ben Goren Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books To: Sean Brunnock Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301192306.AA15867@cambridge.apple.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 19 Jan 1993, Sean Brunnock wrote: > [deleted] > a list of beginner's guides and tell him to buy one. I know of the > following books: > > [deleted] > > _Zen and the Art of the Internet_, > Brendan Kehoe, Prentice Hall, ISBN: 0-13-010778-6 > > But do they discuss the proper way to subscribe to a mailing list? My copy of _Zen_, which I got from an ftp server somewhere (don't remember where, and I'd use archie to find a new copy) and is dated 2 Feb 1992 does indeed discuss how to subscribe to both Internet lists and Listserv lists (the "real" kind that uses Eric's software). It also discusses Usenet at great length. It's one of the best documents I've ever seen, and I'm seriously considering sending it to every newbie I see.... > Sean Brunnock b& ---- Ben Goren Arizona State University School of Music Internet: Ben.Goren@asu.edu BITNet: AUBXG AT ASUACAD From List-Managers-Owner Tue Jan 19 16:56:32 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11287; Tue, 19 Jan 93 16:56:32 PST Received: from SERVER.uwindsor.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11280; Tue, 19 Jan 93 16:56:24 PST Received: by SERVER.uwindsor.ca (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO) for List-Managers@Greatcircle.com id AA18781; Tue, 19 Jan 93 19:54:41 -0500 Message-Id: <9301200054.AA18781@SERVER.uwindsor.ca> Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books To: (List managers) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 19:54:37 EST In-Reply-To: ; from "Ben Goren" at Jan 19, 93 5:19 pm From: Scott Ophof X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Ben Goren said: ]... ]indeed discuss how to subscribe to both Internet lists and Listserv lists ](the "real" kind that uses Eric's software). It also discusses Usenet at Correction: There is no "real" kind in the sense you use it here; there is only *one* "LISTSERV", and it's indeed written by Eric Thomas. The rest either use the name "listserv" withOUT Eric's permission (except for the LISTEARN software), or are list servers (note the space!), or are mailing list managers. Regards. $$/ From List-Managers-Owner Tue Jan 19 23:16:39 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11926; Tue, 19 Jan 93 23:16:39 PST Received: from grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA11919; Tue, 19 Jan 93 23:16:33 PST Received: by grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr (5.67a8/IDA-1.5f) via Rocad id AA18739; Wed, 20 Jan 1993 08:16:58 +0100 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 08:16:58 +0100 From: Christophe Wolfhugel Message-Id: <199301200716.AA18739@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Scott Ophof : > The rest either use the name "listserv" withOUT Eric's permission > (except for the LISTEARN software), or are list servers (note the > space!), or are mailing list managers. Yup. But from some readings (not in this list) seem not to like that packages other than Eric's use the name "listserv" which is understandable, but others also dislike that some UNIX mailing list managers use a "listserv" alias and the same set of commands. This is not reasonnable. Having 5132153165185165156153 sets of commands with changes for each package is just a pain in the ass. I like having a uniform set of commands for the users. Wether they subscribe to a LISTSERV list, a list handled by a listserv on VMS on UNIX I just furnish them the same set of commands with similar functionnalities. When I hear people saying "use another alias and set of commands in order to avoid confusion" I just tell them that they are as stupid as those willing to copyright the look and feel. Chris From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 07:00:17 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14583; Thu, 21 Jan 93 07:00:17 PST Received: from emory.mathcs.emory.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14574; Thu, 21 Jan 93 06:59:55 PST Received: from uumind.UUCP by emory.mathcs.emory.edu (5.65/Emory_mathcs.3.4.4) via UUCP id AA29690 ; Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:00:05 -0500 Received: by mind.ORG (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:12:37 -0500 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by knex.via.mind.ORG (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Wed, 20 Jan 93 07:10:58 EST for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books From: Gess Shankar Reply-To: (Gess Shankar) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 07:01:58 EST In-Reply-To: <9301192306.AA15867@cambridge.apple.com> Organization: |<><>| Knowledge Exchange, GA, USA |<><>| Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sean Brunnock writes: > > A novice sent a subscription request to a mailing list that > I manage, a common event for all of us I'm certain. > > I sent him my standard rebuke ("Please contact your systems administrator > about how to properly subscribe to a mailing list"), but he replied that > there was no one there who could answer his question. One would think > that the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory could afford one guru. > Is there such a thing as "how to properly subscribe to a mailing list"? There are many different flavors of list servers and each has its own way of sending commands and submissions. Two most common errors appear to be sending commands to the list or sending a request to server not using the proper command syntax. e.g. "please add my name to this great list". Instead of sending a "standard rebuke", why not send a detailed help file telling him how to subscribe properly to the list in question? Or am I missing something? Is there really such a thing as "how to properly subscribe to a mailing list"? GeSS -- Gess Shankar |<><>|Internet: gess@knex.via.mind.ORG |<><>| Mmos2-L Admin. |<><>|{rutgers,ogicse,gatech}!emory!uumind!knex!gess |<><>| From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 08:36:37 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14677; Thu, 21 Jan 93 08:36:37 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14670; Thu, 21 Jan 93 08:36:27 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa01410; 21 Jan 93 11:24 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26794; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:26:17 EST Message-Id: <9301211626.AA26794@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:26:17 EST In-Reply-To: Sean Brunnock "list of beginner's InterNet books" (Jan 19, 6:06pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: Sean Brunnock , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > A novice sent a subscription request to a mailing list that > I manage, a common event for all of us I'm certain. > I sent him my standard rebuke ("Please contact your systems administrator > about how to properly subscribe to a mailing list"), but he replied that > there was no one there who could answer his question. One would think > that the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory could afford one guru. We have this discussion so often on this list, that I probably shouldn't get it started again, but, obviously Sean hasn't participated previously... There seem to be two types of list managers: 1. Those that think that users should learn how to use Listserv's, and it's the list manager's job to make them learn, no matter how difficult, and 2. Those that think that every mistake a new user makes is simply a signal to list managers on how to make their procedures and documentation better. As you've probably guessed, I'm of the latter persuasion. Why should someone need a "systems administrator" to learn how to "properly" subscribe? If you need even "one guru", the procedure is simply too tough. Today's Listserv's are simply too inflexible. Here's an example that I ran into recently: A user has a mail system on his Mac (QuickMail or something) that *always* adds a bunch of extraneous "Subject:" and "Office Memo" lines in the text of each message. This user *cannot* use many vanilla Listserv's because they give a "Bad command, flushing rest of your message" error. It doesn't matter how many gurus are at this site, unless they can re-write their mail system. Why should the Listserv flush the rest of the message? Maybe it contains recognizable commands? --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 09:24:28 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14804; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:24:28 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14796; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:24:25 PST Message-Id: <9301211724.AA14796@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 20 Jan 93 07:01:58 EST Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:24:23 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk (Gess Shankar) writes: # Or am I missing something? Is there really such a thing as "how to properly # subscribe to a mailing list"? On the Internet, the standard has always been "send a message to -request". Now, "-request" may be a human, or it may be a program, or it may be a recording that tells you how to use some other program like Majordomo or LISTSERV, but it should definitely exist for any list on the Internet. