From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 08:17:56 2002 Received: from ms.databack.com (ms.databack.com [204.245.195.28]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E14195ADF for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BYRON4100.databack.com (130-94-161-164-dsl.hevanet.com [130.94.161.164]) by ms.databack.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5FFHJw94673 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> X-Sender: bklunz@204.245.195.28 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:18 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Byron Lunz Subject: re-appearing old mail? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/1 X-Sequence-Number: 245 Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)? I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 or 5 days ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon investigation, the only common element I noticed was that each such message had numerous Received: headers, one of which was from rr.com. Examples from three different messages: Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53]) Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55]) Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are regurgitating old messages, which then are treated as new posts upon arrival at our mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this problem or know for sure the source of these mails? -- Byron Lunz DataBack Systems LLC From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 09:12:43 2002 Received: from out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.3.120]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D262E195ACB for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 09:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail4.mx.voyager.net (mail4.mx.voyager.net [216.93.66.203]) by out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.12.3/8.11.4/1.7) with ESMTP id g5FGCEqT011830; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 11:12:14 -0500 Received: from 0pbza.erinet.com (d68.as0.wlmg.oh.voyager.net [207.90.89.69]) by mail4.mx.voyager.net (8.11.6/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g5FGCCE53247; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:12:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20020615120956.02374e70@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: peress/mail.erinet.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:12:10 -0400 To: Byron Lunz , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Nancy Peress Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/2 X-Sequence-Number: 246 At 08:17 AM 6/15/2002 -0700, Byron Lunz wrote: >Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on >discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)? Yes, I'm noticing the same phenomenon, and the origin is also nc.rr.com in every case. Best regards, Nancy Peress From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 10:58:54 2002 Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11BD195B27 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from isdn1-14.connext.net (isdn1-14.connext.net [216.4.158.174]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0GXR00J1PDXCDD@eListX.com> for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:58:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:57:25 -0400 (EDT) From: James M Galvin Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-reply-to: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> X-X-Sender: galvin@three.elistx.com To: Byron Lunz Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/3 X-Sequence-Number: 247 More generally, I see this a lot from Microsoft Exchange users. There is an obscure anomaly for which users who set the "vacation" notice feature will cause all messages that have collected since the notice was set to be resubmitted the moment they login when they get back from "vacation". It's pretty easy to detect if you log message-ids of received messages. This is what I do. Can you say "looping storm"? You only need this to happen once, on a b-i-g list, to understand why I remove with prejudice any subscriber who submits duplicate messages. You can also find them when the envelope from does not match the message header from. The resubmitted message will look exactly like the original except that it will have more Received lines and the envelope from will be the person with the broken mail system. Jim -- James M. Galvin On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Byron Lunz wrote: Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:17:18 -0700 From: Byron Lunz To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: re-appearing old mail? Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)? I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 or 5 days ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon investigation, the only common element I noticed was that each such message had numerous Received: headers, one of which was from rr.com. Examples from three different messages: Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53]) Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55]) Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are regurgitating old messages, which then are treated as new posts upon arrival at our mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this problem or know for sure the source of these mails? -- Byron Lunz DataBack Systems LLC From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 11:01:26 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77821195F45 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 11:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5FI0hJJ003754; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:00:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:00:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: Byron Lunz Cc: "Tom 'Sciuricidus Maximus' Caceci" , Earl Perry , List Managers Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/4 X-Sequence-Number: 248 On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Byron Lunz wrote: > Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on > discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their > inbox)? Yes, several times, and several posts each time. > I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 > or 5 days ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon > investigation, the only common element I noticed was that each > such message had numerous Received: headers, one of which was > from rr.com. Examples from three different messages: > > Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53]) > Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55]) > Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with > > It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are > regurgitating old messages, which then are treated as new posts > upon arrival at our mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this > problem or know for sure the source of these mails? The ones I've seen have all been on a private list running on GNU Mailman; but I'm not the owner. Maybe one of them (in Cc:) knows whether we have any xyz.rr.com addresses, and will tell us. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 14:10:23 2002 Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 863BD195F0E for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:10:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 24-205-152-183.riv-dyn.charterpipeline.net ([24.205.152.183] helo=lehel.goldmark.private) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 17JKny-0002dS-00; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:09:54 -0700 Received: from jeffrey (helo=localhost) by lehel.goldmark.private with local-esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 17JKnx-0007e4-00; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:09:53 -0700 Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 14:09:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeffrey Goldberg X-X-Sender: jeffrey@lehel.goldmark.private Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg To: James M Galvin Cc: Byron Lunz , Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/5 X-Sequence-Number: 249 [mailed and posted] On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, James M Galvin wrote: > More generally, I see this a lot from Microsoft Exchange users. > > There is an obscure anomaly for which users who set the "vacation" > notice feature will cause all messages that have collected since the > notice was set to be resubmitted the moment they login when they get > back from "vacation". I would like to add this to my rant about broken autoresponders http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/auto-resp/ Can you provide either more details or pointers to more details. Thanks, -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 20:42:20 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E63A195AAE for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 20:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D198D351E1; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:41:50 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:32:18 -0400 To: Byron Lunz , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/6 X-Sequence-Number: 250 Yes, from the same general area, and from a particular user on a particular list. Since I am running Mj2, all of the duplicates were caught because the headers were too large and because the message IDs were duplicates. Both of these (by default) cause Mj2 to hold the mail for approval by the moderator and to try and notify the sending user. All had the following more or less in common: This is where they sent it back to me. Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55]) by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600BD103BA4 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 22:43:28 -0400 (EDT) This seems to be where they bounced it around. Received: from mail pickup service by mail8.nc.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 22:39:38 -0400 There is a more or less significant delay between the below line and the one above - I assume that the one above is the reinjection. Received: from ncmx01.mgw.rr.com ([24.93.67.251]) by mail8.nc.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:27:04 -0400 This is their system getting the mail - the same user is always involved --- the user's id begins with the letter "L", Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [64.244.111.110]) by ncmx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5BEKs3o024282 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:20:55 -0400 (EDT) Constantuser is always the same user, I don't feel free to reveal the user's complete address or the complete list id so I put in list@listhost. The origin of the mail is set back to the user in the "From:" line or to some odd variation of that user. My belief is that the end user is re-injecting the mail. The mail is going to the end user, some sort of script is run and then, after minutes or hours, the mail is reinjected. I would appreciate knowing if anyone here sees this as a user or server issue. I see it as a user issue since there is always one user involved and since the re-injection delay is variable. But knowing it is happening on multiple other lists is interesting. It only happens with this one user on one of my lists. At 08:17 AM 2002-06-15 -0700, Byron Lunz wrote: >Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on discussion >lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their inbox)? > >I've had a couple of listowners question why old messages, seen 4 or 5 >days ago, suddenly reappeared on their lists. Upon investigation, the only >common element I noticed was that each such message had numerous Received: >headers, one of which was from rr.com. Examples from three different messages: > > Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53]) > Received: from mail8.nc.