From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 05:29:06 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25084; Mon, 2 Nov 92 05:29:06 PST Received: from dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25074; Mon, 2 Nov 92 05:26:07 PST Received: by dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (5.61++/1.34) id AA25509; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:21:34 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:21:34 -0500 From: ntm1851@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (James L. Bowling) Message-Id: <9211021321.AA25509@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil> To: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe List-Managers-Digest From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 08:25:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25976; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:25:33 PST Received: from sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25969; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:25:28 PST Message-Id: <9211021625.AA25969@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Received: by sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov (16.8/16.2) id AA00924; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:25:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:25:42 -0800 From: Michael Urban Apparently-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 08:30:25 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26014; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:30:25 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26006; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:30:20 PST Message-Id: <9211021630.AA26006@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Michael Urban In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:25:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michael Urban writes: # subscribe list-managers # Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 08:38:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26100; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:38:15 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26082; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:38:05 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA14627; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:38:17 -0800 for Urban@GreatCircle.COM Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA17554; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:37:26 PST for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:37:26 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211021637.AA17554@medraut.apple.com> To: brent@GreatCircle.COM, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: , Urban@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Michael Urban writes: > ># subscribe list-managers ># >Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing >lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to >the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) Well, since I got a message from him asking to be subscribed to my mailing list, I think I ought to do it. I simply took it to be a shorthand way of asking to be on ALL of our mailing lists... From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 08:47:16 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26162; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:47:16 PST Received: from sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26153; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:47:09 PST Message-Id: <9211021647.AA26153@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Received: by sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov (16.8/16.2) id AA01051; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:46:45 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 PST." <9211021630.AA26006@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> X-Face: %q"[Odr2u&o(@]W>9%kwwJ/Td+Ju5!en}ZHQ>G3)9%`RBr7Ct12Dj6LB\Qz@@j|YgfHymB~ Lc>qe:o+U{rh!RVuaYYd{+S4$8tPLu]Y$0<5x>rj-kuS"[eqLFME-('jwXR87s;A3I,=cW*D(> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Your message dated: Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 PST > Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing > lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to > the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) Well, public embarassment is good, although if the goal is to reduce spurious traffic, its value is open to doubt. Mike From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 08:47:26 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26182; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:47:26 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26155; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:47:14 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA20785; Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:47:27 CST Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:47:27 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211021647.AA20785@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, urban@cobra.jpl.nasa.gov In-Reply-To: Brent Chapman's message of Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 -0800 <9211021630.AA26006@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Subject: subscribe... Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michael Urban writes: # subscribe list-managers # Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) I don't know. It's pretty scary to realize that people who supposedly know what they are doing don't read directions and don't know one of the longest standing traditions/standards on the Internet (I think it even predates TCP). Maybe we could create a separate list-managers list with a few mailing loops in it and add them to that! :-) William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 08:48:31 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26207; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:48:31 PST Received: from utkvt1 (UTKVT1.VET.UTK.EDU) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26200; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:48:21 PST Received: from UTKVT1.VET.UTK.EDU by UTKVT1.VET.UTK.EDU (PMDF #3151 ) id <01GQOB8MKA4W8WVZ3E@UTKVT1.VET.UTK.EDU>; Mon, 2 Nov 1992 11:48:15 EDT Date: 02 Nov 1992 11:48:15 -0400 (EDT) From: "John R. Lewis, Ph.D., ADP Project Manager" Subject: subscribe list-managers-digest To: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: <01GQOB8MOATE8WVZ3E@UTKVT1.VET.UTK.EDU> X-Vms-To: IN%"list-managers-digest@greatcircle.com" X-Vms-Cc: TSTMGR Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers-digest From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 09:09:32 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26245; Mon, 2 Nov 92 09:09:32 PST Received: from sgiblab.sgi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26234; Mon, 2 Nov 92 09:09:24 PST Received: from unpc by sgiblab.sgi.com via UUCP (920330.SGI/911001.SGI) for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM id AA23566; Mon, 2 Nov 92 09:09:20 -0800 Received: by unpc.queernet.org (5.61/smail2.2/11-02-92) id AA14012; Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:39:58 -0800 From: rogerk@unpc.queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) Message-Id: <9211021639.AA14012@unpc.queernet.org> To: Brent Chapman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, Michael Urban In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 -0800. <9211021630.AA26006@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:39:58 PST Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing > lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to > the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) info ;-) --- ROGER B.A. KLORESE +1 415 ALL-ARFF rogerk@unpc.QueerNet.ORG {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!sgiblab!unpc!rogerk "Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from." -- J. Foster From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 11:20:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27242; Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:20:41 PST Received: from garlic.inset.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27235; Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:20:35 PST Received: by garlic.inset.com (Sendmail:5.51/Cf:Jr.2.6) id AA14762; Mon, 2 Nov 92 14:16:27 EST From: Adam S. Moskowitz Message-Id: <9211021916.AA14762@garlic.inset.com> Subject: subscribe list-managers-digest (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 14:16:24 EST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: "John R. Lewis, Ph.D., ADP Project Manager" ^^^^ > Subject: subscribe list-managers-digest > To: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM > . . . > > subscribe list-managers-digest This one from a Ph.D. no less! Where, oh where, are the self-trained, fully-aware hackers of days gone by? AdamM From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 15:25:39 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27748; Mon, 2 Nov 92 15:25:39 PST Received: from Ra.MsState.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27741; Mon, 2 Nov 92 15:25:26 PST Received: by Ra.MsState.Edu (4.1/6.5m-FWP); id AA29809; Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:25:18 CST Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:25:18 CST From: Natalie Maynor Message-Id: <9211022325.AA29809@Ra.MsState.Edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Misdirected Mail Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing > lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to > the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) We should thank them. I had been wondering ever since subscribing a few days ago whether anybody ever said anything on this list. --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 17:29:29 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28194; Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:29:29 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28173; Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:29:17 PST Message-Id: <9211030129.AA28173@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: Michael Urban Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:46:45 PST Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 17:29:17 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # Your message dated: Mon, 02 Nov 92 08:30:19 PST # # > Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing # > lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to # > the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) # # Well, public embarassment is good, although if the goal is to reduce # spurious traffic, its value is open to doubt. # # Mike # While it might not reduce the traffic on this list, it might reduce bogus traffic on other lists, and I think that's a good goal considering the membership of this list... -Brent From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 17:51:49 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28319; Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:51:49 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28311; Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:51:45 PST Message-Id: <9211030151.AA28311@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: The dam breaks... Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 17:51:44 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Well, the announcement concerning the creation of List-Managers must have gotten _somewhere_ over the weekend... After a steady 5-10 new users per day over the last week or so, there've been 60 new users so far today. I thought the flood was over when I opened the list to general postings; looks like I was wrong. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 18:01:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28424; Mon, 2 Nov 92 18:01:15 PST Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp2.netcom.com) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28413; Mon, 2 Nov 92 18:01:08 PST Received: from TetraSoft.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28543; Mon, 2 Nov 92 18:59:37 PPE Received: by occam.TetraSoft.com (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NX3.0M) id AA22251; Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:47:24 PST Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:47:24 PST From: Message-Id: <9211030147.AA22251@occam.TetraSoft.com> Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.87.1) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.87.1) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I hate "stupid" postings as much as the next guy, but I think the postings will only increase and not diminish in time. Not because people are getting stupider, but because Internet is spreading --- which I think most of us would agree is a good thing. As Internet becomes widely adopted, newby effects (such as "subscription faux pas"s) will increase in frequency. From an Internet growth perspective, this increase is a *good* thing. Rather than vilify these folks, we should welcome them into the Internet fold. We all were newbies at one time or another (right? :-). I agree a little care can go a long way, but I think the system should be more forgiving, especially on this subscription problem. Automatic filtering of supscription "faux pas"s would help a lot. I won't give any specific suggestions on what "should" happen when someone posts such a subscription request (since I am new to list administration), but some system which prevents a posting from being multicast and which provides feedback to the errant subscriber would be in order (I would think). I think most people really don't know (when they make the mistake), and most companies don't necessarily hire experienced Internet'ters to sysadmin (though exceptions abound, I am sure). 2 cents, = Joe = From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 2 20:41:04 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29042; Mon, 2 Nov 92 20:41:04 PST Received: from holonet.net (orac.holonet.net) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29035; Mon, 2 Nov 92 20:40:58 PST Received: by holonet.net (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA28337; Mon, 2 Nov 92 20:40:43 -0800 Message-Id: <9211030440.AA28337@holonet.net> To: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 20:40:35 -0800 From: Arthur Britto X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 02:49:57 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29455; Tue, 3 Nov 92 02:49:57 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29448; Tue, 3 Nov 92 02:49:48 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 for ) with SMTP; Tue, 3 Nov 1992 10:50:00 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Misdirected subscription requests To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:49:52 WET X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Why not moderate the list? i.e. Only the named list-moderator may mail to the members of the list, all mail sent to the list by non-moderators, gets sent to the moderator. All noise then goes to only one person (who could have an auto-reply filter). If the jobs was a big one then people could take turns... There is a hitch though. If the list gets very busy, the moderator gets annoyed. There is a trade off - personally, I find it both easy and acceptable just to hit the 'D' key and move on... Saying all this, I do agree with an earlier posting which suggested that if anyone *should* know, then its the people who run mailing lists themselves. Regards, John -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory +44 91 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 04:19:34 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29564; Tue, 3 Nov 92 04:19:34 PST Received: from bronto.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29557; Tue, 3 Nov 92 04:18:51 PST Received: by bronto.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (5.65c/ZRZ-MX) id AA07566; Tue, 3 Nov 1992 13:19:01 +0100 From: Frank Elsner Message-Id: <199211031219.AA07566@bronto.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE> Subject: Re: "subscribe list-managers" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 13:18:58 +0100 (MET) In-Reply-To: <9211021630.AA26006@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> from "Brent Chapman" at Nov 2, 92 08:30:19 am Reply-To: elsner@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (Frank Elsner) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL6] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 483 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Brent Chapman wrote: > Michael Urban writes: > # subscribe list-managers > # > Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing > lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to > the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) What about building a mailing list expander which filters such messages and sends a report to the originator ? May require some work :-) > -Brent Frank Elsner (TUBerlin Postmaster) From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 05:27:26 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29660; Tue, 3 Nov 92 05:27:26 PST Received: from wugate.wustl.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29653; Tue, 3 Nov 92 05:27:05 PST Received: by wugate.wustl.edu (5.65c+/WUSTL-0.3) with SMTP id AA05546; Tue, 3 Nov 1992 07:27:05 -0600 Received: by wubios (4.1/SMI-4.1.1); Tue, 3 Nov 92 07:27:04 CST From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Message-Id: <9211031327.AA07132@wubios> Subject: Re: "subscribe list-managers" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 7:27:03 CST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > What about building a mailing list expander which filters such messages > and sends a report to the originator ? > May require some work :-) The LISTSERV which runs on CMS machines by Eric Thomas makes a stab at doing this, along with mail bounces. > > > -Brent > -- J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)] From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 05:34:28 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29678; Tue, 3 Nov 92 05:34:28 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29671; Tue, 3 Nov 92 05:34:08 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA11688; Tue, 3 Nov 92 08:34:21 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 03 Nov 92 12:48:00 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.com To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 12:39:02 UTC In-Reply-To: <9211030147.AA22251@occam.TetraSoft.com> Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk writes: > Hi, > > I hate "stupid" postings as much as the next guy, but I think the > postings will only increase and not diminish in time. Not because > people are getting stupider, but because Internet is spreading --- > which I think most of us would agree is a good thing. As Internet > becomes widely adopted, newby effects (such as "subscription faux > pas"s) will increase in frequency. From an Internet growth > perspective, this increase is a *good* thing. I'll agree with that. > Rather than vilify these folks, we should welcome them into the > Internet fold. We all were newbies at one time or another (right? > :-). I agree a little care can go a long way, but I think the system > should be more forgiving, especially on this subscription problem. > Automatic filtering of supscription "faux pas"s would help a lot. I wish I could filter out newby madness but their very unpredictability makes this a little like shooting mosquitos with a fixed cannon. I'm continually amazed and amused at how creative some people can be in not getting the message on how to use the list. > I won't give any specific suggestions on what "should" happen when > someone posts such a subscription request (since I am new to list > administration), but some system which prevents a posting from being > multicast and which provides feedback to the errant subscriber would > be in order (I would think). > > I think most people really don't know (when they make the mistake), > and most companies don't necessarily hire experienced Internet'ters > to sysadmin (though exceptions abound, I am sure). > > 2 cents, > > = Joe = Is there an RFC on lists? There seems to be some unwritten agreement to use "foo" for a list and "foo-request" for the admin account for the list. Past that there's very little consistency. And, of course, there are the sites that use "listserv" in place of "foo-request." Some of this chaos can be cleaned up with a few well chosen aliases. For example, I have aliased "listserv" to a general catch-all account to keep well meaning people from being bounced. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "...don't forget to listen to the steady beat, | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | don't forget to balance on your ready feet." | From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 05:35:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29696; Tue, 3 Nov 92 05:35:02 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29687; Tue, 3 Nov 92 05:34:42 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA11756; Tue, 3 Nov 92 08:34:55 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 03 Nov 92 13:32:49 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: An introduction From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 13:13:52 UTC Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk FWIW, here's what I run and how I run it. I have three lists, wxsat, Sun-386i, and fs. The last two are pretty much traditional mail lists; someone sends a note and the list gets it. Names are added by hand. My site is actually a 486 running Waffle under MS-DOS so a number of Unix tools aren't available. I've written a bunch of perl scripts to transfer incoming mail to the list. My smart host (run by PSI, Inc.) only has SMTP so I have to bundle up messages with no more than 1024 characters in a remote execute file. This means that some messages are sent five or six times, each with a different list of addresses. (Yech!) I hope to have a Sun 386i under SunOS 4.0.2 running the lists soon but supporting the wxsat list makes this a little difficult right now. Fs, for flight simulator fans, has about 100 names and has very low volume. I started it after getting tired of wading through 10*10^10 articles about Castle Wolfenstein in the pc games newsgroup for one article about Falcon 3.0x. Sun-386i has been handed through at least four administrators and the message format has changed as various people handle it. The first administrator sent a digest but that stopped a while back. The list has about 250 names. Volume is low (2-5 articles per day). Wxsat is the real challenge. It sends out NOAA bulletins on weather satellites. I have to collect these messages from a NOAA account on SCIENCEnet (run by Omnet, Inc.), forward them to my system as messages, and then send the messages to the list. There is also the usual message distribution from subscribers although this is a minor point for wxsat. Volume is only about five to ten messages per day but some bulletins are 50K or greater. Additionaly, I have file servers which send GIFS's and back messages for wxsat and programs for wxsat and fs. While ssg.com is a registered domain, it's actually a result of digital smoke and mirrors in PSI's name server. FTP is out of the question so I have to rely on uuencoding non-ASCII files. Rick P.S. Send subscription requests to [list name]-request@ssg.com. | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "...don't forget to listen to the steady beat, | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | don't forget to balance on your ready feet." | From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 07:49:53 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29849; Tue, 3 Nov 92 07:49:53 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29842; Tue, 3 Nov 92 07:49:35 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA22586; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:49:38 CST Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:49:38 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211031549.AA22586@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Rick Emerson's message of Tue, 03 Nov 92 12:39:02 UTC Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 12:39:02 UTC Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Is there an RFC on lists? There seems to be some unwritten agreement to use "foo" for a list and "foo-request" for the admin account for the list. Well, its more than unwritten. The only RFCs that refer to mailing lists are: 1211 Westine, A.; Postel, J.B. Problems with the maintenance of large mailing lists. 1991 March; 54 p. (Format: TXT=96167 bytes) and 402 North, J.B. ARPA Network mailing lists (Not online) 1972 October 26; 8 p. (Obsoletes RFC 363) and its predecessors Although there may not have been an RFC that explicitly said "-request shall be the request address for all lists", certainly any RFC which listed all the Internet (ARPANet) mailing lists listed a -request address for requests. So I guess you could call it a standard by acclimation. Bill From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 08:24:12 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29950; Tue, 3 Nov 92 08:24:12 PST Received: from ncar.UCAR.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29943; Tue, 3 Nov 92 08:24:04 PST From: woods@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Greg Woods) Message-Id: <9211031624.AA23500@ncar.ucar.EDU> Received: by ncar.ucar.EDU (5.65/ NCAR Central Post Office 07/14/92) id AA23500; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:24:25 MST Subject: Re: what to do about subscription requests To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 9:24:24 MST In-Reply-To: ; from "Rick Emerson" at Nov 3, 92 12:39 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am surprised I haven't seen this posted here yet, but given the present thread I just can't resist. Here's hoping list managers have a sense of humor. This came across another list I am on, and I think might have been posted on USENET as well. --Greg > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:29:59 -0400 > From: ee.ryerson.ca!sizone!no_new_taxes (Read My Lips) > Subject: Are you a clueless mailing list reader? > To: smd@uunet.ca > > > From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) > > To: nm-list@reef.cis.ufl.edu > > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 11:35:27 -0400 > > Attacking Deep Structure writes: > > | MJM -- I have an idea. Why don't you create a new list to which any > | person who sends a subscribe/unsubscribe message to a list proper > | will be added, in addition to having his request fulfilled? This > | way, a list will slowly be built up of people who simply have no clue > | about how mailing lists work. > | > | Each day, a daemon will send a message out to everyone on the list, saying > | something like, "You have been automatically added to this list because > | you are an ignorant dipshit. There is no one watching this list; the > | only way you can become unsubscribed is to figure out the Internet > | standard for issuing control messages to mailing lists. If you had > | followed proper etiquette to begin with, you would not now be on this > | list. Later, d00d." > | > | This public service list would be available to all list maintainers, > | and would have a conspicuous normal address like > | "dumb-fuckers-sender." The brainless sods who were subscribed could > | bleat like sheep to each other as they sent mail to the list trying to > | get unsubscribed. I'm sure it would sustain itself quite nicely after > | it had been operational for about a day and a half. > | > | This is a serious request. > > I've done it. clueless@mantis.co.uk, the Clueless Users Network Test > System (aka the Clueless Users Mailing List). To subscribe, forge > mail from the guilty party saying > > subscribe clueless > > and send it to clueless-request@mantis.co.uk. He can then happily reply > to the regular mail messages, and have his replies sent to everyone else on > the list. He can also send lots of "UNSUB CLUELESS" messages to > clueless@mantis.co.uk and have them forwarded too. Eventually he'll > discover the right way to unsubscribe. > > The regular mail message reads: > > > From: clueless@mantis.co.uk > > To: clueless@mantis.co.uk > > Subject: Welcome, clueless user! > > > > Welcome to the Clueless Users Network Test System, an intelligence test > > for the ignorant and impolite. > > > > You have been automatically added to this mailing list because you sent a > > subscription request like "UNSUB ME" out to the entire readership of a > > mailing list, instead of sending it to the list server or list maintainer. > > > > There is nobody of worth reading this mailing list. The only way you can > > become unsubscribed is to figure out the standard way of unsubscribing > > from an Internet mailing list. Until that time, you will get these > > messages regularly. > > > > If you made an innocent mistake in sending your "UNSUB ME" out to the > > entire list, then you will know how to unsubscribe from this list > > immediately and no harm will be done. > > > > If, on the other hand, you simply have no clue how to deal with mailing > > lists, you'd better start reading up on the subject before you go > > blundering around again. Your attention is cordially drawn to the > > newsgroups news.announce.newusers, news.newusers.questions, and > > news.answers. > > > > Final hint: the mailing list address is clueless@mantis.co.uk. > > > > Have fun. > > > mathew > > - ------- End of Forwarded Message > ------- End of Forwarded Message From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 09:02:48 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00299; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:02:48 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00290; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:02:42 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA22725; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:03:03 CST Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:03:03 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211031703.AA22725@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:47:24 PST From: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I won't give any specific suggestions on what "should" happen when someone posts such a subscription request (since I am new to list administration), but some system which prevents a posting from being multicast and which provides feedback to the errant subscriber would be in order (I would think). GREAT idea. One question: HOW? How does a program determine that a posting is really a request? Length? Key words? A combination of the two? Any algorithm you come up with will be heuristic in nature and prone to error. I'd LOVE to put code in the sun-managers relay to eliminate such misplaced requests, but I can't come up with a decent algorithm. Bill From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 09:11:23 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00362; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:11:23 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00354; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:11:18 PST Message-Id: <9211031711.AA00354@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:03:03 CST Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 09:11:17 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) writes: # How does a program determine that a posting is really a request? # Length? Key words? A combination of the two? Any algorithm you # come # up with will be heuristic in nature and prone to error. I'd LOVE to # put code in the sun-managers relay to eliminate such misplaced # requests, but I can't come up with a decent algorithm. In the case of what we've been seeing on List-Managers, it's pretty simple. All the misdirected requests we've seen so far have been perfectly valid Majordomo requests, just directed to the wrong address. I suspect that most misdirected requests to Majordomo-managed lists (and probably ListServ-managed lists) would be similar. Someone is working on adding code to recognize these requests to the "resend" perl program that I use to handle messages sent my mailing lists. Steve Miller's old "distribute" program used an interesting algorithm. It counted the words in the message, and looked for words in certain classes ("drop or add" words like "remove", "drop", "off", "subscribe", "get", and "add"; "from or to" words like "from" and "to"; and "mail words" like "mail", "mailing", "list", and "dl"). Then, if the word count was < 25 and it had found at least one word in each of the 3 classes, it assumed the message was a natural language administrivia request. This algorithm works fairly well, but it doesn't recognize Majordomo/ListServ commands (they don't trip the "to/from" and "mail words" checks), so you need to add other code to recognize those special cases. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 09:34:19 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00406; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:34:19 PST Received: from gracie.nas.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00398; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:34:02 PST Received: by gracie.nas.nasa.gov (5.61/1.34) id AA01056; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:33:55 -0800 From: cherie@nas.nasa.gov (Cherie N. Lawrence) Message-Id: <9211031733.AA01056@gracie.nas.nasa.gov> Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 9:33:54 PST In-Reply-To: <9211031711.AA00354@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM>; from "Brent Chapman" at Nov 3, 92 9:11 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ># How does a program determine that a posting is really a request? ># Length? Key words? A combination of the two? Any algorithm you ># come ># up with will be heuristic in nature and prone to error. I'd LOVE to ># put code in the sun-managers relay to eliminate such misplaced ># requests, but I can't come up with a decent algorithm. > >Steve Miller's old "distribute" program used an interesting algorithm. >It counted the words in the message, and looked for words in certain >classes ("drop or add" words like "remove", "drop", "off", >"subscribe", "get", and "add"; "from or to" words like "from" and >"to"; and "mail words" like "mail", "mailing", "list", and "dl"). >Then, if the word count was < 25 and it had found at least one word in >each of the 3 classes, it assumed the message was a natural language >administrivia request. Just out of curiousity, how often does this algorithm accidentally filter legitimate messages? I've seen plenty of very brief messages, and "get" and "off" aren't terribly uncommon words... "Subscribe" and "unsubscribe" are probably pretty safe bets... -- cherie@nas.nasa.gov Notice Due to budgetary constraints the light at the end of the tunnel is being turned off. From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 09:43:19 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00451; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:43:19 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00444; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:43:07 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA04634; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:43:21 -0800 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA19334; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:42:28 PST for phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:42:28 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211031742.AA19334@medraut.apple.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I won't give any specific suggestions on what "should" happen when > someone posts such a subscription request Here's what I do: 1) my intro material specifically says that administrivia messages sent to the wrong request will not be processed. 2) I actually enforce that. If someone tries to sign on or off the list by posting to the real address instead of the -request address, I DON'T DO IT. 3) Instead, I send them a note reminding them of their mistake and include the intro material again. The idea is to (a) remind them of what they're supposed to be doing, while (b) not letting them get away with doing it wrong, and (c) do it nicely. It's important to not do the "well, I'll do it this time, but don't do it again" routine, because what you're doing is reinforcing that they can break the rules and get away with it. They need to be forced to go through the routine, because that way they're more likely to remember it next time. It's more work for the admin (it's a lot easier to just do it than go through the mail exchanges and wait for the 'proper' address to be used), but it reduces the overall hassle. To make it work, though, the admin needs to keep up their end: (a) good, clean introductory material on do's and don't's, (b) when someone is added and (more importantly) dropped, send confirmations, (c) process requests on a timely basis to the greatest extent possible, and (d) be nice about it. Firm, but nice. Seems to work for me. While I'm here, a quick intro: I'm currently running one mailing list, "minors@medraut.apple.com", a special interest group on minor league baseball. My wife also runs a list on this machine "sharks@medraut.apple.com" on the San Jose Sharks, plus we have a private, invite-only list that hangs out around here. I've run a number of lists in the past (desktop-publishing, hypercard, OtherRealms, etc, etc, ad nauseum) far-too-many-years I've been on the net. If you want to send mail to me, I'm at chuq@medraut.apple.com. If you want more info about me, those requests should be routed to chuq-request@medraut.apple.com. From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 09:49:30 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00497; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:49:30 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00479; Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:49:19 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 ) with SMTP; Tue, 3 Nov 1992 17:49:38 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:49:28 WET Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211031711.AA00354@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM>; from "Brent Chapman" at Nov 3, 92 9:11 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Someone is working on adding code to recognize these requests to the > "resend" perl program that I use to handle messages sent my mailing lists. > > Steve Miller's old "distribute" program used an interesting algorithm. > It counted the words in the message, and looked for words in certain > classes ("drop or add" words like "remove", "drop", "off", > "subscribe", "get", and "add"; "from or to" words like "from" and > "to"; and "mail words" like "mail", "mailing", "list", and "dl"). > Then, if the word count was < 25 and it had found at least one word in > each of the 3 classes, it assumed the message was a natural language > administrivia request. > This sounds like an extremely large overhead to me - especially when applied to *every* message to every list. What if you added the LISTSERV command set, and the MajorDomo, and the rest! The overhead would increase dramatically. Regards, John -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory 091 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 11:35:45 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00721; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:35:45 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00714; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:35:34 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA29226; Tue, 3 Nov 92 14:35:20 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 03 Nov 92 18:07:20 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: "subscribe list-managers" From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 18:05:14 UTC In-Reply-To: <199211031219.AA07566@bronto.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE> Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Frank Elsner writes: > Brent Chapman wrote: > > Michael Urban writes: > > # subscribe list-managers > > # > > Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing > > lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to > > the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) > > What about building a mailing list expander which filters such messages > and sends a report to the originator ? > May require some work :-) > Actually, it's not that hard to do. A simple perl script can scan mail for obvious phrases and generate either a gripe message or forward the obviously mis-routed messages to the right place. The trick is catching the un-obvious blunders... Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "...don't forget to listen to the steady beat, | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | don't forget to balance on your ready feet." | From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 11:38:25 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00737; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:38:25 PST Received: from sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00730; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:38:17 PST Message-Id: <9211031938.AA00730@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Received: by sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov (16.8/16.2) id AA15024; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:38:34 -0800 To: Brent Chapman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 02 Nov 92 17:29:17 PST." <9211030129.AA28173@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> X-Face: %q"[Odr2u&o(@]W>9%kwwJ/Td+Ju5!en}ZHQ>G3)9%`RBr7Ct12Dj6LB\Qz@@j|YgfHymB~ Lc>qe:o+U{rh!RVuaYYd{+S4$8tPLu]Y$0<5x>rj-kuS"[eqLFME-('jwXR87s;A3I,=cW*D(> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Your message dated: Mon, 02 Nov 92 17:29:17 PST > (on the value of public correction of a misdirected SUBSCRIBE) > > While it might not reduce the traffic on this list, it might reduce > bogus traffic on other lists, and I think that's a good goal > considering the membership of this list... > I honestly do not follow your reasoning of how public humiliation might reduce this sort of traffic. First of all, in the case of this particular list, the parsimonious assumption is that the offending message was the result of a thoughtless error. The absurd unlikelihood that the individual did not know better is, after all, the basis of the irony that prompted the original response. So who is educated by this sort of discourse? The other people who read this list? The person who made the mistake? Even in the case of general-interest lists, when someone posts a misdirected SUBSCRIBE message, I cannot see the point of sending an instructive response to anyone other than the person who sent the message. After all, everyone else who is reading the messages on the list already knows how to subscribe (or were themselves corrected earlier). A public reprimand is simply a further waste of everyone's time and bandwidth, and is, frankly, simply rude behavior, of which this network already has a surfeit. If you really are interested in correcting this sort of spurious traffic, then -- speaking as someone who has just been reminded first-hand that even the best-educated of us will sometimes make careless mistakes -- I might suggest the widespread promulgation of a `subscribe' command, one that could use a machine-readable list of mailing lists (regularly disseminated through typical Usenet/Internet channels) and subscription methods (list server? foobar-request address?) and automatically concoct the appropriate message and send it along. This would be a positive and proactive step. At first contrite, now mildly irritated, Mike From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 11:58:08 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00768; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:58:08 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00761; Tue, 3 Nov 92 11:57:54 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa22918; 3 Nov 92 14:45 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01970; Tue, 3 Nov 92 14:46:44 EST Message-Id: <9211031946.AA01970@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:46:44 EST In-Reply-To: William LeFebvre "Re: Mailing list etiquette" (Nov 3, 11:03am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: William LeFebvre , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > GREAT idea. One question: HOW? > > How does a program determine that a posting is really a request? > Length? Key words? A combination of the two? Any algorithm you > come > up with will be heuristic in nature and prone to error. I'd LOVE to > put code in the sun-managers relay to eliminate such misplaced > requests, but I can't come up with a decent algorithm. Actually, as soon as you give up the idea that it must be perfect, it's pretty easy. You'll let a few subscription requests through, and you'll reject a few legitimate messages, but you'll improve things dramatically. First, we need to standardize on subscription requests. There are people still maintaining lists by hand, but they should tell folks a standard message to put in a mailr request. For lack of a better way, I suggest "subscribe list-name realname" (happens to be the Bitnet Listserv syntax). Here's the algorithm I use: If the message is 5 lines or less, and if it contains any of the words: subscribe, unsubscribe, signon, or signoff, it is returned to the user with a very polite message stating that we suspect that it was not a message to the list, but rather one to Listserv. It offers consolation, and, on the possibility that it was a real message, hints on how to avoid the command filter. It also sends the whole transaction to the list manager. Very easy, very effective. I don't think we've every rejected a legitimate message, although we have let a few non-standard subscription requests slip through. If it happens too often, you can revise the algorithm. I admit if you users are used to total free-form requests for subscriptions, it would be more difficult. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 13:05:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00843; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:05:41 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00836; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:05:32 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14409>; Tue, 3 Nov 1992 16:05:15 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA05587 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk); Tue, 3 Nov 92 15:52:10 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA01825 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Tue, 3 Nov 92 15:52:41 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9211032052.AA01825@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk (John Martin) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 15:52:39 -0500 Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: ; from "John Martin" at Nov 3, 92 12:49 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > This sounds like an extremely large overhead to me - especially when > applied to *every* message to every list. What if you added the > LISTSERV command set, and the MajorDomo, and the rest! The overhead > would increase dramatically. A couple of excuses come to mind: 1) get a better computer. :-) There's no excuse for computational resource shortages in these modern times. On the other hand, Maybe I'm spoiled; the slowest machine on my network is a 25MHz R3000 box... 2) The overhead of this style of filtering is negligible compared to the resources used to expand the addressee list and deliver the mail to all recipients, especially when you consider the resources used on all the receiving machines. Chances are you're actually using less CPU by running such a filter. -- "You are at wit's end. | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON Passages lead off in all | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) directions..." -related by | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) Bryan Manske, 13-Aug-92 | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 13:45:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00915; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:45:02 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00906; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:44:53 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA11861; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:44:35 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 03 Nov 92 20:45:14 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 20:40:38 UTC In-Reply-To: <9211031742.AA19334@medraut.apple.com> Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Eeyore's Evil Twin writes: > > I won't give any specific suggestions on what "should" happen when > > someone posts such a subscription request > > Here's what I do: > > 1) my intro material specifically says that administrivia messages sent to > the wrong request will not be processed. > > 2) I actually enforce that. If someone tries to sign on or off the list by > posting to the real address instead of the -request address, I DON'T DO IT. > > 3) Instead, I send them a note reminding them of their mistake and include > the intro material again. Whew! Sounds kinda hard-nosed to me! People who send "unsubscribe" or "subscribe" to a list suffer the ignomy of getting it wrong before all on the list. If I catch the message, I'll act on it. If the sender complains about not being heard, I ask where the message went. But dump on someone for losing the admin address? Sounds pretty unfriendly to me. People, we need to remember that despite our exalted positions as list administrators or moderators, there really are people who just plain are unimpressed by this high position. This sort of ego tripping has been a mark of Fight-o-net; who needs it here? Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "...don't forget to listen to the steady beat, | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | don't forget to balance on your ready feet." | From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 14:00:01 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00983; Tue, 3 Nov 92 14:00:01 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00974; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:59:54 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA05850; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:58:55 -0800 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA20103; Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:58:02 PST for rick@ssg.com Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:58:02 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211032158.AA20103@medraut.apple.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, rick@ssg.com Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >If the sender complains >about not being heard, I ask where the message went. But dump on someone >for losing the admin address? Sounds pretty unfriendly to me. Sorry, youn evidently missed the part of my post where I noted it had to be friendly, but firm. It's not a factor of losing the admin address, but generally not bothering to find it in the first place. Education only works if you do it in a positive way, and if you let them get away with not following the rules, you aren't educating. You're letting them get away with being lazy (or, at best, ignorant). >People, we need to remember that despite our exalted positions as list >administrators or moderators, there really are people who just plain are >unimpressed by this high position. This sort of ego tripping has been a >mark of Fight-o-net; who needs it here? It's not ego-tripping. I'm running the list for ALL my users, and the majority of the users follow the rules and really dislike the kind of noise these messages cause. You're saying I should make the list less useful to the majority of the users just so I don't make the ones who don't follow the rules unhappy? From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 14:15:16 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01169; Tue, 3 Nov 92 14:15:16 PST Received: from goose.aa.ox.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01157; Tue, 3 Nov 92 14:15:07 PST Received: by goose.aa.ox.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.22.1 #22.9) id ; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:15 EST Message-Id: Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:15 EST From: paulh@ox.com (Paul Haas) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Dealing with inappropriate discussions Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I hope this hasn't come up today. I switched from the digest version to the realtime version of the mailing list today, so I haven't had a chance to read todays traffic. There seems to be a discussion in progress about how to deal with administrivia sent to the list, this message is about how I dealt with another type of inappropriate message. Someone posted a somewhat questionable article to the mailing list that I manage. This lead to a flame war about whether it was appropriate to post the article. Naturally, the flame war used up more bandwidth than the original article. I created a mailing list to discuss what is appropriate for the first list and put anyone who was part of the flame war onto the new mailing list. So far it seems to have worked. I won't really know until the next inappropriate posting. As a list maintainer of an unmoderated list, it appears I am limited to the following techniques for dealing with inappropriate postings: 1. Moderate the list (I'm too lazy for that) 2. Send private mail saying "Don't do that". 3. Send mail to the whole list saying "Nobody do that", perhaps monthly or weekly in the form of a FAQ message. 4. Publicly humiliate people. 5. Have a filter recognize inappropriate postings and bounce them (possibly usefull for blocking naive subscribe/unsubscribe requests) 6. Remove offenders from the list (if they want to they can go to an exploder) 7. Add offenders to another list (ie. clueless or my appropriateness list) Do we as list maintainers have any other tools at our disposal? I think the faster a problem is dealt with, the smaller the burst of unsubscribe requests. I was shocked when I got several requests subscribe to my appropriateness list. I guess some people like that sort of thing. --- Paul Haas work:paulh@ox.com home:paulh@hamjudo.mi.org From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 15:40:49 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01361; Tue, 3 Nov 92 15:40:49 PST Received: from relay2.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01354; Tue, 3 Nov 92 15:40:40 PST Received: from uunet.uu.net (via LOCALHOST.UU.NET) by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA23912; Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:09:45 -0500 Received: from drd.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 180806.19043; Tue, 3 Nov 1992 18:08:06 EST Received: from tierra.drd by drd.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03365; Tue, 3 Nov 92 15:25:57 CST From: mark@drd.com (Resident.Alien) Message-Id: <9211032125.AA03365@drd.com> Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 15:25:56 CST Reply-To: mark.lawrence@drd.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Forwarded message: : From: Eeyore's Evil Twin : > I won't give any specific suggestions on what "should" happen when : > someone posts such a subscription request : : Here's what I do: : : 1) my intro material specifically says that administrivia messages sent to : the wrong request will not be processed. : : 2) I actually enforce that. If someone tries to sign on or off the list by : posting to the real address instead of the -request address, I DON'T DO IT. : : 3) Instead, I send them a note reminding them of their mistake and include : the intro material again. The majority of mis-directed admin requests for framers fall into two categories: Those who are asking to subscribe (and in my particular case, the demographics make for a large population who've never subscribed to a mailing list before and framers is their 'first time') and those who are unsubscribing. In the former case, they genuinely had no idea about the -request convention so chastising them seems rude and unwelcoming. In the latter case, the sound of the door slamming behind them them only serves to annoy and irritate the readers staying behind. I simply handle these requests silently (though the instructions e-mailed to new subscribers is pretty clear about how admin requests should be handled in the future). ! When you have anything of an administrative nature (like address ! change, address deletion, request for help in reaching someone; that ! kind of thing), please e-mail to 'framers-request@uunet.uu.net'. This ! is somewhat of a convention on the Internet/Usenet -- administrative ! addresses are the name of the mailing list suffixed with '-request'. ! You'll see it often. Above all, please DO NOT mail "please remove me" ! requests to the Submissions address! Your hair will fall out and you ! will contract athelete's foot if you do. If you don't know how you got ! on distribution, contact your local postmaster and ask if you are being ! carried on a local alias for framers. -- mark.lawrence@drd.com a.k.a. framers-request@drd.com DRD Corp., 5506 South Lewis Ave., Tulsa, OK 74105 (918)745-9037 fax From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 16:15:29 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01439; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:15:29 PST Received: from cs.utexas.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01432; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:15:22 PST Received: from rascal.ics.utexas.edu by cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.140) with SMTP id AA15518; Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:15:10 -0600 Received: by rascal.ics.utexas.edu (4.0/SMI-4.0) id AA19366; Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:14:42 CST Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:14:40 CST From: Werner Uhrig Reply-To: werner@rascal.ics.utexas.edu (Werner Uhrig) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Mailer: MM v0.90 Subject: Being SMART when running a mailing-list (was Re: List Managers Digest V1 #4) In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 01:10:05 PST Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk there are a certain number of things that a "smart" list-moderator can do to "reduce" hick-ups; the current motivated me to write this article in response to Brent Chapman saying: Hey, gang, what should we do with people who supposedly manage mailing lists that send subscription requests to the whole list instead of to the "-request" address or to Majordomo? :-) well, Brent, rather than asking "what shall we do TO...", we might want to take the attitude "how can we do better" or "what could have been done (by a clever poster/moderator) to avoid the flop in the first place"... hint: avoid FROM, REPLY-TO, SENDER, RETURN-PATH headers which point to an address which you DEFINITELY do not want a response to be sent to !! for example, the digest (I just received) arrived here with the following headers: Return-Path: From: List-Managers-Digest-Owner@GreatCircle.COM To: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM Reply-To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Digest-Owner@GreatCircle.COM my mailer (automatically) generated from this a REPLY-address: To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM lesson to learn here: make the (little?) effort to include a REPLY-TO header, pointing to the "right address" ... correlary: in a message soliciting messages to be sent to an automatized server-address, AVOID, LIKE THE PLAGUE, that any address appear in the headers to which you DEFINITELY do NOT want a message to be sent ... (make the poster DECIDE and WORK to make "a mistake"... ;-) last, but not least: let's avoid "holier than though" messages... ...for I know that Murphy is ("sitting not only on my shoulder") smiling smuckly... Cheers, ---Werner ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | werner@cs.utexas.edu | ..!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!werner | werner@UTXVM.bitnet | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sound bite (the local news just now, reporting on George Bush's activities today in Houston): after voting, he went and bought some country music and, among other things, a hunting license to "go shoot Qyayle (sp?!?)... (makes me wonder if he has considered a Star Wars "Raygun" or some of that Reagan mind-altering voodoo poison for bait...) PS: Representative Henry Gonzales (Ways and Means committee chairman) is right: IMPEACH THE CRIMINALS!! (check a tape of "60 Minutes", Nov 1, 92) From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 16:17:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01456; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:17:41 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01449; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:17:33 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA28208; Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:17:54 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 03 Nov 92 23:55:41 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Coping with the brain dead From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 23:45:22 UTC Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk All of my lists have subscribers throughout the world. Most speak (well, write) English quite well but a few... ah, well, they make reading a challenge. One fellow from a third world country just can't quite get the information in my help message. Rather than attack the guy in the list, I just keep sending him advice in hopes that one day he'll finally see the light. To date *none* of the remaining 150+ subscribers have written "get outta here" or "get a life." I don't have time to invest on impressing my rules on people who won't listen. If I get an unsubscribe, they're toast. It's neat, tidy, and saves time and bandwidth. If they send a subscribe, I assume they saw a copy of message somewhere and sign them up. I also send a "welcome" message explaining the way to use the list. 99.999 times out a hundred that works. I've had maybe three or four real twits show up. The fix, if they don't care to behave with courtesy or consideration, is simple. Their name vanishes from the mail list. Bye, bye! I find censorship abhorent. On the other hand, I know the brain police do show up in funny places. If I find someone feels obliged to carry on in a way I find inappropriate and they don't want to take a suggestion, so much for that. I pull the big switch. After all, it's my computer. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "...don't forget to listen to the steady beat, | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | don't forget to balance on your ready feet." | From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 16:35:22 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01488; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:35:22 PST Received: from garlic.inset.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01481; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:35:15 PST Received: by garlic.inset.com (Sendmail:5.51/Cf:Jr.2.6) id AA12134; Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:30:36 EST From: Adam S. Moskowitz Message-Id: <9211040030.AA12134@garlic.inset.com> Subject: The lists we manage To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:29:52 EST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk As if we all don't have enough mail to read, how about we each post a short not saying what lists we maintain and (briefly) what the charter of those lists are. Also, maybe the size of the list and how you manage it. I've already learned of two new, interesting lists just from the examples folks have given. So, to kick things off, here's my list of lists: bblisa@inset.com - the mailing list of the Back Bay Large Installations Systems Adninistrations group. BB-LISA is semi-affiliated with USENIX, and is similar in scope to Bay LISA (San Francisco Bay, that is). Mostly meeting announcements, with the rare question. (For the geographical-nick-name-impaired, Back Bay is a section of Boston, MA.) About 200 ``members,'' with 13 expander lists attached. I manage it by hand, since after initial flood passed it's only 2 - 3 requests each week. (Not only that, I'm still resisting learning perl!) (Short list, huh?) AdamM From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 16:39:53 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01514; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:39:53 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01506; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:39:49 PST Message-Id: <9211040039.AA01506@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Being SMART when running a mailing-list (was Re: List Managers Digest V1 #4) In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 18:14:40 CST Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 16:39:47 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Werner Uhrig writes: # well, Brent, rather than asking "what shall we do TO...", we # might want to take the attitude "how can we do better" or # "what could have been done (by a clever poster/moderator) # to avoid the flop in the first place"... My point was made in jest that, of all possible people on the Internet, someone subscribing to a list for mailing list managers _ought_ to know the well-established conventions for subscribing to a list. # hint: avoid FROM, REPLY-TO, SENDER, RETURN-PATH headers # which point to an address which you DEFINITELY do not # want a response to be sent to !! # # for example, the digest (I just received) arrived here with # the following headers: # # Return-Path: # From: List-Managers-Digest-Owner@GreatCircle.COM # To: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM # Reply-To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM # Sender: List-Managers-Digest-Owner@GreatCircle.COM # # my mailer (automatically) generated from this a REPLY-address: # # To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM # # lesson to learn here: make the (little?) effort to include # a REPLY-TO header, pointing to the "right address" ... I don't see your point. I put the "Reply-To" header in precisely BECAUSE I want replies to go to the whole list. My goal with this list is to encourage discussion. This is NOT a high-volume list like Sun-Managers (at least, not yet), where it's appropriate for everybody to respond to the poster and the poster to summarize to the list. # correlary: in a message soliciting messages to be sent to # an automatized server-address, AVOID, LIKE THE PLAGUE, that # any address appear in the headers to which you DEFINITELY do # NOT want a message to be sent ... (make the poster DECIDE and # WORK to make "a mistake"... ;-) The mailing list address did NOT appear in the headers of any message I mailed out or posted concerning the creation of List-Managers. The only place I can think of where the mailing list address appears in the headers and instructions for joining appear in the body of a messages is in the digests, and that's kind of hard to avoid, since the instructions for joining are appended to each digest. I chose to optimize the headers for the common case: somebody replying to a message in the digest, not for the uncommon case: somebody getting a copy of the digest "third hand" and following the subscription instructions at the bottom. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 16:48:55 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01558; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:48:55 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01550; Tue, 3 Nov 92 16:48:51 PST Message-Id: <9211040048.AA01550@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The lists we manage In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:29:52 EST Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 16:48:50 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # As if we all don't have enough mail to read, how about we each post a # short not saying what lists we maintain and (briefly) what the charter # of those lists are. Also, maybe the size of the list and how you manage # it. I've already learned of two new, interesting lists just from the # examples folks have given. Uhh... I manage 19 SAGE-related mailing lists on USENIX.ORG and 7 here at GreatCircle.COM; a thumbnail sketch of each would get rather long, so I'll just hit the highlights. I use Majordomo to manage most of my lists (naturally, since I wrote it). Majordomo was specificly written to manage the SAGE lists, after I was crazy enough to volunteer as SAGE-Postmaster at the SAGE kickoff meeting at the Summer USENIX in San Antonio last summer. The lists I manage here at GreatCircle.COM include List-Managers and List-Managers-Digest (naturally), Firewalls and Firewalls-Digest, Majordomo-Users, Majordomo-Announce, and 3 different Civil Air Patrol lists. That really does make 7; I consider Firewalls and Firewalls-Digest to be one list, since the exact same content goes to both (and similarly for List-Managers and List-Managers-Digest). List-Managers and List-Managers-Digest are about 70 and 25 users, respectively. Nice, small, quiet lists! :-) Majordomo-Users and Majordomo-Announce are about 30 users each. The real killers are Firewalls and Firewalls-Digest. 625 users on Firewalls and 125 on Firewalls-Digest. Over 600 of those 750 subscribers joined during the first 3 days after Firewalls was announced. Talk about a "success disaster"! If I hadn't had Majordomo, I really would have been hurting; I was expecting more like 50-60 users when I set up Firewalls. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 17:32:29 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01727; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:32:29 PST Received: from Ra.MsState.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01720; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:32:23 PST Received: by Ra.MsState.Edu (4.1/6.5m-FWP); id AA26628; Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:10:10 CST Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:10:10 CST From: Natalie Maynor Message-Id: <9211040110.AA26628@Ra.MsState.Edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The lists we manage Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I subscribed because I'm about to start a list running on UNIX listserv version 5.5 and need to learn as much as I can about running lists with programs other than Eric Thomas's LISTSERV. I run two LISTSERV lists on a remote system, WORDS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (a discussion of the English language or anything else the subscribers want to discuss) and ADS-L@UGA. CC.UGA.EDU (for members of the American Dialect Society). Because I'm so used to Eric's LISTSERV, I was amused today at comments about listname- request as being a "standard." The list I'm about to start is SMOKE-FREE@ RA.MSSTATE.EDU, a support list for people trying to quit smoking. --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) (non-techy English Professor) From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 17:43:38 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01844; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:43:38 PST Received: from kaukau.comp.vuw.ac.nz by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01837; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:43:24 PST Received: from debretts.comp.vuw.ac.nz by kaukau.comp.vuw.ac.nz id (5.65cVUW/5.2 for ) with SMTP; Wed, 4 Nov 1992 14:43:00 +1300 From: Andy Linton Message-Id: <199211040143.AA24814@kaukau.comp.vuw.ac.nz> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The lists we manage X-Organization: Victoria University, PO Box 600, Wellington, NEW ZEALAND X-Phone: +64 4 495 5054 (Work) or +64 4 499 1819 (Home) X-Fax: +64 4 495 5232 X-Mailer: XMH/mh 6.7.2 Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1992 14:42:59 +1300 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've currently got 168 lists with a total of 2200 names in them. Weeding out duplicates gives around 800 different names. Some of these are 'public' lists which people can add their names to and some are 'private' e.g. lecturers. I use 'sendmail' and a program of my own called 'distribute': DISTRIBUTE(8) UNIX Programmer's Manual DISTRIBUTE(8) NAME distribute - mailing list distribution program SYNOPSIS distribute listname(s) DESCRIPTION Distribute adds extra headers to messages to mailing lists and then resends the message. This is done so that if there is an error in the list (old mailboxes, misspelt mailnames etc.) the error message gets sent to the owner of the list and not to the original sender. The original sender is rarely in a position to fix any problems and often is con- fused by error messages coming from apparently random sites. EXAMPLE It requires this sort of setup in the sendmail aliases file: listname:"|/usr/local/lib/mail/distribute listname" listname-request:asjl@comp.vuw.ac.nz listname-xxx::include:/usr/local/lib/mail/lists/listname The user addresses mail to "listname", "listname-request" is the person responsible for the list and "listname-xxx" is a pointer to the list to expand for delivery. I also provide a simple 'listserv' program. The help file follows. By all means look at how things work but please don't add yourself to lists on our server without considering this: Mail sent across the Pacific link from New Zealand costs my university *real dollars* each month. The LISTSERV Basic Help ----------------------- This server will give you details of mailing lists which are publicly available from the Computer Science department at VUW. These lists are generally 'fanouts' of lists available via the Internet. We already import these lists into New Zealand and so it is preferable if interested parties subscribe to the local fanout. This means that our trans-Pacific link is not carrying the same data multiple times. To use the server send a message to "listserv@comp.vuw.ac.nz" with commands in the message. Unlike some automatic mail servers, the Subject: line is not parsed for commands. The commands are: help help listname This help file or some info about a particular list is sent. index longindex An index of available lists is sent. expand listname A list of those currently subscribed to the list is sent. add listname add mail_address listname Add the sender (or "mail_address") to "listname". The command 'subscribe' is synonymous with 'add'. delete listname delete mail_address listname Delete the sender (or "mail_address") from "listname". The command 'unsubscribe' is synonymous with 'delete'. If you have difficulties or suggestions for other lists, please contact: listmaster@comp.vuw.ac.nz From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 17:43:58 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01866; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:43:58 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01857; Tue, 3 Nov 92 17:43:54 PST Message-Id: <9211040143.AA01857@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The lists we manage In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:10:10 CST Date: Tue, 03 Nov 92 17:43:53 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # I subscribed because I'm about to start a list running on UNIX listserv # version 5.5 and need to learn as much as I can about running lists with # programs other than Eric Thomas's LISTSERV. I run two LISTSERV lists # on a remote system, WORDS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (a discussion of the English # language or anything else the subscribers want to discuss) and ADS-L@UGA. # CC.UGA.EDU (for members of the American Dialect Society). Because I'm # so used to Eric's LISTSERV, I was amused today at comments about listname- # request as being a "standard." The list I'm about to start is SMOKE-FREE@ # RA.MSSTATE.EDU, a support list for people trying to quit smoking. # --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) # (non-techy English Professor) Mailing lists have existed on the Internet for probably 15 or 20 years now, and the "-request" convention was probably established almost that long ago. Does anybody know what the first big mailing list (in those days, big was probably 10-20 users) on the Internet was? How about which list first started pushing the "-request" convention? LISTSERV implementations have been standard on BITNET for years, but they've only become available for the Internet within the last 3-5 years. The Internet "-request" tradition was well established long before Internet LISTSERVs started showing up in significant numbers. When I create a list under Majordomo, I also create a "-request" alias. If somebody sends something to the "-request" alias, they get back a friendly note explaining that this list is managed by Majordomo, and telling them how to use Majordomo to accomplish what they desire, or how to contact a human if they really want to talk to something that breathes. I'd strongly encourage anybody setting up a mailing list on the Internet to provide a "-request" alias, even if all it does is send back a recording. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 21:45:49 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02167; Tue, 3 Nov 92 21:45:49 PST Received: from ames.arc.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02160; Tue, 3 Nov 92 21:45:35 PST Received: from zorch.UUCP by ames.arc.nasa.gov with UUCP id AA04615 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for greatcircle.com!list-managers); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 18:33:56 -0800 Received: by zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (/\==/\ Smail3.1.22.1 #22.2) id ; Tue, 3 Nov 92 21:02 PST Message-Id: Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 21:03 PST From: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The lists we manage Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >As if we all don't have enough mail to read, how about we each post a >short not saying what lists we maintain and (briefly) what the charter >of those lists are. Also, maybe the size of the list and how you manage it. In order of age: unix-pc-net (defunct) - redistribution of the unix-pc.* newsgroups. Fusion Digest - redistribution of sci.physics.fusion. This is actually a bi-directional mail/news gateway. The news->mail side is digestified by some home-grown code originally written for the unix-pc-net list. The mail->news return side is moderated to avoid getting mailer splat posted all over the net. There are 35 addresses on the list (down from a peak of about 130 in 1989), one of which is a BITNET LISTSERV that explodes to about 200 more addresses. Info-Tandem - Discussion of Tandem Guardian and UNIX computers. Currently just an unmoderated reflector. There are currently 45 addresses on this list. Weather-Users - For sharing of tips, hints and code to utilize IP-accessible weather servers. Jeff Masters (maintainer of the U Mich weather servers) has agreed to post announcements of status and changes to this list. The list is currently at 151 addresses, with about 3-5 new subscriptions per week. The first two lists are (were) managed with some home-brew scripts, since they are mail/news gateways, and r$'s code looked too complicated for my usage. I manage the subscriptions by hand for all of my lists, though I am looking at Brent's majordomo package. The latter two lists, since they are unmoderated reflectors, have filters installed on the submission address that scan for mailer splat and forward it to me for examination. Users posting as root can fool the filters, but that's life. I use procmail as the filter, since the control file format is pretty trivial. I've told Brent that I'll look at his Perl 'send' script - the one he uses on his lists - to try to filter administrivia, and when I do that I may well use the script on my own lists. -- Moderator, news.admin.technical; submissions to natech@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG. Moderator, ba.announce; submissions to ba-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG. Moderator, rec.arts.sf.announce; submissions to sf-announce@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG. From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 3 22:50:09 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02222; Tue, 3 Nov 92 22:50:09 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02213; Tue, 3 Nov 92 22:50:03 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA06932; Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:50:20 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA00889; Wed, 4 Nov 92 01:50:19 EST Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 01:50:19 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211040650.AA00889@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Brent Chapman's message of Tue, 03 Nov 92 17:43:53 -0800 <9211040143.AA01857@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Subject: The lists we manage Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I manage a Unix LISTSERV system with four mailing lists and a total subscription of about 700. I'm interested in providing better integration between the mail based services provided by LISTSERV and other information retrieval utilities like Archie, Gopher, FTP, WAIS, etc. Although this is a little bit off-topic for this list, I would be interested in discussion on Internet standards or other methods which could be used to promote this. The Internet has rapidly become one of the largest and most widely used data repositories in existence, especially if mail-based access is included. Mailing lists play an important part in this, and their managers should be in the forefront of the effort to integrate the various services. @alex P.S. Rereading the last paragraph, I realize it sounds a bit like a political speech - I guess I've been watching too much of the election, and not getting enough sleep :-) From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 04:34:29 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02914; Wed, 4 Nov 92 04:34:29 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02900; Wed, 4 Nov 92 04:34:10 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 for ) with SMTP; Wed, 4 Nov 1992 12:34:07 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 12:03:50 WET Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211032052.AA01825@dino.alias.com>; from "C. Harald Koch" at Nov 3, 92 3:52 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Re: > > > This sounds like an extremely large overhead to me - especially when > > applied to *every* message to every list. What if you added the > > LISTSERV command set, and the MajorDomo, and the rest! The overhead > > would increase dramatically. > > A couple of excuses come to mind: > > 1) get a better computer. :-) OK - what I should have said (given the context of the rest of my message) was "This sounds like an extremely *unnecessary* overhead to me" Regards, John -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory 091 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 04:44:52 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02944; Wed, 4 Nov 92 04:44:52 PST Received: from garlic.inset.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02936; Wed, 4 Nov 92 04:44:34 PST Received: by garlic.inset.com (Sendmail:5.51/Cf:Jr.2.6) id AA21435; Wed, 4 Nov 92 07:40:03 EST From: Adam S. Moskowitz Message-Id: <9211041240.AA21435@garlic.inset.com> Subject: Mail receiver software To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 7:40:00 EST In-Reply-To: ; from "Scott Hazen Mueller" at Nov 3, 92 9:03 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I realize that his is only tangential to list-management, but it's related nonetheless. In his message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 21:03 PST, scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller) wrote: > I use procmail as the filter, since the control file format > is pretty trivial. How many other folks out there get so much mail that they have to use an automatic filter? I would imagine that folks who run several lists by hand would want to have incoming requests sorted into different mailboxes, one for each list. For the folks that do use a filter, which one do you use? I recently started using Chip Salzenberg's deliver (I'm a big fan of things that use sh scripts). After only a week, I'm quite satisfied. (For reference, I have about 100 messages a day delivered to any of 20 mailboxes.) AdamM From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 04:46:16 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02965; Wed, 4 Nov 92 04:46:16 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02958; Wed, 4 Nov 92 04:45:56 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 for ) with SMTP; Wed, 4 Nov 1992 12:46:10 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Re: The lists we manage To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 12:46:04 WET In-Reply-To: ; from "Scott Hazen Mueller" at Nov 3, 92 9:03 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Re: > As if we all don't have enough mail to read, how about we each post a > short not saying what lists we maintain and (briefly) what the charter > of those lists are. Also, maybe the size of the list and how you manage it. I am Postmaster/programmer for the Mailbase Project which provides a mailing list service fo UK non-computing academics. We do *not* allow non-UK based lists, or computing specific lists. The National Service started in February this year and we have around 200 lists with about 12000 total susbscriptions. We get around 800 new susbscriptions and 10-20 new lists each month. The prototype has been going since 1991. The project employs 2 programmers, one User Group Support person, one secretary, a documentation officer and a manager. We use a command interpreter called 'Mailbase' which was written here at Newcastle and is being continually developed. Commands are sent to 'Mailbase@mailbase.ac.uk'. There is also a 'Mailbase-helpline@mailbase.ac.uk' for general user queries. (NB: mailbase-admin, mailbase-request, mailbase-helpdesk... etc all wrok as well) Messages to lists are sent to 'listname@mailbase.ac.uk' and are archived automatically. The list owner is: 'listname-request@mailbase.ac.uk' and the list moderator (if applicable), is 'listname-moderator@mailbase.ac.uk' List owners can also add files for retrieval via e-mail using a template. Users can retrieve the archives/ files via e-mail or FTP. There is also an on-line service where users can login and browse details of lists, descriptions, membership and the archives/files. The service is based on a large RDBMS - Ingres on a Sun4/470 - and is written in C/ESQLC, bourne shell and now perl. Mailing list expansion uses an adapted version of the Andy Linton 'distribute' code. We are currently looking at developing both a WAIS interface and incorporating an X.500 service If you want more details, send the commands: index mailbase send mailbase user-card send mailbase owner-card stop to mailbase@mailbase.ac.uk ('stop' makes it ignore your .sig) - or contact me. Regards, John -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory 091 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 08:13:08 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03235; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:13:08 PST Received: from ames.arc.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03228; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:12:46 PST Received: from zorch.UUCP by ames.arc.nasa.gov with UUCP id AA18293 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for greatcircle.com!list-managers); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 04:53:54 -0800 Received: by zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (/\==/\ Smail3.1.22.1 #22.2) id ; Wed, 4 Nov 92 07:17 PST Message-Id: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 07:18 PST From: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mail receiver software Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>I use procmail as the filter, since the control file format >>is pretty trivial. >How many other folks out there get so much mail that they have to use an >automatic filter? [...] For the folks that do use a filter, which one do you >use? I recently >started using Chip Salzenberg's deliver (I'm a big fan of >things that use sh scripts). [...] I used to use a shell-based filter script (a couple of different variants, actually). My original filter was called from .forward; that one got the sysadmin upset because it was sending him error messages every time the system ran out of virtual memory. That also bothered me somewhat, since it meant that my mail was getting toasted. Rev. 2 actually called mail and fed it commands so that I could take advantage of mail's built-in locking. It peeled one message out of the mailbox at a time and filtered and filed it. That was kind of slow. I dumped all that in favor of procmail, which the author advertises as being bullet-proofed against things like low-memory conditions, fork failures and whatnot. I've been real happy with it. I use it both at work (to sort about 200 mail messages daily) and at home (to sort about another 50) into about 12-15 folders in both cases. \scott From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 08:26:39 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03263; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:26:39 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03256; Wed, 4 Nov 92 08:26:18 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA24315; Wed, 4 Nov 92 10:26:20 CST Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 10:26:20 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211041626.AA24315@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: The lists we manage Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I currently manage only one mailing list: sun-managers. (Isn't that enough? :-) ) It's primary purpose is to provide managers of sun machines with a quick way to tap the collective knowledge of other such people on the network, especially when they are faced with a seemingly unsolvable problem. Sun-managers currently has 1515 addresses in its subscription list. At least 471 of these addresses, or 31%, appear to be local exploders, or aliases for more than one person. If you make a conservative estimate that the average local exploder hits 3 people, then this list reaches about 2500 people. But then I know for a fact that it is dumped in to many local news systems, so it is prety much impossible to estimate total readership. I also know for a fact that paper copies of messages appearing on sun-managers make the rounds to those who don't read it directly. My biggest problems at this point: 1: inappropriate traffic: topics that are only ancillary and not directly related to the list's charter. 2: high traffic: about 15 to 20 messages a day. 3: mail loops: we get about 1 every other month it seems, usually caused by someone who misconfigured a mail/news gateway. 4: people who don't know to send requests to -request. William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 09:01:37 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03333; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:01:37 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03324; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:01:34 PST Message-Id: <9211041701.AA03324@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mail receiver software In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 4 Nov 92 7:40:00 EST Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 09:01:33 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Adam S. Moskowitz writes: # How many other folks out there get so much mail that they have to use an # automatic filter? I would imagine that folks who run several lists by # hand would want to have incoming requests sorted into different # mailboxes, one for each list. My personal problem is that if I sort stuff out of my inbox into special mailboxes before I deal with it, I'll never get around to dealing with it and it will just rot there in the special mailbox. My personal operating style is to keep messages in my inbox until I've dealt with them, and to try to keep my inbox down to 50-100 messages. There are 150 in it this morning, so guess what I get to do today? :-) I use MH and the "mh-e" mode of Emacs (only thing I use Emacs for). I do have a little "sort" script that I wrote (after stealing the idea from Erik Fair) that shuffles my inbox to group related messages (for instance, to group all the bounces together, and all the Majordomo notices and requests together, and so forth), but I only run it when my mailbox gets really huge (like when it's 500 messages because I've been away for a couple of days). -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 09:05:20 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03359; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:05:20 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03352; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:05:13 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA06880; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:05:03 -0800 for list-managers@GreatCircle.com Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA20793; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:04:20 PST for mark.lawrence@drd.com Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:04:20 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211041704.AA20793@medraut.apple.com> To: mark.lawrence@drd.com Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >In the former case, they genuinely had no idea >about the -request convention so chastising them seems rude and >unwelcoming. In the latter case, the sound of the door slamming behind >them them only serves to annoy and irritate the readers staying behind. Is anyone out there reading what I said, as opposed to commenting on what they think I might have said? Hello? HELLO? Did I ever use words like chastise? Didn't I emphasize the need to do it in a friendly and productive way? Hey, feel free to comment on my technique all you want, but please avoid writing your own subtext into my attitudes, and then jump on me for your own additions. From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 09:29:52 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03486; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:29:52 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03477; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:29:48 PST Message-Id: <9211041729.AA03477@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Internationalization of mailing lists Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 09:29:47 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Here are some statistics on List-Managers and Firewalls: mycroft 370 % addr_stats.pl /usr/local/mail/lists/firewalls{,-digest} 296 com 25 uk 6 nl 4 at 1 1 nz 158 edu 20 org 6 no 3 fi 1 bit 1 pt 51 gov 16 net 5 ch 3 it 1 br 35 au 10 de 5 kr 3 sg 1 ie 35 mil 8 fr 5 se 2 be 1 il 34 ca 6 jp 5 us 2 dk 1 mx USA 581 (77.36 %) Non-USA 170 (22.64 %) Total 751 mycroft 371 % addr_stats.pl /usr/local/mail/lists/list-managers{,-digest} 37 com 3 ca 3 uk 1 bit 1 jp 1 us 34 edu 3 mil 2 net 1 ch 1 no 8 gov 3 org 1 au 1 de 1 nz USA 88 (87.13 %) Non-USA 13 (12.87 %) Total 101 I think the international presence on these lists is great, and really says something about how the world is changing at a grass-roots level. What do the rest of you see on your lists? The "addr_stats.pl" perl script is available for anonymous FTP from FTP.GreatCircle.COM in file pub/list-managers/addr_stats.shar, if you want to play with it. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 09:52:27 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03525; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:52:27 PST Received: from mozart.aero.ufl.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03518; Wed, 4 Nov 92 09:52:21 PST Received: from localhost by mozart.aero.ufl.edu (5.61ufl/4.10) id AA05290; Wed, 4 Nov 92 12:51:58 -0500 Message-Id: <9211041751.AA05290@mozart.aero.ufl.edu> To: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mail receiver software In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 04 Nov 92 07:18:00 PST." Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 12:51:57 -0500 From: mauricio@mozart.aero.ufl.edu X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I dumped all that in favor of procmail, which the author advertises as being > bullet-proofed against things like low-memory conditions, fork failures and > whatnot. I've been real happy with it. I use it both at work (to sort about > 200 mail messages daily) and at home (to sort about another 50) into about > 12-15 folders in both cases. How complicate is to install procmail? Can it work as a mail server also? From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 11:03:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03793; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:03:33 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03786; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:03:19 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa05321; 4 Nov 92 13:38 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03091; Wed, 4 Nov 92 13:40:13 EST Message-Id: <9211041840.AA03091@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 13:40:12 EST In-Reply-To: Eeyore's Evil Twin "Re: Mailing list etiquette" (Nov 4, 9:04am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: Eeyore's Evil Twin , mark.lawrence@drd.com Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Is anyone out there reading what I said, as opposed to commenting on what > they think I might have said? Hello? HELLO? > > Did I ever use words like chastise? Didn't I emphasize the need to do it in > a friendly and productive way? > Hey, feel free to comment on my technique all you want, but please avoid > writing your own subtext into my attitudes, and then jump on me for your own > additions. Hey, this is great. A brand new list, and we're already into a major flame war within the first week. This is about the lowest signal to noise ratio of any list I read. But, I'll take the "feel free" challenge above. I read your original message, and no matter how friendly or polite you are, the bottom line is that you don't help your users directly, but rather seek to educate them. With the same amount of energy that you expend to educate them, you could fulfil their requests. The problem with the education approach in this context is that many users don't deal enough with Listservs that they can ever be expected to become competent. Others are competent, but make mistakes (I fall in that category). Educating them is futile. Since it doesn't in any way solve any of the problems presented, it can be interpretted as rude. Put in a filter. Our filter actually does what you do; that is send a message back to the user. But it only does that because it was easier to write and I was lazy. The better approach would be to forward the message to the appropriate list. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 11:05:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03811; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:05:15 PST Received: from brazil.cambridge.apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03804; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:05:09 PST Received: from ministry.cambridge.apple.com by brazil.cambridge.apple.com with SMTP (5.64/25-eef) id AA28591; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:10:06 -0500 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by cambridge.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA11249; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:04:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:04:45 -0500 From: Sean Brunnock Message-Id: <9211041904.AA11249@cambridge.apple.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: William LeFebvre's message of Wed, 4 Nov 92 10:26:20 CST <9211041626.AA24315@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> Subject: loops Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello, I manage mailing lists related to Dylan (the language, 550 addresses at the moment. The mailing lists were announced on Sept. 24 and boy are my fingers tired! Wish I knew about Majordomo before now), OODLs (100 addresses), and soon, Macintosh Common LISP (290 adresses). On the subject of loops, the way I handle them is to: 1.) Make our mail server a slow machine. Ours is a IIfx running A/UX. When loops occur, mail piles up on our server rather than getting forwarded to the list as fast as it receives them. 2.) As soon as I discover a loop (usually from other people in the office, I'm not religious about the subjects here) I freeze mail on the server (chmod 000 /usr/spool/mqueue/*) and freeze the list by commenting out its entry in the aliases file and uncommenting the entry I have there for emergencies which forwards the mail to the owners of the list and saves stuff to a seperate file). 3.) Examine the headers of the messages. Fix the problem if it originates from our site. Make noise if elsewhere. 4.) Delete the bad messages from the spool. Unfreeze the spool. 5.) Change the aliases file as soon as the problem is rectified. 6.) Edit the temporary file and append it to the regular archive. I wouldn't be surprised if there were software which could detect loops and take action. If there is, then I'll put it on our server, but I'll still be prepared (slow server, comments in the aliases) for any contingencies. Sean Brunnock From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 11:24:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03873; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:24:33 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03865; Wed, 4 Nov 92 11:24:29 PST Message-Id: <9211041924.AA03865@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: loops In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:04:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 11:24:28 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sean Brunnock writes: # I wouldn't be surprised if there were software which could detect # loops and take action. If there is, then I'll put it on our server, # but I'll still be prepared (slow server, comments in the aliases) # for any contingencies. Hey, Bill, wanna tell us all about Sun-Managers and Mailing List Loops >From Hell? :-) -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 12:12:19 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04015; Wed, 4 Nov 92 12:12:19 PST Received: from garlic.inset.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04003; Wed, 4 Nov 92 12:12:11 PST Received: by garlic.inset.com (Sendmail:5.51/Cf:Jr.2.6) id AA13059; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:07:55 EST From: Adam S. Moskowitz Message-Id: <9211042007.AA13059@garlic.inset.com> Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM (List Managers) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:07:52 EST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In his message of Wed, 4 Nov 1992 13:40:12 EST, "Michael H. Morse" wrote: > the bottom line is that you don't help your users directly, but rather > seek to educate them. > . . . > With the same amount of energy that you expend to educate them, > you could fulfil their requests. I disagree with you that attempting to educate folks is bad (or wasted effort). I think it's even worse to perpetuate their failure to learn by fulfilling their mis-directed request. Somebody, somewhere, has to do some work. Now, either you and I and all the other mailing list managers can spend all of our times doing other people's work for them, or they can do it themselves. I look at mailing lists the same way I look at ATMs: You either learn to use them or you don't get your money. On BB-LISA, if someone sends a subscription request to the list, I may or may not send them a simple note asking them to send it to bblisa-request instead. If they don't do it, I don't add them. If I'm busy, I may ignore their mis-directed request. Too bad for them. If they send to the list asking why they haven't seen anything, someone else will usually point them to the right mailing list. However, I'm happy to say that BB-LISA seems to have a better track record that List-Managers: I think we only got 1 mis-directed request. Maybe SysAdmins are just smarter? I did, however, have to educate people about bblisa-request NOT being the same as bblisa-(gang of organizers), but I don't mind doing that, because it's a different kettle of fish. AdamM From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 14:18:56 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04276; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:18:56 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04269; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:18:40 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa07520; 4 Nov 92 16:17 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03207; Wed, 4 Nov 92 16:18:26 EST Message-Id: <9211042118.AA03207@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 16:18:26 EST In-Reply-To: "Adam S. Moskowitz" "Re: Mailing list etiquette" (Nov 4, 3:07pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: "Adam S. Moskowitz" Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I disagree with you that attempting to educate folks is bad (or wasted > effort). I think it's even worse to perpetuate their failure to learn by > fulfilling their mis-directed request. In general, you're absolutely correct. However, if the task is arcane, and the user does it very infrequently, my experience is that no amount of education will teach them, so it's wasted effort. > Somebody, somewhere, has to do some work. Now, either you and I and all > the other mailing list managers can spend all of our times doing other > people's work for them, or they can do it themselves. The option, IMHO, is for list managers to spend all their time educating a endless number of users, or we can program machines to do the work. You may see a higher calling, but I just want to eliminate tedious, repetitive, manual labor. One subject that we've only touched tangentially in this discussion is that not all lists are the same. Not all automated lists use the same commands, and, believe it or not, there are lists (moderated) where postings and subscription requests go to the same address. This is what makes educating users impossible. I might agree with you if a user could take your teachings and use it with other lists, but the fact is that currently, he/she cannot. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 14:52:52 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04308; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:52:52 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04300; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:52:40 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA29887; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:52:39 -0800 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA21635; Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:51:56 PST for mmorse@z.nsf.gov Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:51:56 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211042251.AA21635@medraut.apple.com> To: adamm@inset.com, mmorse@z.nsf.gov Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >In general, you're absolutely correct. However, if the task is >arcane, and the user does it very infrequently, my experience is that >no amount of education will teach them, so it's wasted effort. That's not my experience. I've found that a user that's walked through the proper procedure once is very unlikely to blow it in the future, while a user that signs on improperly and gets away with it is also very likely to use the same method to sign back off. Maybe I'm changing the world one user at a time, but recividism rates are very low. Doesn't solve the larger problem (how to keep them from making the first mistake at all -- how do you educate someone you don't know exists until the mistake brings them forward? And how do you get them information they don't know to ask for until too late?) but it does keep the noise down AND it means that this person won't make the mistake on some other mailing list, reducing the hassle factor for all the mailing list managers (and readers) downstream from my education. >The option, IMHO, is for list managers to spend all their time >educating a endless number of users, or we can program machines to >do the work. You may see a higher calling, but I just want to >eliminate tedious, repetitive, manual labor. It's part of the job. My belief is that if you don't want to do the entire job, then don't run mailing lists (which, by the way, is exactly what I did. When I got tired of the hassle, I quit. I'm back, in a very small way). If you can automate parts of it, great. But I think things have to be automated in a way that looks at the entire picture -- not just making the administrator's life easier, but making sure it doesn't negatively impact everyone's mailing lists. To that end, if you want a script that watches incoming mail for these noise bursts and automatically send back a "please do it the correct way" message, that's great. If you use that same script to intercept those messages and act on them when they're incorrectly addressed, you're re-inforcing the wrong message to the end user and pushing that incorrect behavior out to the rest of us, because the user has been conditioned to believe what he did was right when it's not. Maybe that's easier for you -- but is it easier for the net as a whole? I don't think so. I think we all need to reinforce the right behaviors together, because the corners you cut to make life easier (a) come back and bite you later, and (2) those corners pop up and poke me in the ribs, too, and they're sharp. >One subject that we've only touched tangentially in this discussion is >that not all lists are the same. Not all automated lists use the same >commands, and, believe it or not, there are lists (moderated) where >postings and subscription requests go to the same address. This is >what makes educating users impossible. I might agree with you if a >user could take your teachings and use it with other lists, but the >fact is that currently, he/she cannot. This is a problem. Probably the biggest hassle I have (other than people trying to get on the OtherRealms mailing list, which has been dead for about two years. Got another request today, and I'll be damned if I know what list-of-lists they're getting it from) is Listserv people thinking I (or my list) is a listserv. This one's a bit tough, since they're doing what they think is right. If it's send to my -request, no problem. I can be a machine, and it's not really wrong. If it gets distributed to the entire list, then I try to point out (nicely. Always nicely. really. Honest) that not all lists are listservs. There are a lot of questions I can't answer, though, for instance "How do you tell the difference?". I'll note, though, that even in the standardized world of listserv, the lists I'm on seem to get a fair number of listserv commands sent ot the group account instead of the server, so it's not just a problem 'over here'. I have mixed feelings about how to handle this one, since this isn't use naivete as much as a paradigm shifting out from under them,and that's not really their fault. What it really comes down to is this: What are we running mail lists for? Is it "To make it as easy as possible to manage"? Or is it "To create as informative and noise-free an environment for the user as possible?" -- is it being run for the convenience of the owner or the user? For me, it's the latter, and that means being proactive about reducing noise, both by stopping noise at the source where necessary and doing what education is necessary to make sure that noise sources learn how to play well with their neighbors. That creates, over time, a lower-volume of noise because you weed out the noise from the repeat offenders, and I'd rather just deal with new-user noise than noise from everyone. From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 15:35:04 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04361; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:35:04 PST Received: from Ra.MsState.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04352; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:34:57 PST Received: by Ra.MsState.Edu (4.1/6.5m-FWP); id AA20103; Wed, 4 Nov 92 17:35:17 CST Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 17:35:17 CST From: Natalie Maynor Message-Id: <9211042335.AA20103@Ra.MsState.Edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Internationalization of mailing lists Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I think the international presence on these lists is great, and really > says something about how the world is changing at a grass-roots level. > What do the rest of you see on your lists? From: Revised List Processor (1.7d) * * English Language Discussion Group * List= WORDS-L * * Country Subscribers * ------- ----------- * Australia 2 * Belgium 1 * Canada 5 * Czechoslovakia 1 * France 1 * Great Britain 1 * Ireland 2 * Japan 2 * Malaysia 1 * Norway 1 * Singapore 2 * Sweden 1 * Taiwan 3 * USA 98 (These figures don't include the people reading WORDS-L through the usenet gateway, of course.) * * American Dialect Society * List= ADS-L * * Country Subscribers * ------- ----------- * Argentina 1 * Australia 1 * Canada 9 * Czechoslovakia 1 * Germany 2 * Great Britain 1 * Hungary 1 * Netherlands 1 * Saudi-Arabia 1 * Taiwan 1 * USA 87 * ??? (ZA) 1 SMOKE-FREE@RA.MSSTATE.EDU (new list as of today): edu 6 com 4 gov 2 ca 2 --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 15:46:20 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04381; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:46:20 PST Received: from goose.aa.ox.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04374; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:46:04 PST Received: by goose.aa.ox.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.22.1 #22.9) id ; Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:44 EST Message-Id: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:46 EST From: paulh@ox.com (Paul Haas) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: loops Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A proposal for automatically blocking mail loops: o Mark each message that gets sent to the list. o Bounce or drop any message so marked. Since headers tend to get mangled in a mail loop, the mark as to be in the body of the message, it could be either a header or a footer. For example, a message sent to the digest version of this list started with: "List Managers Digest Friday, 30 October 1992 Volume 01 : Number 003" You would have to check for the line anywhere in message. I've seen loops where the original mail headers are moved into the body. I'd bounce the first ten messages each day with an automatic message telling the person to put a ">" in front of the line, if they really want to have a line like that in a message. Limiting it to 10 bounces a day, is a simplistic way of preventing bounce loops. I'm sure there are better ways. -- Paul Haas work:paulh@ox.com home:paulh@hamjudo.mi.org (313) 930-1888 (313) HAM-JUDO From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 15:56:56 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04407; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:56:56 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04396; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:56:48 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA06961; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:57:05 -0800 for list-managers@GreatCircle.com Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA21821; Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:56:20 PST for list-managers@GreatCircle.com Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:56:20 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211042356.AA21821@medraut.apple.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Internationalization of mailing lists. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I think the international presence on these lists is great, and really > says something about how the world is changing at a grass-roots level. > What do the rest of you see on your lists? My minor league list: 43 US, 2 Canada (not surprising) San jose Sharks: 94 US (we had one in sweden and one in australia for a while, though). What's surprising is that about 10% of the list are out of the local area of what is really a limited geography list.... From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 18:13:01 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04582; Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:13:01 PST Received: from relay1.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04575; Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:12:56 PST Received: from uunet.uu.net (via LOCALHOST.UU.NET) by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA13966; Wed, 4 Nov 92 21:13:16 -0500 Received: from drd.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 211249.22310; Wed, 4 Nov 1992 21:12:49 EST Received: from tierra.drd by drd.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15789; Wed, 4 Nov 92 16:27:32 CST From: mark@drd.com (Resident.Alien) Message-Id: <9211042227.AA15789@drd.com> Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 16:27:31 CST Reply-To: mark.lawrence@drd.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I didn't think I was taking Chuq to task. The only point I was trying to make was that education doesn't help when: the educatees don't know a-priori what they're doing the educatees are on their way out anyway that's all. Any insinuations about friendly/unfriendly are simply based on my own experience. Getting into flamefests with an individual who has unsubscribed generates little light. I do try to get newbies started off right. Sorry for any confusion. -- mark.lawrence@drd.com (918)743-3013 DRD Corp., 5506 South Lewis Ave., Tulsa, OK 74105 (918)745-9037 fax From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 20:07:19 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04902; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:07:19 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04895; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:07:08 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa08326; 4 Nov 92 17:17 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03250; Wed, 4 Nov 92 17:18:38 EST Message-Id: <9211042218.AA03250@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 17:18:38 EST X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Bounced mail Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Does anybody have a Perl script that can take a folder of bounced mail and produce a list of addresses (preferably in the form of grep -v commands) that caused the mail to bounce? --Mike p.s. I was joking about the grep part... Any format will do. From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 20:12:27 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04935; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:12:27 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04928; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:12:24 PST Message-Id: <9211050412.AA04928@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Misdirected subscription requests In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:49:52 WET Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 20:12:23 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # Why not moderate the list? i.e. Only the named list-moderator may mail # to the members of the list, all mail sent to the list by # non-moderators, gets sent to the moderator. All noise then goes to only # one person (who could have an auto-reply filter). If the jobs was a big # one then people could take turns... # # There is a hitch though. If the list gets very busy, the moderator gets # annoyed. There is a trade off - personally, I find it both easy and # acceptable just to hit the 'D' key and move on... As I mentioned earlier, I own almost 30 mailing lists. Most of them are very quiet. Some of them are a continuous low roar. One of them (Firewalls) ranges from dead silence for days at a time to 100 messages/day if somebody picks a real fight. I don't have time to deal with moderation of all those lists. Even if I had the time, my time isn't in predictable and regular enough chunks for me to provide reliable moderation service. I'm a consultant. Some weeks, I'm in my office all week with little to do but read mail (and kick the occasional ant hill on Firewalls or List-Managers :-); other weeks (like this one), I'm in the field most of the time and doing everything I can to stay more or less even with the incoming email. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 20:35:28 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04977; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:35:28 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04968; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:35:23 PST Message-Id: <9211050435.AA04968@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 92 9:33:54 PST Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 20:35:23 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk cherie@nas.nasa.gov (Cherie N. Lawrence) writes: # >Steve Miller's old "distribute" program used an interesting algorithm. # >It counted the words in the message, and looked for words in certain # >classes ("drop or add" words like "remove", "drop", "off", # >"subscribe", "get", and "add"; "from or to" words like "from" and # >"to"; and "mail words" like "mail", "mailing", "list", and "dl"). # >Then, if the word count was < 25 and it had found at least one word in # >each of the 3 classes, it assumed the message was a natural language # >administrivia request. # # Just out of curiousity, how often does this algorithm accidentally filter # legitimate messages? I've seen plenty of very brief messages, and "get" and # "off" aren't terribly uncommon words... Not very often. It has to find a word from _each_ class of words before it bounces the message. I.e., "get" or "off" alone won't do it, unless the message also contains something about "from or to", and something about "mail or mailing list", AND the whole thing is less than 25 words... Amazingly effective, actually, at catching natural language requests and not catching non-requests. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 20:46:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05027; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:46:44 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05019; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:46:40 PST Message-Id: <9211050446.AA05019@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:46:44 EST Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 20:46:39 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Michael H. Morse" writes: # First, we need to standardize on subscription requests. There are # people still maintaining lists by hand, but they should tell folks a # standard message to put in a mailr request. For lack of a better way, # I suggest "subscribe list-name realname" (happens to be the Bitnet # Listserv syntax). The problem with that syntax is, there's no way to subscribe an address other than the one the mail appears to come from. I.e., a user whose mail appears to come from "user@lab-3-97.company.com" can't request to be subscribed as "user@company.com". This is important, because users often can't control how screwed up their headers get (that's the province of the sysadmins and network providers, who unfortunately don't always get it right), but they _can_ control what goes into the body of the message (usually; if they have the misfortune of being behind something like a QuickMail to SMTP gateway, they're often denied even that). There needs to be some way within the user's control to say "the headers are broken; do it _this_ way." If users want to include their real name along with their subscription request, they can easily do it as a comment in their address (i.e., "subscribe foobar Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman)". -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 20:50:24 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05053; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:50:24 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05045; Wed, 4 Nov 92 20:50:20 PST Message-Id: <9211050450.AA05045@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 3 Nov 1992 15:52:39 -0500 Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 20:50:19 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) writes: # 1) get a better computer. :-) There's no excuse for computational resource # shortages in these modern times. On the other hand, Maybe I'm spoiled; # the slowest machine on my network is a 25MHz R3000 box... Actually, there's something to be said for running your mailing lists from a machine that's fast enough for the job, but NOT blazing fast... A slow machine gives you more time between iterations of feedback loops, for instance. It also acts as a natural "choke" on the traffic, to keep all the folks who have to eventually _read_ the stuff from drowning. Similar arguments apply to slow network links. GreatCircle.COM is at the end of a 9.6 kb/s SLIP link. That means that, no matter what, Firewalls and List-Managers can only beat so hard on my poor little old Sun 3/60... -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 21:05:53 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05136; Wed, 4 Nov 92 21:05:53 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05128; Wed, 4 Nov 92 21:05:49 PST Message-Id: <9211050505.AA05128@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 4 Nov 1992 13:40:12 EST Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 21:05:48 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Michael H. Morse" writes: # Hey, this is great. A brand new list, and we're already into a major # flame war within the first week. This is about the lowest signal to # noise ratio of any list I read. Actually, this is nothing. Firewalls went through THREE canonical flame wars in the first 3 days of its existence: "I want a digest!", "I want a newsgroup!", and "Would everybody just _shut up_?!?". Of the first 200 or so messages, about one third of them had anything to do with the topic of the list, and the other two thirds were complaining about the volume... -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 4 22:13:10 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05242; Wed, 4 Nov 92 22:13:10 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05233; Wed, 4 Nov 92 22:13:06 PST Message-Id: <9211050613.AA05233@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: List-Managers-Digest problems Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 22:13:05 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sorry, gang, there was a configuration problem that caused the last few digests that should have been sent to List-Managers-Digest to be held up here instead. I've just pushed them out, so you should have gotten V1 #5, V1 #6, and V1 #7 all together. The problem was that I'd called my "resend" script which does header rewriting and such with an argument that says "bounce any message over 10k long to the moderator for consideration". While that's appropriate for the undigested mailing list (it lets almost any "normal" post through, and lets me intercept anything like folks posting PostScript documents and such, and decide if I really want to turn that loose), it's not appropriate for the Digest, which is guaranteed to exceed 10k on a busy day. Anyway, sorry for the inconvenience. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 03:41:47 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05589; Thu, 5 Nov 92 03:41:47 PST Received: from Ra.MsState.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05582; Thu, 5 Nov 92 03:41:41 PST Received: by Ra.MsState.Edu (4.1/6.5m-FWP); id AA21960; Thu, 5 Nov 92 05:42:01 CST Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 05:42:01 CST From: Natalie Maynor Message-Id: <9211051142.AA21960@Ra.MsState.Edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Internationalization of mailing lists Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Several people have sent me direct mail in response to the country list I posted yesterday that included "???" for ZA. I should probably have edited that before posting it. The list I sent was automatically provided by LISTSERV. I didn't create it. I was surprised to see the "???" since LISTSERV is usually "smarter" than that. --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 04:44:11 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05689; Thu, 5 Nov 92 04:44:11 PST Received: from owl.nstn.ns.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05682; Thu, 5 Nov 92 04:43:54 PST Received: from cogs.ns.ca (sun1.cogs.ns.ca) by owl.nstn.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA19788; Thu, 5 Nov 92 08:43:37 AST Received: by cogs.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01006; Thu, 5 Nov 92 08:50:00 AST From: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Message-Id: <9211051250.AA01006@cogs.ns.ca> Subject: Creating Lists To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 8:49:59 AST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I guess I'm one of those greenhorns that are the bane of manager's I've been reading about as I browse through the List-Manager's mail, but I do have a serious purpose, and am hoping that you all can provide some direction. I can't seem to find any stuff (literature, RFC's, etc) on the internet on how to create a mailing list. Reading the mail makes me believe it is not as straight forward as I had hoped, and that it may just come down to setting up a lot of scripts, and keeping an eye on things. Can you all point me in any direction? Better than a bull in china shop? Thanx :-) roger@sun1.cogs.ns.ca From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 07:18:40 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05897; Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:18:40 PST Received: from usl.com (usl.usl.com) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05890; Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:18:23 PST Message-Id: <9211051518.AA05890@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:10 EST From: mingus@usl.com (Marcel-Franck Simon) To: Eeyore's Evil Twin Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Received: from usl by usl.com; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:10 EST Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1697 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > This is a problem. Probably the biggest hassle I have (other than people > trying to get on the OtherRealms mailing list, which has been dead for about > two years. Got another request today, and I'll be damned if I know what > list-of-lists they're getting it from) is Listserv people thinking I (or my > list) is a listserv. I resonate with this (old address problem). I'm still getting subscription requests that go to mail-men-request@attunix.att.com, even though this has not been correct since well over two years ago (if you're wondering, the right address is mail-men-request@usl.com.) These requests tend to come in bursts every few months, which makes me believe there is a list-of-lists somewhere being published about that often I know the list-of-lists that Dave Taylor (previously Gene Spafford) maintains and periodically posts to Usenet, is correct. I've occasionally found other list-of-list addresses, but have never gotten a response to any mail I sent there (maybe, given recent discussions here, I used the wrong protocol :-)) What other list-of-lists are there, and how do I get to them? Any info here is much appreciated. By now the old address is so out of date that requests to it are going through really suboptimal routes that depend on an old UUCP map that someone has never updated.... I also resonate with the problem assuming that mail-men is a listserv, I moderate mail-men (primarily because it needs moderation), so the added labor of adding/removing addresses to the list is small. By now though I've gotten so busy that even the few minutes a day it takes is a chore, so pointers I get from folks here are really helpful (despite the flames :-)) Marcel From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 07:58:16 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05938; Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:58:16 PST Received: from brazil.cambridge.apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05931; Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:57:58 PST Received: from ministry.cambridge.apple.com by brazil.cambridge.apple.com with SMTP (5.64/25-eef) id AA00892; Thu, 5 Nov 92 11:02:42 -0500 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by cambridge.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA18081; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:57:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:57:14 -0500 From: Sean Brunnock Message-Id: <9211051557.AA18081@cambridge.apple.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Paul Haas's message of Wed, 4 Nov 92 18:46 EST Subject: Re: loops Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >A proposal for automatically blocking mail loops: > o Mark each message that gets sent to the list. > o Bounce or drop any message so marked. I tend to use the term "loops" in a very general way. The last "loop" on info-mcl was actually a Macintosh gateway at the original poster's site that kept spitting out the same message every minute. The only difference in the messages was the message id and the date. (When I was alerted, 12 messages were distributed to the list, but 30 were stuck in the IIfx's queue waiting to be serviced. Thank god for crappy I/O.) I did receive a curious response. An X.400 gateway in the UK, if memory serves me right, sent a machine generated message stating that it had detected a loop from our machine. Pity I didn't save the message. So it appears that there is software out there which can detect loops and take action. Sean From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 08:20:08 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06000; Thu, 5 Nov 92 08:20:08 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05991; Thu, 5 Nov 92 08:20:00 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14415>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 11:05:25 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA12653 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for roger@cogs.ns.ca); Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:31:04 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA28398 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:31:01 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:31:01 -0500 From: mandrews@alias.com (Mark Andrews) Message-Id: <9211051531.AA28398@dino.alias.com> To: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher), List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Creating Lists Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I can't seem to find any stuff (literature, RFC's, etc) on the internet on >how to create a mailing list. Reading the mail makes me believe it is not >as straight forward as I had hoped, and that it may just come down to >setting up a lot of scripts, and keeping an eye on things. Can you all >point me in any direction? Better than a bull in china shop? > >Thanx :-) roger@sun1.cogs.ns.ca There is one (I think) great RFC on the woes of list maintenance: RFC 1211 Problems with the Maintenance of Large Mailing Lists. By Ann Westine and Jon Postel. It discusses the woes of list management. I recommend it as good reading. Mark From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 08:53:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06086; Thu, 5 Nov 92 08:53:44 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06079; Thu, 5 Nov 92 08:53:33 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA28448; Thu, 5 Nov 92 11:53:24 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 05 Nov 92 16:50:07 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Creating Lists From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 16:46:46 UTC In-Reply-To: <9211051531.AA28398@dino.alias.com> Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk mandrews@alias.com (Mark Andrews) writes: > >I can't seem to find any stuff (literature, RFC's, etc) on the internet on > >how to create a mailing list. Reading the mail makes me believe it is not > >as straight forward as I had hoped, and that it may just come down to > >setting up a lot of scripts, and keeping an eye on things. Can you all > >point me in any direction? Better than a bull in china shop? > > > >Thanx :-) roger@sun1.cogs.ns.ca > > There is one (I think) great RFC on the woes of list maintenance: > > RFC 1211 Problems with the Maintenance of Large Mailing Lists. > > By Ann Westine and Jon Postel. It discusses the woes of list management. > I recommend it as good reading. > > Mark 1211 is helpful for dealing with bounce loops and mail that doesn't go through but doesn't do much for the philosophy of setting up a list. Part of this problem is the variety of mail systems. For example, I only have access to SMTP so I do my mailings differently than someone who has access to batch SMTP. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "When you ski, you dance with the mountain -- | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | and the mountain always leads." | From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 09:49:58 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06142; Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:49:58 PST Received: from WVNVAXA.WVNET.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06135; Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:49:50 PST Received: from MARSHALL.MU.WVNET.EDU by WVNVMS.WVNET.EDU (PMDF #3439 ) id <01GQSJPGKAS09X4PS5@WVNVMS.WVNET.EDU>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 12:33:40 EST Date: 05 Nov 1992 12:30 -0400 (EDT) From: ERMEL STEPP Subject: Re: Internationalization of Lists To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: <8E8C3AB180607CB5@MARSHALL.WVNET.EDU> X-Organization: Marshall University X-Vms-To: _IN%"list-managers@GreatCircle.COM" X-Vms-Cc: M034050 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 4 Nov Brent said: > I think the international presence on these lists is great, and really > says something about how the world is changing at a grass-roots level. > What do the rest of you see on your lists? I am the listoner of FRAC-L and a co-owner of ARACHNET. Here are the country stats for them. FRAC-L @ GITVM1 * Country Subscribers * ------- ----------- * Argentina 1 * Australia 2 * Austria 6 * Belgium 6 * Brazil 33 * Canada 19 * Chile 4 * Columbia 4 * Costa Rica 8 * Czechoslovakia 3 * Denmark 2 * Finland 3 * France 11 * Germany 26 * Great Britain 22 * Greece 4 * Hongkong 2 * Hungary 2 * India 1 * Ireland 4 * Italy 8 * Korea 2 * Lithuania 1 * Mexico 11 * Netherlands 12 * New Zealand 2 * Poland 9 * Portugal 5 * Saudi-Arabia 1 * Singapore 1 * Spain 5 * Sweden 2 * Switzerland 2 * SR 2 * Taiwan 20 * Turkey 2 * TH 1 * USA 338 * Yugoslavia 4 * ??? 11 * * Total number of users subscribed to the list: 602 (non-"concealed" only) * Total number of countries represented: 40 (non-"concealed" only) * ARACHNET @ UOTTAWA * Country Subscribers * ------- ----------- * Australia 4 * Canada 19 * Columbia 1 * Denmark 1 * Finland 1 * France 1 * Germany 1 * Great Britain 6 * Ireland 2 * Israel 2 * Italy 2 * Netherlands 1 * Saudi-Arabia 1 * Sweden 1 * Taiwan 2 * Turkey 2 * USA 147 * ??? 1 * * Total number of users subscribed to the list: 195 (non-"concealed" only) * Total number of countries represented: 18 (non-"concealed" only) * Ermel Dr. Ermel Stepp Internet m034050@marshall.wvnet.edu Professor, Ed. Adm. BITNET m034050@marshall Marshall University FAX (304) 696-6221 Huntington, WV 25755 VOICE (304) 696-2946 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 10:11:23 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06193; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:11:23 PST Received: from livbird.liv.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06182; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:11:15 PST Received: from localhost.liv.ac.uk by liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk with Local-SMTP (PP) id <17226-0@liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:10:59 +0000 To: Sean Brunnock Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: loops In-Reply-To: The Message of "Thu, 05 Nov 92 10:57:14 EST." Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 18:10:52 GMT Message-Id: <17224.720987052@livbird.liv.ac.uk> From: Alan Thew Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:57:14 -0500 Sean Brunnock wrote: > >>A proposal for automatically blocking mail loops: >> o Mark each message that gets sent to the list. >> o Bounce or drop any message so marked. > .... >I did receive a curious response. An X.400 gateway in the UK, if memory >serves me right, sent a machine generated message stating that it had >detected a loop from our machine. Pity I didn't save the message. > >So it appears that there is software out there which can detect >loops and take action. One can check Message-Id: fields, check trace fields. Neither is "bullet proof" but they work most of the time. Alan Thew From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 10:18:56 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06216; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:18:56 PST Received: from WVNVAXA.WVNET.