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 09:43:10 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15107; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:43:10 PST Received: from hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu (hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15100; Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:43:04 PST Received: from localhost by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2685>; Thu, 21 Jan 1993 12:42:57 -0500 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books In-Reply-To: mmorse's message of Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:26:17 -0500. <9301211626.AA26794@z.nsf.gov> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 12:42:44 -0500 From: Chris Siebenmann Message-Id: <93Jan21.124257est.2685@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk | Why should the Listserv flush the rest of the message? Maybe it | contains recognizable commands? If you relentlessly search for commands, sooner or later you'll find them -- even in, say, looping mail messages. No thanks. I *like* the fact that LISTSERV cuts this off at the source. In general, there is only so much that one can do to compensate for badly broken software; sooner or later you have to draw the line and punt; there's always humans around (one hopes). I'm happy to draw the line at mail systems that scatter strange things in messages. - cks From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 11:00:57 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15582; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:00:57 PST Received: from elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (elxr-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15575; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:00:51 PST Received: by elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (4.1/SMI-4.1+DXRm2.2) id AA21281; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:01:18 PST Message-Id: <9301211901.AA21281@elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:01:17 -0800 From: Dave Hayes Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > There seem to be two types of list managers: > > 1. Those that think that users should learn how to use > Listserv's, and it's the list manager's job to make them > learn, no matter how difficult, and > > 2. Those that think that every mistake a new user makes is > simply a signal to list managers on how to make their > procedures and documentation better. Given the high influx of new users into the wonderful world of net connectivity, I would be inclined to assume that the latter position is much more productive. One way to solve some of this dilemna would be to only advertise the "-request" address as the way of contacting the list, and then provide an automatic help file as a blanket response to people who mail to that address... ------ Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...usc!elroy!dxh Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly. From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 11:08:21 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15621; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:08:21 PST Received: from presto.ig.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15614; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:08:15 PST Received: by presto.ig.com (5.61/1.15) id AA20988; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:08:00 -0800 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:07:58 PST From: "John M. Relph" Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:01:17 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> There seem to be two types of list managers: >> >> 2. Those that think that every mistake a new user makes is >> simply a signal to list managers on how to make their >> procedures and documentation better. > >Given the high influx of new users into the wonderful world of net connectivity, >I would be inclined to assume that the latter position is much more productive. > >One way to solve some of this dilemna would be to only advertise the "-request" >address as the way of contacting the list, and then provide an automatic help file >as a blanket response to people who mail to that address... That's a great idea in theory, but unfortunately there are always those oh-so-enthusiastic newbies out there who take it upon themselves to advertise their favourite lists by broadcasting to the entire known universe: Hey! Let's talk about XXX! Send a message to XXX-list@some.host! And OF COURSE they forget the -request part of the address. -- John From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 11:16:39 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15657; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:16:39 PST Received: from antares.mcs.anl.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15650; Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:16:33 PST Received: from skeeve.mcs.anl.gov by antares.mcs.anl.gov (4.1/SMI-GAR) id AA20956; Thu, 21 Jan 93 13:16:32 CST Received: by skeeve.mcs.anl.gov (4.1/GeneV4) id AA17376; Thu, 21 Jan 93 13:16:30 CST Message-Id: <9301211916.AA17376@skeeve.mcs.anl.gov> To: Dave Hayes Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, rackow@antares.mcs.anl.gov Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:01:17 PST." <9301211901.AA21281@elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 13:16:29 CST From: Gene Rackow Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk That is kind of an interesting idea, but probably won't fix much. Some amount of the newbie problems are because they are told that "list" is a good thing to be on. You should really get it... Newbie now sends a message to "list" because he thinks it something interesting, not ever knowing about the -request address. There is also a major problem in that many people on the lists JUST DO NOT READ. It's not that uncommon to see a message posted by the list administrator about "administrivia" which does have the proper addresses and even -request reply addresses in it. Some bozoid will see the admin message, think it's about time to get off of that list and send back a unsubscribe message to the WHOLE list. The day the AI stuff gets to the point of really being able to parse a message and understand what the boziod is asking and not allow administrivia messages through to the whole list will come, but probably not in the lifetime of most of the current mailing lists or maintainers. Distribute has taken care of a number of those messages, but not all. --Gene From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 14:33:32 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15932; Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:33:32 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15925; Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:33:25 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa05577; 21 Jan 93 17:27 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27058; Thu, 21 Jan 93 17:29:37 EST Message-Id: <9301212229.AA27058@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:29:37 EST In-Reply-To: Dave Hayes "Re: list of beginner's InterNet books" (Jan 21, 11:01am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: Dave Hayes , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > One way to solve some of this dilemna would be to only advertise the "-request" > address as the way of contacting the list, and then provide an automatic help file > as a blanket response to people who mail to that address... This has the advantage that it has long been an Internet tradition. The disadvantage is that it is quite foreign to those brought up on the BITNET, which, from my experience, is still a very significant group. One of the reasons we've resisted this approach in the past is that we are also a BITNET host, and some (anyone care to make a guess what percentage?) BITNET sites cannot send mail to addresses that have over 8 characters. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 15:28:44 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16018; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:28:44 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16009; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:28:35 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA07857; Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:28:26 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA27142; Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:30:49 EST Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:30:49 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9301212330.AA27142@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: brent@GreatCircle.COM Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9212212100.AA09422@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> (message from Brent Chapman on Mon, 21 Dec 92 13:00:03 -0800) Subject: How to deal with bounces Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > # Note that some SMTP servers accept neither EXPN nor VRFY (the default > # Zmailer configuration, for example). > # > # - cks > Further, even some that do accept EXPN and VRFY don't always tell you > what you want to know. > The common problem I see is that folks wanting to check > "user@company.com" TELNET to the gateway machine, then do "vrfy user". > The gateway machine quite rightly returns "no such user", since there > _isn't_ any such user ON THE GATEWAY MACHINE. If they had instead > done "vrfy user@company.com", they would have gotten back "address OK" > (which still doesn't tell them whether or not the user actually > exists; it just tells them that the gateway knows how to handle mail > addressed to "*@company.com"). Just wanted to note that the expn.c program I posted to this list a while back does use the fully qualified address first, and then tries the local name only in the event of a mailer which can't deal with requests to EXPN or VRFY addresses with @ in them. It also tries both EXPN and VRFY, so except for mailers which don't support either, it gets a response. @alex From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 15:54:00 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16043; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:54:00 PST Received: from elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (elxr-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16036; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:53:53 PST Received: by elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (4.1/SMI-4.1+DXRm2.2) id AA23327; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:53:51 PST Message-Id: <9301212353.AA23327@elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov> To: Gene Rackow Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:53:51 -0800 From: Dave Hayes Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > That is kind of an interesting idea, but probably won't fix much. Often times, because a particular solution won't fix the _entire_ problem, it is assumed that the solution is unworkable. Is that the case in this instance? > There is also a major problem in that many people on the lists JUST > DO NOT READ. On the lists or not, this is a common affliction of people everywhere. Myself included. :-) ------ Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...usc!elroy!dxh He who has self-conceit in his head - Do not imagine that he will ever hear the truth. From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 15:56:45 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16064; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:56:45 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16056; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:56:38 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA16167; Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:57:05 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA16547; Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:39:07 EST Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:39:07 EST From: johnw@bahainvs.org (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9301212339.AA16547@bahainvs> To: "List Managers" Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Reply-To: johnw@bahainvs.org Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk About "newbies" and their education: I find that one of my biggest drawbacks as a systems administrator is that I've forgotten how to think stupidly. Not that stupidity is bad in itself; it comes just before understanding. But to wallow in it is deplorable, and to forget it is dangerous! No matter how simple you make things, there's always SOMEBODY who doesn't get it. This can be incredibly frustrating. I remember nights when I've sat down and thought: how can they possible have miscontrued this? Are they trying to be stupid? Lately I have been trying to engineer a UUCP/Email Client program, made up of a few other packages (Pegasus, UUPC/Extended). The obj- ective is to provide my WAN community with a super-simple way to access the Internet. It has turned to be an educational experience: it has taught me a great deal about the mystery of stupidity. It's a mystery that I think a lot of people would do well to learn; for we're not going to be able to "raise" the understanding of our newbies unless we can somehow speak their language, and learn to forestall their aggrevating antics. So I don't think it's bad intentions on their part; it's just that there's this enormous gap between "guru" and "newbie". The chasm is so great that the two stand opposed to each other like night and day. The list server of the future is either going to have to be uselessly simple, or so developed that it transcends the limitations of its own intelligence (when it can ascend to such heights that it reverts back to its own origin). It would be a Taoist piece of magic, but at the moment, some of our list servers may just be too darn intelligent. Fuzziness is the universal trait shared by the minds of all newbies. Clear cut distinctions just don't wash. So we need a program that can deal with fuzziness! (someone mentioned AI... I think that's an excellent way to go). Until then, it's a problem that's just going to get worse the more you think about it. At the present time, there doesn't seem to be much you can do except put on a happy grin, swallow a Tums, and answer their questions (no matter how stupid). John Wiegley (johnw@bahainvs.org) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 15:58:24 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16085; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:58:24 PST Received: from elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (elxr-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16078; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:58:17 PST Received: by elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov (4.1/SMI-4.1+DXRm2.2) id AA23371; Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:58:36 PST Message-Id: <9301212358.AA23371@elxr.jpl.Nasa.Gov> To: "Michael H. Morse" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:58:35 -0800 From: Dave Hayes Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > One of the reasons we've resisted this approach in the past is that we > are also a BITNET host, and some (anyone care to make a guess what > percentage?) BITNET sites cannot send mail to addresses that have over > 8 characters. Hmmm...can you enforce a method of sending things to a list such that only those people on that list can send mail to it? Otherwise, the mail is bounced to a "-request" address... ------ Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...usc!elroy!dxh If you want to get rid of somebody, just tell them something for their own good. From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 21 23:17:46 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16532; Thu, 21 Jan 93 23:17:46 PST Received: from grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16525; Thu, 21 Jan 93 23:17:39 PST Received: by grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr (5.67a8/IDA-1.5f) via Rocad id AA23278; Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:17:37 +0100 Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:17:37 +0100 From: Christophe Wolfhugel Message-Id: <199301220717.AA23278@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Gene Rackow : > The day the AI stuff gets to the point of really being able to parse a > message and understand what the boziod is asking and not allow administrivia Anyway by essence you can count on those bozos to find out the holes of such AI software... By definition they generally manage to get on a list but *never* (or well I have one unique list where people know how to leave, maybe because most subscribers are system administrators and have some experience in that field) keep nor remember instructions on how to leave. Those bozos are generally the sames who send messages to the list server (when existant) and commands to the list... I already gave up facing user's stupidity ! Next action might be to filter all mail addressed to listserv@, *-request@ so I won't loose times every end of school years having people removed from lists. Chris From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 22 05:51:25 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16982; Fri, 22 Jan 93 05:51:25 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16975; Fri, 22 Jan 93 05:51:06 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa12908; 22 Jan 93 8:40 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27465; Fri, 22 Jan 93 08:42:55 EST Message-Id: <9301221342.AA27465@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:42:55 EST In-Reply-To: Dave Hayes "Re: list of beginner's InterNet books" (Jan 21, 3:53pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: Dave Hayes , Gene Rackow Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > There is also a major problem in that many people on the lists JUST > > DO NOT READ. > > On the lists or not, this is a common affliction of people everywhere. > Myself included. :-) My experience (which includes myself) is that hardly *anybody* reads things before they try the intuitive (to them, that is) action. If that doesn't work, probably 95% will read and follow an informative error message. This is how the PC revolution has trained people, so we better get used to it. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 22 20:16:11 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17917; Fri, 22 Jan 93 20:16:11 PST Received: from SERVER.uwindsor.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17910; Fri, 22 Jan 93 20:16:01 PST Received: by SERVER.uwindsor.ca (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO) for List-Managers@Greatcircle.com id AA17305; Fri, 22 Jan 93 23:14:18 -0500 Message-Id: <9301230414.AA17305@SERVER.uwindsor.ca> Subject: Re: list of beginner's InterNet books To: (List managers) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 23:14:13 EST In-Reply-To: <9301212339.AA16547@bahainvs>; from "John Wiegley" at Jan 21, 93 6:39 pm From: Scott Ophof X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:39:07 EST johnw@bahainvs.org (John Wiegley) said: >About "newbies" and their education: > I find that one of my biggest drawbacks as a systems administrator > is that I've forgotten how to think stupidly. Not that stupidity is > bad in itself; it comes just before understanding. The word "stupid" has a negative connotation, as does "newbie". And just *using* the words builds up certain reaction patterns, on *both* sides. *I* know *you* mean "pre-understanding", but not everybody does, and certainly not the average user; (s)he feels insulted, and rightly so IMHO. Say Jack and Mark both have seen FAQs in news.answers, but Jack doesn't know he's to look in news.answers for FAQs. *That* makes Jack "stupid". But say Jack has never heard of netnews at all. *Now* he is *not* stupid; he just doesn't have the same knowledge base... > But to wallow in > it is deplorable, and to forget it is dangerous! No matter how > simple you make things, there's always SOMEBODY who doesn't get it. > This can be incredibly frustrating. Betcha it's not even a question of "making it simple", but more of "putting it a different way"; one needs to get on the same "track" as the other person. *THAT* can be incredibly frustrating. :-) > I remember nights when I've sat > down and thought: how can they possible have miscontrued this? Are > they trying to be stupid? No.. I don't think so. Maybe a case of assuming they have a piece of knowledge which in actuality they do *not*? Like, if one doesn't KNOW that "news.answers" contains the FAQs, then telling a user to "look in the relevant FAQ" is just a waste of time. > we're not going to be able