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55]) > Received: from mail6.nc.rr.com [24.93.67.53] by mail.darron.net with > >It looks to me like one or more rr.com mail servers are regurgitating old >messages, which then are treated as new posts upon arrival at our >mailserver. Is anyone else seeing this problem or know for sure the source >of these mails? -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 21:01:30 2002 Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833C9195AAE for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-1-8-251.il.sprintbbd.net [66.1.8.251]) by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5G41JO10047 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:01:19 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <002601c214ea$4b5d3e60$fb080142@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 22:59:41 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Archive-Number: 200206/7 X-Sequence-Number: 251 Nick Simicich wrote, | The origin of the mail is set back to the user in the "From:" line or to | some odd variation of that user. | | My belief is that the end user is re-injecting the mail. The mail is going | to the end user, some sort of script is run and then, after minutes or | hours, the mail is reinjected. About three or four years ago I saw the same thing happening on two lists running on eGroups (before it became Yahoo Groups). The messages were not redistributed but rather bounced because the list's Mailing-List: or X-Mailing-List: (whichever it was then) header was already present; however, the reinjecter had reset From_ to match From:, so they were bounced to their original authors. In both cases, the offender had a personal domain connected through the bouncing system and there was no member at an address in the bouncing system's domain. By running nslookup -q=any on the domains of all members, I helped both listowners find the culprits. One was probably malicious, the other may have been a stupid misconfiguration. All I can say is the obvious: kick the culprit off the list and reserve judgment about the provider unless there are future incidents from other members in that domain. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 21:42:32 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 151BA195AAE for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:42:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C34351D9 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:42:04 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020616003940.097ce910@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:41:25 -0400 To: From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/8 X-Sequence-Number: 252 This also happened on spam-l were someone picked out some of the bouncing headers: Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 20707028 for SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:45:09 -0400 Received: from 24.93.67.53 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 13:45:09 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by mail6.triad.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 02:22:28 -0400 Received: from flmx01.mgw.rr.com ([65.32.1.38]) by mail6.triad.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:34:49 -0400 Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by flmx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5ALYmUa020119 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:34:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <20.00643BA7@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:32:16 -0400 Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 20701390 for SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:45:40 -0400 Received: from 24.93.67.53 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:45:40 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by mail6.triad.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 02:18:12 -0400 Received: from ncmx01.mgw.rr.com ([24.93.67.251]) by mail6.triad.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:58:20 -0400 Received: from suite.net ([207.227.89.66]) by ncmx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g5AFwJtH020986 for ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:58:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 30389 invoked by uid 7797); 10 Jun 2002 15:57:17 -0000 Delivered-To: mac-do1137-SPAML@R58.ORG Received: (qmail 30386 invoked by uid 0); 10 Jun 2002 15:57:17 -0000 Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (209.119.0.109) by ns2.suite.net with SMTP; 10 Jun 2002 15:57:17 -0000 At 02:09 PM 2002-06-15 -0700, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: >[mailed and posted] > >On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, James M Galvin wrote: > > > > More generally, I see this a lot from Microsoft Exchange users. > > > > There is an obscure anomaly for which users who set the "vacation" > > notice feature will cause all messages that have collected since the > > notice was set to be resubmitted the moment they login when they get > > back from "vacation". > >I would like to add this to my rant about broken autoresponders > > http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/auto-resp/ > >Can you provide either more details or pointers to more details. > >Thanks, > >-j > > >-- >Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/ >Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 15 21:49:58 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030BD195AAE for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:49:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE74D351DD; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:49:30 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020616004422.132ac238@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:49:27 -0400 To: abuse@rr.com, postmaster@rr.com, From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: <002601c214ea$4b5d3e60$fb080142@ord351473> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/9 X-Sequence-Number: 253 At 10:59 PM 2002-06-15 -0500, David W. Tamkin wrote: >Nick Simicich wrote, > >| The origin of the mail is set back to the user in the "From:" line or to >| some odd variation of that user. >| >| My belief is that the end user is re-injecting the mail. The mail is going >| to the end user, some sort of script is run and then, after minutes or >| hours, the mail is reinjected. > >About three or four years ago I saw the same thing happening on two lists >running on eGroups (before it became Yahoo Groups). The messages were not >redistributed but rather bounced because the list's Mailing-List: or >X-Mailing-List: (whichever it was then) header was already present; however, >the reinjecter had reset From_ to match From:, so they were bounced to their >original authors. When I thought it was only one person and only one list, I assumed that it was the user. I think I was wrong. It is happening all over and the common point is rr.com. [...] >All I can say is the obvious: kick the culprit off the list and reserve >judgment about the provider unless there are future incidents from other >members in that domain. The problem is that this is suddenly happening to a lot of southeast rr.com addresses - on my list, on spam-l, to other people here, and so forth. It is beginning to seem like it is an ISP issue, and it is not at all clear what the ISP would be doing, reinjecting the mail with a bad mail from:<> nor why they are doing this suddenly for a range of users. It does seem we should be copying abuse@rr.com and postmaster@rr.com in the hope that they will fix their problem. -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 06:57:41 2002 Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D97195F7B for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 06:57:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-1-8-251.il.sprintbbd.net [66.1.8.251]) by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5GDvaO29820 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:57:37 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <002f01c2153d$ad17c640$fb080142@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> <5.1.0.14.2.20020616004422.132ac238@127.0.0.1> Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:46:41 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Archive-Number: 200206/10 X-Sequence-Number: 254 Nick followed up, | The problem is that this is suddenly happening to a lot of southeast rr.com | addresses - on my list, on spam-l, to other people here, and so forth. It | is beginning to seem like it is an ISP issue, and it is not at all clear | what the ISP would be doing, reinjecting the mail with a bad mail from:<> | nor why they are doing this suddenly for a range of users. I had several situations on the last list I ran where I banned a domain. None of the subscribers with addresses in the banned domains were at fault; in N-1 cases it was flaky MTA setups that I was sick of dealing with, and the other was an ISP who had done something so horrible to me personally that I decided that their customers' experiences on that ISP should not benefit from my efforts to manage and moderate the list. (For that last one I did not tell the subscribers why I would no longer send the list to their domain.) Most weren't interested enough to give me other addresses and just quietly let me close their subscriptions. Some gave me other addresses. Predictably, nobody proactively unsubbed. I expected that some who didn't reply (despite thirty-day, fifteen-day, and seven-day notices) would write a couple months later to ask what happened to the list, but none did ... for those situations. I had that last happen in another story, which did not involve banning a domain. | It does seem we should be copying abuse@rr.com and postmaster@rr.com in the | hope that they will fix their problem. Perhaps Road Runner will do something (but aren't they owned by AOL?); in the meantime, I wouldn't blame any affected listadmin from suspending all subscriptions to rr.com addresses and inviting those members to receive the list elsewhere. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 07:20:40 2002 Received: from mail.goes.com (mail.goes.com [208.208.69.5]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06478195ACD for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 07:20:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oemcomputer (a236.goes.com [63.76.36.236]) by mail.goes.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g5GEK5w69247; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:20:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <003601c21541$6bfb8b20$ec244c3f@oemcomputer> From: "wayfarer" To: "David W. Tamkin" , References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020615211521.143dda98@127.0.0.1> <5.1.0.14.2.20020616004422.132ac238@127.0.0.1> <002f01c2153d$ad17c640$fb080142@ord351473> Subject: newbe Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:23:38 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Archive-Number: 200206/11 X-Sequence-Number: 255 I am new and not tech orientated. I am about to start a list so I joined this one in order to get some knowledge. If my questions seem amateurish. it is because I am an amateur. If my questions are to amateurish tell me and I will leave "irreverence is a virtue, disrespect is a sin" wayfayer tomm join http:// www.communicationinstitute.com for free From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 20:07:25 2002 Received: from yertle.kciLink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [216.194.193.105]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DADB5195AC4 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 20:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yertle.kciLink.com (Postfix, from userid 100) id 873932178B; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:06:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Vivek Khera MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15629.21067.407855.861583@yertle.kciLink.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:06:51 -0400 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-Archive-Number: 200206/12 X-Sequence-Number: 256 >>>>> "BL" == Byron Lunz writes: BL> Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on BL> discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their BL> inbox)? The usual cause I've experienced is some broken mail system that uses the "To:" header (not the SMTP envelope recipient) to deliver the mail. When it sees the list address it just re-sends the message to the list. Usually these types of systems hide behind a single ISP email account and then "burst" the messages to their local users based on the "To" header. Obviously, it is very easy to write broken software, and the rest of the world gets to suffer. The quick fix is to track down the offending address and remove it from your list. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc. Internet: khera@kciLink.com Rockville, MD +1-240-453-8497 AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 21:06:07 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904AC1959EC for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F2E4351DD; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:05:33 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020616235807.227ab8b0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:03:13 -0400 To: Vivek Khera , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: re-appearing old mail? In-Reply-To: <15629.21067.407855.861583@yertle.kciLink.com> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> <5.0.2.1.2.20020615081242.02e1b9c0@204.245.195.28> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/13 X-Sequence-Number: 257 At 11:06 PM 2002-06-16 -0400, Vivek Khera wrote: > >>>>> "BL" == Byron Lunz writes: > >BL> Is anyone else seeing the re-appearance of old messages on >BL> discussion lists (or just old messages re-appearing in their >BL> inbox)? > >The usual cause I've experienced is some broken mail system that uses >the "To:" header (not the SMTP envelope recipient) to deliver the >mail. When it sees the list address it just re-sends the message to >the list. Usually these types of systems hide behind a single ISP >email account and then "burst" the messages to their local users based >on the "To" header. Obviously, it is very easy to write broken >software, and the rest of the world gets to suffer. Unless this is a policy suddenly taken up by a large number of people at rr.com, I doubt it is the case this time. Do these systems also reconstitute the "Mail From:<>" addresses as well? >The quick fix is to track down the offending address and remove it >from your list. Well, I can understand that if that was what was happening. I might even be tempted to do that in this case. -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 21:36:18 2002 Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95857195AC7 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:36:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78AEB630D for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:33:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? Message-ID: X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/14 X-Sequence-Number: 258 Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to request that it define one. I've tried to turn on the subject prefix for my subscription to this list, but messsages to the list that I have received since then do not carry a subject prefix. Here are my current settings as reported by majordomo@greatcircle.com: Receiving each message as it is posted Subscriber flags: noeliminatecc nohide nohidepost nopostblock prefix ... I have already tried asking the list owner, but have not received a response. Adding subject prefix to messages from this list would greatly help with identifying mail from this list in my mailbox. Just in case, let me say now that I am not interested in suggestions to change my MUA. :) -- Thank you, Michael From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:03:12 2002 Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8EA1959EC for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [64.81.78.186] (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186]) by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5H51nt22081; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:01:49 -0700 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:01:43 -0700 Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? From: Chuq Von Rospach To: "Michael S. Johnson" , Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-Archive-Number: 200206/15 X-Sequence-Number: 259 On 6/16/02 9:35 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote: > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to > request that it define one. And if you do, I'll probably leave. Learn to use filters, don=B9t force the system to muck with the subject line to do something only a small percentage of list users want. --=20 Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/ No! No! Dead girl, OFF the table! -- Shrek From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:06:45 2002 Received: from tom.iecc.com (tom.iecc.com [208.31.42.38]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DFD31959EC for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:06:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 19517 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2002 01:06:17 -0400 Received: (ofmipd 208.31.42.38); 17 Jun 2002 05:05:55 -0000 Date: 17 Jun 2002 01:06:17 -0400 Message-ID: From: "John R Levine" To: "Chuq Von Rospach" Cc: "list-managers@greatcircle.com" Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/16 X-Sequence-Number: 260 > > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to > > request that it define one. > > And if you do, I'll probably leave. MJ2 makes the subject prefix a per-subscriber option. If Brent defines one, you only get it if you send "set list-managers prefix" to majordomo. I think prefixes are pretty lame, too, but they're not as lame as some of the MUAs that can't filter on header lines other than To, From, and Subject. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "Just how much hay did we buy?" asked Tom, balefully. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:21:30 2002 Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648EC195ABF for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A8CB628F for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:19:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:20:39 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: "list-managers@greatcircle.com" Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/17 X-Sequence-Number: 261 On 17 Jun 2002, John R Levine wrote: > > > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to > > > request that it define one. > > > > And if you do, I'll probably leave. As John Levine points out, a subject prefix is not something that everyone is forced to receive. I'm asking that one be defined so that it becomes easier to scan my inbox visually for messages from this list. All of the other lists I subscribe to support this feature, and it adds value to my mail-reading experience, regardless of the MUA I use. > I think prefixes are pretty lame, too, but they're not as lame as some > of the MUAs that can't filter on header lines other than To, From, and > Subject. My MUA can filter on it, but if I automatically move mail away from my Inbox to other folders, I forget to read them. Out of sight->out of mind. That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to suggest an MUA that solves that problem? :) Otherwise, why be such a grouch about it? -- Michael From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:38:07 2002 Received: from [10.0.1.6] (adsl-89-209.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.209.89]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DC69195ABF; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:37:36 +1000 To: "Michael S. Johnson" , "list-managers@greatcircle.com" From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200206/18 X-Sequence-Number: 262 At 10:20 PM -0700 6/16/02, Michael S. Johnson wrote: >On 17 Jun 2002, John R Levine wrote: > > > > > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to > > > > request that it define one. > > > > > > And if you do, I'll probably leave. > >As John Levine points out, a subject prefix is not something that everyone >is forced to receive. I'm asking that one be defined so that it becomes >easier to scan my inbox visually for messages from this list. All of the >other lists I subscribe to support this feature, and it adds value to my >mail-reading experience, regardless of the MUA I use. I have now defined it, so that those users who want it can enable it. Those that don't, like Chuq and myself, can stick with the default, which disables it. > > > I think prefixes are pretty lame, too, but they're not as lame as some > > of the MUAs that can't filter on header lines other than To, From, and > > Subject. > >My MUA can filter on it, but if I automatically move mail away from my >Inbox to other folders, I forget to read them. Out of sight->out of mind. >That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to >suggest an MUA that solves that problem? :) > >Otherwise, why be such a grouch about it? Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-) -Brent -- Brent Chapman From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:39:52 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72C89195AB4 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:39:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA30351DD for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:39:24 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020617011311.2316dd48@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:38:39 -0400 To: From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200206/19 X-Sequence-Number: 263 At 10:01 PM 2002-06-16 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >On 6/16/02 9:35 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote: > > > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to > > request that it define one. > >And if you do, I'll probably leave. Learn to use filters, donšt force the >system to muck with the subject line to do something only a small percentage >of list users want. The joy of Majordomo2, which this list is apparently being run under based on the flags reported (I just verified it), is that subject prefixes and reply-to are an individual option (overridable, of course, based on site preference, but if a user likes reply-to or subject prefixes they can set them). Defining the subject prefix does not force it down your throat. It just allows those who want one to get one. The default subject prefix is [listname], in this case [list-managers]. I have no idea if they have set this to null because they have some religious opposition. I see that they are offering three kinds of digests so they are probably not completely into doing all splitting in the MTA. And, yes, that means that if the list has all combinations of users set, that there will be a message dropped into the MTA for those who want neither reply-to nor subject prefix, one for the both crowd, one for the reply to but not subject prefix group and one for the subject prefix and no reply-to group. It works real well. http://www.greatcircle.com/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=greatcircle.com Is the management URL for users, by the way. I had to guess at it. Do a "forgot my password" and confirm, and then you can set your options as you choose. -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:44:37 2002 Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D1E1959EC for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37AEB628F for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:42:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:00 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: "list-managers@greatcircle.com" Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/20 X-Sequence-Number: 264 On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Brent Chapman wrote: > I have now defined it, so that those users who want it can enable it. Thank you, much appreciated. I look forward to receiving my message echoed back with a subject prefix. > Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-) Oh, the humanity! Curling's over, too, isn't it? Love that game. Cracks me up. -- Michael From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 22:45:56 2002 Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 496BA196032; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [64.81.78.186] (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186]) by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5H5itt22731; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:55 -0700 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:44:49 -0700 Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? From: Chuq Von Rospach To: Brent Chapman , "Michael S. Johnson" , "list-managers@greatcircle.com" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200206/21 X-Sequence-Number: 265 On 6/16/02 10:37 PM, "Brent Chapman" wrote: > I have now defined it, so that those users who want it can enable it. > Those that don't, like Chuq and myself, can stick with the default, > which disables it. Fair enough. I don't care if others want it. I do care if they feel they can force it on those that don't want it because they do. >> Otherwise, why be such a grouch about it? > > Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-) No, it's having fought this fight dozens of times over the years on various lists, and knowing that every time I survey ALL of the users, and not just those demanding I add these bloody subject line flags, that the % of users who actually want it will be under 15% of the total subscribers. But that 15% feels they're preference overrides the much larger group that DOESN'T want it. It's a squeaky wheel thing. Like most other humans, list admins don't want justice, they want quiet. So squeaky wheels tend to get what they squeak for. And to even the tally, I got squeaky back. -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/ He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:11:02 2002 Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34A5195ABF for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:10:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [64.81.78.186] (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186]) by plaidworks.