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06209; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:18:49 PST Received: from MARSHALL.MU.WVNET.EDU by WVNVMS.WVNET.EDU (PMDF #3439 ) id <01GQSL6Q27U89X4DHT@WVNVMS.WVNET.EDU>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:16:11 EST Date: 05 Nov 1992 13:13 -0400 (EDT) From: ERMEL STEPP Subject: Creation of VAX mailing list To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: <9485FB83C0607CB5@MARSHALL.WVNET.EDU> X-Organization: Marshall University X-Vms-To: _IN%"list-managers@GreatCircle.COM" X-Vms-Cc: M034050 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am considering creating a new mailing list. The local system is a VAX and I want to consider the VAX as an alternative to a VM with LISTSERV. What LISTSERV-like software is available for the VAXCluster? Ermel Stepp M034050@MARSHALL.WVNET.EDU From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 10:26:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06241; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:26:33 PST Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06234; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:26:26 PST Received: from [90.190.12.52] by apple.com with SMTP (5.61/7-Aug-1992-eef) id AA17811; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:26:40 -0800 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: by medraut.apple.com (5.64/25-eef) id AA22530; Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:25:56 PST for mingus@usl.com Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:25:56 PST From: Eeyore's Evil Twin Message-Id: <9211051825.AA22530@medraut.apple.com> To: chuq@medraut.apple.com, mingus@usl.com Subject: Re: Mailing list etiquette Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I resonate with this (old address problem). I'm still getting subscription >requests that go to mail-men-request@attunix.att.com, even though this >has not been correct since well over two years ago I think this is the ultimate old address problem: every so often, I get a posting sent to me as moderator of comp.text.desktop. Anyone want to try to remember how long ago I stopped doing that and turned that group over to being unmoderated? (Never, ever do that. it doesn't work. Trust me. Give it a new name and start fresh). Not only that, but it was at a previous job with a previous email address, an address that doesn't forward to me. So somewhere out there we have machines that (a) ignore all the control messages to switch to unmoderated, (b) have admins that won't do it, either, but (c) WERE able to change the email address for the moderator to my new home. Go figure. I got one about three months ago, and since that happened when I was at Sun, it's almost four years old, and still happening. From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 11:58:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06363; Thu, 5 Nov 92 11:58:41 PST Received: from sunlight.Stanford.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06356; Thu, 5 Nov 92 11:58:36 PST Received: from elaine42.Stanford.EDU by sunlight.Stanford.EDU (4.1/AIR-1.0) id AA01884; Thu, 5 Nov 92 11:58:30 PST Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 11:58:30 PST From: whenry@leland.stanford.edu Message-Id: <9211051958.AA01884@sunlight.Stanford.EDU> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: another rfc Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rfc1153 covers formatting a digest. (a fragment follows) Walter Henry Conservation Lab Stanford Univ Libraries RFC 1153 Digest Message Format April 1990 ... This memo describes the de facto standard Digest Message Format. It is not meant to supersede nor replace the generic message encapsulation format described in RFC 934. It merely documents a particular message encapsulation format that existed well before RFC 934 was published and continues to be the format of choice for digest messages. Description A digest message is a conventional message consisting of a header and body conforming to RFC 822 as clarified in RFC 1123. There is no fixed size. Limitations may exist in intermediate mail gateways which restrict the size. The typical digest size is 15,000 characters. From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 13:25:04 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06500; Thu, 5 Nov 92 13:25:04 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06491; Thu, 5 Nov 92 13:24:55 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14416>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:25:06 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA16981 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM); Thu, 5 Nov 92 16:05:43 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA04724 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM); Thu, 5 Nov 92 16:05:10 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9211052105.AA04724@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: another rfc To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:05:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <9211051958.AA01884@sunlight.Stanford.EDU>; from "whenry@leland.stanford.edu" at Nov 5, 92 2:58 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > rfc1153 covers formatting a digest. (a fragment follows) You should also look at RFC1341 (MIME); it defines a ContentType of multipart/digest, signifying a multipart document where each part is a mail message. -- "What is life?" "A rich | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON tapestry when learning from | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) a Master like you, sir!" | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) "You pass!" -Purolator ad | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 14:16:21 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06585; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:16:21 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06578; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:16:13 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA19384; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:16:02 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA03343; Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:16:01 EST Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:16:01 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211052216.AA03343@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Internationalization of Lists Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I ran the addr_stats.pl script, but found that I had to make some modifications to get correct statistics on some of my lists where people are subscribed via BITNET or UUCP, or with RFC-822 route-addrs. My revised version of the addr_stats.pl script is appended at the end of this message. JPEG@cs.columbia.edu 97 com 13 au 5 nl 3 it 2 mil 1 nz 79 edu 13 gov 4 uucp 3 se 2 org 1 sg 15 uk 8 jp 3 dk 3 us 1 at 1 tw 14 ca 7 no 3 fr 2 bitn 1 ch 1 yu 14 de 5 net 3 in 2 fi 1 gr USA 201 (65.47 %) Non-USA 100 (32.57 %) Non-DNS 6 ( 1.95 %) Total 307 _______________________________________________________________________________ ACIS-ALLIANCE@cs.columbia.edu 83 com 6 jp 4 tw 2 org 1 in 1 us 21 edu 6 uk 3 bitn 1 fi 1 it 9 ca 5 gov 3 de 1 hu 1 kr USA 112 (75.68 %) Non-USA 33 (22.30 %) Non-DNS 3 ( 2.03 %) Total 148 _______________________________________________________________________________ ORNET@cs.columbia.edu 79 edu 10 ca 5 bitn 2 net 1 gov 19 com 6 in 2 mil 2 uucp USA 103 (81.75 %) Non-USA 16 (12.70 %) Non-DNS 7 ( 5.56 %) Total 126 _______________________________________________________________________________ Modified version of addrstats.pl: #!/usr/local/bin/perl require "/u/dcc/dupuy/perl/mailstuff.pl"; $localdom = `hostname`; $localdom = `domainname` if ($localdom !~ /\./); chop $localdom; while () { @a = &ParseAddrs($_); foreach (@a) { $_ = &CanonAddr($_); @n = split("@"); @p = split(/\./, $n[1]); if ($#p < 0) { @p = split(/\./, $localdom); } $_ = $p[$#p]; tr/A-Z/a-z/; $count{$_}++; $total++; if (/^arpa$|^com$|^gov$|^mil$|^net$|^edu$|^org$|^us$/) { $domestic++; } else { if (/^bitnet$|^earn$|^^uucp$/) { $pseudo++; } else { $foreign++; } } } } @data = (sort ncmp keys %count); $cols = 6; $rows = int($#data / $cols + 1); for ($i = 0 ; $i < $rows ; $i ++) { for ($j = 0 ; $j < $cols ; $j++) { $_ = $data[$i + $rows * $j]; if (defined($_)) { printf "%4d %-4.4s", $count{$_}, $_; } else { print " "; } print (($j != 5) ? " " : "\n"); } } print "\n"; printf "USA\t%4d (%5.2f %%)\n", $domestic, $domestic / $total * 100.0; printf "Non-USA\t%4d (%5.2f %%)\n", $foreign, $foreign / $total * 100.0; printf "Non-DNS\t%4d (%5.2f %%)\n", $pseudo, $pseudo / $total * 100.0; print "\n"; printf "Total\t%4d\n", $total; sub ncmp { return(($count{$b} <=> $count{$a}) || ($a cmp $b)); } # $addr = &CanonAddr($addr) sub main'CanonAddr { s/^@[^:]*://; # strip route-addrs 1 while s/[^!]*!([^!])!/\1!/; # strip leading !-paths s/^([^!]*)!([^!@]*).*$/\2@\1.uucp/; # convert uucp addrs $_; } From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 14:31:20 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06621; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:31:20 PST Received: from uu4.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06614; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:31:13 PST Received: from svcdudes.comby uu4.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA26260; Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:21:13 -0500 Received: from moose. by svcdudes.com (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.0) id AA07286; Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:54:30 PST Received: by moose. (NX5.67c/NX3.0S) id AA05647; Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:52:58 -0800 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:52:58 -0800 From: Michael Rutman Message-Id: <9211051752.AA05647@moose.> Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.87.1) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.87.1) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Creating Lists Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I can't seem to find any stuff (literature, RFC's, etc) on the internet on > how to create a mailing list. Reading the mail makes me believe it is not > as straight forward as I had hoped, and that it may just come down to > setting up a lot of scripts, and keeping an eye on things. Can you all > point me in any direction? Better than a bull in china shop? I know the feeling because I barely have one up and it's been a long time. I would strongly recommend Majordomo since it comes with a nice document describing large mailing lists. Things not to do. 1> Put everyone in one alias. Will not work for more than about 10 people. 2> Set up the automatic reply to the mailing list. Bounced mail will then go to the entire list and you will make a lot of enemies real quickly. 3> Test the mailing list with a lot of people. This involves to many people who only want a working mailing list. I recommend 4 or 5. 4> Expect anyone to set it up for you. Nobody will. Things to do. 1> Take down the entire mailing list if you even suspect there is a loop. 2> Remove people when they ask to be removed, no matter how they ask 3> Remove people when they get obnoxious. Nobody likes a flame war. Of course, I still don't consider wargames@svcdudes.com a successful group yet as there has been very little dialog on it and I'm not even sure if everyone subscribed is receiving anything. --- Michael Rutman | moose@svcdudes.com Cubist | makes me a NeXT programmer Software Ventures | maker of MicroPhone Pro #include | really offensive political statement From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 14:44:00 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06660; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:44:00 PST Received: from livbird.liv.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06653; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:43:51 PST Received: from localhost.liv.ac.uk by liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk with Local-SMTP (PP) id <18093-0@liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk>; Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:44:25 +0000 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Internationalization of Lists In-Reply-To: The Message of "Thu, 05 Nov 92 17:16:01 EST." Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 22:44:19 GMT Message-Id: <18091.721003459@livbird.liv.ac.uk> From: Alan Thew Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I run a list for Rexx on Un*x urexx-l@liverpool.ac.uk 48 bit 27 edu 16 com 11 uk 11 ca 6 uucp 6 de 2 mil 2 jp 2 gr 1 us 1 se 1 nz 1 no 1 nl 1 it 1 il 1 gov 1 es Produceed with vi,awk,tr,paste :-) :-) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 14:46:09 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06678; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:46:09 PST Received: from net.bio.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06671; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:46:00 PST Received: by net.bio.net (5.65/IG-2.0) with SMTP id AA01692; Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:46:17 -0800 Message-Id: <9211052246.AA01692@net.bio.net> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Biggest list contest, entry number #5327 Reply-To: shibumi@net.bio.net X-Disclaimer: Unless otherwise noted below, this is not a policy statement Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 14:46:16 -0800 From: "Kenton A. Hoover" Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The BIOSCI project is an NSF project to facilitate communications between biologists in many fields, using electronic communications. We support a set of newsgroups (the 'bionet.' groups) and 84 public and semi-private (non-advertisted) mailing lists. In Europe and the Middle East, mailings from the lists are handled as part of the SEQNET project at SERC Daresbury. 1588 total users are handled via email in the Americas, Pacific and Africa. The mailings originate on the net.bio.net machine at IntelliGenetics in Mountain View, California. Lists have from 1 to 354 users. We have no problem with loops, even given the large number of BITNET users. We are working on a paper, which we hope to get done for either Winter USENIX or the next LISA conference which describes how we do whatwe do, and some of the issues and problems we have had to overcome to make all of this work smoothly for biologists (and ourselves). | Kenton A. Hoover | shibumi@net.bio.net | | BIOSCI Network Administrator | | | BIOSCI/IntelliGenetics, Inc. | +1 415 962 7300 | |=========== net.bio.net -- The New Home of the bionet Newsgroups ============| | All Governments, including the worst on earth and the most tyrannical on | | earth, are free Governments to that portion of the people who voluntarily | | support them. | | -- Lysander Spooner | From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 15:38:45 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07031; Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:38:45 PST Received: from eris.sj.ate.slb.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07024; Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:38:39 PST Received: from hunter.sj.ate.slb.com by eris.sj.ate.slb.com (5.59SLBATE/SLB-SERVER-1.16) id AA07730; Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:37:16 PST Message-Id: <9211052337.AA07730@eris.sj.ate.slb.com> Received: from localhost by hunter.SJ.ATE.SLB.COM (4.1/DUMB-1.0) id AA09768; Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:37:24 PST To: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM Cc: basie@sj.ate.slb.com Subject: Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 15:37:23 -0800 From: basie@sj.ate.slb.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Subscribe list-managers-digest From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 17:08:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07273; Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:08:02 PST Received: from rata.vuw.ac.nz by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07266; Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:07:47 PST Received: by rata.vuw.ac.nz id AA28495 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for List-Managers-Digest@greatcircle.com); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:07:17 +1300 Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:07:17 +1300 Message-Id: <199211060107.AA28495@rata.vuw.ac.nz> From: Tony Martindale To: List-Managers-Digest@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: basie@sj.ate.slb.com's message of Thu, 05 Nov 92 15:37:23 -0800 <9211052337.AA07730@eris.sj.ate.slb.com> Subject: Subscriptions please! Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Subscribe list-managers-digest Here it is the first live test case! Or is it someone with a sense of humor :) Tony Martindale Computing Services Centre, phone: +64 4 495 5051 Victoria University of Wellington, fax: +64 4 471 5386 P.O. Box 600, Wellington, NEW ZEALAND. From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 5 20:53:36 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07559; Thu, 5 Nov 92 20:53:36 PST Received: from ames.arc.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07552; Thu, 5 Nov 92 20:53:25 PST Received: from zorch.UUCP by ames.arc.nasa.gov with UUCP id AA06892 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for greatcircle.com!list-managers); Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:53:06 -0800 Received: by zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (/\==/\ Smail3.1.22.1 #22.2) id ; Thu, 5 Nov 92 20:31 PST Message-Id: Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 20:31 PST From: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Biggest list contest... Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Brent - perhaps we should invite Peter Neumann (one 'n' or two?) to join list-managers and submit RISKS for the "biggest list contest"? 0.5 :-) \scott, who would hate to run a really big list from a UUCP site... From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 03:25:23 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07926; Fri, 6 Nov 92 03:25:23 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07919; Fri, 6 Nov 92 03:25:12 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 for ) with SMTP; Fri, 6 Nov 1992 11:24:55 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Creating Lists To: moose%moose@svcdudes.com (Michael Rutman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 11:24:47 WET Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211051752.AA05647@moose.>; from "Michael Rutman" at Nov 5, 92 9:52 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I agree with everything you say but... > Things not to do. ... > 2> Set up the automatic reply to the mailing list. Bounced mail will then go to > the entire list and you will make a lot of enemies real quickly. There are ways to avoid this happening. We have lists which use automatic-reply-to-the-list. This is useful in some cases, particularly for committee type lists. To avoid errors going to the whole list, (or, even worse, to us ;-) ), we take the following steps: The automatic reply to simply adds a Reply-To field, (which some MUA's may ignore), specifying the name of the list. Add a Sender: field which is 'listname-request'. (The From: field should remain intact throughout) If a person has added a Reply-To field into their message then copy this into the distributed message and dont add your own. An extra measure is to add a listname-owner entry to the aliases file. NB: This is what we do and it works. I'm not saying that this is correct or that it will work for your system so no flames please. Regards, John -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory 091 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 03:55:52 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07958; Fri, 6 Nov 92 03:55:52 PST Received: from relay2.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA07951; Fri, 6 Nov 92 03:55:47 PST Received: from uunet.uu.net (via LOCALHOST.UU.NET) by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA05001; Fri, 6 Nov 92 06:56:09 -0500 Received: from melpar.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 065539.23777; Fri, 6 Nov 1992 06:55:39 EST Received: by melpar (5.59/25-eef) id AA19129; Fri, 6 Nov 92 06:37:32 EST Message-Id: <9211061137.AA19129@melpar> From: melpar!witcher@uunet.UU.NET (Dorian Witcher) X-Mailer: SCO System V Mail (version 3.2) To: uunet!GreatCircle.com!List-Managers@uunet.UU.NET Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 6:37:32 EST Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 06:51:39 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08185; Fri, 6 Nov 92 06:51:39 PST Received: from discord.cme.nist.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08178; Fri, 6 Nov 92 06:51:22 PST Received: by discord.cme.nist.gov (4.1/SMI-3.2-del.7) id AA11252; Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:51:15 EST Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:51:15 EST From: clark@cme.nist.gov (Steve Clark) Message-Id: <9211061451.AA11252@discord.cme.nist.gov> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Subject: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Several people have said they add a Sender: list-request header to outbound messages in order to intercept error messages. I use a script I inherited from another list owner which adds Errors-To: list-request and Administrivia-To: list-request instead. Is there any functional difference between the two? Are these two different ways of solving the same problem, or are there classes of problems addressed by one and not the other? -steve clark@cme.nist.gov From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 07:35:51 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08236; Fri, 6 Nov 92 07:35:51 PST Received: from violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08229; Fri, 6 Nov 92 07:35:29 PST Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:34:40 GMT Message-Id: <1778.199211061534@violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk> Received: by violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk id AA01778; Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:34:40 GMT From: Ian Dickinson X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.4 2/2/92) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Intro Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Since the done thing seems to be to desribe the lists we run...... The only public list I run is the Deviants List It's a simple reflector and I'm looking for some nice massaging software. Here's the spread of subscribers.... 21 uk 2 mil 1 de 1 org 19 com 2 us 1 net 1 uucp 12 edu 1 ca 1 nz 62 total I also run a lot inf internal lists... Cheers, -- \/ato - Ian Dickinson - NIC handle: ID17 No-one is to molest vato@csv.warwick.ac.uk ...!mcsun!uknet!warwick!vato the wombat when /I=I/S=Dickinson/OU=CSV/O=Warwick/PRMD=UK.AC/ADMD= /C=GB/ anyone is @c=GB@o=University of Warwick@ou=Computing Services@cn=Ian Dickinson watching. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 08:07:45 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08275; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:07:45 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08268; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:07:28 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA02551; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:07:31 CST Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:07:31 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211061607.AA02551@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Resident.Alien's message of Wed, 4 Nov 92 16:27:31 CST <9211042227.AA15789@drd.com> Subject: Mailing list etiquette Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: mark@drd.com (Resident.Alien) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 16:27:31 CST Reply-To: mark.lawrence@drd.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I didn't think I was taking Chuq to task. The only point I was trying to make was that education doesn't help when: the educatees don't know a-priori what they're doing the educatees are on their way out anyway What about the next list they join, or the other list that they are going to drop next week? William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 08:32:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08538; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:32:02 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08526; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:31:55 PST Message-Id: <9211061631.AA08526@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Administrivia to list-managers Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 08:31:54 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Folks, I really apologize that I don't have the administrivia filter in place on List-Managers yet. Scott Hazen Mueller has sent me patches for my "resend" program, but I haven't had a chance to install and test them yet. The bad news is, I don't think I'll get to it until some time next week. I'm about to head out of town for 5 days of search and rescue work (a couple of days of long-scheduled training at Vandenberg AFB, followed by a couple of days on a current mission in Winnemucka, Nevada, unless they find the missing plane before I get there on Monday). My apologies, and please bear with me through the occasional bogus administrivia posting until I get the matter addressed. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 08:49:52 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08608; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:49:52 PST Received: from sgi.sgi.com (SGI.COM) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08601; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:49:41 PST Received: from athos.pei.com by sgi.sgi.com via UUCP (920330.SGI/910110.SGI) for list-managers@greatcircle.com id AA14758; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:49:36 -0800 Received: from athos.pei.com by pei.pei.com (5.52/900721.SGI) for sgi!greatcircle.com!list-managers id AA24292; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:47:01 PST Received: by athos (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26538; Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:50:47 PST Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:50:47 PST From: berry@athos.pei.com (Berry Kercheval) Message-Id: <9211061650.AA26538@athos> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: forwarded message from Jamie Zawinski Reply-To: berry@pei.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk All you list managers may find this message amusing. Or instructive, or something. Since I'm on help-lucid-emacs I got a few of the bounces last night, too. --berry ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Site: From: Jamie Zawinski Sender: jwz%thalidomide@lucid.com To: help-lucid-emacs@lucid.com, bob_weiner@pts.mot.com Subject: DANGER! TOXIC! Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 19:38:33 PST Bob Weiner recently sent out a message <9211060306.AA08039@pts4.pts.mot.com> whose headers read From: ex594bw@pts4.pts.mot.com (Bob Weiner) To: help-lucid-emacs@lucid.com Cc: cckrasic%math@uunet.uu.net) This has unleashed the dreaded sendmail virus: all sites running sendmail which have this message pass through them will generate a bounce message back to help-lucid-emacs-request@lucid.com *as well as* sending the message on, allowing all downstream sites to do the same. In the ~20 minutes since this message passed through lucid.com, we've already recieved 90 bounces. I expect that thousands more are on the way. Happy happy. Joy joy. -- Jamie - ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: Thu, 09 May 91 23:26:50 -0700 From: "Erik E. Fair" (Your Friendly Postmaster) To: tcp-ip@NIC.DDN.MIL, unicode@SUN.COM, [...] Subject: Case of the Replicated Errors: An Internet Postmaster's Horror Story [Forwarded to RISKS by Jerry Leichter and Jim Horning] This Is The Network: The Apple Engineering Network. The Apple Engineering Network has about 100 IP subnets, 224 AppleTalk zones, and over 600 AppleTalk networks. It stretches from Tokyo, Japan, to Paris, France, with half a dozen locations in the U.S., and 40 buildings in the Silicon Valley. It is interconnected with the Internet in three places: two in the Silicon Valley, and one in Boston. It supports almost 10,000 users every day. When things go wrong with E-mail on this network, it's my problem. My name is Fair. I carry a badge. [insert theme from "Dragnet"] The story you are about to read is true. The names have not been changed so as to finger the guilty. It was early evening, on a Monday. I was working the swing shift out of Engineering Computer Operations under the command of Richard Herndon. I don't have a partner. While I was reading my E-mail that evening, I noticed that the load average on apple.com, our VAX-8650, had climbed way out of its normal range to just over 72. Upon investigation, I found that thousands of Internet hosts were trying to send us an error message. I also found 2,000+ copies of this error message already in our queue. I immediately shut down the sendmail daemon which was offering SMTP service on our VAX. I examined the error message, and reconstructed the following sequence of events: We have a large community of users who use QuickMail, a popular macintosh based E-mail system from CE Software. In order to make it possible for these users to communicate with other users who have chosen to use other E-mail systems, ECO supports a QuickMail to Internet E-mail gateway. We use RFC822 Internet mail format, and RFC821 SMTP as our common intermediate E-mail standard, and we gateway everything that we can to that standard, to promote interoperability. The gateway that we installed for this purpose is MAIL*LINK SMTP from Starnine Systems. This product is also known as GatorMail-Q from Cayman Systems. It does gateway duty for all of the 3,500 QuickMail users on the Apple Engineering Network. Many of our users subscribe, from QuickMail, to Internet mailing lists which are delivered to them through this gateway. One such user, Mark E. Davis, is on the unicode@sun.com mailing list, to discuss some alternatives to ASCII with the other members of that list. Sometime on Monday, he replied to a message that he recieved from the mailing list. He composed a one paragraph comment on the original message, and hit the "send" button. Somewhere in the process of that reply, either QuickMail or MAIL*LINK SMTP mangled the "To:" field of the message. The important part is that the "To:" field contained exactly one "<" character, without a matching ">" character. This minor point caused the massive devastation, because it interacted with a bug in sendmail. Note that this syntax error in the "To:" field has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual recipient list, which is handled separately, and which, in this case, was perfectly correct. The message made it out of the Apple Engineering Network, and over to Sun Microsystems, where it was exploded out to all the recipients of the unicode@sun.com mailing list. Sendmail, arguably the standard SMTP daemon and mailer for UNIX, doesn't like "To:" fields which are constructed as described. What it does about this is the real problem: it sends an error message back to the sender of the message, AND delivers the original message onward to whatever specified destinations are listed in the recipient list. This is deadly. The effect was that every sendmail daemon on every host which touched the bad message sent an error message back to us about it. I have often dreaded the possibility that one day, every host on the Internet (all 400,000 of them) would try to send us a message, all at once. On monday, we got a taste of what that must be like. I don't know how many people are on the unicode@sun.com mailing list, but I've heard from Postmasters in Sweden, Japan, Korea, Australia, Britain, France, and all over the U.S. I speculate that the list has at least 200 recipients, and about 25% of them are actually UUCP sites that are MX'd on the Internet. I destroyed about 4,000 copies of the error message in our queues here at Apple Computer. After I turned off our SMTP daemon, our secondary MX sites got whacked. We have a secondary MX site so that when we're down, someone else will collect our mail in one place, and deliver it to us in an orderly fashion, rather than have every host which has a message for us jump on us the very second that we come back up. Our secondary MX is the CSNET Relay (relay.cs.net and relay2.cs.net). They eventually destroyed over 11,000 copies of the error message in the queues on the two relay machines. Their postmistress was at wit's end when I spoke to her. She wanted to know what had hit her machines. It seems that for every one machine that had successfully contacted apple.com and delivered a copy of that error message, there were three hosts which couldn't get ahold of apple.com because we were overloaded from all the mail, and so they contacted the CSNET Relay instead. I also heard from CSNET that UUNET, a major MX site for many other hosts, had destroyed 2,000 copies of the error message. I presume that their modems were very busy delivering copies of the error message from outlying UUCP sites back to us at Apple Computer. This instantiation of this problem has abated for the moment, but I'm still spending a lot of time answering E-mail queries from postmasters all over the world. The next day, I replaced the current release of MAIL*LINK SMTP with a beta test version of their next release. It has not shown the header mangling bug, yet. The final chapter of this horror story has yet to be written. The versions of sendmail with this behavior are still out there on hundreds of thousands of computers, waiting for another chance to bury some unlucky site in error messages. Are you next? [insert theme from "The Twilight Zone"] just the vax, ma'am, Erik E. Fair apple!fair fair@apple.com - ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------- End of forwarded message ------- From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 09:21:26 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08694; Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:21:26 PST Received: from relay1.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08687; Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:21:20 PST Received: from uunet.uu.net (via LOCALHOST.UU.NET) by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA06542; Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:20:49 -0500 Received: from ittc.UUCP by uunet.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 121818.22084; Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:18:18 EST Received: from schlitz.ittc.wec.com by ittc.wec.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01689; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:46:39 EST From: Dave Scott Received: by schlitz.ittc.wec.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02409; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:46:39 EST Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:46:39 EST Message-Id: <9211061546.AA02409@schlitz.ittc.wec.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Organization: Westinghouse, ITTC, Pgh, PA. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 10:06:40 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08742; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:06:40 PST Received: from net.bio.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08735; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:06:32 PST Received: by net.bio.net (5.65/IG-2.0) with SMTP id AA15334; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:06:26 -0800 Message-Id: <9211061806.AA15334@net.bio.net> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Biggest list contest... In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Nov 92 20:31:00 PST." Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 10:06:25 -0800 From: "Kenton A. Hoover" Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I was not, by any means, suggesting that BIOSCI has the biggest list. I was just giving some statistics. | Kenton A. Hoover | shibumi@net.bio.net | | BIOSCI Network Administrator | | | BIOSCI/IntelliGenetics, Inc. | +1 415 962 7300 | |=========== net.bio.net -- The New Home of the bionet Newsgroups ============| | The United States Tax Court ruled in favor of the Internal Revenue | | Service's claim that Irwin Schiff would have to pay $92,000 in back taxes | | and penalties. Schiff is the author of "How Anyone Can Stop Paying Income | | Taxes," the now-failed thesis that the IRS lacked the authority to tax | | anyone who did not file a return, a strategy he had employed since 1973. | From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 10:17:56 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08795; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:17:56 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA08783; Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:17:41 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA02769; Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:17:38 CST Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:17:38 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211061817.AA02769@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Brent Chapman's message of Wed, 04 Nov 92 11:24:28 -0800 <9211041924.AA03865@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Subject: loops Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 11:24:28 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Hey, Bill, wanna tell us all about Sun-Managers and Mailing List Loops >From Hell? :-) Do you really want to know? The first instantiation of sun-managers had about 300 address as I recall (it's been a few years). I did what Brent did with this list: took requests for about a week before turning the list "on". Of course, back then, everything was done by hand (and I had to walk to work, 18 miles in the snow, up hill, both ways..... :-) ). When the first message went out to sun-managers, there were no fewer than three separate mail loops in the original list of subscribers. For some reason, I thought that these people were the elite, the best of the best, and that they could be trusted to not make silly mistakes like that. I had a lot to learn. I quickly wrote a program to explicitly relay incoming sun-managers messages out to the entire list. At the heart of this program is code that enters each message's message-id in a dbm file along with a time stamp (sound familiar?). If the message-id already exists in the database, then the message is silently dropped. My theory was that that should catch any realistic mail loop, since no one could possibly screw things up so badly that looping messages would have different message-ids. That theory lasted about a month. My most recent mail loop from hell was caused by someone out on the west coast installing a new MTA called "INN". He decided to use some new neat slick feature of INN that made setting up mail/news gateways easy. Unfortunately, he got the syntax wrong and EVERY news message (I mean e-v-e-r-y news message from e-v-e-r-y newsgroup) was getting forwarded to sun-managers. This did not make me happy. Based on that experience, I decided that there is yet another piece of code that must be added to the relay. It must keep a database of envelope from addresses (those that appear in the SMTP FROM command), their frequency, and last date received. Any message from an address for which I have already seen, say, 3 messages in the past 12 hours, gets dropped. My relay program, affectionaltely called "sm-resend", has evolved over the years, mostly due to experience earned the hard way. Here are the steps it takes to avoid mail loops and other inappropriate messages: 1) check the message-id against a database of ids already sent. 2) check the From: line for these usernames: "daemon", "mailer-daemon", "mmdf", "notes", "uucp", "news". 3) check the From: line against a "blacklist" file. This is my last defense: I can always (well, almost always) break a mail loop by adding the offensive from address to the blacklist. I don't use this to drop messages from obnoxious or abusive users.......yet. 4) check the To: line for the string "sun-managers": if it isn't there then this is likely a message that was CC-ed to the list. Since this is forbidden in the charter, the message is not resent, but an explanatory message is returned to the sender. 5) check the Subject: line for the leading string "Re:" and drop the message (with explanation) if it is there. Rationale is the same as for #4 (sun-managers policy, to hold down on traffic, is that replies go to the original sender, and s/he has the duty of summarizing and posting the results---this avoids 500 replies going to the list all saying "add -ldl to /usr/lib/shlib.etc/Makefile"). Things that should still be implemented: a) check the envelope from address for the same users that I check in #2 above b) check the envelope from address against a frequency database c) check the body of the message for subscription requests (currently the relay code doesn't even touch the body, so I think this will be a major undertaking). My software is not currently generally available. It was something that has grown like a fungus rather than being designed and implemented correctly. It has almost no documentation. I *DO* plan on making it available to those who are interested. But I stress that I do not currently have the time to put it in a distributable form. So please don't ask. Sorry. This message is primarily intended to relay my experiences to other interested parties. I hope it has helped. William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 6 20:41:57 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09882; Fri, 6 Nov 92 20:41:57 PST Received: from sgiblab.sgi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09875; Fri, 6 Nov 92 20:41:50 PST Received: from unpc by sgiblab.sgi.com via UUCP (920330.SGI/911001.SGI) for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM id AA15871; Fri, 6 Nov 92 20:42:10 -0800 Received: by unpc.queernet.org (5.61/smail2.2/11-02-92) id AA02446; Fri, 6 Nov 92 20:41:23 -0800 From: rogerk@unpc.queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) Message-Id: <9211070441.AA02446@unpc.queernet.org> To: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Biggest list contest... In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 05 Nov 92 20:31:00 -0800. Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 20:41:22 PST Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > \scott, who would hate to run a really big list from a UUCP site... I know what you mean. "qn" has 297, and I'm UUCP'd... --- ROGER B.A. KLORESE +1 415 ALL-ARFF rogerk@unpc.QueerNet.ORG {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!sgiblab!unpc!rogerk "Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from." -- J. Foster From List-Managers-Owner Sat Nov 7 00:12:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10056; Sat, 7 Nov 92 00:12:44 PST Received: from math.uwaterloo.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10049; Sat, 7 Nov 92 00:12:15 PST Received: from thinkage.uucp by math.uwaterloo.ca with uucp id ; Sat, 7 Nov 92 03:11:38 -0500 Received: from hog.Thinkage.On.CA by mailhost id AA14352; Sat, 7 Nov 92 03:07:38 EST Received: from hog.Thinkage.On.CA by mailslave hog id AA29337; Sat, 7 Nov 92 03:07:36 EST Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 03:07:36 EST From: harley-request@Thinkage.On.CA (Ken Dykes) Message-Id: <9211070807.AA29337@hog.Thinkage.On.CA> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, harley-request@hog.Thinkage.On.CA Subject: join list for mailing list managers Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca thankx - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada [43.47N 80.52W] kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca postmaster@thinkage.com thinkage!kgdykes harley-request@thinkage.on.ca kgdykes@math.uwaterloo.ca From List-Managers-Owner Sun Nov 8 21:36:07 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA12335; Sun, 8 Nov 92 21:36:07 PST Received: from vax.cs.pitt.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA12328; Sun, 8 Nov 92 21:36:01 PST Received: from gcc.UUCP by vax.cs.pitt.edu (5.65/1.14) id AA25315; Mon, 9 Nov 92 00:16:19 -0500 Received: by gcc.edu (DECUS UUCP ///1.3-1/2.5/); Sun, 8 Nov 92 18:54:05 DST Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 18:54:05 DST Message-Id: <0096351FA005EE80.21205B1C@gcc.edu> From: "Mr. Fantasy" Subject: subscribe list-managers To: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM X-Vms-Mail-To: UUCP%"list-managers-digest@greatcircle.com" X-Vms-Mail-Cc: STU892103 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk subscribe list-managers From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 9 08:53:46 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA13840; Mon, 9 Nov 92 08:53:46 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA13832; Mon, 9 Nov 92 08:53:41 PST Message-Id: <9211091653.AA13832@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Yeahh!! The administrivia filter is in place! Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 08:53:40 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I finally had a chance this morning to add and test the administrivia filter for the "resend" program that handles submissions to List-Managers and other mailing lists here at GreatCircle.COM. We shouldn't be getting any more Majordomo "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" requests to the whole list, at least, and it looks like it will do a passable job of stopping many of the natural language "please add me to your list" type requests as well. Thanks to Scott Hazen Mueller for doing most of the work; all I had to do was take his code and make it controllable by a command-line switch. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 9 09:49:59 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14604; Mon, 9 Nov 92 09:49:59 PST Received: from snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca ([131.104.48.1]) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14597; Mon, 9 Nov 92 09:49:47 PST Received: by snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (5.64/1.35) id AA06334; Mon, 9 Nov 92 17:51:47 GMT From: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Message-Id: <9211091751.AA06334@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Subject: Re: Yeahh!! The administrivia filter is in place!t To: brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 12:51:46 EST Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211091653.AA13832@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM>; from "Brent Chapman" at Nov 9, 92 8:53 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Brent Chapman writes: > > I finally had a chance this morning to add and test the administrivia > filter for the "resend" program that handles submissions to List-Managers > and other mailing lists here at GreatCircle.COM. We shouldn't be getting > any more Majordomo "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" requests to the whole list, > at least, and it looks like it will do a passable job of stopping many of > the natural language "please add me to your list" type requests as well. > > Thanks to Scott Hazen Mueller for doing most of the > work; all I had to do was take his code and make it controllable by a > command-line switch. > Could you give us a little more details about this? I'm using the "distribute" program, and I would LOVE to filter out admin requests to the whole list...it's a major pet peeve of mine. thanks, Steve Portigal, owner of Undercover the Rolling Stones list, 3 daysk, 55 subscribers and growing -- /*************************************************************\ | Steve Portigal University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario | | stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (519) 824-4120 x 3580 | \*************************************************************/ From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 9 13:11:11 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15346; Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:11:11 PST Received: from math.uwaterloo.