to "raise" the understanding of our > newbies unless we can somehow speak their language, and learn to There! You said it yourself... >;-) > So I don't think it's bad intentions on their part; >Right!! > it's just that > there's this enormous gap between "guru" and "newbie". The chasm is > so great that the two stand opposed to each other like night and day. The list server of the future is either going to have to be After having been called "stupid", "newbie", "dumb", "luser" by someone who (probably totally unsuspectingly!) feels himself miles- high over that person, wouldn't *you* feel humiliated, furious, and non-responsive to "down-talking"? > uselessly simple, or so developed that it transcends the limitations > of its own intelligence (when it can ascend to such heights that it > reverts back to its own origin). It would be a Taoist piece of > magic, but at the moment, some of our list servers may just be too > darn intelligent. Fuzziness is the universal trait shared by the > minds of all newbies. Clear cut distinctions just don't wash. So > we need a program that can deal with fuzziness! (someone mentioned > AI... I think that's an excellent way to go). NOPE! 1: Fuzziness is a *universal* trait of humans, period. (professionals, listen to yourself *outside* your specialty) 2: "Clear cut distinctions" aren't, except to those who understand the underlying matter. (try explaining the Unix quoting rules to someone barely understanding them for the REXX language (me)) 3: Those list servers aren't "too darn intelligent"; the HELP FILES are *way* too often written by people who fully understand the matter, and thus automatically assume too much knowledge on the part of the reader. The writers can't help doing so! (even the LISTSERV docs could use a serious rewrite) 4: Since this list mainly relates to list servers ON UN*X, there is the assumption that all those using them are Unix experts. (this is a false, incorrect assumption) 5: If Unix is to really be "the opsys of the future", as so many blatantly expound, then all those concerned will *HAVE* to accept that a percentage of the users will *not ever* become anything like the current "gurus", nor need they... > Until then, it's a problem that's just going to get worse the more > you think about it. At the present time, there doesn't seem to be > much you can do except put on a happy grin, swallow a Tums, and > answer their questions (no matter how stupid). At the present time, it *can* be changed, if you look at it from the *users'* point of view, with *their* knowledge-base. This *will* mean getting rid of the "newbie/guru" attitude... What would happen if the so-called "gurus" had a mandatory 1-week- per-semester period when they couldn't make use of the goodies they were used to, and were forced to use what the so-called "newbies" had to make-do with? Lemme tell you; I know what it feels like, after a whole year... (Um.. effectively 2 days on, 5 days recuperating. :-/ ) At the moment I could kick most computer-related things to that hot place down-under and back again, and happily do it all over again (the kicking, I mean), and double for Un*x! WHY I do this? Don't ask. Not after the above explanation. Just accept that I'm no masochist. BTW, IMHO writing docs should be a mandatory 3-person thing: - One person who knows the application inside-out. - One who knows (close to) nothing about it. - One who can write human language correctly and acts as "interface" between the "programmer" and the "user". Regards! $$\ F. Scott Ophof ---------------------------> I speak *only* for *myself* <----- My credo: Computers exist for OUR benefit, NEVER vice-versa. From List-Managers-Owner Wed Jan 27 08:57:15 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26445; Wed, 27 Jan 93 08:57:15 PST Received: from urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26432; Wed, 27 Jan 93 08:57:06 PST Received: from tabaqui (tabaqui.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE) by urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (4.1/urmel-MX.45) id AA23631; Wed, 27 Jan 93 17:56:52 +0100 Received: by tabaqui (4.1/POOL.3) id AA03066; Wed, 27 Jan 93 17:56:22 +0100 Message-Id: <9301271656.AA03066@tabaqui> From: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:56:20 +0100 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm currently at the verge of releasing a YAMLP (Yet Another Mailinglist Package). But before I release it I would like to hear your opinions on the header-fields subject again. Suppose some mailinglist is called "testlist@some.where". What I currently do with incoming submissions before sending them out: - Strip all Precedence:, Received:, Return-Receipt-To: and Errors-To: fields. - Prepend the following existing fieldnames with Old- (i.e. Return-Path: becomes Old-Return-Path:): Return-Path:, X-Envelope-To:, X-Envelope-From:, Resent-From:, Resent-Sender: - Add Precedence: bulk - Add Resent-Sender: testlist-request@some.where - Add Resent-From: testlist@some.where - Add X-Loop: testlist@some.where - Add only if the corresponding fields are not already there: Subject: Unidentified subject! X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/SERIAL_NR - Change the envelope From address into testlist-request@some.where . So far I am fairly confident that all these things are what one generally expects. The only thing I am wondering about is perhaps if I should add a Sender: field (defeating RFC-822, since that says one can only add Resent-Sender: fields). Opinions, suggestions welcome. -- Sincerely, berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). berg@physik.tu-muenchen.de "And now for something *completely* different!" From List-Managers-Owner Wed Jan 27 09:43:08 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26617; Wed, 27 Jan 93 09:43:08 PST Received: from grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26610; Wed, 27 Jan 93 09:43:00 PST Received: by grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr (5.67a8/IDA-1.5f) via Rocad id AA22417; Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:42:51 +0100 From: Christophe Wolfhugel Message-Id: <199301271742.AA22417@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing To: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:42:50 +0100 (MET) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301271656.AA03066@tabaqui> from "Stephen R. van den Berg" at Jan 27, 93 05:56:20 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1334 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Stephen R. van den Berg said: |- Strip all Precedence:, Received:, Return-Receipt-To: and Errors-To: fields. I would not recommend stripping Received. It might be useful in case of loops. On the other side, there are still many sendmail (and perhaps other agents) with MAXHOPS set to a very low value (like 17). In one case I had a bounce due to this. For return-receipt-to it's your choice. It sounds like more a personnal choice. Reason would suggest to remove this. I like being able to have it. There are sites where the config adds a return-receipt to each mail (how annoying) ! |- Prepend the following existing fieldnames with Old- (i.e. Return-Path: | becomes Old-Return-Path:): You should use X-Old-blah. Return-path is useless and methinks can be dropped. |- Add Precedence: bulk Correct me if I'm wrong: bulk will not generate error messages (bounce, user unknown, etc..) ? |- Change the envelope From address into testlist-request@some.where . I like this. Many software, like BITNET's Listserv, keep the sender's from address which is great for getting bounces and of course there is no admin to remove those users from the list. Also, what is your position regarding other fields like extended ones (X-Face and stuff) ? -- Christophe Wolfhugel | Email: Christophe.Wolfhugel@grasp.insa-lyon.fr From List-Managers-Owner Wed Jan 27 11:05:25 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26763; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:05:25 PST Received: from relay1.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26756; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:05:18 PST Received: from uunet.uu.net (via LOCALHOST.UU.NET) by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA09659; Wed, 27 Jan 93 14:05:18 -0500 Received: from eiffel.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 140453.16396; Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:04:53 EST Received: from lyon.eiffel.com by glasgow.eiffel.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA17418; Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:32:44 PST Received: by lyon.eiffel.com (5.61/1.34) id AA19370; Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:35:04 -0800 To: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 27 Jan 93 17:56:20 +0100." <9301271656.AA03066@tabaqui> X-Mailer: MH [version 6.7.2] Organization: Interactive Software Engineering, Santa Barbara CA Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:35:03 PST Message-Id: <19368.728159703@lyon.eiffel.com> From: Raphael Manfredi Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Quoting Stephen R. van den Berg: > The only thing I am wondering about is perhaps if I should > add a Sender: field (defeating RFC-822, since that says one can only add > Resent-Sender: fields). Where did you see that in RFC-822? In paragraph 4.4.2, RFC-822 says: Since the critical function served by the "Sender" field is identification of the agent responsible for sending mail and since computer programs cannot be held accountable for their behavior, it is strongly recommended that when a computer pro- gram generates a message, the HUMAN who is responsible for that program be referenced as part of the "Sender" field mail- box specification. This seems to be close enough to your problem. Therefore you should go ahead and add the Sender: field yourself. -- Raphael Manfredi Interactive Software Engineering Inc. 270 Storke Road, Suite #7 / Tel +1 (805) 685-1006 \ Goleta, California 93117, USA \ Fax +1 (805) 685-6869 / From List-Managers-Owner Wed Jan 27 11:17:42 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26798; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:17:42 PST Received: from urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26791; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:17:32 PST Received: from tabaqui (tabaqui.