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5H6AIt23009; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:10:18 -0700 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:10:10 -0700 Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? From: Chuq Von Rospach To: "Michael S. Johnson" , "list-managers@greatcircle.com" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200206/22 X-Sequence-Number: 266 On 6/16/02 10:44 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote: >> Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-) > > Oh, the humanity! Curling's over, too, isn't it? Love that game. > Cracks me up. Why? Because you don't understand it? (mr. Grumpy happens to be a curling fan, of course). It ended for the season back in April with the world championships. It's a great sport, one of the few you can still be competitive in once you hit middle age. -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/ The first rule of holes: If you are in one, stop digging. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:17:54 2002 Received: from [10.0.1.6] (adsl-89-209.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.209.89]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6774195FC9; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:17:51 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:17:23 +1000 To: Chuq Von Rospach , "Michael S. Johnson" , "list-managers@greatcircle.com" From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200206/23 X-Sequence-Number: 267 At 11:10 PM -0700 6/16/02, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >On 6/16/02 10:44 PM, "Michael S. Johnson" wrote: > >> Probably has something to do with hockey season being over... :-) > > > > Oh, the humanity! Curling's over, too, isn't it? Love that game. > > Cracks me up. > >Why? Because you don't understand it? (mr. Grumpy happens to be a curling >fan, of course). It ended for the season back in April with the world >championships. It's a great sport, one of the few you can still be >competitive in once you hit middle age. Emphasis on the word "hit"... Oh, wait a second, were you talking about curling? ;-) -Brent -- Brent Chapman From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:25:00 2002 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84848195FEB for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7092512D4; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:24:05 -0700 (PDT) To: "Michael S. Johnson" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: Message from "Michael S. Johnson" of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 PDT." References: X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:24:05 -0700 Message-ID: <1361.1024295045@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200206/24 X-Sequence-Number: 268 On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) Michael S Johnson wrote: > Does this list have a subject prefix defined? If not, I would like to > request that it define one. Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:27:47 2002 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01955195FC9 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EBA212D4; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:27:21 -0700 (PDT) To: "Michael S. Johnson" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: Message from "Michael S. Johnson" of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 PDT." References: X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:27:21 -0700 Message-ID: <1390.1024295241@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200206/25 X-Sequence-Number: 269 On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) Michael S Johnson wrote: > Just in case, let me say now that I am not interested in suggestions > to change my MUA. :) Pine is a perfectly acceptable MUA... -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 16 23:49:47 2002 Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E4D0195ACA for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21FD5B628F; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 02:47:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: J C Lawrence Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: <1361.1024295045@kanga.nu> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/26 X-Sequence-Number: 270 On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, J C Lawrence wrote: > Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant. Thank you for that helpful tip. Seeing the list address sometimes in the To, sometimes in the CC header was unreliable to filter on. I used Pine's "Participant contains list-managers@greatcircle.com" criterium in an inbox color rule to identify this list, where "Participant" searches the From, To, and CC headers instead of requiring the user to define one rule for each header separately. -- Michael From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 00:46:52 2002 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAB41959FD for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:46:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4100E12D4; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:46:24 -0700 (PDT) To: "Michael S. Johnson" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: Message from "Michael S. Johnson" of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 PDT." References: X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 00:46:24 -0700 Message-ID: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200206/27 X-Sequence-Number: 271 On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) Michael S Johnson wrote: > On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, J C Lawrence wrote: >> Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant. > Thank you for that helpful tip. Slightly more expanded: On lists that support RFC 2369, filter by the List-Id header. That's what its there for. For everything else I've found Sender: to be the most reliable. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 07:23:14 2002 Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E52195ABF for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 07:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA18283; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:22:30 -0400 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Envelope-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu> References: Message from "Michael S. Johnson" of "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:49:09 PDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:18:41 -0400 To: J C Lawrence From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Archive-Number: 200206/28 X-Sequence-Number: 272 At 3:46 AM -0400 6/17/02, J C Lawrence is rumored to have typed: > On lists that support RFC 2369, filter by the List-Id header. Unfurtunately, that ain't a lot of help on _this_ list. Charlie (who has a question he needs to ask about that specific of the List-* header fields, but I want to re-read the RFC first) From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 08:18:32 2002 Received: from mail.rev.net (server02.rev.net [206.67.68.98]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E6F195AFA for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fantasy (cosell.gva.net [65.164.103.253]) by mail.rev.net (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g5HFHvh28661 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:17:57 -0400 Message-Id: <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net> From: "Bernie Cosell" Organization: Fantasy Farm Fibers To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:17:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-reply-to: References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.3.1(snapshot 20020108) (server02.rev.net) X-Archived: msg.1024327077.moXX2o@server02.rev.net X-Archive-Number: 200206/29 X-Sequence-Number: 273 On 17 Jun 2002, at 10:18, Charlie Summers wrote: > At 3:46 AM -0400 6/17/02, J C Lawrence is rumored to have typed: > > > On lists that support RFC 2369, filter by the List-Id header. > > Unfurtunately, that ain't a lot of help on _this_ list. Right, but between List-Id and Sender, that gets just about every list *i've* seen in a fairly long time. Any of you run into lists whose MLM uses _neither_ sender nor list-id?? But of course, *neither* of those is of any use for folks who inflict OE on themselves -- a meta question: Is there *any*other* mail client that _cannot_ filter on those headers? OE is the only one I know of, but there are undoubtedly more, I suppose... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 08:33:24 2002 Received: from pop2a.ripco.com (pop2a.ripco.com [209.100.227.25]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA265195ABF for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:33:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dattier@localhost) by pop2a.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id g5HFWnt04531 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:32:49 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <200206171532.g5HFWnt04531@pop2a.ripco.com> Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (list-managers@greatcircle.com) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:32:49 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Chuq Von Rospach" at Jun 16, 2002 10:44:49 PM From: "David W. Tamkin" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200206/30 X-Sequence-Number: 274 Chuq wrote, > Fair enough. I don't care if others want it. I do care if they feel they can > force it on those that don't want it because they do. Michael, your contentment with getting it on his own copies is refreshing. In my experiences, not only have all those who proposed tagging opened the subject by demanding that it be the law of the list, but they've been noticeably disappointed to learn it was an option and that the rest of the list would continue to survive without it. They had to face up to its being a personal preference and not the superior way. I swear you're the first one I've ever seen actually walk away satisfied with getting tags on his own copies instead of acting deflated and defeated be- cause they wouldn't be forced on everybody else. Michael wrote, | My MUA can filter on it, but if I automatically move mail away from my | Inbox to other folders, I forget to read them. Out of sight->out of mind. If the list software didn't support it as an option, the solution to that is to set up a filter that catches your incoming copies of the list's distribu- tions by the Sender: header and then adds the tag. Heck, that's how I remove the tags from my copies of posts from lists that insert them on all posts. | That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to | suggest an MUA that solves that problem? Surely there are MUAs that call one's attention to new mail in other folders. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 08:38:58 2002 Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00798195F8D for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:38:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA26048; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:38:24 -0400 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net> References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:38:53 -0400 To: "Bernie Cosell" , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? X-Archive-Number: 200206/31 X-Sequence-Number: 275 At 11:17 AM -0400 6/17/02, Bernie Cosell is rumored to have typed: > But of course, *neither* of those is of any use for folks who inflict OE > on themselves -- a meta question: Is there *any*other* mail client that > _cannot_ filter on those headers? OE is the only one I know of, but > there are undoubtedly more, I suppose... Um...please understand, I cannot stand OE. And I cannot speak to the Windoze version of the thing, but I _have_ installed/configured the Macintosh version (5.02), and it _can_ filter on arbitrary header fields. Under the Tools menu, select Rules. Create a new rule, name it. Under the pop-up, select either "Specific Header" and fill in the header field name, or select "Any Header"; either way, fill in the contents of, say, the list's List-ID: header field, and in the "Action" box, tell it what to do with the message (move it, copy it, eat it, whatever). Make sure it's Enabled, and close the Rule and then the Rules window. Unlike Eudora (at least the old 3.1 I intentionally use to avoid HTML, javascript, OLE...er...ActiveX, etc., etc.), it doesn't open windows for those "folders" it transfers things into, but it does enbolden the folder name. I would _never_ recommend OE to anyone (I think it's clunky, stilted, and has less features and more security risks than an email application from 1997), but in fairness, at least in the Macintosh version, it CAN filter on arbitrary header fields. Charlie From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 09:05:12 2002 Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5AD195AFA for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:05:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-1-8-251.il.sprintbbd.net [66.1.8.251]) by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5HG4LO04764 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:04:31 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <002601c21618$a48faa20$fb080142@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu> Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:03:45 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Archive-Number: 200206/32 X-Sequence-Number: 276 Charlie wrote, | Um...please understand, I cannot stand OE. And I cannot speak to the | Windoze version of the thing, but I _have_ installed/configured the | Macintosh version (5.02), and it _can_ filter on arbitrary header fields. Outlook Express for Windows cannot; this is version 6.0, and I started with 4.something, which couldn't either, nor could 5.0 or 5.5. My personal solution is to receive mail from lists at shell accounts, where procmail drops them into folders that OE reads via IMAP. Before anyone attacks me for using OE at all, I started using it because it was *there*, and by now I'm too entrenched for a change to be easy, and I've yet to see anything where the potential improvement over OE is worth the learning curve plus the adjustment. But I am not championing it nor even defending it. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 09:12:16 2002 Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D946195AFA for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:12:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA28393; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:11:46 -0400 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200206171532.g5HFWnt04531@pop2a.ripco.com> References: from "Chuq Von Rospach" at Jun 16, 2002 10:44:49 PM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:04:01 -0400 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (list-managers@greatcircle.com) From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? X-Archive-Number: 200206/33 X-Sequence-Number: 277 At 11:32 AM -0400 6/17/02, David W. Tamkin is rumored to have typed: > Surely there are MUAs that call one's attention to new mail in other folders. Yup; Eudora Pro 3.1 (from 1997) for Macintosh opens each "mailbox" (I know, it's a misnomer, but so is "folder") it transfers mail into after a retrieve. My desktop doesn't look so very good in the mornings... ;) Charlie From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 09:22:54 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3762195ABF for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:22:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BE9B351DE for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:22:26 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020617120117.03f18680@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:04:13 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Subject prefix for In-Reply-To: <1361.1024295045@kanga.nu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/34 X-Sequence-Number: 278 At 11:24 PM 2002-06-16 -0700, J C Lawrence wrote: >Filter by the Sender header. Its reliable and constant. Not if they use all of the mj2 features. Built in verp, y-know. Hmmmm....according to my settings, I have set prefix, I just double checked, but I see no prefixes... -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 10:39:02 2002 Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.13.23]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B727195AAD for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 13845 invoked by uid 50); 17 Jun 2002 17:38:34 -0000 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? References: <2305.1024299984@kanga.nu> <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net> In-Reply-To: <200206171517.g5HFHvh28661@mail.rev.net> ("Bernie Cosell"'s message of "Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:17:56 -0400") From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:38:34 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 12 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090005 (Oort Gnus v0.05) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp, sparc-sun-solaris2.6) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Archive-Number: 200206/35 X-Sequence-Number: 279 Bernie Cosell writes: > Right, but between List-Id and Sender, that gets just about every list > *i've* seen in a fairly long time. Any of you run into lists whose MLM > uses _neither_ sender nor list-id?? Not run, but I've seen them. Checking my sorting rules, I occasionally use Mailing-List (pure ezmlm, not ezmlm-idx, mailing lists) and X-Loop, and once in a while Return-Path. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 10:40:04 2002 Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B2A195AED for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:40:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8EFB621A; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:37:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:39:28 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: Nick Simicich Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subject prefix for In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020617120117.03f18680@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/36 X-Sequence-Number: 280 On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Nick Simicich wrote: > Hmmmm....according to my settings, I have set prefix, I just double > checked, but I see no prefixes... Ah, that would be because the list prefix is not surrounded by [square brackets]. The convention on other lists is to enclose the subject prefix in [square brackets], but this list does not. It was probably just an oversight. I do see the text "List-Managers" near the beginning of each message subject now, after the "Re: " prefix if there is one. For example with this message, for those with set prefix turned on: * Current: "Re: List-Managers Subject prefix for" * Desired: "Re: [List-Managers] Subject prefix for" Brent, may I ask for this small correction, please? -- Much appreciated, Michael From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 10:55:36 2002 Received: from foobar.noderunner.net (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD72D195AED for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:55:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (foobar.noderunner.net [199.34.34.27]) by foobar.noderunner.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0968B633F; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:53:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:55:01 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: "Michael S. Johnson" To: "David W. Tamkin" Cc: "list-managers@greatcircle.com" Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? In-Reply-To: <200206171532.g5HFWnt04531@pop2a.ripco.com> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: michj@michj0-xp.redmond.corp.microsoft.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/37 X-Sequence-Number: 281 On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, David W. Tamkin wrote: > Michael, your contentment with getting it on his own copies is refreshing. Thank you. There was never any intent to enforce the subject prefix on all subscribers. It is unfortunate that prominent list personalities misunderstood my request in that way. Chuq and I have reached an understanding and have declared a truce. :) I run a list or two, so I am sensitive to that issue. I researched the prefix setting by first requesting help documents from the Majordomo server. Because the documentation shows that it is a per-user setting, there didn't seem to be any harm in setting the feature, noticing that it didn't work, realizing that it probably was not defined for the list, then asking the list owner to define one. When I didn't hear back from the list owner, I thought it might be a policy issue, so I made the request here on the list, figuring that either a list co-owner would step up to the task, or that people who knew better would be able to enlighten me as to why there was no subject prefix. Although I now see that I should have, I didn't think that a list of list owners would require me to pad my request with assurances that my request would not negatively impact *their* experience on this list, and would not seek to enforce changes to *all* subscribers. Frankly, I thought this list was more mature and knowledgable about that sort of thing, given the authoritative posture of many of the frequent participants. > If the list software didn't support it as an option, the solution to > that is to set up a filter that catches your incoming copies of the > list's distribu- tions by the Sender: header and then adds the tag. My MUA (PC-Pine) does not support altering the content of messages in the way you describe. Yes, your suggestion is certainly worth implementing if it could. > | That's not an MUA problem. That's an attention deficit problem. Dare to > | suggest an MUA that solves that problem? > > Surely there are MUAs that call one's attention to new mail in other folders. Yes, there are. Outlook and Outlook Express are two of them. I use both for other purposes, but I use Pine because I have almost 10 years of mailbox archives in that plaintext format. If I started using Outlook or OE for my daily non-work mail, I would then have two incompatible data stores - one would not be able to search the other. -- Michael From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 11:49:43 2002 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC30195F3B for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:49:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) id g5HIn4336163 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:49:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Envelope-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Received: from tom-w2kc (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g5HIn3U36093 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:49:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:49:10 -0400 From: Tom Neff Reply-To: tneff@grassyhill.org To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? Message-ID: <58208703.1024325350@[192.168.0.1]> In-Reply-To: <002601c21618$a48faa20$fb080142@ord351473> References: <002601c21618$a48faa20$fb080142@ord351473> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Win32) Organization: Grassy Hill Entertainment MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Scanner: scanned by Inflex 1.0.12.3 - http://pldaniels.com/inflex X-Archive-Number: 200206/38 X-Sequence-Number: 282 --On Monday, June 17, 2002 11:03 AM -0500 "David W. Tamkin" wrote: > My personal solution is to receive mail from lists at shell accounts, > where procmail drops them into folders that OE reads via IMAP. > > Before anyone attacks me for using OE at all, I started using it because > it was *there*, and by now I'm too entrenched for a change to be easy, > and I've yet to see anything where the potential improvement over OE is > worth the learning curve plus the adjustment. But I am not championing > it nor even defending it. Respectfully -- if all you're doing is reading IMAP folders hosted on an external server, the learning curve in switching to something decent like Mulberry or Mozilla Mail is almost nonexistent. And you'll be protected from the cavalcade of MS security holes. That alone is worth the switch. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Jun 17 15:43:27 2002 Received: from [10.0.1.6] (adsl-105-209.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.209.105]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE95D195F3C; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 08:42:55 +1000 To: "Michael S. Johnson" , Nick Simicich From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Subject prefix for Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200206/39 X-Sequence-Number: 283 At 10:39 AM -0700 6/17/02, Michael S. Johnson wrote: >On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Nick Simicich wrote: > > Hmmmm....according to my settings, I have set prefix, I just double > > checked, but I see no prefixes... > >Ah, that would be because the list prefix is not surrounded by [square >brackets]. The convention on other lists is to enclose the subject prefix >in [square brackets], but this list does not. It was probably just an >oversight. I do see the text "List-Managers" near the beginning of each >message subject now, after the "Re: " prefix if there is one. > >For example with this message, for those with set prefix turned on: > >* Current: "Re: List-Managers Subject prefix for" >* Desired: "Re: [List-Managers] Subject prefix for" > >Brent, may I ask for this small correction, please? > >-- >Much appreciated, >Michael Oops, sorry, I thought the software would add the square brackets automatically. Fixed now. -Brent -- Brent Chapman From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Jun 20 07:44:45 2002 Received: from mail8.wlv.netzero.net (mail8.wlv.netzero.net [209.247.163.58]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 94BF71959F8 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 07:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 20124 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2002 14:44:07 -0000 Received: from dialup-65.59.82.147.dial1.tampa1.level3.net (HELO netzero.net) (65.59.82.147) by mail8.wlv.netzero.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2002 14:44:07 -0000 Message-ID: <3D11E540.CD8A97C8@netzero.net> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 10:22:56 -0400 From: Kirk Bailey Organization: Silas Dent Memorial Cabal of ERIS Esoteric and hot dog boiling society X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Michael S. Johnson" , list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Subject prefix for list-managers@greatcircle.com? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200206/40 X-Sequence-Number: 284 Hmmm, I could turn it on with a file for each list, and if not found, it simply reproduces the subject, hmmm..... "Michael S. Johnson" wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Kirk Bailey wrote: > > > interesting. I wrote TinyList to always automatically insert > > '[(listname)]' before the provided subject, and assumed it would aid > > in the use of list service and facilitate reading and filtering list > > messages; this thread is providing much useful fodder for > > consideration. > > I'm glad that there are others on the list who find this thread useful > instead of annoying and threatening to their way of life. ^_^ > > Thank you for letting me know that it has been of use to you. Making such > an option user-specific appears to be more desirable than an > everyone-or-noone feature. > > I'm sure you've also thought of this, but inserting the [(listname)] > prefix in a consistent position in the subject header and avoiding > duplicates is a big plus. > > -- > Michael -- end Respectfully, Kirk D Bailey +---------------------"Thou Art Free." -Eris-----------------------+ | http://www.howlermonkey.net mailto:highprimate@howlermonkey.net | | http://www.tinylist.org +--------+ mailto:grumpy@tinylist.org | +------------------Thinking| NORMAL |Thinking----------------------+ +--------+ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:11:44 2002 Received: from bp.ucs.louisiana.edu (bp.ucs.louisiana.edu [130.70.132.231]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ABFD195AEF for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:11:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from louisiana.edu (h144172.louisiana.edu [130.70.144.172]) by bp.ucs.louisiana.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3/ull-ucs-server_1.6) with ESMTP id g5SKBA125554 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 15:11:10 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3D1CC308.7030106@louisiana.edu> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 15:11:52 -0500 From: Istvan Berkeley User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Gorillas at Play Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200206/41 X-Sequence-Number: 285 Hi there, I just received an unusual bit of spam. It was from msn.com inviting me to join their system. They even tell me how easy it would be to switch from my AOL account! Of course, they offer me the option to 'opt out' from future mailings too! Now, if the '800 pound gorilla' style ISPs are resorting to spam, what hope is there that we can ever trust them to enforce sensible anti-spam policies. Has anyone else seen anything like this? All the best, Istvan -- Istvan S. N. Berkeley, Ph.D. istvan@louisiana.edu Philosophy and Cognitive Science The University of Louisiana at Lafayette Tel: (337) 482-6807 P. O. Box 43770, Lafayette Fax: (337) 482-5002 Louisiana, 70504, U.S.A. http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~isb9112 From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:19:53 2002 Received: from clifford.inch.com (ns.biglist.com [216.223.208.40]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B900E195B12 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 52550 invoked by uid 501); 28 Jun 2002 20:19:20 -0000 Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:19:20 -0400 From: Omar Thameen To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Verizon postmaster contact? Message-ID: <20020628161920.A52207@clifford.inch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-Archive-Number: 200206/42 X-Sequence-Number: 286 Anyone have contact info (pref. phone #) for Verizon mail server issues? They're blocking SMTP connections, presumably because of the volume we're sending, and I can't get anyone to tell me anything other than to send email to abuse@verizon.net. I've emailed that address, as well as postmaster@verizon.net, but have heard nothing. Please respond privately if you don't want to put it in the archives. Thanks, Omar From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:20:05 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B0061960BD for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5SKJRJU001376; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:19:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:19:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: Istvan Berkeley Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Gorillas at Play In-Reply-To: <3D1CC308.7030106@louisiana.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/43 X-Sequence-Number: 287 On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Istvan Berkeley wrote: > Now, if the '800 pound gorilla' style ISPs are resorting to spam, > what hope is there that we can ever trust them to enforce > sensible anti-spam policies. Has anyone else seen anything like > this? I think so. My first private account in retirement was with earthlink, and they certainly did it. -- RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger double retiree and linux greenhorn Delenda est MegaSleazo! From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 13:57:14 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A198195AEF for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:57:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5SKtvJU005883; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:56:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:55:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: Omar Thameen Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Verizon postmaster contact? In-Reply-To: <20020628161920.A52207@clifford.inch.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/44 X-Sequence-Number: 288 On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Omar Thameen wrote: > Anyone have contact info (pref. phone #) for Verizon mail server > issues? They're blocking SMTP connections, presumably because of > the volume we're sending, and I can't get anyone to tell me anything > other than to send email to abuse@verizon.net. I've emailed that > address, as well as postmaster@verizon.net, but have heard nothing. As a Verizon customer, I can get 0.verizon.linux, and can usually post to it. Want me to put up the paragraph, saying it's from a colleague on the list-managers' list? There are other 0.verizon.foobar groups; I'll try to spot a better one. -- RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger Delenda est MegaSleazo! From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Jun 28 14:13:13 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1824195AF0 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5SLCdJU007949; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:12:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:12:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: List Managers Cc: Omar Thameen Subject: Omar, I bet this is relevant! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/45 X-Sequence-Number: 289 On 0.verizon.security, I found a message that seems relevant to Omar Thameen's problem. I doubt it's forwardable, but I'll try to copy & paste it here, and maybe he can mine it. Reply-To: "Dennis Dayman [Verizon Online Security Operations]" From: "Dennis Dayman [Verizon Online Security Operations]" Newsgroups: 0.verizon.security References: <3D1042EF.5CA7066B@someoneelse.com> <3D1112E8.8D6D66A0@someoneelse.com> Subject: Re: Does Verizon block some email????? Lines: 32 Organization: Verizon Online Internet X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 23:36:01 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.180.7.162 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrddc01.gnilink.net 1024529761 199.180.7.162 (Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:36:01 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:36:01 EDT Xref: cyclone1.gnilink.net 0.verizon.security:775 X-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:36:01 EDT (nwrddc01.gnilink.net) I am in talks with TOPICA at this time. We are working on a temporary solution this week and hopefully after this week a more permanent solution by next Friday. -- ------------------------------- Dennis Dayman Verizon Online Security Operations vz.security@verizon.net "HiEv" wrote in message news:3D1112E8.8D6D66A0@someoneelse.com... > Weldon Wallick wrote: > > Yes, it is Topica!!! > > > > What the hell is the big idea??????? > > Well, Scott couldn't be very specific. He just said > (on 6/11) that they had talked to Topica and there > was something they could do (or not do) so they > wouldn't be counted as spammers anymore, and if they > did that then the problem should be solved in two > months or so. > > See the thread I pointed you to earlier if you want > to see his exact words. > NB : the thread in question, for any who can get to 0.verizon.anything, is: >It wouldn't happen to be Topica would it? You might >want to check the "Verizon and Topica" thread in >0.verizon.adsl to see what's going on there even if >it's not the Topica mailing list. > >They are probably being excluded as spam. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 09:02:47 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9261959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45ED3351D9; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:02:10 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 03:51:22 -0400 To: List Managers From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Omar, I bet this is relevant! Cc: Omar Thameen In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/46 X-Sequence-Number: 290 Topica is in the process of being added to a number of blocklists, and I am unsure if this is the issue at Verizon. (At least, this is the way I interpret the discussion on SPAM-L). If there was a bounce available, seeing it might help. Feel free to e-mail it to me privately. However, there may well be some escalation blacklisting regarding topica. They have had some large number of lists with spamtrap addresses signed up onto their service and they have not vetted them well. They also have some subsidiary who is more, shall we say, oriented to delivering less solicited mail, and that subsidiary delivers from the same servers. So, if I was looking for uninterrupted service and my mailing list was actually opt-in, I would go elsewhere for mailing list service. At 05:12 PM 2002-06-28 -0400, Beartooth wrote: > On 0.verizon.security, I found a message that seems >relevant to Omar Thameen's problem. I doubt it's forwardable, but >I'll try to copy & paste it here, and maybe he can mine it. > >Reply-To: "Dennis Dayman [Verizon Online Security Operations]" >-- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 09:21:53 2002 Received: from firehouse.net (dsl-64-130-18-61.telocity.com [64.130.18.61]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9130E1959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 50955 invoked by uid 85); 29 Jun 2002 16:22:42 -0000 Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:22:40 -0400 To: List Managers Subject: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] Message-ID: <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="K8nIJk4ghYZn606h" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1>; from njs@scifi.squawk.com on Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:51:22AM -0400 From: "Alan B. Clegg" X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/0.52 (Python 2.2 on FreeBSD/i386) X-TMDA-Fingerprint: PKCVIa/C10l0oRwfqiulT5LlJCM X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11 X-Archive-Number: 200206/47 X-Sequence-Number: 291 --K8nIJk4ghYZn606h Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Unless the network is lying to me again, Nick Simicich said:=20 > However, there may well be some escalation blacklisting regarding=20 > topica. They have had some large number of lists with spamtrap addresses= =20 > signed up onto their service and they have not vetted them well. This is an interesting point on which I'd love to see some discussion (not sure that it's relavent here, so please tell me to move it elsewhere if that is appropriate, or followup with me off list).=20 One of my systems was recently blacklisted by SPEWS. It took me a few days to find out 1) that it had happened and 2) to get it fixed. It seems that a spamtrap address somewhere had gotten "mail from me" and that seems to be an automatic, one-shot blacklisting offense. Now, I use TMDA for junk-mail dispatching, and it sends an e-mail back to anyone that I don't have in an explicit whitelist explaining what is happening, and how to deal with getting mail to me (it's really simple, and a really nice system for those that have not seen it yet). Anyway, after talking with the SPEWS folks, the only thing I can figure out is that a piece of spam had an envelope From_ of a spamtrap and=20 they tagged me. The mail that had been "harvested" in the spamtrap was one of my TMDA explanation mail. The SPEWS guys would not tell me what the address of the spamtrap was so I was not able to see which piece of mail had triggered it. Has anyone else seen spam with spamtrap return addresses? AlanC --=20 | Alan Clegg | Networks | Security | UNIX | 802.11 |=20 perl -le '$_=3D"6110>374086;2064208213:90<307;55";tr[0->][ LEOR\!AUBGNSTY];= print' --K8nIJk4ghYZn606h Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9Hd7QyJP8xSfQVdsRAmieAKCiV5GxXvfZBLgXytksyzpSmL9AiACbBWJc 9v0RZGQ1u8wNwQWdX9OR6mM= =wZvL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --K8nIJk4ghYZn606h-- From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 09:31:38 2002 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D311959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C9B1969; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:31:01 -0700 (PDT) To: "Alan B. Clegg" Cc: List Managers Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] In-Reply-To: Message from "Alan B. Clegg" of "Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:22:40 EDT." <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1> <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:31:01 -0700 Message-ID: <19899.1025368261@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200206/48 X-Sequence-Number: 292 On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:22:40 -0400 Alan B Clegg wrote: > Anyway, after talking with the SPEWS folks, the only thing I can > figure out is that a piece of spam had an envelope From_ of a spamtrap > and they tagged me. The mail that had been "harvested" in the > spamtrap was one of my TMDA explanation mail. The SPEWS guys would > not tell me what the address of the spamtrap was so I was not able to > see which piece of mail had triggered it. More than likely it was a bit of KLEZ. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:00:51 2002 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 749221959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9065C12E0; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Cc: "Alan B. Clegg" , List Managers Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] In-Reply-To: Message from J C Lawrence of "Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:31:01 PDT." <19899.1025368261@kanga.nu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1> <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> <19899.1025368261@kanga.nu> X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:00:19 -0700 Message-ID: <20379.1025370019@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200206/49 X-Sequence-Number: 293 On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:31:01 -0700 J C Lawrence wrote: > More than likely it was a bit of KLEZ. As an aside to which: I assume I'm not the only one getting KLEZzed onto single-opt-in lists? -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:22:31 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD221959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5THLsJU027152; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:21:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:21:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: J C Lawrence Cc: "Alan B. Clegg" , List Managers Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] In-Reply-To: <20379.1025370019@kanga.nu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/50 X-Sequence-Number: 294 On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, J C Lawrence wrote: > > As an aside to which: I assume I'm not the only one getting > KLEZzed onto single-opt-in lists? Single-opt-in?? -- RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger double retiree & linux greenhorn w/RH 7.2 Keep in mind that I have no idea what I am talking about. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:31:36 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C2C195AE2 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5THV2JU028009 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:31:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:31:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: List Managers Subject: lmgr spamfilter Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/51 X-Sequence-Number: 295 Odd, at least to me: I got a confirm-this autoreply to my last message to this list. fwiw, I'm using my usual radix account, but telnetted in under W98 instead of ssh'd in under linux, also from the usual other verizon account. Maybe that tells someone something interesting; if not, my apologies for wasting bandwidth! -- RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger Delenda est MegaSleazo! From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:39:40 2002 Received: from www.lofcom.com (lofcom.com [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6C83195AE2 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:39:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-63-158-007.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.63.158.7]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA11829; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:38:46 -0400 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Envelope-To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20379.1025370019@kanga.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:38:54 -0400 To: KHLsv , J C Lawrence From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Cc: "Alan B. Clegg" , List Managers X-Archive-Number: 200206/52 X-Sequence-Number: 296 At 1:21 PM -0400 6/29/02, Beartooth is rumored to have typed: > Single-opt-in?? Non-comfirmed. Charlie From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:41:53 2002 Received: from tom.iecc.com (tom.iecc.com [208.31.42.38]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 32754196012 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7003 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2002 13:41:15 -0400 Received: (ofmipd 208.31.42.38); 29 Jun 2002 17:40:53 -0000 Date: 29 Jun 2002 13:41:15 -0400 Message-ID: From: "John R Levine" To: "Alan B. Clegg" Cc: "List Managers" Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] In-Reply-To: <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/53 X-Sequence-Number: 297 > Has anyone else seen spam with spamtrap return addresses? Lots. Not just Klez, either. This month's spamware gimmick is to pick both the To: and the From: addresses from the list of victims. If you're getting strange bounces messages from places you've never sent any mail to, much less sent spam to, that's why. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "Just how much hay did we buy?" asked Tom, balefully. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:44:14 2002 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (unknown [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F22319605A for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kanga.nu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.home.kanga.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EFC212E0; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:43:42 -0700 (PDT) To: Charlie Summers Cc: KHLsv , "Alan B. Clegg" , List Managers Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] In-Reply-To: Message from Charlie Summers of "Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:38:54 EDT." References: <20379.1025370019@kanga.nu> X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:43:42 -0700 Message-ID: <21513.1025372622@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200206/54 X-Sequence-Number: 298 On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:38:54 -0400 Charlie Summers wrote: > At 1:21 PM -0400 6/29/02, Beartooth is rumored to have typed: >> Single-opt-in?? > Non-comfirmed. True, I've seen both terms used. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 10:48:11 2002 Received: from pop2b.ripco.com (pop2b.ripco.com [209.100.227.27]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F493195F41 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 10:48:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ord351473 (cpe-66-87-152-33.il.sprintbbd.net [66.87.152.33]) by pop2b.ripco.