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15338; Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:10:22 PST Received: from thinkage.uucp by math.uwaterloo.ca with uucp id ; Mon, 9 Nov 92 16:09:35 -0500 Received: from hog.Thinkage.On.CA by mailhost id AA00613; Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:41:28 EST Received: from hog.Thinkage.On.CA by mailslave hog id AA09195; Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:41:26 EST Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:41:26 EST From: harley-request@Thinkage.On.CA (Ken Dykes) Message-Id: <9211092041.AA09195@hog.Thinkage.On.CA> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: my apologies, and do you stop people doing what i did?? Cc: Majordomo@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >From: "private email from a subscriber of this list" >Subject: Re: join list for mailing list managers >To: harley-request@Thinkage.On.CA (Ken Dykes) >Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 10:44:14 AST >Try sending your subscribe request to... > Majordomo@GreatCircle.COM very embarassing. i read the instructions and then memfaulted... flip flip flip flip, ah here it is: excuse number #5 i was addressing the message when the phone rang, the boss entered the office, my medication beeper went off, and an attack of diarrhea coincided. now, lets see if i can subscribe and apologize at the same time: (i cc'd this message to hopefully :-) the correct address) subscribe list-managers kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca >not to the mailing list itself. That way we all get to see it but can't >do much about it. please accept my apologies. you'd think someone running a list would know better, and worse, he did have the real address. but that could be topic of discussion, how do you folkes improve the success-rate of getting members (and potential members :-) to use correct addresses? even putting the address on the bottom of every digest is somehow too transparent for the drain bamaged. (and putting at the top of digest static information is just ugly in my opininon and rather avoid it) i would assume (and have, as a subscriber, seen) there's a worse problem with reflector/non-digests where you dont put static-info on every message. below is the "trailer" i use on my digests. it may be coincidental, but the number of misdirected quit requests dropped obviously when i changed "Administrivia" to "Administrivia/join/quit". (at the same time i changed "Articles" to "Articles to whole world") This change was for my international members who are not strong on english/north-american-jargon. But it seems the word was too cute even for those presumed to be able to "guess" its meaning. Do things really needed to spelled out in full for the lowest (more) common (than i would like) denominator? Also, i use "-request" form believing that at goodly percentage of the net users are familiar with the concept. Do lists (like this one :-) who dont use -request get a LOT more quit/join misdirections? ---digest trailer template--- ***** End of harley digest #1992-%d [%d] %.24s Articles to whole world: harley@thinkage.on.ca Archive requests to: harley-archive@thinkage.on.ca Administrivia/join/quit to: harley-request@thinkage.on.ca Less advised addressing: {watmath,uunet}!thinkage!harley [-request, -archive] harley@thinkage.com [-request, -archive] ---end template--- - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada [43.47N 80.52W] kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca postmaster@thinkage.com thinkage!kgdykes harley-request@thinkage.on.ca kgdykes@math.uwaterloo.ca From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 9 13:29:04 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15410; Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:29:04 PST Received: from sumax.seattleu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15403; Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:28:56 PST Received: by sumax.seattleu.edu id AA04941 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:30:30 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:30:28 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Garner Subject: Hello! To: Brent Chapman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211091653.AA13832@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm fairly new to the Internet, but I'm interested in setting up my own list. I have no idea what that entails (that's why I joined this list), but I felt I might as well ask now... 1) Are there public domain list serving programs? 2) What's a good site to find such programs? 3) Would I need permission from my postmaster/site to start a list? (I realize each site probably has it's own rules, but I'd like to know what the norm is regarding lists and their sites.) Well, that's about it... I'm sure I'll think of more questions at a later date. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jeff Garner Shoestring Software Products jgarner@seattleu.edu (206) 232-1096 Mercer Island, Washington jgarner@visual.spk.wa.us From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 05:58:01 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16747; Tue, 10 Nov 92 05:58:01 PST Received: from owl.nstn.ns.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16740; Tue, 10 Nov 92 05:57:23 PST Received: from cogs.ns.ca (sun1.cogs.ns.ca) by owl.nstn.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA11938; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:21:06 AST Received: by cogs.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09896; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:27:40 AST From: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Message-Id: <9211101327.AA09896@cogs.ns.ca> Subject: Help! Automation To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 9:27:39 AST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Well thanks for the encouragment, particularily Brent Chapman and Rick Emerson. I did it. I put my foot in it and set up a mailing list. Announced it just yesterday, and already a few people are taking interest. What to do now? Yes. What to do? As I see it I am not going to able to do this thing manually for any time at all. The least that I need is a way to auto- distribute the incoming mail. Is there an existing script out there that can do this that I can use? Sooner or later I am going to have to get smart about this, aren't I? I am on a SUN (4.2) using elm. We are hooked into the internet through a local network (nstn) and of course ca-net. Thanks for any help you can give. =========================================================================== Roger Mosher Phone (902)584-2226 College of Geographic Sciences Fax (902)584-7211 50 Elliott Road email roger@sun1.cogs.ns.ca Lawrencetown N.S. B0S 1P0 =========================================================================== From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 06:28:24 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16776; Tue, 10 Nov 92 06:28:24 PST Received: from snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16769; Tue, 10 Nov 92 06:28:12 PST Received: by snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (5.64/1.35) id AA11965; Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:29:39 GMT From: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Message-Id: <9211101429.AA11965@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Subject: Re: Help! Automation To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 9:29:37 EST In-Reply-To: <9211101327.AA09896@cogs.ns.ca>; from "Roger Mosher" at Nov 10, 92 9:27 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Yeah, me too. I've got 75 subscribers since Friday. That means each time view the headers of the message, open up the text file that is my mailing list, and then cut and paste. I'm using distrbute to send the messages, and the elm filter thing to save all messages to undercover-request into their own mailbox so I can take care of them all at once. I'd love to find some way to automate some of this, or to prevent admin messages from going out to the list... And is there some easy way to make digests? People are complaining about the traffic... A lot of questions on this group...no asnwers so far... STeve -- /*************************************************************\ | Steve Portigal University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario | | stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (519) 824-4120 x 3580 | \*************************************************************/ From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 06:49:20 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16804; Tue, 10 Nov 92 06:49:20 PST Received: from sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16797; Tue, 10 Nov 92 06:49:05 PST Received: by sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA14387; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:49:19 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:49:19 -0500 From: Dave Sill Message-Id: <9211101449.AA14387@sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211101327.AA09896@cogs.ns.ca> Subject: Re: Help! Automation Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Roger Mosher writes: > >Yes. What to do? As I see it I am not going to able to do this thing >manually for any time at all. The least that I need is a way to auto- >distribute the incoming mail. Is there an existing script out there >that can do this that I can use? I run a sizeable net-wide mailing list as well as a couple local to ORNL, and, although I don't spend much time processing add/remove requests, I'd like not to have to fool with them. The net-wide list (decstation-managers) uses a customized forwarder that keeps a database of message ID's (for rejecting duplicates) and enforces the list's policy of "no discussion" by rejecting articles including the list address in the CC field only. This is a modified version of the program Phil LeFabvre wrote for the sun-managers list. Ideally, I'd like a program that could be plugged into the -request address to handle add/remove/help requests. I'd like to avoid reworking the list address itself. I grabbed a copy of the UNIX listserv software, and it doesn't look like it'd be too easy to use with decstation-managers. It also looks overly complex. How easy is it to set-up and run a simple mailing list using listserv? Does anyone have a concise description of what needs to be done? The documentation is verbose, and I'd rather not pore through it all. What servers need to be run? How does one create a new list? Are there any alternatives to listserv? -- Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov) For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick. Martin Marietta Energy Systems For every Bill Gates there is a Richard Workstation Support Stallman. --Paul Graham From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 07:56:12 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16906; Tue, 10 Nov 92 07:56:12 PST Received: from Ra.MsState.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16880; Tue, 10 Nov 92 07:55:56 PST Received: by Ra.MsState.Edu (4.1/6.5m-FWP); id AA14694; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:55:25 CST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:55:25 CST From: Natalie Maynor Message-Id: <9211101555.AA14694@Ra.MsState.Edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Help! Automation Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I grabbed a copy of the UNIX listserv software, and it doesn't look > like it'd be too easy to use with decstation-managers. It also looks > overly complex. How easy is it to set-up and run a simple mailing > list using listserv? Does anyone have a concise description of what > needs to be done? The documentation is verbose, and I'd rather not > pore through it all. I've been running a new list on Unix listserv 5.5 for just under a week now and have found it smooth and easy. Let me quickly point out that I did not set it up, though. I'm a non-techy English professor. Our local Unix guru did the techy stuff to get the list going. Your comment about the documentation makes me wonder whether it's the same program. I'm pretty sure that he said that the documentation for this listserv was skimpy. As for the running of the list from my perspective as "listowner," I've found that it's pretty simple. It doesn't seem to offer the features of Eric Thomas's well-known bitnet listserv, making it less capable of doing "fancy things" but also making it simple to use. My main objection to it so far is its name. Already people are seeing the address listserv@ra.msstate.edu and assuming, in spite of my announcements to the contrary, that it's Eric's listserv program. Although some of the commands are identical, not all are. --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 09:17:12 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17191; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:17:12 PST Received: from owl.nstn.ns.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17183; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:16:56 PST Received: from cogs.ns.ca (sun1.cogs.ns.ca) by owl.nstn.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA03518; Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:16:28 AST Received: by cogs.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12313; Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:22:55 AST From: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Message-Id: <9211101722.AA12313@cogs.ns.ca> Subject: Re: Automation: distrbute, elm filters To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:22:55 AST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Forwarded message: From stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca Tue Nov 10 12:25:08 1992 From: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Message-Id: <9211101612.AA12728@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Subject: Re: Help! Automation To: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:12:36 EST In-Reply-To: <9211101547.AA11232@cogs.ns.ca>; from "Roger Mosher" at Nov 10, 92 11:47 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Roger Mosher writes: > > Steve, > > You already seem light years ahead of me. I just jumped in like > a fool. Can you tell me more about "distrbute", and the "elm > filter thing" you refer to in your mail. > > Is it bad etiquette to respond personally to something picked > up from the mailing list. I hope not. NO! Definitely not. etiquette seems to be if it's of general interest, reply to list else reply to sender. I replied to you at first, then figured I would throw it out to the whole list. Distribute: it's availalbe via ftp and I don't remember where. It is this program that allows you to mail out to many users as one. It is supposedly nice in that it wo'nt bring the system down. If you know how to use archie you can find the latest version. What it has you do is create an alias in the sysetm aliases file (which you must have root priviledge to do, I pleaded), and then when you mail to ,say, undercover, it will be expaneded to all the names. The alisess file tells the program where to look for the maliing list (ie, in my directory) as well as header and footer files (which makes it kinda handy). There were enough mailing lists that our admin guy actualy got the program and pt it the /bin or something directory so all aliases on our system use distribute. here's the file .elm/filter-rules if (from contains "Julian A Sims") then delete if (from contains "gjg2001@andy.bgsu.edu") then delete if (to contains "undercover-request") then save /u1/grad/grads072/Mail/request if (from contains "words-l") then save /u1/grad/grads072/Mail/words-l if (subject contains "DOOL") then delete if (subject contains "AMC") then delete if (subject contains "Frida") then delete which does various obvious things, the third line being useful here. Here's my .forward file: "|/usr/local/bin/filter/ -o/tmp/stevep.filter_errors" which filters the mail before I get it. That way all admin requests are put in a separate mailbox before I ever get to them. I can take care of them all at once. Perhaps this is useful enough to forward to the list? I won't do it since I am replying to you, but please feel free to forward it yourself.. Steve -- /*************************************************************\ | Steve Portigal University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario | | stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (519) 824-4120 x 3580 | \*************************************************************/ -- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 09:21:45 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17213; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:21:45 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17205; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:21:32 PST Message-Id: <9211101721.AA17205@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: "Michael H. Morse" Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Bounced mail In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 4 Nov 1992 17:18:38 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:21:31 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Michael H. Morse" writes: # Does anybody have a Perl script that can take a folder of bounced mail # and produce a list of addresses (preferably in the form of grep -v # commands) that caused the mail to bounce? # # --Mike # # p.s. I was joking about the grep part... Any format will do. I've thought about this problem, and never come up with a good solution. There are just too many possible forms that the error messages come back in. Often, the address referenced in the bounce bears little or no resemblance to any address on your list. It's _real_ frustrating. On the other hand, I've discovered that after I get the initial bugs shaken out of a new list, the number of bounces drops sharply. List-Managers, for instance, which is now up to about 190 users, hasn't had any messages bounce in the last few days. When messages _do_ bounce, I'm pretty ruthless about moving bouncing addresses off the main list and onto my "Bounces" list. This is an idea that I got from Kenton Hoover . Basicly, you create a list at your site called "Bounces". This list is rigged in such a way that bounces for it come back to "nobody" (/dev/null), rather than to a human. Once each day, you send a message to "Bounces" that basicly says "Hi, your mail was bouncing, so we moved you off of a mailing list at this site (include list of lists at this site here) to our 'Bounces' list. If the problem's been fixed, here's how you get off of 'Bounces' and back on to the other list.". If an address stays on the 'Bounces' list for more than a month or so, I just give up and delete it. With Majordomo, this is really easy to implement. I just set up the Bounces list under Majordomo, then wrote a little perl program called "bounce" that, given a mailing list name and a list of email addresses, issues the appropriate commands to Majordomo to unsubscribe those addresses from that mailing list and subscribe them to the 'Bounces' list. So, if somebody's mail starts bouncing from List-Managers, say "joe@foobar.com", I just do "bounce list-managers joe@foobar.com" and he goes away... The message I send to "Bounces" every day includes example Majordomo commands to get off of Bounces and back on to my other mailing lists. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 09:24:30 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17237; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:24:30 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17229; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:24:26 PST Message-Id: <9211101724.AA17229@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Creating Lists In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 5 Nov 92 8:49:59 AST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:24:25 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) writes: # I guess I'm one of those greenhorns that are the bane of manager's I've been # reading about as I browse through the List-Manager's mail, but I do have # a serious purpose, and am hoping that you all can provide some direction. You're right, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of guidance for folks on how to set up and run an Internet mailing list. That's one of the reasons I set up List-Managers, to foster discussions and try to tap the "accumulated wisdom of the masters". -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 09:30:20 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17264; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:30:20 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17256; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:30:16 PST Message-Id: <9211101730.AA17256@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: loops In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:57:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:30:15 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sean Brunnock writes: # I tend to use the term "loops" in a very general way. The last "loop" # on info-mcl was actually a Macintosh gateway at the original poster's # site that kept spitting out the same message every minute. The only # difference in the messages was the message id and the date. (When I was # alerted, 12 messages were distributed to the list, but 30 were stuck # in the IIfx's queue waiting to be serviced. Thank god for crappy I/O.) Searching a message for a "Message-ID:" field you've already seen is good. I've seen loops, however, where the broken program has added totally new headers every time through, so you need to search the whole body of the message for an un-quoted Message-ID: line (i.e., one that isn't prefaced by some other character, and thus might be part of a quote from somebody else's article). On the other hand, there are loops that regenerate the headers every time through (including a new message-ID), but don't push the old headers into the body. I've thought of computing a cryptographic checksum the body of messages as they come through, then comparing this with checksums calculated for past bodies. If the checksum for the body matches, and the bodies were the same length, then chances are excellent (essentially guaranteed) that it's the same message with new headers. This breaks, however, if you tag the bodies of messages with something as they go through your posting software, unless you filter out your tag before calculating the checksums for comparison. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 09:50:27 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17372; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:50:27 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17364; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:50:21 PST Message-Id: <9211101750.AA17364@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Creating Lists In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 6 Nov 92 11:24:47 WET Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:50:20 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "John Martin" writes: # Add a Sender: field which is 'listname-request'. (The From: field # should remain intact throughout) For the lists I managed, the Sender: field is "listname-owner". Mail sent to "listname-request" for my lists gets back a recording telling you how to use Majordomo, and how to contact a human if you really need to. # An extra measure is to add a listname-owner entry to the aliases file. On some systems (for instance, the ones I run, which use Sun's supplied sendmail), this needs to be "owner-listname". Other versions of sendmail, and other mailers, may use other conventions. For those that aren't familiar with the "owner-*" or "*-owner" stuff, here's what it does. If there exists a problem with an alias "foobar" (including that an address that's part of that alias that is bouncing), Sendmail first looks for another alias of the form "owner-foobar" (or "foobar-owner", depending on your version of sendmail). If it finds an "owner" alias, it sends the bounce message to that alias. Otherwise, it sends the bounce message back to the originator of the message, and a copy to "Postmaster". You can see why using an "owner-*" alias is important for a mailing list. You don't want the bounces to go back to someone who sent a message to the list; there's nothing they can do about it. You don't want them to go to Postmaster; if they're not the maintainer of the list, you'll annoy the hell out of them. You want them to go to the person who maintains the list. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 09:58:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17459; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:58:02 PST Received: from dw3f.ess.harris.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17415; Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:53:52 PST Received: by dw3f.ess.harris.com (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA14928; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:53:13 -0500 Message-Id: <9211101753.AA14928@dw3f.ess.harris.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Novice/Greenhorn or otherwise in need of wisdom Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:53:13 -0500 From: "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I fall into that great category of Novice/Greenhorn. I am very much interested in setting up a list server because I can see tremendous value in the interaction/communication it fosters. I don't have any funding for a list server, therefore I will look for public domain software. I have a workstation that I use at work, but I'm not the administrator. I do not have root privileges. My unix background is minimal. How can I set up a list server on my workstation driven by files and executables residing strictly in my home directory with "standard" access permissions? Thank you. Jim Truitt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | NAME :JAMES O. TRUITT (JIM) | HARRIS CORPORATION | INFORMATION | | PHONE :1-407-984-5791 | P. O. BOX 98000 | SYSTEMS | | FAX :1-407-984-6323 | MELBOURNE, FL 32902 | DIVISION | | EMAIL :HARRIS.JTRUITT@IC1D.HARRIS.COM | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 10:07:50 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17518; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:07:50 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17510; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:07:46 PST Message-Id: <9211101807.AA17510@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:51:15 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:07:45 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk clark@cme.nist.gov (Steve Clark) writes: # Several people have said they add a Sender: list-request header to # outbound messages in order to intercept error messages. I use a # script I inherited from another list owner which adds Errors-To: # list-request and Administrivia-To: list-request instead. Is there any # functional difference between the two? Are these two different ways # of solving the same problem, or are there classes of problems # addressed by one and not the other? "Sender:" is pretty clearly defined by RFC822 ("Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text Messages"; the bible for what Internet message headers should look like). "Errors-To:" isn't even mentioned. Here are some relevant quotes concerning "Sender:". It's pretty clear from these that mailing lists SHOULD include a "Sender:" field in their outgoing messages, and that the field should point to where you want bounced messages to return to. This field contains the authenticated identity of the AGENT (person, system or process) that sends the message. It is intended for use when the sender is not the author of the mes- sage, or to indicate who among a group of authors actually sent the message. ... Since the critical function served by the "Sender" field is identification of the agent responsible for sending mail and since computer programs cannot be held accountable for their behavior, it is strongly recommended that when a computer pro- gram generates a message, the HUMAN who is responsible for that program be referenced as part of the "Sender" field mail- box specification. ... For systems which automatically generate address lists for replies to messages, the following recommendations are made: o The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent notices of any problems in transport or delivery of the original messages. If there is no "Sender" field, then the "From" field mailbox should be used. o The "Sender" field mailbox should NEVER be used automatically, in a recipient's reply message. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 10:22:42 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17613; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:22:42 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17604; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:22:38 PST Message-Id: <9211101822.AA17604@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Biggest list contest... In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 06 Nov 92 20:41:22 PST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:22:37 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # > \scott, who would hate to run a really big list from a UUCP site... # # I know what you mean. "qn" has 297, and I'm UUCP'd... Actually, running a big list from a UUCP site has some real advantages. First, if you have a 400-user mailing list, this doesn't mean that every incoming message generates 400 outgoing messages. Sendmail (at least) is a little smarter than that. It notices that the 400 messages are all going the same direction (via UUCP to whoever your UUCP relay is), so it bundles them all into one message with 400 names on the envelope (actually, there's a limit to how many names it will put on a single envelope, but you get the idea; it bundles the message into a few envelopes with lots of addresses on each envelope). This one message then goes off to your relay site, and _they_ get to explode it into 400 separate outgoing messages. Second, being at the end of a UUCP line means there is some natural latency in the system. I've come to believe this is actually a good thing for most discussion-oriented mailing lists. First off, it means that flame wars can't proceed that fast! Second, it also means that mailer loops can't explode as fast; it's a lot easier to deal with one loop per hour (when you call your UUCP neighbor) than one loop per second (which is what you might get with an IP connection). GreatCircle.COM is not a UUCP site, but my situation is very similar to that of a UUCP site. I'm at the end of a 9600 kb/s dial-on-demand SLIP link. I don't explode the messages here; I hand off one message with hundreds of addressees to relay site on the Internet, who explodes them. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 10:29:40 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17682; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:29:40 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17673; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:29:31 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 ) with SMTP; Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:29:40 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Creating Lists To: brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:29:35 WET Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211101750.AA17364@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM>; from "Brent Chapman" at Nov 10, 92 9:50 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > # An extra measure is to add a listname-owner entry to the aliases file. > > On some systems (for instance, the ones I run, which use Sun's > supplied sendmail), this needs to be "owner-listname". Other versions > of sendmail, and other mailers, may use other conventions. > Whoops! Yes, I should have said 'owner-listname' rather than 'listname-owner'. I also use a Sun but not Sun's own Sendmail. Sorry for any confusion. John -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory 091 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 10:29:58 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17706; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:29:58 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17692; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:29:51 PST Message-Id: <9211101829.AA17692@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Yeahh!! The administrivia filter is in place! In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 9 Nov 92 12:51:46 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:29:50 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) writes: # Could you give us a little more details about this? I'm using the # "distribute" program, and I would LOVE to filter out admin requests # to the whole list...it's a major pet peeve of mine. It's a little perl script I wrote (and which Scott Hazen Mueller added the administrivia code to) called "resend". It will be part of the next Majordomo release, but it's also available separately for anonymous FTP from "FTP.GreatCircle.COM", file "pub/list-managers/resend.shar". It does basicly the same things as "distribute" (it even uses the same command line arguments for most of them). It has several added advantages, though. First, it's written in perl, so it's much shorter and easier (in my opinion) to expand and maintain. Second, it adds a "-p " command so that you can automatically insert a "Precedence:" field in outgoing messages. Third, it adds a "-M " argument so that messages exceeding a certain max size can be forwarded to the mailing list owner for inspection before they go on to the list. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 10:34:12 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17771; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:34:12 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17762; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:34:08 PST Message-Id: <9211101834.AA17762@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Hello! In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:30:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:34:07 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Jeff Garner writes: # I'm fairly new to the Internet, but I'm interested in setting up my # own list. I have no idea what that entails (that's why I joined this # list), but I felt I might as well ask now... # # 1) Are there public domain list serving programs? # 2) What's a good site to find such programs? Majordomo (the program you used to get onto List-Managers) is available for anonymous FTP from FTP.GreatCircle.COM, file "majordomo.tar.Z". There's also a file there called "majordomo.ps.Z" that is a paper describing Majordomo that I delivered at the LISA conference last month. # 3) Would I need permission from my postmaster/site to start a list? # (I realize each site probably has it's own rules, but I'd like # to know what the norm is regarding lists and their sites.) It would be a very good idea. If nothing else, they'll probably have to set up the appropriate entries in your machine's alias file, unless it's publicly writable. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 10:38:45 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17802; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:38:45 PST Received: from tux.fa.asu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17795; Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:38:34 PST Received: from tux.FA.ASU.EDU by tux.fa.asu.edu (5.64/A/UX-3.00) id AA00463; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:38:49 PST Message-Id: <9211101938.AA00463@tux.fa.asu.edu> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:38:51 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: aubxg@asuvm.inre.asu.edu (Ben Goren) Subject: RE: Help! Automation Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > A lot of questions on this group...no asnwers so far... Speaking of which, I don't suppose there's a FAQ for this list, is there? If not, I think it'd be a good project for the group. >/*************************************************************\ >| Steve Portigal University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario | >| stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (519) 824-4120 x 3580 | >\*************************************************************/ b& ---- Ben Goren Arizona State University School of Music Internet: aubxg@asuvm.inre.asu.edu BITNet: AUBXG AT ASUACAD From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 11:01:34 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17903; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:01:34 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17895; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:01:30 PST Message-Id: <9211101901.AA17895@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Help! Automation In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 92 9:29:37 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:01:29 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) writes: # Yeah, me too. I've got 75 subscribers since Friday. That means each # time view the headers of the message, open up the text file that is # my mailing list, and then cut and paste. I'm using distrbute to send # the messages, and the elm filter thing to save all messages to undercover-request into their own mailbox so I can take care of them all at once. I'd love # to find some way to automate some of this, or to prevent admin messages # from going out to the list... Check out the "resend" script that I described earlier this morning. # And is there some easy way to make digests? People are complaining about the # traffic... Well, first off, realize that every list goes through this phase early in its life. The traffic is high because everybody asks the questions that they've been wanting to ask forever. The traffic gets even higher because a bunch of people start complaining about the traffic. It will pass. Trust me. Just ignore it. Now, all that said, if you really want to provide a digest, the code I use to create digests is available for anonymous FTP from FTP.GreatCircle.COM, file "pub/list-managers/tools/digest.shar". It's not particularly well documented (I've been too busy running all these mailing lists and writing my tools to write the documentation for my tools! :-), but there are some sample files included that show how I use it to run the Firewalls-Digest mailing list. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 11:04:38 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17927; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:04:38 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17919; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:04:34 PST Message-Id: <9211101904.AA17919@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Help! Automation In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 92 09:49:19 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:04:33 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Dave Sill writes: # I grabbed a copy of the UNIX listserv software, and it doesn't look # like it'd be too easy to use with decstation-managers. It also looks # overly complex. How easy is it to set-up and run a simple mailing # list using listserv? Does anyone have a concise description of what # needs to be done? The documentation is verbose, and I'd rather not # pore through it all. # # What servers need to be run? How does one create a new list? # # Are there any alternatives to listserv? The complexity of installing and running the UNIX listserv was one of the main reasons I wrote Majordomo. Unfortunately, to a certain extent, Majordomo is starting to suffer from "creeping featurism" itself, and if I'm not careful, might end up as unwieldy as listserv. Majordomo is available for anonmyous FTP from FTP.GreatCircle.COM, file "pub/majordomo.tar.Z". You might want to start with the file "pub/majordomo.paper.ps.Z", which is a paper that I delivered at LISA last month which describes how Majordomo works and why. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 11:13:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18064; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:13:02 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18056; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:12:58 PST Message-Id: <9211101912.AA18056@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Help! Automation In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:38:51 -0800 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:12:56 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk aubxg@asuvm.inre.asu.edu (Ben Goren) writes: # > A lot of questions on this group...no asnwers so far... # # Speaking of which, I don't suppose there's a FAQ for this list, is there? # If not, I think it'd be a good project for the group. I agree that it would be a very good thing, but I don't have time to create and maintain it. If somebody else does that, I'll certainly give it a home here on GreatCircle.COM along with all the rest of the List-Managers-related stuff that's available for anonymous FTP. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 11:30:24 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18253; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:30:24 PST Received: from sumax.seattleu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18246; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:30:15 PST Received: by sumax.seattleu.edu id AA22237 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:31:44 -0800 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:31:42 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Garner Subject: Reading Lists To: Brent Chapman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211101730.AA17256@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I hope this isn't considered too off-topic, but I have a question about list management from the READER's point of view.. I'm on several lists, and I use Pine to read my mail. I just wish there was a way to set up an unattended nightly process to segregate my mail. I did this on the VAX last year, but I'm not as good at unix scripting (basically totally ignorant). All I'd like is a program that separates incoming mail based on the From address. Does anyone have something like this already? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jeff Garner Shoestring Software Products jgarner@seattleu.edu (206) 232-1096 Mercer Island, Washington jgarner@visual.spk.wa.us From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 11:50:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18348; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:50:15 PST Received: from snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18341; Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:50:06 PST Received: by snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (5.64/1.35) id AA14568; Tue, 10 Nov 92 19:51:52 GMT From: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Message-Id: <9211101951.AA14568@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Subject: Re: Reading Lists To: jgarner@seattleu.edu (Jeff Garner) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:51:51 EST Cc: brent@GreatCircle.COM, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: ; from "Jeff Garner" at Nov 10, 92 11:31 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Jeff Garner writes: > > > All I'd like is a program that separates incoming mail based on the From > address. Does anyone have something like this already? Yeah like I posted earlier today, the elm mailer handles this beautifully. Actually you probably dont need to read with elm...I'm not sure. You need a .forward file thus: "|/usr/local/bin/filter/ -o/tmp/stevep.filter_errors" and I have a file .elm/filter-rules that filters my mail into the appropriate boxes or deletes it etc based on from field. if (to contains "undercover-request") then save /u1/grad/grads072/Mail/request if (from contains "words-l") then save /u1/grad/grads072/Mail/words-l if (subject contains "DOOL") then delete > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Jeff Garner Shoestring Software Products jgarner@seattleu.edu > (206) 232-1096 Mercer Island, Washington jgarner@visual.spk.wa.us > -- /*************************************************************\ | Steve Portigal University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario | | stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (519) 824-4120 x 3580 | \*************************************************************/ From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 12:08:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18392; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:08:44 PST Received: from d.ecc.engr.uky.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18385; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:08:32 PST Received: from s.ecc.engr.uky.edu by d.ecc.engr.uky.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA10971; Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:40:02 EST Received: by s.ecc.engr.uky.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17543; Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:55:15 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:55:15 EST From: morgan@engr.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) Message-Id: <9211101955.AA17543@s.ecc.engr.uky.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Letting your admin know, was Re: Hello! Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Jeff Garner writes: > 3) Would I need permission from my postmaster/site to start a list? > (I realize each site probably has it's own rules, but I'd like > to know what the norm is regarding lists and their sites.) You may (or may not) "need permission"; however, it's ALWAYS a good idea to let your sysadmin know. There's nothing more confusing (and, in some cases, annoying) than a suddenly-slothful mail system. If you anticipate a high amount of traffic, your admin may be able to coordinate/implement such things as non-peak delivery (if the system is busy, wait until the evening to deliver). It's also good to put the admin in the loop to head off any complaints he may receive from other sites' postmasters (things like mailer loops, repeated bounces, et cetera) This brings me to a few burning (for list managers, anyway) questions: [ PERSONAL OPINIONS FOLLOW -- READ AT YOUR OWN RISK 8) ] Q: Should my mailing list be a digest or a repeater? A: That depends on several factors. You should consider the number of postings per day, their size, the number of sub- scribers, and the "general load" on the host system. You can take advantage of existing software to implement either method; it's up to you (and, hopefully, your admin as well). A digest requires a bit more effort on your part, but the benefits are great. You should also consider the purpose of the list. A list for fans of The Struggling Expectorate could probably sur- vive quite well as a digest, but the "security incidents in progress" list would depend on timely delivery. Your choice in this matter is not final; you may decide to move to/from a digest format as the list matures. It's fairly common for a reflector list to grow to a point where digestifi- cation is needed. I've particpated in several lists that began as reflectors, moved to digests, and continued to grow happily. Q: Should I archive my mailing list? If so, how should I make it available? A: Again, this is up to you (and your subscribers). Some lists, such as those devoted to particular hardware/software platforms, contain enough technical goodies to warrant complete archival. Others develop a list of Frequently Asked Questions, which is posted regularly (monthly, in most cases) and made available for retrieval. The "conversational" lists are, in my experience, rarely archived. If you want to make archives or FAQs available, talk to your system administrator. If your system supports anonymous FTP, you may be able to place your materials there. You can also handle such requests by hand or implement a mail server to de- liver them automatically. How much to archive? That depends on your taste and the limits of the system you're using. If you have a high-traffic list, your archives could balloon in size. If you run into problems (not enough disk space, don't have anonymous FTP), ask your subscribers! You can usually find someone who'll share the load with you. If you have access to Usenet, you can post your FAQ to the newsgroup news.answers. (Posting to Usenet will also give your list more advertisement) Q: Should my list be moderated? A: This is, perhaps, the diciest issue in mailing list management. There are several points to consider: - Moderating a list will require a *large* chunk of your time. You can't moderate "some of the time"; you'll be examening each and every posting that comes down the line. - Moderation can cause real problems among your subscribers. Moderation implies the existence of evaluation criteria, and you MUST be fair in your actions. I've seen lists in which certain people get "blackballed" for various reasons, and it has a real chilling effect on the other participants. - Moderation usually reqires a digest format; it's next to impossible to moderate messages as they come in, and you'll wind up spending even more time on it..... - It is ESSENTIAL that your subscribers are aware of the moderator's policy. You can't just 'decide' that a par- ticular subject/posting/person is improper; you've got to have an established set of criteria with which to work. Q: What about commercial stuff? A: As always, this depends on several criteria. - Many, if not most, academic sites have policies which limit the "commercial use" of their systems. If your list is (or becomes) "Today's hot deals at Joe Shmo Computers, Inc.", you could make life difficult. - Consider your subscribers. Some lists, such as "New Equipment" or "Printers" lists, could be expected to have a reasonable amount of commercial traffic. In my experience, limited commercial traffic *related to the discussion* is acceptable. Don't let subscribers start broad- casting flyers and/or price lists "just for the heck of it". The difference? Something like "we had that problem, and we found that a BlipCo PX93/388 fixed it; here's their address and phone number" would be okay, but "Here's the new price list for BlipCo, hot off the press for our customers" is going to be shot . Other questions as they come to mind......perhaps this could be the basis for our FAQ. 8) --Wes From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 12:38:14 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18426; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:38:14 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18419; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:38:08 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA29780; Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:38:27 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA02239; Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:22:35 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:22:35 EST From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9211102022.AA02239@bahainvs> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: A security issue with automatic mailing-list servers.. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello all.. I've written an automatic Mailing List server in 'C' that will take e-mail requests containing search parameters, and return the personal/ Internet information for the person(s) that match the search criterion. It implements a rather crude security feature. When it receives mail, It checks the "From:" field against all members of the database, and if there is a match either in the database, or in the shadowing file, it will honor the request. The difficulity is that any hacker with about 2 minutes of contemplation could get past it by just hacking out a request file with the name of someone they *knew* to be in the database (like myself for example), and then just send it directily through sendmail. My question is this: what further security measures could be taken so I can be better assured that the recipients of validated server requests are MEMBERS of the server's database? It would be a valuable service to those who in the database, but there has been some concern about others obtaining a copy of the list. Any reponses would be greatly appreciated. The server is running on a NeXTstation, and is being programmed using 'C', sed, and some other script languages. Responses can be as technical as you like. Thanks, John From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 12:56:10 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18462; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:56:10 PST Received: from uxc.cso.uiuc.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18453; Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:55:45 PST Received: from alexia.lis.uiuc.edu by uxc.cso.uiuc.edu with SMTP id AA23678 (5.67a8/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:54:49 -0600 Received: by alexia.lis.uiuc.edu id AA18710 (5.61 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:54:41 -0600 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:54:41 -0600 From: Gregory B. Newby Message-Id: <9211102054.AA18710@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Unix listserv.....a few questions & comments Cc: gbnewby@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk First allow me to say this list is a very good idea. Next let me say "hi" to Steve Portigal -- sorry I missed Chi this year! I've been messing with Unix Listserv. Currently, I'm administering about 3 different lists, and have several others I'm looking to set up. I have two general difficulties: 1. One Listserv is running on a Sun IPC. This poor little box gets oodles and oodles of 'sendmail' processes started whenever a message is being sent out, evidently because some of the places messages are being delivered to take awhile to respond, transfer the message, etc. Several times, these sendmail processes have brought the system to a halt (my sysadmin says it needed to get rebooted, even... perhaps an 'out of processes' error). So, I need to figure out a better way of getting messages out there, or get Listserv to stop firing up some many sendmail processes. Any ideas on #1? It sounded like the 'distribute' option mentioned in an earlier message might work, but there weren't enough details in the messages discussing it for me to know just how to proceed. A few extra details: generally NO ONE is logged into the IPC -- it's not an overloaded system (except when mail is being sent via listserv). Also, these lists are 100-300 people, scattered all over the world. 2. I've installed Listserv (version 5.5) on my Silicon Graphics Iris workstation. It runs Sys5, but also has most of the standard BSD stuff available. Everything installs OK, but I get a "memory fault" error returned whenever it processes mail from a non-local address. Anyone got Listserv up and running on an Iris? Any similar problems under Sys5? I'll save details for anyone who thinks they might be able to help. (BTW: there's nothing wrong with the Iris' memory!) Thanks! -- Greg PS: I think I like the VM listserv better! Sorry, A.K. ***** Greg Newby, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ***** Ass't Prof, Grad. Sch. of Library and Information Science ***** Research Scientist, Nat'l Cntr for Supercomputing Applications ***** 417 David Kinley Hall, 1007 W. Gregory Drive, Urbana, IL, 61801 ***** Voice: 217-244-7365. Fax: 217-244-3302 ***** gbnewby@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu, gnewby@ncsa.uiuc.edu, gbnewby@uiuc.edu From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 13:28:56 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18550; Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:28:56 PST Received: from iti.org (hela.iti.org) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18543; Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:28:46 PST Received: by iti.org (5.65b/IDA-1.2.8) id AA22912; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:30:17 -0500 Received: by lokkur.dexter.mi.us (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29967; Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:09:32 EST From: scs@lokkur.dexter.mi.us (Steve Simmons) Message-Id: <9211101909.AA29967@lokkur.dexter.mi.us> Subject: Re: Creating Lists To: brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:09:31 -0500 (EST) Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211101724.AA17229@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> from "Brent Chapman" at Nov 10, 92 09:24:25 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4beta PL11] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 282 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >You're right, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of guidance for >folks on how to set up and run an Internet mailing list. Seriously, an RFC is needed. Someone like Phil or Brian should write it. There are FYI RFCs all the time; this is clearly a case where one is needed. From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 13:32:59 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18594; Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:32:59 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18587; Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:32:53 PST Received: from CSD.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA13680; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:33:04 -0500 From: jbw@cs.bu.edu (Joe Wells) Received: by csd.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA26147; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:33:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:33:04 -0500 Message-Id: <9211102133.AA26147@csd.bu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: excess sendmail processes (was: Unix listserv.....a few questions...) In-Reply-To: <9211102054.AA18710@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> References: <9211102054.AA18710@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> Sent-Via: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "GBN" == Gregory B. Newby writes: GBN> 1. One Listserv is running on a Sun IPC. This poor little box GBN> gets oodles and oodles of 'sendmail' processes started whenever GBN> a message is being sent out, evidently because some of the places GBN> messages are being delivered to take awhile to respond, transfer GBN> the message, etc. GBN> Several times, these sendmail processes have brought the GBN> system to a halt (my sysadmin says it needed to get rebooted, even... GBN> perhaps an 'out of processes' error). GBN> So, I need to figure out a better way of getting messages GBN> out there, or get Listserv to stop firing up some many sendmail GBN> processes. Try doing the list like this in /etc/aliases: "|/usr/lib/sendmail -odq -oi -ffoobar-request@cs.bu.edu foobar-inbox" The "-odq" means store the message in the queue, rather than trying to deliver it immediately. Of course, you have to have started a sendmail daemon that processes the queue periodically. I think you can also set some options so that the individual sendmail process which is started to process a queue item will just put it back in the queue when it gets a timeout rather than waiting for a response. -- Enjoy, Joe Wells Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- send e-mail for details From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 14:21:18 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18831; Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:21:18 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18824; Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:21:09 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA05536; Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:21:27 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA02629; Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:14:40 EST Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:14:40 EST From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9211102214.AA02629@bahainvs> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63) To: Jeff Garner Subject: Re: Reading Lists Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk To sort out e-mail on a Unix box: 1. Get your System's Administrator to a make an alias for you in the file "/etc/sendmail/aliases" (BSD) or "/etc/aliases" (SYS5?). It doesn't matter what the alias it is, because no one will see it. You might name it "jgarner-mailsort". The aliases should pipe incoming mail to a script file name "sortmail". If you are doing it, the line would look like: jgarner-mailsort: "|/usr/bin/sortmail /usr/spool/mail/jgarner" (or wherever "sortmail" resides, insert the proper pathname; likewise with the default mailbox path). 2. Here's a possible sortmail, written in 'C': (I apologize for it's hackish nature; I wrote for you just now.. I tested it as best I could.) ------------------------------------------------------------------- /* File: sortmail.c A mail sorting hack by: John Wiegley e-mail: johnw%bahainvs@cs.umd.edu phone: (703) 742-4030 No guarantees are made as to the functionality of this code. All data loss is at the risk of the user. TO USE------ make a file in the same directory as this program called "sortlist", which is of the following format expected-email-address mailbox-name For instance, mail from "johnw%bahainvs" could be sorted to the mailbox "/usr/johnw/johnw.mbox" with the line: johnw%bahainvs /usr/johnw/johnw.mbox The "sortmail" program functions as a filter, so it's just right for using as an e-mail alias. NOTE: the sortmail should be run with 1 argument, namely, the address of the default mailbox for that user. Here is an example line for "aliases": jeff-sortmail: "|/usr/bin/sortmail /usr/spool/mail/jeff" (or wherever the default mail lives..) Good Luck! Nov 10, 92 -- ANSI C code */ #include #include main(int argc, char *argv[]) { char field[21], content[81], buffer[101], *begin; char tempfile[15], address[51], c; int found = 0, i, j; FILE *file_ptr, *mailbox, *mail; strcpy(tempfile, tmpnam((char *) NULL)); mail = fopen(tempfile, "w"); do { if ((c = fgetc(stdin)) == EOF) break; fputc(c, mail); } while (!feof(stdin)); mail = freopen(tempfile, "r", mail); do { fgets(buffer, 100, mail); sscanf(buffer, "%s %[^\n]", field, content); if (!strcmp("From:", field)) { found = 1; break; } } while (!feof(mail) && !found); fclose(mail); /* First, check to see if the address is embedded within '<>' characters */ found = 0; for (i = 0; i < strlen(content); i++) if (content[i] == '<') { begin = &content[(j = i) + 1]; found = 1; } else if (content[i] == '>') { strncpy(buffer, begin, i - j); break; } /* If not, it should be the first item on the line.. */ if (!found) sscanf(content, "%s %[^\n]", buffer, (char *) NULL); /* save the "From:" address in 'address' */ strcpy(address, buffer); file_ptr = fopen("sortlist", "r"); do { /* If the "From:" field is nobody special, then tack the mail onto the regular mailbox */ if (!fgets(buffer, 100, file_ptr)) sprintf(buffer, "%s %s", address, argv[1]); sscanf(buffer, "%s %s", field, content); if (!strcmp(field, address)) { /* Now append the incoming mailfile to the right mailbox */ mailbox = fopen(content, "a"); mail = fopen(tempfile, "r"); do { if ((c = fgetc(mail)) == EOF) break; fputc(c, mailbox); } while (!feof(mail)); fprintf(mailbox, "\n\n"); fclose(mailbox); fclose(mail); break; } } while (!feof(file_ptr)); fclose(file_ptr); return (0); } --------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 16:26:06 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19721; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:26:06 PST Received: from hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu (hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19714; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:26:00 PST Received: from localhost by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2777>; Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:26:09 -0500 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) In-Reply-To: brent's message of Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:07:45 -0500. <9211101807.AA17510@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:26:07 -0500 From: Chris Siebenmann Message-Id: <92Nov10.192609est.2777@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hmm, I've always thought that Sender: should be left alone when going through a mailing list, and that the mailing list should just rewrite the envelope from address (SMTP Mail From:, UUCP 'From ') to itself. - cks From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 16:30:35 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19739; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:30:35 PST Received: from hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu (hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19732; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:30:29 PST Received: from localhost by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2777>; Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:30:40 -0500 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Are there any *-request handling programs out there? Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:30:36 -0500 From: Chris Siebenmann Message-Id: <92Nov10.193040est.2777@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk What I'm looking for is sort of a half a solution to mailing lists; a program that can sit on a -request address and handle add and delete requests, revising a specified file to delete and add addresses. It's been my perception that all the solutions to date that do this also want to process the mailing list themselves; I don't want that, as my mailer already does a great job with the mailing lists themselves. I just want to automate requests. A package that had a 'bounce' program like the one recently mentioned here would be great, too. Can any of the existing packages be easily adopted to just do this? Thanks in advance; I will summarize to the list should I get helpful answers and a working system. - cks From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 16:43:38 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19796; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:43:38 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19787; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:43:34 PST Message-Id: <9211110043.AA19787@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:26:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:43:33 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # Hmm, I've always thought that Sender: should be left alone when going # through a mailing list, and that the mailing list should just rewrite # the envelope from address (SMTP Mail From:, UUCP 'From ') to itself. No, RFC822 makes it pretty clear that's backwards. The agent (the mailing list software in this case) should rewrite the "Sender:" field at will, but should NOT rewrite the From: line. The 'From ' line is a UUCP/Sendmail abomination that I basicly just ignore. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 16:47:07 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19826; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:47:07 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19817; Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:47:03 PST Message-Id: <9211110047.AA19817@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Are there any *-request handling programs out there? In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:30:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:47:02 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chris Siebenmann writes: # What I'm looking for is sort of a half a solution to mailing lists; # a program that can sit on a -request address and handle add and delete # requests, revising a specified file to delete and add addresses. # It's been my perception that all the solutions to date that do this # also want to process the mailing list themselves; I don't want that, # as my mailer already does a great job with the mailing lists themselves. # I just want to automate requests. # # A package that had a 'bounce' program like the one recently mentioned # here would be great, too. # # Can any of the existing packages be easily adopted to just do this? Majordomo makes a very strong distinction between managing the list (what you want) and managing what gets sent to the list (what you don't want). It does the former and NOT the latter. The "resend" program that I posted about earlier today will be included with future Majordomo releases, but it's there for completeness; it's not required by Majordomo. If you've already got something that works for managing what gets sent to the list, feel free to use that instead of "resend". -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 17:17:40 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20005; Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:17:40 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19998; Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:17:34 PST Received: from CSD.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA16869; Tue, 10 Nov 92 20:17:50 -0500 From: jbw@cs.bu.edu (Joe Wells) Received: by csd.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA28403; Tue, 10 Nov 92 20:17:50 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 20:17:50 -0500 Message-Id: <9211110117.AA28403@csd.bu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) In-Reply-To: <9211110043.AA19787@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> References: <9211110043.AA19787@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Sent-Via: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "Brent" == Brent Chapman writes: Brent> The 'From ' line is a UUCP/Sendmail abomination that I basicly Brent> just ignore. It's the only way you can get the "SMTP FROM: address" from sendmail. Surely you don't think that is unimportant. -- Joe Wells Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- send e-mail for details From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 18:20:19 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20288; Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:20:19 PST Received: from hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu (hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20281; Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:20:12 PST Received: from localhost by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2777>; Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:20:25 -0500 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) In-Reply-To: brent's message of Tue, 10 Nov 92 19:43:33 -0500. <9211110043.AA19787@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:20:13 -0500 From: Chris Siebenmann Message-Id: <92Nov10.212025est.2777@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk | No, RFC822 makes it pretty clear that's backwards. The agent (the | mailing list software in this case) should rewrite the "Sender:" field | at will, but should NOT rewrite the From: line. The SMTP Mail From: line isn't the same as the header 'From:' line. The former is where you're supposed to send error messages; the latter should be left alone. - cks From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 18:26:03 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20327; Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:26:03 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20317; Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:25:48 PST Message-Id: <9211110225.AA20317@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: Chris Siebenmann Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:20:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:25:47 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # | No, RFC822 makes it pretty clear that's backwards. The agent (the # | mailing list software in this case) should rewrite the "Sender:" field # | at will, but should NOT rewrite the From: line. # # The SMTP Mail From: line isn't the same as the header 'From:' line. # The former is where you're supposed to send error messages; the latter # should be left alone. # # - cks RFC822 is talking about the "From:" header line. Sorry if that wasn't what you were talking about. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 21:51:08 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20544; Tue, 10 Nov 92 21:51:08 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20537; Tue, 10 Nov 92 21:51:03 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA25943; Wed, 11 Nov 92 00:51:23 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA03464; Wed, 11 Nov 92 00:45:07 EST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 00:45:07 EST From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9211110545.AA03464@bahainvs> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63) To: "List Managers" Subject: .cc? Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk .forward serves forward all mail. Is there anything like .cc which will allow you to carbon copy all mail? A script could be written to do the job, but I wondering if there existed something simple like this. Thanks, John From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 10 22:21:12 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20573; Tue, 10 Nov 92 22:21:12 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA20566; Tue, 10 Nov 92 22:21:06 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA26572; Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:21:27 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA03484; Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:08:21 EST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:08:21 EST From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9211110608.AA03484@bahainvs> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63) To: "List Managers" Subject: Two things.. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk One-- I found that the "From " field *can* be tampered with. So what I decided to do is to use the "From " field in conjunction with the "Received:" fields. Somebodies would have a hard time faking their sending domain! Two-- Does anyone know how to interpose a filter between a mailer and sendmail? I'd like to write mail with carriage returns ONLY AT THE END OF A PARAGRAPH, but the rest of the world would like to see carriage returns AT THE END OF 72 COLUMN SENTENCES. There is a simple Unix utility to do this. But how I get the mail to pass through the filter before it reaches sendmail? Thanks, John From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 06:38:11 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21257; Wed, 11 Nov 92 06:38:11 PST Received: from snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21250; Wed, 11 Nov 92 06:38:04 PST Received: by snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (5.64/1.35) id AA19193; Wed, 11 Nov 92 14:40:00 GMT Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 14:40:00 GMT From: david@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (David C. J. Leip) Message-Id: <9211111440.AA19193@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: mail precedence Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi there list managers, I noticed that in the mail header I get from this particular mailing list there is a "precedence" line. (ie. Precedence: bulk) I also noticed in the man pages for vacation that the vacation program will not respond to messages that have the precedence set to bulk or junk. This sound like quite an attractive feature for my mailing list. Can anyone tell me how I can set this or have mail prompt me for a setting. Thanks. - David. +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | David Leip University of Guelph | | david@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca Computing & Information Science | | (519) 824-4120 ext.3709 Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1 | | | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 07:23:24 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21293; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:23:24 PST Received: from okra02.millsaps.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21286; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:23:17 PST Received: by okra.millsaps.edu (MX V3.1C) id 4065; Wed, 11 Nov 1992 09:23:58 CST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 09:23:51 CST From: Larry Horn To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: hornlo@okra.millsaps.edu Message-Id: <0096372B.76B20CE0.4065@okra.millsaps.edu> Subject: Re: Creating Lists Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >You're right, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of guidance for >folks on how to set up and run an Internet mailing list. That's one >of the reasons I set up List-Managers, to foster discussions and try >to tap the "accumulated wisdom of the masters". This will only be of interest to VMS managers, but I've found that Matt Madison's MX mailer software to be easy to configure and use. You can set up mailing lists that allow automatic [un]subscription or have those requests forwarded to the list manager, archiving of the messages, and associated file servers. It can handle the -Request and FILESERV interfaces. It is available from the LISTSERV at WKUVAX1 (BITNET) or via anonymous ftp from . - ---------------------------------- signed: 11-NOV-1992 09:23 C*T (USA) --- - Larry Horn / Millsaps College / Jackson, MS / hornlo@okra.millsaps.edu - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 07:27:18 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21309; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:27:18 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21304; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:27:11 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14411>; Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:27:21 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA19483 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:07:46 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA29621 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:07:46 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9211111507.AA29621@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:07:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: <92Nov10.192609est.2777@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> from "Chris Siebenmann" at Nov 10, 92 07:26:07 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL5] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1045 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [ Chris Siebenmann writes: ] > Hmm, I've always thought that Sender: should be left alone when going > through a mailing list, and that the mailing list should just rewrite > the envelope from address (SMTP Mail From:, UUCP 'From ') to itself. Unfortunately, many (most?) network mail systems *still* don't process the envelope separately from the headers, so this isn't reliable. The From_ header gets damaged, or the From: header is replaced with the From_ header, or... The Internet proper is much better than it used to be, but the Internet is still only a small portion of our extended Email network. There are also Resent-* fields in RFC822, which are useful when you want to change a header that already exists. -- "What is life?" "A rich | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON tapestry when learning from | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) a Master like you, sir!" | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) "You pass!" -Purolator ad | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 07:27:34 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21324; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:27:34 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AB21304; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:27:24 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14409>; Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:27:20 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA18907 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk); Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:01:55 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA29508 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:01:54 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9211111501.AA29508@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Creating Lists To: John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk (John Martin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:01:53 -0500 Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "John Martin" at Nov 10, 92 01:29:35 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL5] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 876 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > On some systems (for instance, the ones I run, which use Sun's > > supplied sendmail), this needs to be "owner-listname". Other versions > > of sendmail, and other mailers, may use other conventions. > > > Yes, I should have said 'owner-listname' rather than 'listname-owner'. I > also use a Sun but not Sun's own Sendmail. Sounds to me like the safest thing to do is use both; that way mail sent to either address will be processed correctly, and if you upgrade your mailer, or switch to another machine, you won't suddenly see bizarre behaviour. -- "What is life?" "A rich | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON tapestry when learning from | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) a Master like you, sir!" | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) "You pass!" -Purolator ad | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 07:35:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21343; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:35:15 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21336; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:35:07 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA10425; Wed, 11 Nov 92 09:35:27 CST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 09:35:27 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211111535.AA10425@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Brent Chapman's message of Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:43:33 -0800 <9211110043.AA19787@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Subject: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:43:33 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # Hmm, I've always thought that Sender: should be left alone when going # through a mailing list, and that the mailing list should just rewrite # the envelope from address (SMTP Mail From:, UUCP 'From ') to itself. No, RFC822 makes it pretty clear that's backwards. The agent (the mailing list software in this case) should rewrite the "Sender:" field at will, but should NOT rewrite the From: line. Brent: he was referring to the envelope from address: the address that appears in the SMTP "from" command. This is an address that does not necessarily appear in the header anywhere. It is appropriate to change this address as well, since most sendmails will send error messages to that address (totally ignoring any Sender: in the header). William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 07:58:42 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21375; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:58:42 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21368; Wed, 11 Nov 92 07:58:35 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA10499; Wed, 11 Nov 92 09:58:56 CST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 09:58:56 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211111558.AA10499@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: would this have been filtered out? Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Okay all you request filter gurus, I have a question for you. Would any of the request sniffer/eliminator programs have detected that the enclosed message was a request? This message is, unfortunately, rather typical of the ones that sun-managers sees. -------------------- Return-Path: Sender: sun-managers-relay@ra.mcs.anl.gov Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 09:47:54 GMT From: Ashwin_Mistry@gec-epl.co.uk Reply-To: Ashwin_Mistry@gec-epl.co.uk Followup-To: junk To: sun-managers@rice.edu Subject: swap mail address At present I receive the SUN-MANAGER on my email add ie Ashwin_Mistry@gec-epl.co.uk OR ashwin@.gec-epl.co.uk. I would appreciate it if you could change this to News_Feed@gec-epl.co.uk. Thank you very much. Ashwin -------------------- Bill From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 08:36:48 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21449; Wed, 11 Nov 92 08:36:48 PST Received: from Ra.MsState.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21442; Wed, 11 Nov 92 08:36:38 PST Received: by Ra.MsState.Edu (4.1/6.5m-FWP); id AA17519; Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:36:55 CST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:36:55 CST From: Natalie Maynor Message-Id: <9211111636.AA17519@Ra.MsState.Edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Quick Dumb Question Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I started to send this directly to Brent but then thought that maybe other people have the same question. Does the program running this list have a command like bitnet listserv's NOMAIL or Unix listserv's POSTPONE (the latter of which is a misleading word since the command doesn't postpone anything -- it's exactly like NOMAIL). The reason I'm asking is that I'm about to leave town and am setting NOMAIL (or its equivalent) on most lists to cut down on amount of mail to go through while telnetting from other systems. --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 11:14:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21711; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:14:33 PST Received: from coos.dartmouth.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21704; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:14:16 PST Received: by coos.dartmouth.edu (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA01931; Wed, 11 Nov 92 14:14:12 -0500 Message-Id: <9211111914.AA01931@coos.dartmouth.edu> Subject: Re: .cc? To: bahainvs!johnw@cs.umd.edu (John Wiegley) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:14:12 -0500 (EST) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211110545.AA03464@bahainvs> from "John Wiegley" at Nov 11, 92 00:45:07 am From: csquared@coos.dartmouth.edu (C Squared) X-Celtics: Larry, you will be missed X-Red-Sox: Wait til next year (Where have I heard that before) X-Biggreen-Football: ThreePeat!!!! X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL6] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 619 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > .forward serves forward all mail. > > Is there anything like .cc which will allow you to carbon > copy all mail? A script could be written to do the job, but > I wondering if there existed something simple like this. > If you set the .forward file like this: /address@home.system address@cc.to.system then it will put a copy in your mailbox and forward a copy to a different address. the '/' tells the forward to only do it once, otherwise you'll just get an unending forward loop. C Squared ps I'm sending this to the entire list in case I screwed up the syntax somewhere, and someone can correct me =) From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 11:21:53 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21810; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:21:53 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21801; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:21:49 PST Message-Id: <9211111921.AA21801@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: mail precedence In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Nov 92 14:40:00 GMT Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:21:48 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk david@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (David C. J. Leip) writes: # I noticed that in the mail header I get from this particular mailing list # there is a "precedence" line. (ie. Precedence: bulk) I also noticed in the # man pages for vacation that the vacation program will not respond to messages # that have the precedence set to bulk or junk. This sound like quite an # attractive feature for my mailing list. Can anyone tell me how I can set this # or have mail prompt me for a setting. That's one of the things the "resend" program that I described here yesterday will do: add a specified "Precedence:" header. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 11:32:24 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21855; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:32:24 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21847; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:32:06 PST Message-Id: <9211111932.AA21847@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: Natalie Maynor Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Quick Dumb Question In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:36:55 CST Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:32:06 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # I started to send this directly to Brent but then thought that maybe # other people have the same question. Does the program running this list # have a command like bitnet listserv's NOMAIL or Unix listserv's POSTPONE # (the latter of which is a misleading word since the command doesn't postpone # anything -- it's exactly like NOMAIL). # # The reason I'm asking is that I'm about to leave town and am setting NOMAIL # (or its equivalent) on most lists to cut down on amount of mail to go through # while telnetting from other systems. # --Natalie (maynor@ra.msstate.edu) No; simply send an "unsubscribe list-managers" to Majordomo@GreatCircle.COM before you go, and "subscribe list-managers" when you get back. You can catch up on what you missed, if you want, from the archives. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 11:38:47 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21925; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:38:47 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA21917; Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:38:43 PST Message-Id: <9211111938.AA21917@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: .cc? In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:14:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:38:42 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # > # > .forward serves forward all mail. # > # > Is there anything like .cc which will allow you to carbon # > copy all mail? A script could be written to do the job, but # > I wondering if there existed something simple like this. # > # If you set the .forward file like this: # # /address@home.system address@cc.to.system # # then it will put a copy in your mailbox and forward a copy to a different # address. the '/' tells the forward to only do it once, otherwise you'll # just get an unending forward loop. # # C Squared # # ps I'm sending this to the entire list in case I screwed up the syntax # somewhere, and someone can correct me =) Actually, it's '\', not '/', and you probably want the .forward file on home.system to say "\address", and you need a comma between the addresses. I.e., what you really want is "\login, address@cc.to.system". -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 18:29:23 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA22936; Wed, 11 Nov 92 18:29:23 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA22928; Wed, 11 Nov 92 18:29:18 PST Message-Id: <9211120229.AA22928@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Novice/Greenhorn or otherwise in need of wisdom In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 10 Nov 92 12:53:13 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 18:29:17 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" writes: # How can I set up a list server on my workstation driven by # files and executables residing strictly in my home directory with # "standard" access permissions? Short answer: you probably can't. You probably need your sysadmin's cooperation to set up the appropriate aliases in your system's /usr/lib/aliases or /etc/aliases file (unless these files are publicly-writable, which they shouldn't be). The whole point of Majordomo, though, is that the Majordomo sets up the Majordomo software, and sets up each list ONCE, and doesn't have to have anything more to do with it. The routine administration of each list is left to the owner of the list. You might be able to talk your sysadmin into this. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 11 19:47:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA23086; Wed, 11 Nov 92 19:47:33 PST Received: from Princeton.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA23079; Wed, 11 Nov 92 19:47:26 PST Received: by Princeton.EDU (5.65b/2.94/princeton) id AA28826; Wed, 11 Nov 92 22:47:07 -0500 Received: by silence.princeton.nj.us (5.65c/1.101) id AA13916; Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:01:01 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:01:01 -0500 From: Jay Plett Message-Id: <199211120301.AA13916@silence.princeton.nj.us> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Reply-To: jay@Princeton.EDU Subject: Re: mail precedence Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk While setting up a very large list, I first did some experimenting with a small dummy list. The list uses the customary pair of aliases: listname: "|/aliases-dir/massage-it listname-out" listname-out: :include:/aliases-dir/listname where /aliases-dir/massage-it does: ... | /usr/lib/sendmail -oi -odq -flistname-request listname-out I added a "Precedence: Bulk" line to the headers. If one of the recipients was "nosuchuser@neighbor.edu", that copy of the message would be silently dropped by neighbor.edu. I don't remember for certain, but I think that even "nosuchuser" was silently dropped by the processing host. Without the Precedence line, a bounce message came back to listname-request as expected. Is misaddressed bulk mail supposed to be silently dropped? Am I doing something wrong? With a list of >1000 recipients, I don't want it to grow endlessly because I never hear about bad addresses. But I also prefer not to keep up with everybody's vacation plans :-). If it matters, the processing host is running IDA-sendmail 5.65c and neighbor.edu is running 5.65b. ...jay From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 06:57:53 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA24153; Thu, 12 Nov 92 06:57:53 PST Received: from VM1.NoDak.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA24146; Thu, 12 Nov 92 06:57:42 PST Received: from SDSUVM.BITNET by VM1.NoDak.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3114; Thu, 12 Nov 92 08:57:02 CST Received: from SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU (MUSIC) by SDSUVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 1522; Thu, 12 Nov 92 08:54:02 CST Message-Id: <12NOV92.09611374.0028.MUSIC@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 08:53:57 CST From: Joe Moore To: Subject: List subject clearing house In-Reply-To: In reply to your message of WED 11 NOV 1992 03:10:07 CST Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Thanks for starting this list. I think it will be helpful. I followed the IETF discussions until they broke down between Eric Thomas' Revised Listserv and Unix Listserv. I don't want to start those arguments up again, but I would really like to see a simple, automated clearinghouse for list subjects. In other words, as a user, I want to be able to check for the existence of a list without caring whether it's on an Eric Thomas listserv or brand 'x' list server. I know that Eric would cooperate in an effort to do that. Where the discussion broke down was when some of the IETF people started demanding major changes in LISTSERV without having good reason (in Eric's estimation). Joe Moore South Dakota State University From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 09:11:46 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA24456; Thu, 12 Nov 92 09:11:46 PST Received: from gateway.sequent.