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE) by urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (4.1/urmel-MX.45) id AA27181; Wed, 27 Jan 93 20:17:41 +0100 Received: by tabaqui (4.1/POOL.3) id AA03233; Wed, 27 Jan 93 20:17:11 +0100 Message-Id: <9301271917.AA03233@tabaqui> From: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:17:10 +0100 In-Reply-To: Christophe Wolfhugel's message as of 1993 Jan 27 Wed 18:42. <199301271742.AA22417@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Christophe Wolfhugel wrote: >Stephen R. van den Berg said: >|- Strip all Precedence:, Received:, Return-Receipt-To: and Errors-To: fields. >I would not recommend stripping Received. It might be useful in case >of loops. On the other side, there are still many sendmail (and >perhaps other agents) with MAXHOPS set to a very low value (like 17). >In one case I had a bounce due to this. For loopdetection I use the X-Loop: header I add myself. Exactly for the reason you mention (sendmails with too low MAXHOPS values) I remove the Received fields. I want to maximise the likelyhood of delivery. Also, stripping the Received: lines first saves on the clutter. I gather that problems either occur between the list site and the submitter (in which case you still have the Received fields), or between the list-site and the subscriber(s). In which case you only need the Received fields added after the mail has left the list-site (which is exactly what I provide). >|- Prepend the following existing fieldnames with Old- (i.e. Return-Path: >| becomes Old-Return-Path:): >You should use X-Old-blah. Hmmm..., I chose the Old- prefix because all the other prefixes commonly used were longer, e.g. Original-, Originator-. Using X-Old- instead would add another two characters. Why this rejection of Old-? RFC-822 allows it. And because it is the shortest meaningful prefix for renaming overridden fields, why not support it to become a defacto-standard? > Return-path is useless and methinks >can be dropped. Hmmm..., RFC-822 says otherwise. I always think, when in doubt, follow the RFC :-). Return-Path: can be useful for authentication/diagnostic purposes. I preserve it in favor of the Received fields. >|- Add Precedence: bulk >Correct me if I'm wrong: bulk will not generate error messages >(bounce, user unknown, etc..) ? That depends on the Precedence value of bulk configured in e.g. the sendmail.cf file. But the question is valid, what is the usual Precedence value for bulk? If it's negative, bounces will not be generated. Should lists receive bounces? (I think so) Should we invent another Precedence value, say, "Precedence: list" for use by mailinglists exclusively? Should I leave the whole Precedence field alone (i.e. not take it out, and not add one myself)? >|- Change the envelope From address into testlist-request@some.where . >Also, what is your position regarding other fields like extended ones >(X-Face and stuff) ? Everything else is passed through as is. Censoring those is unwarranted (IMHO). -- Sincerely, berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). berg@physik.tu-muenchen.de "And now for something *completely* different!" From List-Managers-Owner Wed Jan 27 12:35:32 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26943; Wed, 27 Jan 93 12:35:32 PST Received: from relay2.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26936; Wed, 27 Jan 93 12:35:24 PST Received: from uunet.uu.net (via LOCALHOST.UU.NET) by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA10841; Wed, 27 Jan 93 15:35:25 -0500 Received: from eiffel.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 153311.18017; Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:33:11 EST Received: from lyon.eiffel.com by glasgow.eiffel.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA17649; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:46:22 PST Received: by lyon.eiffel.com (5.61/1.34) id AA20351; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:48:42 -0800 To: Christophe Wolfhugel Cc: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 27 Jan 93 18:42:50 +0100." <199301271742.AA22417@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> X-Mailer: MH [version 6.7.2] Organization: Interactive Software Engineering, Santa Barbara CA Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:48:41 PST Message-Id: <20349.728164121@lyon.eiffel.com> From: Raphael Manfredi Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Quoting Christophe Wolfhugel: > Stephen R. van den Berg said: > |- Add Precedence: bulk > > Correct me if I'm wrong: bulk will not generate error messages > (bounce, user unknown, etc..) ? There is nothing mentionned in the Sendmail Operation Guide. The Precedence field is used to compute the priority in the queue. A special low low priority may be set by adding in sendmail.cf something like: Pbulk=-1000 Also vacation-like program do not send a vacation message if there is a Precedence header set to either bulk or junk. I think some site do not bounce back the whole message tagged with a bulk precedence, but only extract the header. You should still get error messages though, or it's a design flaw (since NOT getting something back usually means it arrived correctly). > Also, what is your position regarding other fields like extended ones > (X-Face and stuff) ? It might not be a good idea. For instance, assuming I am turning this list into a newsgroup via my mailagent and then ask inews to e-mail me everything posted to the newsgroup so that I can forward it to the whole list. My account acting as a gateway, I would like to avoid loops, i.e. posting to the newsgroup something which I have already seen and forwarded to the list, or something inews sends me back after the initial posting by the mailagent. For that purpose, the mailagent adds an X-Filter line. If the mailing list gateway strips it, then I'm stuck and will have a loop with no control over it. -- Raphael Manfredi Interactive Software Engineering Inc. 270 Storke Road, Suite #7 / Tel +1 (805) 685-1006 \ Goleta, California 93117, USA \ Fax +1 (805) 685-6869 / From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 08:19:00 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28630; Thu, 28 Jan 93 08:19:00 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28623; Thu, 28 Jan 93 08:18:52 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14462>; Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:19:18 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA29197 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Thu, 28 Jan 93 16:14:13 GMT Received: by dino.alias.com id AA28732 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:14:12 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9301281614.AA28732@dino.alias.com> Subject: UNIX listserv To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:14:09 -0500 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 941 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk It appears that Anastasios' UNIX listserv adds the following header to all outgoing messages: Version: 5.5 -- Copyright (c) 1991/92, Anastasios Kotsikonas I find this somewhat annoying. 1) It's not a valid RFC 822 header. 2) Under current copyright law, it means that Anastasios is claiming copyright on all *messages* sent through his listserv software. This is clearly not the intent, but it is the result. I have no objection to copyrighted software, but the copyright does not belong in the data processed by the software. I urge you to check your listservs and remove the code that inserts this header. -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 09:39:24 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28889; Thu, 28 Jan 93 09:39:24 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28881; Thu, 28 Jan 93 09:39:15 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa26980; 28 Jan 93 11:28 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06255; Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:30:46 EST Message-Id: <9301281630.AA06255@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:30:46 EST In-Reply-To: "C. Harald Koch" "UNIX listserv" (Jan 28, 11:14am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: "C. Harald Koch" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: UNIX listserv Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I urge you to check your listservs and remove the code that inserts this > header. I don't like the header either, but Tasos has put a lot of work into the code. If you don't like the header, don't run the code. I doubt that Tasos will get his lawyers after you, and he'd probably be on shakey ground anyway, but I, for one, think it would be unethical to do what you urge. There are other programs around that would suit your requirements (i.e. no copyright notices) better. BTW, all our publications go out to a couple of thousand people on the list, and nobody has ever even asked, much less complained, "Why Tasos has a copyright on all NSF publications?" I suspect most people realize that it's the software that's copyrighted, not the messages. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 09:50:16 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29004; Thu, 28 Jan 93 09:50:16 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28997; Thu, 28 Jan 93 09:50:09 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA01748; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:50:13 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA17711; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:50:10 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:50:10 -0500 Message-Id: <9301281750.AA17711@cs.bu.edu> To: chk@alias.