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g5THlqg22407 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:47:53 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <008d01c21f94$e9385840$21985742@il.sprintbbd.net> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: "List Managers" References: Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 12:44:59 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Archive-Number: 200206/55 X-Sequence-Number: 299 J C Lawrence wrote: > As an aside to which: I assume I'm not the only one getting > KLEZzed onto single-opt-in lists? and Beartooth asked, | Single-opt-in?? My take is that Lawrence meant lists where you send a join command and are added on the strength of that one message. That's in contrast to double opt-in lists, where you send a join command, the list software asks you if the join command really came from you and includes a confirmation code to return if it did, and you send back the confirmation code to complete the process. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 13:03:23 2002 Received: from clifford.inch.com (ns.biglist.com [216.223.208.40]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AEB8A1959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:03:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 4847 invoked by uid 501); 29 Jun 2002 20:02:50 -0000 Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 16:02:50 -0400 From: Omar Thameen To: Nick Simicich Cc: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: connecting to verizon.net [WAS: Re: ...I bet this is relevant!] Message-ID: <20020629160250.A1041@clifford.inch.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1>; from njs@scifi.squawk.com on Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:51:22AM -0400 X-Archive-Number: 200206/56 X-Sequence-Number: 300 On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:51:22AM -0400, Nick Simicich wrote: > Topica is in the process of being added to a number of blocklists, and I am > unsure if this is the issue at Verizon. (At least, this is the way I > interpret the discussion on SPAM-L). If there was a bounce available, Is that SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM , or something else? I've been looking for another mailing list pertinent to list hosting providers, particularly those hosting large lists. Any recommendations? > seeing it might help. Feel free to e-mail it to me privately. There's no bounce, it's just a "connection refused" from relay.verizon.net (their MXer). > However, there may well be some escalation blacklisting regarding > topica. They have had some large number of lists with spamtrap addresses > signed up onto their service and they have not vetted them well. They also > have some subsidiary who is more, shall we say, oriented to delivering less > solicited mail, and that subsidiary delivers from the same servers. Hmmmm. Is their subsidiary that e-publisher.com (or something like that)? I'm just curious. > So, if I was looking for uninterrupted service and my mailing list was > actually opt-in, I would go > elsewhere for mailing list service. The issue I emailed about is not a list I have at Topica. It's with some of our servers. Omar From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 20:44:38 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CFB7195F4A for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 20:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E34A83501A for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 23:44:01 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629163804.263d47c0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 17:53:54 -0400 To: List Managers From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? In-Reply-To: <21513.1025372622@kanga.nu> References: <20379.1025370019@kanga.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/57 X-Sequence-Number: 301 At 10:43 AM 2002-06-29 -0700, J C Lawrence wrote: >On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:38:54 -0400 >Charlie Summers wrote: > > > At 1:21 PM -0400 6/29/02, Beartooth is rumored to have typed: > >> Single-opt-in?? > > > Non-comfirmed. > >True, I've seen both terms used. Single opt-in is usually used by spammers to describe their opt in lists, where you are opted in because they want to send the mail in to you. This is as contrasted to double-opt-in, which is a term for a list where they actually confirm that you want to be on the list by verifying your intent. I did a search for the term, double opt in, in the Google Usenet archives a few weeks ago, and the earliest use I could find of the term in relationship to e-mail was a spammer trying to make verification of addresses seem terminally difficult. But there are people who feel fairly strong about this whole mess --- that terminology has to be clear or that one has lost the education battle. If you are a spammer, you should call them "single opt-in" or "double opt-in". If you are not, call them what they are - unverified or verified e-mail addresses. Don't add any extra credibility to the "type any address into a web form" sort of sign in, and don't make verification seem like an unnecessary step. -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Jun 29 23:49:06 2002 Received: from scifi.squawk.com (scifi.squawk.com [208.176.124.156]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871311959E9 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 23:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2F55351EB for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2002 02:48:31 -0400 (EDT) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020630012913.288efec8@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: njs@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 02:08:38 -0400 To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: connecting to verizon.net [WAS: Re: ...I In-Reply-To: <20020629160250.A1041@clifford.inch.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200206/58 X-Sequence-Number: 302 At 04:02 PM 2002-06-29 -0400, Omar Thameen wrote: >On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:51:22AM -0400, Nick Simicich wrote: > > Topica is in the process of being added to a number of blocklists, and > I am > > unsure if this is the issue at Verizon. (At least, this is the way I > > interpret the discussion on SPAM-L). If there was a bounce available, > >Is that SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM , or something else? I've been >looking for another mailing list pertinent to list hosting providers, >particularly those hosting large lists. Any recommendations? Yes. I think it is pertinent because of the same reason that this list is pertinent. You hear things regarding how e-mail is handled and what people expect in terms of "best practices". > > seeing it might help. Feel free to e-mail it to me privately. > >There's no bounce, it's just a "connection refused" from >relay.verizon.net (their MXer). Odd. That sounds like they have the servers blocked at the border routers or they have done something else specifically to filter them. verizon.net is a single IP address. It is priority zero MX from verizon.net and they only have the one IP address. However, if you try connecting to port 25 on the system repeatedly, you get different banners. This means that they are likely using some sort of "dispatching" system of the sort used by IBM from the Atlanta Olympics on, that routes the initial connection packets (and the rest of the packet in that connection) using stateful routing. (Or they could be using a circuit level proxy that simply punches a tcp forwarding connection to one of several servers, but that is the "low tech" method - the other method only requires that you track syns and fins and origin/destination tuples -- and you only have to handle the packets that are headed to the servers, the return packets can be routed.) I have no trouble telnetting to port 25 on those servers. There may well be some sort of issue with some server/firewall combinations that do not work well with connection dispatchers (although they are supposed to be completely transparent). All they do is (typically) change the mac address on the far end to vector your syn to one or the other of the back end servers --- and then they have to remember state so that they can forward any of your other packets that are part of the same connection to the same server. I can imagine some sort of incompatibility with a load balancing connection router, but a circuit level one probably can't be incompatible with anything. Even if there is a icmp filtering issue, this should not cause connection refused. > > However, there may well be some escalation blacklisting regarding > > topica. They have had some large number of lists with spamtrap addresses > > signed up onto their service and they have not vetted them well. They > also > > have some subsidiary who is more, shall we say, oriented to delivering > less > > solicited mail, and that subsidiary delivers from the same servers. > >Hmmmm. Is their subsidiary that e-publisher.com (or something like >that)? I'm just curious. I think so. I can't remember exactly - it is not my attempt to be evasive, I just do not remember. > > So, if I was looking for uninterrupted service and my mailing list was > > actually opt-in, I would go > > elsewhere for mailing list service. > >The issue I emailed about is not a list I have at Topica. It's with >some of our servers. Well, I was confused. Not the first time. -- War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made so by the exertions of better men than himself. -- John Stuart Mill Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 30 02:52:47 2002 Received: from yertle.kciLink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [216.194.193.105]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F29A195F70 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2002 02:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yertle.kciLink.com (Postfix, from userid 100) id 9F73E2178A; Sun, 30 Jun 2002 05:52:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Vivek Khera MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15646.54478.544905.50964@yertle.kciLink.com> Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 05:52:14 -0400 To: "Alan B. Clegg" Cc: List Managers Subject: Re: Spamtrap e-mail addresses in spam headers? [was: Omar's Relevance] In-Reply-To: <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629033852.03cd4eb0@127.0.0.1> <20020629122240.B50344@shazam.wetworks.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.04 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-Archive-Number: 200206/59 X-Sequence-Number: 303 >>>>> "ABC" == Alan B Clegg writes: ABC> Has anyone else seen spam with spamtrap return addresses? Given that spammers tend to rotate through their address list to alter the smtp from address, it would follow that at some point or other one of the spamtrap addresses in their list would be used as the source address in a message they sent. This one just happened to go to you. Or it could be Klez attacking someone who has the spamtrap address in their address book. That's my guess. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Jun 30 08:42:53 2002 Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6755D195B29 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2002 08:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from saltmine.radix.net (saltmine.radix.net [207.192.128.40]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5UFgIJU016421; Sun, 30 Jun 2002 11:42:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 11:42:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Beartooth X-X-Sender: karhunhammas@saltmine.radix.net Reply-To: KHLsv To: Omar Thameen Cc: List Managers Subject: Spam-L (was Re: connecting to verizon.net) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020630012913.288efec8@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200206/60 X-Sequence-Number: 304 At 04:02 PM 2002-06-29 -0400, Omar Thameen wrote: >Is that SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM , or something else? I've >been looking for another mailing list pertinent to list hosting >providers, particularly those hosting large lists. Any >recommendations? I was subscribed to spam-L for some time, before i retired. Even though 90% of the content was hopelessly over my head, I learned stuff I could use. People were friendly, helpful, and without exception tolerant of my cluelessness. For any of you who can actually follow all of this discussion, and aren't already on, I can't recommend it highly enough. -- RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger All the evil in the world couldn't do justice to a spammer. Send spam to spamrecycle@chooseyourmail.com and to uce@ftc.gov See http://www.cauce.org/