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA24444; Thu, 12 Nov 92 09:11:33 PST Received: from cruncher.sequent.com by gateway.sequent.com (5.61/1.34) id AA18512; Thu, 12 Nov 92 09:12:18 -0800 Received: by cruncher.sequent.com (5.65/1.34) id AA15184; Thu, 12 Nov 92 09:11:46 -0800 From: Jim Battan Message-Id: <9211121711.AA15184@cruncher.sequent.com> Subject: a brief non-howto on managing mailing lists To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 9:11:45 PST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 CRG PL14c] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I posted this article to comp.mail.misc a few months ago. You might find it interesting. I recommend this mail-group's members form a FYI to be submitted to the Internet community so mistakes like mine don't happen as often. I'm not on the Mailing-Lists mailing list, so send your replies to me directly. How Not to Run an Internet Mailing List or How to get 470 e-mail messages in a day This article describes the author's experiences in setting up and running an Internet mailing list. It is intended for budding or wannabe mailing list maintainers. Experienced mailing list maintainers will probably laugh as they read this; they've probably learned it all the hard way. Hopefully by publishing this, I'll save at least one other person some hassle. When the honda mailing list (for discussions about Honda automobiles) maintainer posted a message to its 370 members saying his machine was going away, I decided this was my chance for at least 15 seconds of fame, so I took him up on it. I thought, "gee, this should be easy", and would increase my knowledge about e-mail in general. When I sent out a message to the list saying I'd be the new maintainer, I got many kudos back saying people were grateful someone stepped up to the task. The maintainer had a bunch of DCL scripts he used on a VAX/VMS system, but these wouldn't help me on a UNIX system, so I looked around for some tools to help me automate the task. I found the "distribute" package that the maintainer of the sun-nets mailing list used to run sun-nets. I compiled the program on my Sequent machine and installed the necessary mail aliases for submissions, administrivia, and error messages from the mailer daemon. I figured I'd use the "Precedence: Bulk" header to the outgoing messages so that I wouldn't receive error messages. I didn't want to have to trace down "unknown user" or "system down" errors. I also decided to undigest the list. The list had been digested and sent out once a day under the old maintainer. Often times, the traffic was so light the digest would be empty except for the headers, so I decided to undigestify the list. This met with some strong opposition right away, I countered with a suggestion that the users use a mail filter on their systems (elm, mh, mush, and Z-mail all have filtering capabilities). Anyway, I was in charge, so I didn't waver in undigestifying the list. I tested the system with the list only containing my e-mail address, and things worked right, so I thought I was all ready. On the day of the cutover, the old maintainer sent me the mailing list member list, and I put it in an alias file. I sent out a message to the list saying it had found its new home, and gave the members the new e-mail locations to send submissions and administrivia. That day, my belief in a perfect world was shattered. :-) About two hours after I sent out the first message, I started to get back error messages from the mailer daemons at about twenty sites, giving a wide variety of reasons for not delivering my message. I thought, "oh, that's okay, I'll just wait until I get a second error message for that user, and I'll remove them from the alias temporarily." This worked okay for the first hour, but then the flood continued. I started getting error messages back from three sites in particular every hour. I guess my "Precedence: Bulk" line wasn't helping. Some of the mailers would also send error messages to root, mailer-daemon, or the whole list. Then I waited for the first submission to show up. Nothing. I got a call from a person who said they got bounced mail saying the honda alias wasn't known at our Internet gateway machine. I talked to our sysadmins, and they discovered the alias hadn't been put on it, thinking it was a "recreational" alias and not a type of alias that needed to be known to the world. They fixed this, but not before I got about ten complaints from the members in my personal mailbox. Later that morning, the first submissions started arriving. At the time, our Sequent system was running an alpha copy of a new sendmail program. This alpha version had a bug in it that duplicated mail messages once in a while. It started duplicating all the incoming submissions. Of course, both copies generated error messages for the sites or users I couldn't reach. I sent a mail message to the users saying they'd have to put up with the duplicates; our engineering group promised a fixed copy of sendmail in two days. Then the administrivia requests for removal started pouring in. People complained that whereas they used to receive just one honda digest a day, they were now receiving two copies of every submission. Not only that, but some of the mailer programs would send error messages back to the list, not to the "Errors-To" header. Then members started sending mail to the list voicing their opinions on the problems of undigestifying and receiving duplicates, and others would send mail to the list telling those members not to send complaints about the list to the whole list. Things quickly snowballed. At one point our Internet gateway was processing 45 sendmails, delivering to about 350 sites each. The sysadmins threatened to remove the aliases and kill the sendmails unless I fixed the problem immediately. I sent a warning to the list (which showed up twice), and removed all members for which I was getting bounced mail. Things quieted down a little, but the next day they were still busy. The sysadmin told me I had to remove the list. Fortunately, someone at UCLA noticed my problems, and being a list maintainer already, volunteered to take it over. The list is now in his hands, back as a once-a-day digest, and I've learned lots of lessons: o Don't think that running an Internet mailing list is as easy as using a mail alias inside your company. There are more factors involved than you can control, and you're dealing with people who have different capabilities, facilities, and computers than the ones you have. I was surprised at the number of people on the Honda list that read their mail over 1200 baud modems using PCs and very basic MUAs. I'm used to high-speed lines with UNIX workstations, the latest sendmail, and Elm. o Get approval from your site's system administration department before you decide to host a mailing list on their machines. Even if you do the list processing on your own Sun, the mail still has to traverse over theirs to get outside the company. o Every mailing list should have a FAQ list. This "Frequently Asked Questions" should contain common questions that new members usually ask, with commonly-accepted answers for each. This cuts down on the traffic considerably. The FAQ should also contain service levels the administrator will try to adhere to for administrivia requests (moves, adds, removes, etc.). It should describe whether the list is digested or not, and why. It should also explain the various mail aliases for the list in great detail; nothing starts a flame-fest faster than a newbie posting a "please remove me" message to the whole list. It should also explain where to find information on filtering mail with the various mail readers. Decide whether you'll allow advertising and "for-sale" messages on the list. Also suggest a protocol for replying to messages; low-volume lists allow replies to go to the list, high-volume lists like replies to go to the originator, who then summarizes and posts back to the list the answer(s). o There are several programs available to help you manage the list. The previously-mentioned "distribute" program is available in ftp.umiacs.umd.edu:pub/distribute.tar.Z. A full-functioned package that sounds good but that I haven't tried is "listserv" (no, this doesn't have much to do with BITNet's LISTSERV). It was posted to alt.sources, and is available in cs.bu.edu:pub/listserv. It sounds like listserv obviates the need for the maintainer to perform administrative requests; they're done through program control by the members. o Remember that you have to be root (or have a setuid program) to set the From_ line in a posting. Setting the From_ line is a good idea. o sendmail uses a bunch of headers to control its behavior. But you can't count on the headers being observed by the different mailers out there. I suggest you set the "Precedence", "Errors-To", and From_ headers appropriately. Leave alone the From: header, and add a "Sender" header with the list's administrative address if you want. Don't forget to remove old headers that don't make sense or that you're adding in. o If you have the time, digesting is much better than not. You can filter out inappropriate submissions, make sure addresses look good, etc. If you have even more time, you can read the RFC that talks about the possible causes behind the various error messages you'll get back from mailers. o Advertise your mailing list in the "list of lists" postings. See news.answers, news.announce.newusers, and mail.misc for the address of these lists. Send the info to interest-groups-request@nisc.sri.com. If your list is an off-shoot of a newsgroup, post your FAQ periodically to that Usenet group. -- Jim Battan - Sequent Computer Systems, Beaverton, OR battan@sequent.com or uunet!sequent!battan +1 503 578 5129 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 14:35:52 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25775; Thu, 12 Nov 92 14:35:52 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25767; Thu, 12 Nov 92 14:35:46 PST Message-Id: <9211122235.AA25767@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Jim Battan Subject: Re: a brief non-howto on managing mailing lists In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 12 Nov 92 9:11:45 PST Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 14:35:44 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Jim Battan writes: # This article describes the author's experiences in setting up and # running an Internet mailing list. It is intended for budding or # wannabe mailing list maintainers. Experienced mailing list maintainers # will probably laugh as they read this; they've probably learned it # all the hard way. Hopefully by publishing this, I'll save at least # one other person some hassle. A very admirable set of goals. Education for the masses and entertainment for the cogniscenti... :-) Let me comment on a few of the points here... # I figured I'd use the "Precedence: Bulk" header to the outgoing messages # so that I wouldn't receive error messages. I didn't want to have to # trace down "unknown user" or "system down" errors. Well, first, realize that the "Precedence" header is not defined in either RFC822 (which generally specifies all the recognized headers for Internet messages, and their semantics) or RFC1123 (the so-called "host requirements" RFC, that clarifies and expands on lots of previous RFCs), so there is no clearly defined "correct" thing for mailers to do. Second, not getting back error messages is not necessarily a good thing. Entropy means that your list will get progressively less correct, and you'll never know about it. That means you're consuming resources that you don't need to be, both on your own end and on the intervening and would-be recipient systems. Watch for a separate message from me shortly concerning the evils of Sendmail, poorly written "vacation" programs, and "Precedence:" lines... # I also decided to # undigest the list. The list had been digested and sent out once a day # under the old maintainer. Often times, the traffic was so light the # digest would be empty except for the headers, so I decided to undigestify # the list. This met with some strong opposition right away, I countered # with a suggestion that the users use a mail filter on their systems # (elm, mh, mush, and Z-mail all have filtering capabilities). Anyway, # I was in charge, so I didn't waver in undigestifying the list. My solution is to offer my lists in both digest and non-digest form. I don't "moderate" the digest. It gets the same messages that the non-digest list recieves. Incoming messages are queued for the digest at the same time they're sent out to the non-digest list. Once a day (if there have been any messages that day), or whenever the queue of messages for the digest crosses a certain size threshold, I have a little program that goes through the messages queued for the digest and creates a digest. It strips the headers from the messages, merges them into a digest with the appropriate header, intro, and trailer, and sends it off to the digest mailing list. # the first hour, but then the flood continued. I started getting error # messages back from three sites in particular every hour. I guess my # "Precedence: Bulk" line wasn't helping. Some of the mailers would # also send error messages to root, mailer-daemon, or the whole list. Again, this is a Sendmail thing (and even then, it depends on the particular .cf file they're running; Sun's supplied .cf files, for instance, don't do anything special with "Precedence: bulk"). Mailers sending error messages to root, mailer-daemon, or the whole list are probably broken IF the headers on your outgoing messages are correct (i.e., you've got a valid "Sender:" line). "Errors-To:" is another header that is NOT defined by RFC822 or RFC1123, so you can't count on it for anything in a large context. Even most Sendmails that I've seen have bugs in the generation of Errors-To: fields; if your Errors-To: field specifies an alias, Sendmail rewrites it into the expansion of the alias (i.e., if I've got a .forward file because I'm on vacation, the Errors-To: lines for my lists start coming out as "Errors-To: \brent, "|/usr/local/bin/nvacation brent ..."", which is clearly wrong. # o There are several programs available to help you manage the list. # The previously-mentioned "distribute" program is available in # ftp.umiacs.umd.edu:pub/distribute.tar.Z. A full-functioned package # that sounds good but that I haven't tried is "listserv" (no, this # doesn't have much to do with BITNet's LISTSERV). It was posted # to alt.sources, and is available in cs.bu.edu:pub/listserv. # It sounds like listserv obviates the need for the maintainer to # perform administrative requests; they're done through program # control by the members. There's also now Majordomo, of course, which I'm sure you're all tired of hearing about by now. # o Remember that you have to be root (or have a setuid program) to set # the From_ line in a posting. Setting the From_ line is a good idea. This is not exactly true. What's true is that only "trusted users" can set the "From " line (by using the "-f" flag) for Sendmail. Trusted users are specified on the "T" line(s) of your sendmail.cf file, and are normally limited to "root", "daemon", and "uucp", but there's no reason that a sysadmin can't add a random user to that list. # o sendmail uses a bunch of headers to control its behavior. But you # can't count on the headers being observed by the different mailers # out there. I suggest you set the "Precedence", "Errors-To", and From_ # headers appropriately. Leave alone the From: header, and add a "Sender" # header with the list's administrative address if you want. Don't forget # to remove old headers that don't make sense or that you're adding in. As I've mentioned above, "Precedence:" and "Errors-To:" appear to be inventions of Sendmail that aren't defined in the RFCs and probably aren't supported in other mailers. # o If you have the time, digesting is much better than not. You can filter # out inappropriate submissions, make sure addresses look good, etc. # If you have even more time, you can read the RFC that talks about # the possible causes behind the various error messages you'll get # back from mailers. Digesting doesn't necessarily equate to moderating; see above. Thanks for sharing your very enlightening experiences! -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 15:05:00 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25955; Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:05:00 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA25945; Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:04:55 PST Message-Id: <9211122304.AA25945@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: On the evils of Sendmail, Precedence:, and broken vacation programs Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:04:54 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've been digging into the relationship between Sendmail, the "Precedence:" header, vacation programs, and error messages for mailing lists. Here's what I've found. The "Precedence:" header is not defined in RFC822 (which describes all the other headers in Internet messages) or RFC1123 (the so-called "hosts requirements" RFC, which clarifies, interprets, and supercedes parts of lots of other RFCs, including RFC822). Therefore, whatever is done with "Precedence:" is likely to vary from mailer to mailer on the Internet. Sendmail assigns a "class" (which is an integer) to each message based on its "Precedence:" header. If there is no "Precedence:" header, or if Sendmail doesn't recognize the value (i.e., "bulk", "junk", or whatever) of the "Precedence:" header, then Sendmail assigns a class of 0. The "Precedence:" values that Sendmail recognizes and the class numbers that they correspond to are defined by the "P" lines in the sendmail.cf file (i.e., "Pjunk=-100" maps a precedence of "junk" to a class of -100). If the "class" is negative, and there's a problem delivering the message, Sendmail doesn't return the bounce to the sender; it just drops it on the floor. The sample sendmail.cf included with the Sendmail sources by Berkeley, and in turn shipped by many vendors, defines "Pbulk=-60". Thus you will not get error messages back on "Precedence: bulk" messages sent to these systems. The standard sendmail.cf shipped by Sun (and probably by some other vendors) does not define "Pbulk", therefore "Precedence: bulk" mail gets a class of 0 on those systems. Thus you will get error messages back on "Precedence: bulk" messages sent to such systems. The original Berkeley "vacation" program looked for "Precedence: bulk" or "Precedence: junk" headers, or for mail from "*-request@*"; if it saw any of those, it didn't forward a vacation response. This may have worked acceptably when the program was written, but it is insufficient today. The current Berkeley "vacation" program does all that, and also replies ONLY if the user's name (or one of a set of aliases that the user defines) appears explicitly on the "To:" or "Cc:" line. This is a much better design. Unfortunately, there are a lot of old "vacation" programs, or broken emulators thereof, that don't do the "user or alias on the 'To:' or 'Cc:' line" check. So, the mailing list manager is left with a dilemma. If they add a "Precedence: bulk" line to thwart the "vacation" programs, then they won't get any mailing list error messages back from Sendmail systems which define "Pbulk" as a negative number (which is a lot of systems). If they don't add the "Precedence: bulk" line, they get back messages from all the old or broken "vacation" programs out there. If the vacation program is only moderately broken, it will reply to the "Sender:" line, and only the mailing list owner will see the vacation message. If it's more broken, it will reply to the "From:" line, who cares very little that Joe User on a mailing list happens to be on vacation. If it's very broken, it will reply to the "From:" _and_ to the "To:" and "Cc:" lines, and the whole list will get to hear about some poor schmuck's travel plans). Solutions? Damned if I know... -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 15:20:32 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26094; Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:20:32 PST Received: from othello.admin.kth.se by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26087; Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:20:22 PST Received: from mercutio.admin.kth.se by othello.admin.kth.se (5.65+bind 1.8+ida 1.4.2/4.0b) id AA21652; Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:20:14 +0100 Received: by mercutio.admin.kth.se (5.65+bind 1.8+ida 1.4.2/4.0) id AA10347; Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:20:46 +0100 Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:20:46 +0100 Message-Id: <9211122320.AA10347@mercutio.admin.kth.se> From: Olle Jarnefors To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Olle Jarnefors , Peter Svanberg References: <9211061451.AA11252@discord.cme.nist.gov> <9211101807.AA17510@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> <92Nov10.192609est.2777@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> <9211111507.AA29621@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Sender: and error interception (was Re: Creating Lists) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have read the discussion about how to intercept error messages with great interest. Here are some comments on several previous articles. Brent Chapman writes (10 Nov 92 10:07:45 -0800): > clark@cme.nist.gov (Steve Clark) writes [6 Nov 92 09:51:15 EST]: > > # Several people have said they add a Sender: list-request header to > # outbound messages in order to intercept error messages. I use a > # script I inherited from another list owner which adds Errors-To: > # list-request and Administrivia-To: list-request instead. Is there any > # functional difference between the two? Are these two different ways > # of solving the same problem, or are there classes of problems > # addressed by one and not the other? > > "Sender:" is pretty clearly defined by RFC822 ("Standard for the > Format of ARPA Internet Text Messages"; the bible for what Internet > message headers should look like). "Errors-To:" isn't even mentioned. > > Here are some relevant quotes concerning "Sender:". It's pretty clear > from these that mailing lists SHOULD include a "Sender:" field in > their outgoing messages, and that the field should point to where you > want bounced messages to return to. RFC 822 was amended by the later RFC 1123, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support", which I think haven't been mentioned on this list earlier. As a matter of fact, in a few cases it actually _changes_ rules in RFC 822, and the point discussed here is one of them. (Another one is a change in the syntax for mailboxes, making the initial phrase part before a route-address optional.) Here are some quotes from RFC 1123: : ... When a : message is delivered or forwarded to each address of an : expanded list form, the return address in the envelope : ("MAIL FROM:") MUST be changed to be the address of a person : who administers the list, but the message header MUST be left : unchanged; ... : - - - : (E) The translation algorithm used to convert mail from the : Internet protocols to another environment's protocol : SHOULD try to ensure that error messages from the foreign : mail environment are delivered to the return path from the : SMTP envelope, not to the sender listed in the "From:" : field of the RFC-822 message. : : DISCUSSION: : Internet mail lists usually place the address of the : mail list maintainer in the envelope but leave the : original message header intact (with the "From:" : field containing the original sender). This yields : the behavior the average recipient expects: a reply : to the header gets sent to the original sender, not : to a mail list maintainer; however, errors get sent : to the maintainer (who can fix the problem) and not : the sender (who probably cannot). This RFC also has some other things to say about mailing lists. I will include the most relevant parts in a following article. It's meagre in my opinion, but to my knowledge it's the only official Internet standard concerning mailing lists. (It is part of Internet STD 3. RFC 822 is Internet STD 11.) Chris Siebenmann writes (10 Nov 1992 19:26:07 -0500): > Hmm, I've always thought that Sender: should be left alone when going > through a mailing list, and that the mailing list should just rewrite > the envelope from address (SMTP Mail From:, UUCP 'From ') to itself. Yes, this is right according to RFC 1123. C. Harald Koch writes (11 Nov 1992 10:07:45 -0500): > Unfortunately, many (most?) network mail systems *still* don't process the > envelope separately from the headers, so this isn't reliable. The From_ > header gets damaged, or the From: header is replaced with the From_ header, > or... > > The Internet proper is much better than it used to be, but the Internet is > still only a small portion of our extended Email network. This is a solution that can handle both mailers following the new rules of RFC 1123 and the old rules of RFC 822, I think: 1) Change the SMTP sender to the preferred address for error messages. 2) Change the "Sender:" field to the same address. 3) Add an "Errors-To:" field with the same address. (At least I don't think that this can hurt, although this isn't a standardized header field.) 4) If the original message already contained a "Sender:" field: Transform it to an "Original-Sender:" field. > There are also Resent-* fields in RFC822, which are useful when you want to > change a header that already exists. Yes, but the old address should be kept in the original "Sender:" field and the address for error messages should be added in a "Resent-Sender:" field, according to RFC 822. So this may not cope with old mailers that always send bounced messages to the "Sender:" address. I have discussed this and other header problems connected with mailing lists with the list administrator at nada.kth.se, Peter Svanberg , and hope that he will present some other ideas in this forum soon. /Olle -- Olle Jarnefors Internet: ojarnef@admin.kth.se Information Management Services UUCP: ...!uunet!mcsun!sunic!kth!ojarnef Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) BITNET: ojarnef@sekth Fax:+46 8 10 25 10 S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden Phone: +46 8 790 71 26 (time zone +0100) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 16:08:27 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26236; Thu, 12 Nov 92 16:08:27 PST Received: from othello.admin.kth.se by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26107; Thu, 12 Nov 92 15:22:44 PST Received: from mercutio.admin.kth.se by othello.admin.kth.se (5.65+bind 1.8+ida 1.4.2/4.0b) id AA21661; Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:23:01 +0100 Received: by mercutio.admin.kth.se (5.65+bind 1.8+ida 1.4.2/4.0) id AA10368; Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:23:34 +0100 Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:23:34 +0100 Message-Id: <9211122323.AA10368@mercutio.admin.kth.se> From: Olle Jarnefors To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: Olle Jarnefors References: <9211122320.AA10347@mercutio.admin.kth.se> Subject: About mailing lists in RFC 1123 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [This is an excerpt from:] Network Working Group Internet Engineering Task Force Request for Comments: 1123 R. Braden, Editor October 1989 Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support [The part about mailing lists follows:] 5.3.6 Mailing Lists and Aliases An SMTP-capable host SHOULD support both the alias and the list form of address expansion for multiple delivery. When a message is delivered or forwarded to each address of an expanded list form, the return address in the envelope ("MAIL FROM:") MUST be changed to be the address of a person who administers the list, but the message header MUST be left unchanged; in particular, the "From" field of the message is unaffected. DISCUSSION: An important mail facility is a mechanism for multi- destination delivery of a single message, by transforming or "expanding" a pseudo-mailbox address into a list of destination mailbox addresses. When a message is sent to such a pseudo-mailbox (sometimes called an "exploder"), copies are forwarded or redistributed to each mailbox in the expanded list. We classify such a pseudo-mailbox as an "alias" or a "list", depending upon the expansion rules: (a) Alias To expand an alias, the recipient mailer simply replaces the pseudo-mailbox address in the envelope with each of the expanded addresses in turn; the rest of the envelope and the message body are left unchanged. The message is then delivered or forwarded to each expanded address. (b) List A mailing list may be said to operate by "redistribution" rather than by "forwarding". To expand a list, the recipient mailer replaces the pseudo-mailbox address in the envelope with each of the expanded addresses in turn. The return address in the envelope is changed so that all error messages generated by the final deliveries will be returned to a list administrator, not to the message originator, who generally has no control over the contents of the list and will typically find error messages annoying. 5.3.7 Mail Gatewaying Gatewaying mail between different mail environments, i.e., different mail formats and protocols, is complex and does not easily yield to standardization. See for example [SMTP:5a], [SMTP:5b]. However, some general requirements may be given for a gateway between the Internet and another mail environment. (A) Header fields MAY be rewritten when necessary as messages are gatewayed across mail environment boundaries. DISCUSSION: This may involve interpreting the local-part of the destination address, as suggested in Section 5.2.16. The other mail systems gatewayed to the Internet generally use a subset of RFC-822 headers, but some of them do not have an equivalent to the SMTP envelope. Therefore, when a message leaves the Internet environment, it may be necessary to fold the SMTP envelope information into the message header. A possible solution would be to create new header fields to carry the envelope information (e.g., "X- SMTP-MAIL:" and "X-SMTP-RCPT:"); however, this would require changes in mail programs in the foreign environment. (B) When forwarding a message into or out of the Internet environment, a gateway MUST prepend a Received: line, but it MUST NOT alter in any way a Received: line that is already in the header. DISCUSSION: This requirement is a subset of the general "Received:" line requirement of Section 5.2.8; it is restated here for emphasis. Received: fields of messages originating from other environments may not conform exactly to RFC822. However, the most important use of Received: lines is for debugging mail faults, and this debugging can be severely hampered by well-meaning gateways that try to "fix" a Received: line. The gateway is strongly encouraged to indicate the environment and protocol in the "via" clauses of Received field(s) that it supplies. (C) From the Internet side, the gateway SHOULD accept all valid address formats in SMTP commands and in RFC-822 headers, and all valid RFC-822 messages. Although a gateway must accept an RFC-822 explicit source route ("@...:" format) in either the RFC-822 header or in the envelope, it MAY or may not act on the source route; see Sections 5.2.6 and 5.2.19. DISCUSSION: It is often tempting to restrict the range of addresses accepted at the mail gateway to simplify the translation into addresses for the remote environment. This practice is based on the assumption that mail users have control over the addresses their mailers send to the mail gateway. In practice, however, users have little control over the addresses that are finally sent; their mailers are free to change addresses into any legal RFC-822 format. (D) The gateway MUST ensure that all header fields of a message that it forwards into the Internet meet the requirements for Internet mail. In particular, all addresses in "From:", "To:", "Cc:", etc., fields must be transformed (if necessary) to satisfy RFC-822 syntax, and they must be effective and useful for sending replies. (E) The translation algorithm used to convert mail from the Internet protocols to another environment's protocol SHOULD try to ensure that error messages from the foreign mail environment are delivered to the return path from the SMTP envelope, not to the sender listed in the "From:" field of the RFC-822 message. DISCUSSION: Internet mail lists usually place the address of the mail list maintainer in the envelope but leave the original message header intact (with the "From:" field containing the original sender). This yields the behavior the average recipient expects: a reply to the header gets sent to the original sender, not to a mail list maintainer; however, errors get sent to the maintainer (who can fix the problem) and not the sender (who probably cannot). (F) Similarly, when forwarding a message from another environment into the Internet, the gateway SHOULD set the envelope return path in accordance with an error message return address, if any, supplied by the foreign environment. [Here is some general rules from the introduction to RFC 1123:] 1. INTRODUCTION This document is one of a pair that defines and discusses the requirements for host system implementations of the Internet protocol suite. This RFC covers the applications layer and support protocols. Its companion RFC, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communications Layers" [INTRO:1] covers the lower layer protocols: transport layer, IP layer, and link layer. These documents are intended to provide guidance for vendors, implementors, and users of Internet communication software. They represent the consensus of a large body of technical experience and wisdom, contributed by members of the Internet research and vendor communities. This RFC enumerates standard protocols that a host connected to the Internet must use, and it incorporates by reference the RFCs and other documents describing the current specifications for these protocols. It corrects errors in the referenced documents and adds additional discussion and guidance for an implementor. For each protocol, this document also contains an explicit set of requirements, recommendations, and options. The reader must understand that the list of requirements in this document is incomplete by itself; the complete set of requirements for an Internet host is primarily defined in the standard protocol specification documents, with the corrections, amendments, and supplements contained in this RFC. A good-faith implementation of the protocols that was produced after careful reading of the RFC's and with some interaction with the Internet technical community, and that followed good communications software engineering practices, should differ from the requirements of this document in only minor ways. Thus, in many cases, the "requirements" in this RFC are already stated or implied in the standard protocol documents, so that their inclusion here is, in a sense, redundant. However, they were included because some past implementation has made the wrong choice, causing problems of interoperability, performance, and/or robustness. This document includes discussion and explanation of many of the requirements and recommendations. A simple list of requirements would be dangerous, because: o Some required features are more important than others, and some features are optional. o There may be valid reasons why particular vendor products that are designed for restricted contexts might choose to use different specifications. However, the specifications of this document must be followed to meet the general goal of arbitrary host interoperation across the diversity and complexity of the Internet system. Although most current implementations fail to meet these requirements in various ways, some minor and some major, this specification is the ideal towards which we need to move. These requirements are based on the current level of Internet architecture. This document will be updated as required to provide additional clarifications or to include additional information in those areas in which specifications are still evolving. This introductory section begins with general advice to host software vendors, and then gives some guidance on reading the rest of the document. Section 2 contains general requirements that may be applicable to all application and support protocols. Sections 3, 4, and 5 contain the requirements on protocols for the three major applications: Telnet, file transfer, and electronic mail, respectively. Section 6 covers the support applications: the domain name system, system initialization, and management. Finally, all references will be found in Section 7. 1.1 The Internet Architecture For a brief introduction to the Internet architecture from a host viewpoint, see Section 1.1 of [INTRO:1]. That section also contains recommended references for general background on the Internet architecture. 1.2 General Considerations There are two important lessons that vendors of Internet host software have learned and which a new vendor should consider seriously. 1.2.1 Continuing Internet Evolution The enormous growth of the Internet has revealed problems of management and scaling in a large datagram-based packet communication system. These problems are being addressed, and as a result there will be continuing evolution of the specifications described in this document. These changes will be carefully planned and controlled, since there is extensive participation in this planning by the vendors and by the organizations responsible for operations of the networks. Development, evolution, and revision are characteristic of computer network protocols today, and this situation will persist for some years. A vendor who develops computer communication software for the Internet protocol suite (or any other protocol suite!) and then fails to maintain and update that software for changing specifications is going to leave a trail of unhappy customers. The Internet is a large communication network, and the users are in constant contact through it. Experience has shown that knowledge of deficiencies in vendor software propagates quickly through the Internet technical community. 1.2.2 Robustness Principle At every layer of the protocols, there is a general rule whose application can lead to enormous benefits in robustness and interoperability: "Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send" Software should be written to deal with every conceivable error, no matter how unlikely; sooner or later a packet will come in with that particular combination of errors and attributes, and unless the software is prepared, chaos can ensue. In general, it is best to assume that the network is filled with malevolent entities that will send in packets designed to have the worst possible effect. This assumption will lead to suitable protective design, although the most serious problems in the Internet have been caused by unenvisaged mechanisms triggered by low-probability events; mere human malice would never have taken so devious a course! Adaptability to change must be designed into all levels of Internet host software. As a simple example, consider a protocol specification that contains an enumeration of values for a particular header field -- e.g., a type field, a port number, or an error code; this enumeration must be assumed to be incomplete. Thus, if a protocol specification defines four possible error codes, the software must not break when a fifth code shows up. An undefined code might be logged (see below), but it must not cause a failure. The second part of the principle is almost as important: software on other hosts may contain deficiencies that make it unwise to exploit legal but obscure protocol features. It is unwise to stray far from the obvious and simple, lest untoward effects result elsewhere. A corollary of this is "watch out for misbehaving hosts"; host software should be prepared, not just to survive other misbehaving hosts, but also to cooperate to limit the amount of disruption such hosts can cause to the shared communication facility. [And finally:] 1.3 Reading this Document 1.3.1 Organization In general, each major section is organized into the following subsections: (1) Introduction (2) Protocol Walk-Through -- considers the protocol specification documents section-by-section, correcting errors, stating requirements that may be ambiguous or ill-defined, and providing further clarification or explanation. (3) Specific Issues -- discusses protocol design and implementation issues that were not included in the walk- through. (4) Interfaces -- discusses the service interface to the next higher layer. (5) Summary -- contains a summary of the requirements of the section. Under many of the individual topics in this document, there is parenthetical material labeled "DISCUSSION" or "IMPLEMENTATION". This material is intended to give clarification and explanation of the preceding requirements text. It also includes some suggestions on possible future directions or developments. The implementation material contains suggested approaches that an implementor may want to consider. The summary sections are intended to be guides and indexes to the text, but are necessarily cryptic and incomplete. The summaries should never be used or referenced separately from the complete RFC. 1.3.2 Requirements In this document, the words that are used to define the significance of each particular requirement are capitalized. These words are: * "MUST" This word or the adjective "REQUIRED" means that the item is an absolute requirement of the specification. * "SHOULD" This word or the adjective "RECOMMENDED" means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore this item, but the full implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed before choosing a different course. * "MAY" This word or the adjective "OPTIONAL" means that this item is truly optional. One vendor may choose to include the item because a particular marketplace requires it or because it enhances the product, for example; another vendor may omit the same item. An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more of the MUST requirements for the protocols it implements. An implementation that satisfies all the MUST and all the SHOULD requirements for its protocols is said to be "unconditionally compliant"; one that satisfies all the MUST requirements but not all the SHOULD requirements for its protocols is said to be "conditionally compliant". -- Olle Jarnefors Internet: ojarnef@admin.kth.se Information Management Services UUCP: ...!uunet!mcsun!sunic!kth!ojarnef Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) BITNET: ojarnef@sekth Fax:+46 8 10 25 10 S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden Phone: +46 8 790 71 26 (time zone +0100) From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 17:20:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26567; Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:20:33 PST Received: from piggy.ucsb.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA26560; Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:20:24 PST Received: by piggy.ucsb.edu id AA02414 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM); Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:20:13 -0800 Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:20:13 -0800 From: Jim Lick Message-Id: <199211130120.AA02414@piggy.ucsb.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: coupla things Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk First I wanted to comment on a message in the most recent digest. It is possible to change the From_ header using sendmail without being a trusted user. If there is a 'bsmtp' command, use it and feed the appropriate commands to it. If not, make a link of 'bsmtp' to sendmail. Or run sendmail with the -bs option. I use the pipe to bsmtp option from a perl script filter which is the 'front-end' of my lists. This also avoids one of the problems I was having earlier. If mail for the list is received via smtp from anywhere else in the world, the alias pipe back to sendmail would be able to change From_, but if local users posted to the list through the usual way, the From_ header would not change because they weren't trusted users. blech. Anyways, in this case it is advantageous that smtp is less secure. On to a more important matter, and one which has been covered a bit in this group already. What to do about administrative requests being posted to the list itself? All of my lists have attached to it at the bottom of EVERY SINGLE MESSAGE a little blurb about where to send things. This helps some, but there's still a large number of requests to the list itself. My policy has been that I will ignore any administrative requests posted to the list. I have gone out of my way in informing subscribers of the correct procedure both in my welcome message when subscribing, and the tags on every message. I don't want to encourage the improper behavior any. I often feel a bit callous about this when I have to remind folks of my policy, but most subscribers tend to be sympathetic. In related but more pertinent discussion... Someone posted a message in a popular newsgroup about one of my mailing lists, but told people the posting address for the list as the address to subscribe. Needless to say, this caused a great deal of subscribe requests to be posted to the list. When I found out about the article, I issued a cancel message for it. Does anyone think I was out of line for doing so? I felt that it was somewhat of an emergency situation, and think it was justified, but I know that this is a touchy area. --- jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu --- Jim Lick --- jim@tcp.com --- jIngOrO@CaveMUCK --- --- CaveMUCK is back! Telnet to cave.tcp.com (128.95.10.106) port 2283 --- From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 12 22:21:59 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27400; Thu, 12 Nov 92 22:21:59 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27393; Thu, 12 Nov 92 22:21:53 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA13764; Fri, 13 Nov 92 01:21:42 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA06265; Fri, 13 Nov 92 01:01:34 EST Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 01:01:34 EST From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9211130601.AA06265@bahainvs> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: "no such user" ping-pong tournaments... Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Is it possible to set up a "default" account, where all mail can go to if it's addressed to a non-existant user? I've got a UUCP connection set up right now, and if someone sends mail to a non-existant user on my domain, it ping-pongs 17 times between the 'bahainvs' and 'mimsy.cs.umd.edu'. This can be a REAL pain. Is there anyway for mail to be instantly trapped, and sent to a default somebody, like postmaster? Thanks, John From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 13 05:22:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27939; Fri, 13 Nov 92 05:22:15 PST Received: from dw3f.ess.harris.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27932; Fri, 13 Nov 92 05:21:56 PST Received: by dw3f.ess.harris.com (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA25114; Fri, 13 Nov 92 08:24:01 -0500 Message-Id: <9211131324.AA25114@dw3f.ess.harris.