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, mmorse@z.nsf.gov Subject: Re: UNIX listserv Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I urge you to check your listservs and remove the code that inserts this > > header. > > I don't like the header either, but Tasos has put a lot of work into > the code. If you don't like the header, don't run the code. I doubt > that Tasos will get his lawyers after you, and he'd probably be on > shakey ground anyway, but I, for one, think it would be unethical to > do what you urge. There are other programs around that would suit > your requirements (i.e. no copyright notices) better. > > BTW, all our publications go out to a couple of thousand people on the > list, and nobody has ever even asked, much less complained, "Why Tasos > has a copyright on all NSF publications?" I suspect most people > realize that it's the software that's copyrighted, not the messages. First of all, I will explain this for the last time; messages do not have versions so the header line does not apply to the message. On the other hand, yes it is confusing and you may argue "but header lines refer to the message that follows"; well, not this one -- therefore it has been changed to: X-Listserver-Vrsion: .... this is both clear AND RFC 822 for the net police. The instruction "remove the code that inserts this header." is not well thought of at best. Tasos From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 10:01:14 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29074; Thu, 28 Jan 93 10:01:14 PST Received: from harper-hall.cit.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29067; Thu, 28 Jan 93 10:01:07 PST Received: by harper-hall.cit.cornell.edu id <511939>; Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:01:49 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:01:47 -0500 From: Michael Scott Shappe Reply-To: mss1@cornell.edu To: "Michael H. Morse" Cc: "C. Harald Koch" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: UNIX listserv In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:30:46 -0500 Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm not positive, but I belive that the Version header is taken out in the impending 6.0 release of the code, anwyay... -- Michael S. Shappe * mss1@cornell.edu (Cornell Generic) 125 Caldwell Hall * mshappe@harper-hall.cit.cornell.edu (Work) Ithaca NY 14853 * mikey@amnesia.ithaca.ny.us (Home) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 10:58:58 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29271; Thu, 28 Jan 93 10:58:58 PST Received: from pi-chan.ucsb.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29263; Thu, 28 Jan 93 10:58:21 PST Received: by pi-chan.ucsb.edu id AA07935 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:55:44 -0800 From: Jim Lick Message-Id: <199301281855.AA07935@pi-chan.ucsb.edu> Subject: Return Receipt To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:55:43 -0800 (PST) Cc: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301280910.AA27944@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> from "List-Managers-Digest-Owner@greatcircle.com" at Jan 28, 93 01:10:05 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL11] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1164 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: Christophe Wolfhugel > Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:42:50 +0100 (MET) > Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing > > For return-receipt-to it's your choice. It sounds like more a > personnal choice. Reason would suggest to remove this. I like > being able to have it. There are sites where the config adds > a return-receipt to each mail (how annoying) ! How ironic the timing of this message was. Last night I got a few hundred return receipts because someone on a list I am subscribed to had a return receipt line which included the address of the list. The list has over 150 subscribers. Each of their mailers sent a return receipt back to the list which then mailed it out to all of us subscribers, for a total of #subscribers bounces in each subscriber's mailbox, and #subscribers^2 extra messages going through the list-host. It was not fun. --- jim@pi-chan.ucsb.edu --- Jim Lick --- jim@tcp.com --- jIngOrO@CaveMUCK --- --:):-- perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most -- |\| | |/| --:(:-- --- CaveMUCK is back! --- Telnet to cave.tcp.com (128.95.10.106) port 2283 --- From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 11:05:09 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29303; Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:05:09 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29294; Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:04:39 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14469>; Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:04:56 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA01325 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Thu, 28 Jan 93 18:25:46 GMT Received: by dino.alias.com id AA01351 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Thu, 28 Jan 93 13:25:43 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9301281825.AA01351@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: UNIX listserv To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:25:41 -0500 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2953 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Boy, these guys are sensitive... Mike Morse writes: > Tasos has put a lot of work into the code. I know that. I applaud his efforts. I think he deserves recognition. But look: lots of programs out there that manipulate mail put version information into a mail message. Many of them have just as much work put into them as UNIX Listserv. Yet UNIX Listserv is the only one that puts Copyright information into the headers. What makes Listserv so special? (also see below) > BTW, all our publications go out to a couple of thousand people on the > list, and nobody has ever even asked, much less complained, "Why Tasos > has a copyright on all NSF publications?" "Nobody has complained" is not an excuse for this behaviour. I don't care what the header refers to; the point is that the string "Copyright 1991/92 Anastasios Kotsikonas" is being attached to any message sent through a UNIX Listserv, and it's wrong. A Copyright message in this form refers to the text containing it; regardless of intent, that's the fact of the matter. Why is it 'unethical' for me to ask people to remove the code that adds this header to mail? I'm not telling people to remove the copyright from the *code* (which is where it belongs, not in the message). Please explain your comments... > If you don't like the header, don't run the code I don't run the code (for reasons that have nothing to do with the header). But if I subscribe to a mailing list that uses UNIX Listserv, I have no choice about having my mail copyrighted. Telling me not to subscribe to those lists is not an answer. Both responses show incredible naivety. Anastasios himself writes: > therefore it has been changed to: > > X-Listserver-Vrsion: .... [sic] I have no problems with a version header in mail. Many programs put "X-Mailer: stuff (e.g. ELM [version 2.4 PL8]). There's a Mime-Version: header which is important for MIME messages. Most Received: headers contain the version number for mailers and configuration files. NONE OF THEM HAVE COPYRIGHT INFORMATION! Go ahead, put a X-Listserv-Version: header into the message. I wouldn't even object to: X-Listserv-Version: 5.5 -- by Anastasios Kotsikonas Which would give you the exact same level of recognition as the existing header. I object to the Copyright appearing in processed messages, because of the legal (and social) interpretations of a copyright message. > The instruction "remove the code that inserts this header." is not well > thought of at best. Please explain yourself. I'm not asking people to remove your copyright from your code; that would be unethical. What are you saying here? -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 12:14:23 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29428; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:14:23 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29421; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:14:02 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA05012; Thu, 28 Jan 93 15:14:13 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA21083; Thu, 28 Jan 93 15:14:12 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 15:14:12 -0500 Message-Id: <9301282014.AA21083@cs.bu.edu> To: chk@alias.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: UNIX listserv Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > The instruction "remove the code that inserts this header." is not well > > thought of at best. > > Please explain yourself. I'm not asking people to remove your copyright from > your code; that would be unethical. What are you saying here? This is well beyond the scope of this list; this should be taken on a personal level, and the discussion in public is closed. Tasos From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 12:32:52 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29480; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:32:52 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29473; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:32:46 PST Received: by apple.com (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA02019; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:33:12 -0800 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:33:12 -0800 From: I Bleed Teal Message-Id: <9301282033.AA02019@apple.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: copyrights in messages Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Excuse me for butting in in the middle of a topic, but I wasn't following it closely until the copyright issue came up. Be VERY careful when mucking around with copyrights. It's a great way to get yourself in yogurt. >the point is that the string "Copyright 1991/92 >Anastasios Kotsikonas" is being attached to any message sent through a >UNIX Listserv, and it's wrong If that's what being done, then it very definitely IS wrong, because what is being done on a legal level is that Anastasios is claiming copyright of the contents of the message. That's incorrect from the point of view of what he's TRYING to do (which is claim his copyright to the program being used), but even worse, on a strictly legal sense he's usurping the copyright from the owner (the person who wrote the message in the first place, which has an implicit copyright extant because of the Berne convention). That's not only wrong, but blatantly illegal, and it puts Anastasios at potential legal liability if someone decided to get snarky and involve lawyers. The best advice I have about copyright: don't screw around with it unless you've done your homework. It doesn't matter what your INTENT is, but how the law is structured, and you can do real harm to yourself by not understanding the implications of a very complex legal construct like copyright. Chuq From List-Managers-Owner Thu Jan 28 12:51:03 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29580; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:51:03 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29573; Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:50:56 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14475>; Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:51:17 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA03903 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for tasos@cs.bu.edu); Thu, 28 Jan 93 20:46:36 GMT Received: by dino.alias.com id AA03469 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Thu, 28 Jan 93 15:46:34 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9301282046.AA03469@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: UNIX listserv To: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:46:33 -0500 Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301282014.AA21083@cs.bu.edu> from "Anastasios Kotsikonas" at Jan 28, 93 03:14:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1016 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > > The instruction "remove the code that inserts this header." is not well > > > thought of at best. > > > > Please explain yourself. I'm not asking people to remove your copyright from > > your code; that would be unethical. What are you saying here? > > This is well beyond the scope of this list; this should be taken on a personal > level, and the discussion in public is closed. Hmm. I've asked people to modify software that is being used to maintain Internet mailing lists. You've told me that this was not well thought out. I asked you why. Sounds to me like this is still well within the scope of this list. Perhaps you aren't willing to defend your comments in a public forum? -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 01:42:07 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01232; Fri, 29 Jan 93 01:42:07 PST Received: from SERVER.uwindsor.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01225; Fri, 29 Jan 93 01:41:59 PST Received: by SERVER.uwindsor.ca (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO) for List-Managers@Greatcircle.com id AA12248; Fri, 29 Jan 93 04:40:41 -0500 Message-Id: <9301290940.AA12248@SERVER.uwindsor.ca> Subject: Re: UNIX listserv To: (List managers) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 4:40:35 EST In-Reply-To: <9301281614.AA28732@dino.alias.com>; from "C. Harald Koch" at Jan 28, 93 11:14 am From: Scott Ophof X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:14:09 -0500 chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) said: ]It appears that Anastasios' UNIX listserv adds the following header to all ======== ]outgoing messages: ]Version: 5.5 -- Copyright (c) 1991/92, Anastasios Kotsikonas ]I find this somewhat annoying. ]1) It's not a valid RFC 822 header. ]2) Under current copyright law, it means that Anastasios is claiming ] copyright on all *messages* sent through his listserv software. This is ======== ] clearly not the intent, but it is the result. After all the discussion re copyright matters, methinks Tasos' solution ain't so bad, viz. following quote from his reply. :-) On Thu, 28 Jan 93 12:50:10 -0500 tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) said: ]X-Listserver-Vrsion: .... ======== ]this is both clear AND RFC 822 for the net police. Except for one thing; I don't like the oft-used term "listserv". This term applies imho *only* to Eric Thomas' name for his implementation of a list server, and I don't care whether Eric's software and/or the name "listserv" enjoy legal protection or not; fair play should be enough to have us respect this, law or no law. Note that I have dual set of feelings here: - On one hand wishing to respect Eric's rights to the name and software *he* made & wrote. - On the other hand wanting to minimize the confusion for users, by having all list servers that act the same also adressed the same. All in all, may I urgently and respectfully request non-use of the term "listserv" (any case, upper/lower/mixed) EXCEPT when referring to Eric Thomas' software? I could easily go for: X-List-Serv-Version: .... and: This in analogy to TWG first calling their port of the IBM editor XEDIT to Unix "uniXEDIT", but switched to "uni-XEDIT" when Unisys complained about it being the same as their "unixEDIT"... (with a grin) How about it, Tasos? Is this a fair solution for all concerned? :-) Regards. $$\ F. Scott Ophof ---------------------------> I speak *only* for *myself* <----- My credo: Computers exist for OUR benefit, NEVER vice-versa. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 04:47:25 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01694; Fri, 29 Jan 93 04:47:25 PST Received: from urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de ([137.226.144.3]) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01653; Fri, 29 Jan 93 04:45:57 PST Received: from tabaqui (tabaqui.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE) by urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (4.1/urmel-MX.45) id AA22752; Fri, 29 Jan 93 13:45:07 +0100 Received: by tabaqui (4.1/POOL.3) id AA09354; Fri, 29 Jan 93 13:44:39 +0100 Message-Id: <9301291244.AA09354@tabaqui> From: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 13:44:38 +0100 In-Reply-To: Raphael Manfredi's message as of 1993 Jan 27 Wed 10:35. <19368.728159703@lyon.eiffel.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Raphael Manfredi wrote: >Quoting Stephen R. van den Berg: >> The only thing I am wondering about is perhaps if I should >> add a Sender: field (defeating RFC-822, since that says one can only add >> Resent-Sender: fields). >Where did you see that in RFC-822? In paragraph 4.4.2, RFC-822 says: > gram generates a message, the HUMAN who is responsible for > that program be referenced as part of the "Sender" field mail- > box specification. >This seems to be close enough to your problem. Therefore you should go ahead >and add the Sender: field yourself. I disagree with you here. RFC-822 says that if the From: field you generate does not point to a single mailbox which can be mailed to (or if the mailbox mentioned on the From: line does not belong to a human), then you should add a Sender: field with the responsible person's name on it. I.e. RFC-822 regards the From: and Sender: fields as a pair, you can only add a Sender: field if you generated the From: field as well. In the case of forwarding mail (which is exactly what a mailinglist does), you must add a Resent-From: field. The Resent-From: field I add points to the list itself (which is correct, I think). But, the responsible person would be the -request address. Therefore, in addition to the Resent-From: field, we add a Resent-Sender: field with the -request address on it. -- Sincerely, berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). berg@physik.tu-muenchen.de "And now for something *completely* different!" From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 04:54:38 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01713; Fri, 29 Jan 93 04:54:38 PST Received: from urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de ([137.226.144.3]) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01706; Fri, 29 Jan 93 04:54:19 PST Received: from tabaqui (tabaqui.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE) by urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (4.1/urmel-MX.45) id AA22904; Fri, 29 Jan 93 13:54:10 +0100 Received: by tabaqui (4.1/POOL.3) id AA09382; Fri, 29 Jan 93 13:53:41 +0100 Message-Id: <9301291253.AA09382@tabaqui> From: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 13:53:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: Raphael Manfredi's message as of 1993 Jan 27 Wed 11:48. <20349.728164121@lyon.eiffel.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Raphael Manfredi wrote: >Quoting Christophe Wolfhugel: >> Stephen R. van den Berg said: >> |- Add Precedence: bulk >> >> Correct me if I'm wrong: bulk will not generate error messages >> (bounce, user unknown, etc..) ? >There is nothing mentionned in the Sendmail Operation Guide. The Precedence >field is used to compute the priority in the queue. A special low low priority >may be set by adding in sendmail.cf something like: > Pbulk=-1000 >I think some site do not bounce back the whole message tagged with a bulk >precedence, but only extract the header. You should still get error messages >though, or it's a design flaw (since NOT getting something back usually means >it arrived correctly). Not quite. The sendmail manual I have says that the Precedence value is used for prioritising the queue, but also, for determining if any bounce messages are to be sent. I.e. if the Precedence value is negative, no bounce message will EVER be generated (no matter what the error condition). BTW, I checked this with some mail messages, the manual is right. Normally the following standard Precedence values are defined in the sendmail.cf file: Pspecial-delivery=100 Pfirst-class=0 Pjunk=-100 I presume that Precedence classes not specified in the .cf file default to zero? (anyone who knows for sure?) This would imply that message with Precedence: bulk normally generate bounce messages in case of errors. If someone wants to add a "Pbulk" line in his sendmail.cf file I urge him NOT to give it a negative value. I.e. suggested hierarchy: Pspecial-delivery=100 Pfirst-class=50 Pbulk=0 Pjunk=-100 BTW, since "Precedence: bulk" seems to be the right way to mark mail-messages coming from mailinglists, I urge *everyone* to make sure that their mailinglist software adds this field. -- Sincerely, berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). berg@physik.tu-muenchen.de "And now for something *completely* different!" From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 05:43:47 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01798; Fri, 29 Jan 93 05:43:47 PST Received: from grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01791; Fri, 29 Jan 93 05:43:28 PST Received: by grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr (5.67a8/IDA-1.5f) via Rocad id AA15937; Fri, 29 Jan 1993 14:43:45 +0100 From: Christophe Wolfhugel Message-Id: <199301291343.AA15937@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing To: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 14:43:45 +0100 (MET) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301291253.AA09382@tabaqui> from "Stephen R. van den Berg" at Jan 29, 93 01:53:39 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 596 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Stephen R. van den Berg said: |Not quite. The sendmail manual I have says that the Precedence value is used |for prioritising the queue, but also, for determining if any bounce messages |are to be sent. I.e. if the Precedence value is negative, no bounce message |will EVER be generated (no matter what the error condition). BTW, I checked |this with some mail messages, the manual is right. Then I don't think it is wise to use bulk mail because this will make lists grow for ever if no bounces are generated. -- Christophe Wolfhugel | Email: Christophe.Wolfhugel@grasp.insa-lyon.fr From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 05:49:54 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01818; Fri, 29 Jan 93 05:49:54 PST Received: from urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de ([137.226.144.3]) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01811; Fri, 29 Jan 93 05:49:35 PST Received: from tabaqui (tabaqui.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE) by urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (4.1/urmel-MX.45) id AA24298; Fri, 29 Jan 93 14:49:22 +0100 Received: by tabaqui (4.1/POOL.3) id AA09567; Fri, 29 Jan 93 14:48:54 +0100 Message-Id: <9301291348.AA09567@tabaqui> From: berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 14:48:52 +0100 In-Reply-To: Christophe Wolfhugel's message as of 1993 Jan 29 Fri 14:43. <199301291343.AA15937@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Christophe Wolfhugel wrote: >Stephen R. van den Berg said: >|Not quite. The sendmail manual I have says that the Precedence value is used >|for prioritising the queue, but also, for determining if any bounce messages >|are to be sent. I.e. if the Precedence value is negative, no bounce message >|will EVER be generated (no matter what the error condition). BTW, I checked >|this with some mail messages, the manual is right. >Then I don't think it is wise to use bulk mail because this will make >lists grow for ever if no bounces are generated. But that's not what will happen. Like I said, by default, sendmail throws in "bulk" mail with a precedence value of "0". Which means that bounces are indeed generated. Bounces for "bulk" mail are only not generated if someone were so stupid as to assign to bulk a precedence value lower than "0" (as far as I know, noone has done this). -- Sincerely, berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). berg@physik.tu-muenchen.de "And now for something *completely* different!" From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 07:15:32 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02017; Fri, 29 Jan 93 07:15:32 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02010; Fri, 29 Jan 93 07:15:27 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA26684; Fri, 29 Jan 93 10:15:11 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA12622; Fri, 29 Jan 93 10:15:10 -0500 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 10:15:10 -0500 Message-Id: <9301291515.AA12622@cs.bu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, ophof@SERVER.uwindsor.ca Subject: Re: UNIX listserv Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > X-List-Serv-Version: .... > (with a grin) How about it, Tasos? Is this a fair solution for As I said yesterday (or two days ago) it is: X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- Copyright (c) 1991-93, Anastasios Kotsikonas ^^ Tasos From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 08:25:35 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02114; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:25:35 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02107; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:25:25 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa10906; 29 Jan 93 10:49 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07456; Fri, 29 Jan 93 10:51:32 EST Message-Id: <9301291551.AA07456@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 10:51:31 EST In-Reply-To: Anastasios Kotsikonas "Re: UNIX listserv" (Jan 29, 10:15am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: UNIX listserv Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- Copyright (c) 1991-93, Anastasios Kotsikonas How about something similar to what Mush puts in: X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) So how about: X-List-Server: Listserv for Unix (5.31 9/9/91) by Anastasios Kotsikonas Then you could also have: X-List-Server: Majordomo (1.0 1/1/93) by Brent Chapman This would serve all the identified requirements: 1) identify the software for kudos or flames 2) properly recognize the authors for their contribution to the net 3) satisfy the RFC's under the various interpretations (I assume, I'm not an expert here) I don't think that dropping the "copyright" phrase hurts Tasos. I am not a lawyer, but I know enough about copyright law that I can't believe that his *code* is in any way protected by the copyright notices sent out in the header of messages that his software had a part in mailing. He could still insist that the "X-List-Server:" line be retained as part of the conditions for using his property (the Listserv for Unix) code. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 08:57:23 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02190; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:57:23 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02183; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:57:17 PST Received: by apple.com (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA16267; Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:57:17 -0800 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 08:57:17 -0800 From: I Bleed Teal Message-Id: <9301291657.AA16267@apple.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, mmorse@z.nsf.gov Subject: Re: UNIX listserv Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk FWIW: >> X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- Copyright (c) 1991-93, Anastasios Kotsikonas This would be in violation of international copyright, since it places the copyright on the message, not on the code of the server. It's technically illegal. > X-List-Server: Listserv for Unix (5.31 9/9/91) by Anastasios > Kotsikonas This is fine. If you really, really want to be anal-retentive about people knowing that Listserv is owned and controlled by you, you could even put in something like: X-List-Server: Listserv for Unix (5.31 9/9/91), a proprietary system by Anastasios Kotsikonas used with permission. On the other hand, I think this is all amazingly silly, because the person reading the message doesn't CARE about what list processing software is being used and is the wrong audience to preach to anyway. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 09:37:19 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02276; Fri, 29 Jan 93 09:37:19 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02269; Fri, 29 Jan 93 09:37:03 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14487>; Fri, 29 Jan 1993 12:36:52 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA27266 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for mmorse@z.nsf.gov); Fri, 29 Jan 93 17:15:02 GMT Received: by dino.alias.com id AA15875 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Fri, 29 Jan 93 12:15:02 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9301291715.AA15875@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: UNIX listserv To: mmorse@z.nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse), tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 12:15:00 -0500 Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9301291551.AA07456@z.nsf.gov> from "Michael H. Morse" at Jan 29, 93 10:51:31 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 849 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > So how about: > > X-List-Server: Listserv for Unix (5.31 9/9/91) by Anastasios > Kotsikonas > > This would serve all the identified requirements: > 1) identify the software for kudos or flames > 2) properly recognize the authors for their contribution to the net > 3) satisfy the RFC's under the various interpretations (I assume, > I'm not an expert here) I support this solution 100%. I object to the Copyright message, not the header itself. (I apologize if that hasn't been made clear by now). -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Fri Jan 29 22:10:11 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03245; Fri, 29 Jan 93 22:10:11 PST Received: from SERVER.uwindsor.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03238; Fri, 29 Jan 93 22:10:04 PST Received: by SERV