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Asking for basic howto instructions for setting up majordomo. Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 08:24:01 -0500 From: "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Good morning to all you Gurus and Wizards of lists. Today I bite the bullet with your help. I'm convinced mailing lists are an excellent mechanism to foster communication and productivity. So I'm going to attempt to install the majordomo myself. Here's where I am: 1. I work on a DECstation 3100 running Ultrix 4.2. 2. I have the root password. 3. I have downloaded the majordomo release. 4. I also grabbed releases of listserv and distribute and I grabbed the sort hack that was put on the mailing list. Now help! 5. The majordomo requires perl. I don't have perl. Therefore I must locate and install an appropriate version of perl. Help! Archie tells me about many versions of perl. I need to know an appropriate version with pretty precise instructions on how to install it. 6. I could use more precise instructions on installing the majordomo also. Setting up directories and aliases, etc. Any help is appreciated. Thanks Jim Truitt PS - Did I mention I'm one of those bothersome "greenhorns"? I know only enough about what I'm doing to get things really messed up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | NAME :JAMES O. TRUITT (JIM) | HARRIS CORPORATION | INFORMATION | | PHONE :1-407-984-5791 | P. O. BOX 98000 | SYSTEMS | | FAX :1-407-984-6323 | MELBOURNE, FL 32902 | DIVISION | | EMAIL :HARRIS.JTRUITT@IC1D.HARRIS.COM | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 13 06:17:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28001; Fri, 13 Nov 92 06:17:41 PST Received: from sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA27994; Fri, 13 Nov 92 06:17:27 PST Received: by sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA22235; Fri, 13 Nov 92 09:17:07 -0500 Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 09:17:07 -0500 From: Dave Sill Message-Id: <9211131417.AA22235@sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV> To: "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211131324.AA25114@dw3f.ess.harris.com> Subject: Re: Asking for basic howto instructions for setting up majordomo. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" writes: > > Today I bite the bullet with your help. I'm convinced mailing >lists are an excellent mechanism to foster communication and >productivity. So I'm going to attempt to install the majordomo myself. Not that this is inappropriate here, but there are mailing lists specifically for Majordomo on GreatCircle.COM. > Here's where I am: > > 1. I work on a DECstation 3100 running Ultrix 4.2. Oops. I think you'll have to upgrade to 4.3 or install a modern version of sendmail. Pre-4.3 Ultrix sendmail's don't support the use of "include" in the aliases file, and since Majordomo wants each mailing list in a file of its own, they won't work. If you can't upgrade to 4.3, I suggest building the IDA sendmail. Ask archie where to find it. > 5. The majordomo requires perl. I don't have perl. Therefore I must > locate and install an appropriate version of perl. Help! Archie > tells me about many versions of perl. I need to know an > appropriate version with pretty precise >instructions on how to install it. You want 4.035. It should be easy to find. Just follow the directions. > 6. I could use more precise instructions on installing the > majordomo also. Setting up directories >and aliases, etc. The README really ought to be enough. Just do your best to follow the instruction/examples, and if it doesn't work and you can't figure out why, let us know. If you want one person to ask, try me. >PS - Did I mention I'm one of those bothersome "greenhorns"? I know >only enough about what I'm doing to get things really messed up. That's OK, messing up is a great way to learn how not to mess up. As long as this DECstation you're installing on isn't a critical/production system with other active users, you can't really do anything too bad. If you're *really* worried, do backups first. Good luck. I think you've made the right choice between listserv and Majordomo. -- Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov) For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick. Martin Marietta Energy Systems For every Bill Gates there is a Richard Workstation Support Stallman. --Paul Graham From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 13 08:28:25 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28311; Fri, 13 Nov 92 08:28:25 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA28304; Fri, 13 Nov 92 08:28:19 PST Received: by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA05934; Fri, 13 Nov 92 11:28:35 -0500 Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 10:59:19 -0500 From: james@ny.neavs.com (James Corrigan) Received: by ny.neavs.com (NX5.67c/3.2.083191-NEAVS) id AA00261; Fri, 13 Nov 92 10:59:19 -0500 Message-Id: <9211131559.AA00261@ny.neavs.com> Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.87.1) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.87.1) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Help starting a list using a NeXT workstation Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am researching what alternatives exist for setting up a list using a NeXT workstation running NextStep 3.0. Has anyone had any experience with the NeXT in this regard? Also, can anyone expain the differences between Majordomo and listserv - or point me in the right direction to obtain that information? Thanks for the help. James James Corrigan NEAVS James@NY.NEAVS.COM 333 Washington Street, Suite 850 617 523 6020 Boston, MA 02108 From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 13 14:17:36 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29218; Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:17:36 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29211; Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:17:28 PST Received: from hudson.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA01877; Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:17:37 -0500 Received: by hudson.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA09920; Fri, 13 Nov 92 17:17:36 EST Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 17:17:36 EST From: dupuy@hudson.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211132217.AA09920@hudson.cs.columbia.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: gbnewby@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu In-Reply-To: <9211102054.AA18710@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> (message from Gregory B. Newby on Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:54:41 -0600) Subject: Unix listserv.....a few questions & comments Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > 1. One Listserv is running on a Sun IPC. This poor little box gets oodles > and oodles of 'sendmail' processes started whenever a message is being sent > out, evidently because some of the places messages are being delivered to > take awhile to respond, transfer the message, etc. > It sounded like the 'distribute' option mentioned in an earlier message > might work, but there weren't enough details in the messages discussing it > for me to know just how to proceed. Neither distribute nor the suggestion Joe Wells made will solve your problem, since listserv is invoking sendmail itself (directly or by connecting to the SMTP port) to deliver to each of the recipients individually. By default, listserv does this for each recipient separately, but by using the "-m" option in the listserv configuration file, listserv will do multiple delivery - I find that 25 recipients strikes a nice balance between too many sendmail processes, and having sendmail take forever to process each message. Sendmail sorts the recipients and attempts delivery to each in turn - when one mail server can't be reached, everyone else is held up as well - this is one of the main problems with large mailing lists which aren't managed by listserv. So my config file lines look like this: # test list; non-subscribers can post, send 25-recipient batch list listserv-test listserv-test@cs.columbia.edu dupuy passwd -s -m 100 Having said this, list-managers is not really the place to be asking these sorts of questions about Unix listserv - there is a listserv-maintained mailing list which you can subscribe to by sending mail to . Try asking your qeustion about SGI Iris support there - somebody may know more than I do. > PS: I think I like the VM listserv better! Sorry, A.K. The VM listserv is certainly the most mature and functional of all the listserver programs. It's too bad that it doesn't run under a more modern operating system. @alex From List-Managers-Owner Sat Nov 14 01:08:18 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29822; Sat, 14 Nov 92 01:08:18 PST Received: from presto.ig.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA29815; Sat, 14 Nov 92 01:08:10 PST Received: by presto.ig.com (5.61/1.15) id AA23781; Sat, 14 Nov 92 01:05:02 -0800 Message-Id: <9211140905.AA23781@presto.ig.com> Date: Sat, 14 Nov 92 01:04:59 -0800 From: mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) Subject: Re: Two things.. To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM X-Orig-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:08:21 EST X-Orig-From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.umd.edu (John Wiegley) X-Orig-Message-Id: <9211110608.AA03484@bahainvs> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk bahainvs!johnw@cs.umd.edu (John Wiegley) writes: > [...] > Two-- Does anyone know how to interpose a filter between a mailer and > sendmail? I'd like to write mail with carriage returns ONLY AT > THE END OF A PARAGRAPH, but the rest of the world would like to > see carriage returns AT THE END OF 72 COLUMN SENTENCES. There > is a simple Unix utility to do this. But how I get the mail to > pass through the filter before it reaches sendmail? I suspect there is no good general-case solution for this, simply because each mail user agent calls sendmail or whatever it uses for transport in a different way. If you have source to your mail program, obviously you can have it do anything you want; if not, you can replace sendmail with a wrapper program that invokes the filter (hint: simply giving your message to fmt(1) won't work, because you absolutely don't want to muck with the header!) and then calls sendmail with the appropriate arguments. BUT, what I don't understand is why you need this -- essentially every modern text editor, whether it's vi or emacs or Word Perfect or or whatever, does "word wrap", that is, where you type continuously and it take care of the newlines for you. And any reasonable mail program on a UNIX box that I've seen lets you choose what editor you want to use to compose mail with. Am I missing something? -- Michael C. Berch mcb@presto.ig.com / mcb@net.bio.net / mcb@postmodern.com From List-Managers-Owner Sat Nov 14 09:52:43 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00336; Sat, 14 Nov 92 09:52:43 PST Received: from mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00329; Sat, 14 Nov 92 09:52:24 PST Received: by mimsy.cs.UMD.EDU (5.61/UMIACS-0.9/04-05-88) id AA12659; Sat, 14 Nov 92 12:52:32 -0500 Received: by bahainvs (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.1) id AA08199; Sat, 14 Nov 92 12:31:28 EST Date: Sat, 14 Nov 92 12:31:28 EST From: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Message-Id: <9211141731.AA08199@bahainvs> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63) To: "List Managers" Subject: Re: Two things.. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On the NeXTstation, one generally composes and send e-mail with the NeXTmail utility. It DOES do word-wrapping, however, it does not put returns on the lines when it sends it out. As for not wanting to muck with the headers, here is the script that is being used: #!/bin/csh -f cat > /tmp/pt echo \ | cat /tmp/pt - | tee /tmp/pt.w | sed -n '1,/^$/p' > /tmp/pt.t cat /tmp/pt.w | sed -n '/^$/,$p' | sed '1d' | \ expand -2 | fmt | cat /tmp/pt.t - | \ /usr/lib/sendmail "$1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 $9" rm -f /tmp/pt /tmp/pt.w /tmp/pt.t (This way, only the message portion is "fmt"ted). The 'fmt' program is a horrible choice, since it only breaks paragraphs on a BLANK LINE. Another program, perhaps 'efmt', will have to be written that will break paragraphs on a '\n'. That way, mucking with the headers wouldn't be a problem, since it would leave them alone. And BTW- interposing this between sendmail and the NeXTmailer was no problem. There is a preferences option for setting which mailer-engine the NeXTmailer uses. Thanks for the replies, John From List-Managers-Owner Sun Nov 15 16:18:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01687; Sun, 15 Nov 92 16:18:41 PST Received: from att.att.com (att-out.att.com) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01680; Sun, 15 Nov 92 16:18:34 PST Message-Id: <9211160018.AA01680@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 19:15 EST From: psrc@pegasus.att.com (Paul S R Chisholm) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: running filters on messages (was Re: Two things..) Content-Length: 3174 Content-Type: text Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk bahainvs!johnw@cs.umd.edu (John Wiegley) asks "how to interpose a filter between a mailer and sendmail" (because he'd like to make sure lines are kept to no more than 72 characters). The rough trick is to get the mail transfer agent (e.g., sendmail) to recognize which messages this should be done with (based on the sender and recipient), run the message through the appropriate filter, and then deliver the message. If you can express this at all, the main trick is to avoid infinite recursion of the rewrite rule. (I did this once with an SVR4 mail surrogate, but I don't remember the details.) mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) suggests using a filter between the mail user agent (e.g., Mail or mailx) and the message transfer agent. This is certainly simpler. He also points out running the whole message through a filter doesn't work; you (usually!) don't want to filter the header lines. I have a filter (for the user agent, not the transfer agent) that passes through all lines up to and including the first line with no non-blank characters (e.g., up to the first empty line), and then does interesting things with the remaining lines. Michael also asks: > BUT, what I don't understand is why you need this -- essentially every > modern text editor, whether it's vi or emacs or Word Perfect or or > whatever, does "word wrap", that is, where you type continuously and it > take care of the newlines for you. And any reasonable mail program on > a UNIX box that I've seen lets you choose what editor you want to use > to compose mail with. Am I missing something? One user's "reasonable" is another person's "lousy". I'll give two examples. First, some people do use word wrap, but they set the length of the line to the width of their terminal (or terminal window); this often exceeds 100 characters. (This can be a problem with vi, which defines the wrap margin as a distance from the right; this varies depending on the width of the terminal.) Second, at least one user agent (the one in Sun OpenWindows 3.0) wraps on the screen without wrapping lines in the file being sent; the sending user *thinks* the lines look nice, and a receiving user with the same user agent does, too; everyone else gets one line per paragraph. Everyone seems to think that sendmail is the only reasonable UNIX-based message transfer agent. I've found that /bin/mail in SVR4 is very nice. It can match address patterns the way sendmail can, but never has such "deep" tree of decisions at any one time. (SVR4 has a program called "sendmail"; it's used only for transport over TCP/IP, in the same way uux is used for transport over uucp links.) If you want nothing to do with "commercial" operating systems (from such vendors as Sun and HP/Apollo), feel free to sneer. If your UNIX platform is moving toward SVR4 (a direction even OSF has endorsed), I think you'll find the new mail transport agent to be very nice. Paul S. R. Chisholm, AT&T Bell Laboratories/EasyLink Services, att!pegasus!psrc, psrc@pegasus.att.com, AT&T Mail !psrchisholm I'm not speaking for my employer, or for the guys who now hold the trademark on the word UNIX; I'm just speaking my mind. From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 18 04:46:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09390; Wed, 18 Nov 92 04:46:44 PST Received: from mozart.aero.ufl.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09383; Wed, 18 Nov 92 04:46:05 PST Received: from localhost by mozart.aero.ufl.edu (5.61ufl/4.10) id AA24804; Wed, 18 Nov 92 07:46:00 -0500 Message-Id: <9211181246.AA24804@mozart.aero.ufl.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: More error handling questions Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 07:45:59 -0500 From: mauricio@mozart.aero.ufl.edu X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Today I received the following error message: ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 421 seq.hull.ac.uk.tcp... Deferred: Connection timed out during user open with sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk ----- Unsent message follows ----- [...] What does the above mean? How can I have my mailing list to retry sending this message to the subscriber in question? From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 18 10:03:34 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09793; Wed, 18 Nov 92 10:03:34 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09786; Wed, 18 Nov 92 10:03:28 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA07336; Wed, 18 Nov 92 12:03:46 CST Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 12:03:46 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211181803.AA07336@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: mauricio@mozart.aero.ufl.edu's message of Wed, 18 Nov 92 07:45:59 -0500 <9211181246.AA24804@mozart.aero.ufl.edu> Subject: More error handling questions Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 07:45:59 -0500 From: mauricio@mozart.aero.ufl.edu X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Today I received the following error message: ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 421 seq.hull.ac.uk.tcp... Deferred: Connection timed out during user open with sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk ----- Unsent message follows ----- [...] What does the above mean? How can I have my mailing list to retry sending this message to the subscriber in question? Notice the following pieces of that message: the number 421 and the word "Deferred". Any SMTP error whose 3 digit number starts with "4" indicates a transient failure. When an MTA sees a 4xx error code, it is supposed to hang on to the message and try again later. Also, when sendmail says it has "deferred" something, that means it has placed it back in the queue for a later attempt (exactly what it is supposed to do when it sees a 421 or any other 4xx code). Check the mail queue to see if it is still there. Sendmail will give up on a message after a configurable period of time (usually between 3 and 5 days). William LeFebvre Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Wed Nov 18 16:27:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10734; Wed, 18 Nov 92 16:27:44 PST Received: from nada.kth.se (cyklop.nada.kth.se) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10727; Wed, 18 Nov 92 16:27:34 PST Received: from localhost.nada.kth.se by nada.kth.se (5.61-bind 1.4+ida/nada-mx-1.0) id AA28085; Thu, 19 Nov 92 01:27:43 +0100 Message-Id: <9211190027.AA28085@nada.kth.se> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: <9211122320.AA10347@mercutio.admin.kth.se> from "Olle Jarnefors " "Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:20:46 +0100 " Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 01:27:42 +0100 From: Peter Svanberg Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Quoting: Olle Jarnefors > > This is a solution that can handle both mailers following the > new rules of RFC 1123 and the old rules of RFC 822, I think: > > 1) Change the SMTP sender to the preferred address for error > messages. > > 2) Change the "Sender:" field to the same address. > > 3) Add an "Errors-To:" field with the same address. (At least > I don't think that this can hurt, although this isn't a > standardized header field.) > > 4) If the original message already contained a "Sender:" field: > Transform it to an "Original-Sender:" field. > : > : > I have discussed this and other header problems connected with > mailing lists with the list administrator at nada.kth.se, Peter > Svanberg , and hope that he will present some > other ideas in this forum soon. Here I am! ;-) To add to the above list (this is what we do): 5) If the original message did not contain a "Reply-To:" field, add one containing the list address. 6) Remove any "Return-Receipt-To:" field. Do you consider this OK? "Return-Receipt-To: ADDR" makes Sendmail send a receipt to ADDR upon "final delivery" to the recipients mailbox. To use this on a mailing list is normally not advisable as you may end up with hundreds of receipts. 7) Add a field on this form: X-Mailing-List: [list name/description]*[sequence number] <[list address]> Example: X-Mailing-List: Mailing list admin*207 This is something we would like to promote. It is useful for (at least) three purposes: a) It identifies the message as a mailing list ditto and makes it easy for an incoming-mail-sorter. b) It serves as a loop detector - any incoming message containing this field with the correct list address can be dumped. c) The sequence number faciliates for a subscriber to find out if he missed some message on the list. Also, it is easier for anyone to refer to a number than to a long message-id. Other things that could be useful (we don't do this): 8) Add a Message-Id field if not present (and append "(added)" to make it possible to find out that it isn't an original id). 9) Put envelope contents in X-Envelope-From: and X-Envelope-To: and the received date (the date on the From_ line) in X-Received-Date. --- Peter Svanberg, NADA, KTH Email: psv@nada.kth.se Dept of Num An & CS, Royal Inst of Tech Phone: +46 8 790 71 46 S-100 44 Stockholm, SWEDEN Fax: +46 8 790 09 30 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 19 13:14:53 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA13849; Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:14:53 PST Received: from dw3f.ess.harris.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA13841; Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:14:45 PST Received: by dw3f.ess.harris.com (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA17614; Thu, 19 Nov 92 16:17:08 -0500 Message-Id: <9211192117.AA17614@dw3f.ess.harris.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: I bit the bullet and choked on it! Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 16:17:08 -0500 From: "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, Last week I tried to set up a mail server (install majordomo) on my DECstation 3100 running Ultrix 4.2. I ran into many more obstacles than I anticipated. Is there another mail server implementation that I can use that will give me the basics, but doesn't require perl and an upgrade to Ultrix 4.3? Thanks in advance Jim Truitt From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 19 13:44:51 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14031; Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:44:51 PST Received: from wugate.wustl.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14024; Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:44:23 PST Received: by wugate.wustl.edu (5.65c+/WUSTL-0.3) with SMTP id AA06492; Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:44:10 -0600 Received: by wubios (4.1/SMI-4.1.1); Thu, 19 Nov 92 15:44:08 CST From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Message-Id: <9211192144.AA20458@wubios> Subject: I bit the bullet and choked on it! (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:44:08 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL11] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 692 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "James O. Truitt " writes: > > Last week I tried to set up a mail server (install majordomo) > on my DECstation 3100 running Ultrix 4.2. I ran into many more > obstacles than I anticipated. > Although I think we have it finally installed on SunOS 4.1, I have to say that the amount of effort expended was considerably more than I would have anticipated from reading the fine paper about how the design of the system was to make it easy to install. -phil -- J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)] From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 19 13:59:25 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14109; Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:59:25 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14099; Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:59:20 PST Message-Id: <9211192159.AA14099@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: I bit the bullet and choked on it! (fwd) In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:44:08 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:59:19 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # "James O. Truitt " writes: # > # > Last week I tried to set up a mail server (install majordomo) # > on my DECstation 3100 running Ultrix 4.2. I ran into many more # > obstacles than I anticipated. # > # Although I think we have it finally installed on SunOS 4.1, I have to say that # the amount of effort expended was considerably more than I would have # anticipated from reading the fine paper about how the design of the system was # to make it easy to install. I don't think I actually claimed "ease of installation" as a goal in the Majordomo paper. Majordomo _was_ easier for me to install than listserv would have been, because I wrote Majordomo. It's not so easy for anyone else to install, because the documentation leaves a lot to be desired, and for that I apologize. I intend to correct that as soon as possible; I just haven't had any time to work on Majordomo lately, not do I expect to for another month or two. The particular problems that James Truitt ran into seem to be portability problems in running the software on something other than what I wrote it on (a Sun running SunOS 4.x). I don't have access to other machines to test the software on, so I'll have to rely on the user community to port it to other platforms and send me back diffs so that I can make future releases more inherently portable. A number of folks have managed to get it installed and working, so it _can_ be done. The more your environment differs from mine, and the less comfortable you are reading and fixing perl code, the harder that's going to be. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 19 14:29:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14237; Thu, 19 Nov 92 14:29:44 PST Received: from dw3f.ess.harris.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA14230; Thu, 19 Nov 92 14:29:32 PST Received: by dw3f.ess.harris.com (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA17922; Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:30:58 -0500 Message-Id: <9211192230.AA17922@dw3f.ess.harris.com> To: Brent Chapman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, jtruitt@dw3f.ess.harris.com Subject: Re: I bit the bullet and choked on it! (fwd) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:59:19 PST." <9211192159.AA14099@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:30:57 -0500 From: "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi Brent and all, I didn't mean to imply that majordomo was hard to install. It's difficult for me because I don't already have perl and I'm running Ultrix 4.2. If I already had these things in place I'm sure the installation would have been fairly simple. My installation problems do not stem from majordomo, but my own particular workstation. I still want majordomo. I'm trying to locate a machine that has everything I need and where I can convince the owner/administrator to let me do it. We have many, many action teams, user groups, software improvement teams, interest groups, etc... These groups meet on some routine basis and this is fine, but with majordomo you move into the realm of being able to meet continuously. You don't have to wait a month for the next meeting to discuss a new thought. You can be sharing everyday. I will have majordomo, but I may have to wait. So I'll take what I can get for now. Thanks to all and apologies to the major Jim Truitt From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 19 23:01:17 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15144; Thu, 19 Nov 92 23:01:17 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15038; Thu, 19 Nov 92 21:37:56 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA05143; Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:37:27 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA06624; Fri, 20 Nov 92 00:37:26 EST Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 00:37:26 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211200537.AA06624@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: LSTSRV-L@uga.cc.uga.edu Cc: unix-listserv@stormking.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211162114.AA25926@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> (message from Eric Thomas on Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:43:35 +0100) Subject: Large list processing - battle of the LISTSERVs Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In reply to my message on LSTSRV-L suggesting a 3-way split of a large (10000 subscriber) mailing list between BITNET LISTSERV, Unix LISTSERV, and a Usenet newsgroup, Eric Thomas writes: > I'm afraid I don't follow the logic. Apart from the fact that the average > distribution takes one order of magnitude less resources on BITNET than on > the Internet (and that's quoting an *average* reduction factor - for a list > of this size the difference would be even bigger), usenet is not going to > save any bandwidth if there are only 10,000 people interested in the > information, as the postings will be sent to a lot more hosts than it would > with the list. I'm not sure exactly what "resources" you are comparing when you say that BITNET uses an order of magnitude less to distribute messages (and it's not clear whether you are comparing BITNET to Internet SMTP, Internet NNTP, or something else). My feeling is that any comparison of "resources" will be a case of apples and oranges, especially when comparing networks as different as BITNET and Internet. What matters is whether the owners and other users of the resources in question feel whether the resources are overloaded or not. If dumping 8000 mail addresses for expansion on a single INTERBIT MAILER doesn't significantly affect its ability to forward other mail in a timely fashion, or do any of the other things it is supposed to do, then there is no problem. The only people who can adequately judge that are the administrators of the INTERBIT MAILER in question. As for a comparison between mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups, I think that just comparing "bandwidth" is rather simplistic. First of all, even bandwidth comparisons are difficult, since netnews typically batches hundreds of articles together for transmission, often using compression, while mail tends to be piece by piece. Second, one of the big advantages of newsgroups is that the distribution mechanism is completely separate from mail. If so many large messages are sent that the spooling area for news overflows, there is usually no impact on the mail system. Also, only one copy of each message is stored, regardless of the number of recipients on each machine. Finally, Usenet newsgroups are a different medium than mailing lists - they have more topical organization than mailing lists, and it is much easier to drop in and out of a newsgroup whenever one wants to. Many people gateway mailing lists to local newsgroups just to take advantage of the features of the medium. So my feeling is that unless there are real problems with gatewaying to a newsgroup (like inappropriate postings from news readers) newsgroup gateways are desirable whenever a significant number of subscribers would prefer to receive the list as a newsgroup. > This list was apparently set up to distribute announcement/digest type > messages, rather than to solicit discussions. This does not mean that a newsgroup is inappropriate; a moderated newsgroup might be desirable if people preferred to receive messages through the medium of news, especially if the postings were large (e.g. postscript documents). However, given the short-term nature of the list, it does seem like setting up newsgroup and other gateways might not be worth the trouble. However, I think it is worth considering if the NAVIGATE workshop is offered again. > May I ask what adding a unix so-called-LISTSERV Internet list would buy you? I'm sorry if the existence of a different (and somewhat incompatible) implementation of LISTSERV bothers you. If you want, trademark the name LISTSERV, I don't care - I didn't write or name the Unix implementation - I just use it, and like it. > I realize I am sounding dense, but I simply don't understand what there is > to gain from splitting a perfectly working list into two separate lists > using different, incompatible software and then attempting to somehow > reconcile the whole mess, especially if postings are infrequent. The BITNET and Internet communities have different needs and preferences, and it is not surprising that there are differences between the two LISTSERV implementations. However, they are compatible enough that the 5 or 6 commands which are all that 90% of the subscribers ever use are the same. Given a list split and gatewayed between BITNET and Internet, there are advantages for the subscribers on both networks. The first advantage (and the reason I suggested it in the beginning) is that the INTERBIT mail gateway only has to expand one address, and the peered Unix LISTSERVs can spread the mail load amongst themselves more easily than appears to be the case with BITNET LISTSERV and the INTERBIT gateways. But there are other reasons why people on the Internet might prefer to subscribe to the Internet half of a mailing list. One is that the latest version of Unix LISTSERV supports interactive sessions, so that Internet users don't have to wait for mail batch processing to subscribe/unsubscribe/etc. Yes, I know that BITNET LISTSERV has a similar feature (using RSCS SEND, I think). But that feature isn't accessible to users who aren't on BITNET. Another feature is the ability to subscribe to a digested version of the mailing list, automatically created by Unix LISTSERV. Other, less visible, features could include better support for future Internet mail standards than might be available on the INTERBIT gateways. Finally, I don't think that "reconcil[ing] the whole mess" will be that difficult. I believe that both implementations of LISTSERV support mail gateways to Usenet newsgroups - there seems to me to be no reason why the same features couldn't be used to gateway between the two LISTSERV systems. > The LISTSERV backbone happily delivers 4-6 millions of messages a day and > few sites ever complain about resulting CPU or network load. The only issue > is what happens to private mail on the poor machine which suddenly gets > 8,500 recipients to handle, and if it is a problem it should be easy to peer > the list. I'm sure that the BITNET LISTSERV system is by far the most efficient way of delivering mail to sites which are on BITNET. It may even be more efficient at delivering mail to sites which aren't. But that doesn't mean that Unix LISTSERV may not have more to offer to Internet subscribers, who may care less about efficiency than about the features which are available to them. And it doesn't mean that there is no reason to provide the lists as Usenet newsgroups as well. I'm not proposing that everybody move all their BITNET LISTSERV lists onto Unix LISTSERV lists. But I think having two implementations for the two communities, and taking advantage of both, it a better solution than insisting that everybody use one or the other. @alex From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 01:08:58 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15372; Fri, 20 Nov 92 01:08:58 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15365; Fri, 20 Nov 92 01:08:49 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA09849; Fri, 20 Nov 1992 04:08:35 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA07142; Fri, 20 Nov 92 04:08:33 EST Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 04:08:33 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211200908.AA07142@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: brent@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211050446.AA05019@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> (message from Brent Chapman on Wed, 04 Nov 92 20:46:39 -0800) Subject: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Michael H. Morse" writes: > First, we need to standardize on subscription requests. There are > people still maintaining lists by hand, but they should tell folks a > standard message to put in a mailr request. For lack of a better way, > I suggest "subscribe list-name realname" (happens to be the Bitnet > Listserv syntax). "Brent Chapman" replies: > The problem with that syntax is, there's no way to subscribe an > address other than the one the mail appears to come from. > If users want to include their real name along with their subscription > request, they can easily do it as a comment in their address (i.e., > "subscribe foobar Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman)". For the sake of compatibility with BITNET and Unix LISTSERV, which both use the "subscribe list-name realname" syntax, might I suggest that if people have a need to provide an alternate address which should be subscribed, that there be a separate command (the ADDRESS, PATH or RETURN-PATH commands of some mail-based file retrieval commands come to mind). Having a spearate command to change the address can be useful for any command which will generate mail in response, whether it is a subscription request or something else. @alex From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 05:46:41 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15660; Fri, 20 Nov 92 05:46:41 PST Received: from eagle.lerc.nasa.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15653; Fri, 20 Nov 92 05:46:23 PST Received: Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:46:27 EST from sandman.lerc.nasa.gov by eagle.lerc.nasa.gov (4.1/LeRC/DLW/TAF(1.2-main)) Received: Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:46:26 -0500 by sandman.lerc.nasa.gov (920330.SGI/LeRC/DLW/TAF(1.2-local)) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:46:26 -0500 From: drich@sandman.lerc.nasa.gov (Daniel Rich) Message-Id: <9211201346.AA02707@sandman.lerc.nasa.gov> To: "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" Cc: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: I bit the bullet and choked on it! (fwd) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> On Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:30:57 -0500, "James O. Truitt (407)984-5791 W2/7742 FAX (407)984-6323" said: James> It's difficult for me because I don't already have perl and James> I'm running Ultrix 4.2. If I already had these things in place James> I'm sure the installation would have been fairly simple. We have both perl4.035 and majordomo running on a DECstation 5500 with Ultrix 4.2. While I admit it wasn't the easiest piece of software I have a ever installed, it wasn't that bad. I followed the instructions in the paper, and it went right in (with only a little hacking). James> We have many, many action teams, user groups, software James> improvement teams, interest groups, etc... These groups meet on some James> routine basis and this is fine, but with majordomo you move into the James> realm of being able to meet continuously. You don't have to wait a James> month for the next meeting to discuss a new thought. You can be sharing James> everyday. I will have majordomo, but I may have to wait. So I'll take James> what I can get for now. That is something like what we are using it for. Right now, I only have one list running on it, and it is closed, but I have several others that we plan on moving over to it in the near future. It does work, and well! -- Dan Rich | drich@lerc.nasa.gov | (216) 433-4000 Sr. Systems Engineer | "Danger, you haven't seen the last of me!" RMS Technologies, Inc. | "No, but the first of you turns my stomach!" NASA Lewis Research Center | -- The Firesign Theatre's Nick Danger From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 07:24:34 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15767; Fri, 20 Nov 92 07:24:34 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15760; Fri, 20 Nov 92 07:24:27 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14472>; Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:24:34 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA20235 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.Com); Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:15:27 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA23767 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.Com); Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:15:26 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9211201515.AA23767@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:15:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: <9211200908.AA07142@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> from "Alexander Dupuy" at Nov 20, 92 04:08:33 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1223 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk dupuy@cs.columbia.edu writes: > For the sake of compatibility with BITNET and Unix LISTSERV, which both use > the "subscribe list-name realname" syntax, might I suggest that if people have > a need to provide an alternate address which should be subscribed, that there > be a separate command (the ADDRESS, PATH or RETURN-PATH commands of some > mail-based file retrieval commands come to mind). Having a spearate command > to change the address can be useful for any command which will generate mail > in response, whether it is a subscription request or something else. Your comments about a generic path command are good, and that's what many MBASes use right now. However, I disagree that compatibility with BITNET LISTSERV is important. BITNET's LISTSERV was designed for BITNET, and it shows; a proper system for the Internet *should* be redesigned without being held back by previous systems. -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 07:56:31 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15800; Fri, 20 Nov 92 07:56:31 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15791; Fri, 20 Nov 92 07:56:21 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa22715; 20 Nov 92 10:44 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15221; Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:46:22 EST Message-Id: <9211201546.AA15221@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:46:22 EST In-Reply-To: Alexander Dupuy "Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests" (Nov 20, 4:08am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu, List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Cc: brent@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > For the sake of compatibility with BITNET and Unix LISTSERV, which both use > the "subscribe list-name realname" syntax, might I suggest that if people have > a need to provide an alternate address which should be subscribed, that there > be a separate command (the ADDRESS, PATH or RETURN-PATH commands of some > mail-based file retrieval commands come to mind). Having a spearate command > to change the address can be useful for any command which will generate mail > in response, whether it is a subscription request or something else. In fact, that's what we do here (we use "address" or "set address"). Actually, I've implemented this without having to change the Listserv for Unix code. Before presenting the incoming message to Listserv, I run it through a small Perl script that scans for the "address" command. If it finds one, it substitutes the e-mail address given for the "From " line address. Thus I didn't have to hack any C code. This is not perfect (what to do with multiple "address" commands, etc), but it seems to solve 99.99% of the problem. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 08:50:47 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15874; Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:50:47 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15867; Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:50:39 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA23227; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:50:21 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA09615; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:50:18 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:50:18 -0500 Message-Id: <9211201650.AA09615@cs.bu.edu> To: LSTSRV-L@uga.cc.uga.edu, dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Subject: Re: Large list processing - battle of the LISTSERVs Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, unix-listserv@stormking.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Gentlemen, this is in reply to both messages sent recently by Mr. Alex Dupuy and Mr. Eric Thomas; I would like to clarify a few things and give credit were necessary. ET> general, then let's talk bandwidth/resources, and the conclusion is that ET> a usenet group with only 10k subscribers is a waste of resources and When referring to "conclusions" like this, it would be helpful to provide references to studies that support such a claim. ET> bandwidth due to the tremendous amount of hosts which will get ET> information they are not interested in, batched or not batched. Keep in mind that each site CHOOSES which news groups to carry and which not to, so such generalizations COULD be, but not necessarily ARE true. AD> I'm sorry if the existence of a different (and somewhat incompatible) AD> implementation of LISTSERV bothers you. ET> You got it wrong. I have no problem with the existence of 200 unix list ET> managers, as long as they don't call themselves 'unix listserv version ET> x.y' and don't claim in their documentation to be a 'port of the bitnet ET> listserver'. In my next version of whatever is that I am doing, I specifically mention: **** LISTSERV is a system that was originally designed by Eric Thomas for BITNET nodes and extensive help on that system is available from your favorite BITNET node (uga.cc.uga.edu for example; send email to listserv@uga.cc.uga.edu for more information). This version is a bitnet- flavored UNIX implementation (not a port of the original LISTSERV), written (and still developed) by Tasos Kotsikonas and a group of current users. No connection exists between the two implementations, except that the latter was influenced by the the former, and lots of requests are similar. **** [comments on the truthfulness of the above are welcome]. Now, what each list manager calls himself/herself has no relevance to the discussion. ET> How do you think I feel when users start reporting bugs they ET> found on these servers to *me*, and then insulting me for having made I would kindly ask you to have them contact me. So far NO ONE HAS INSULTED ME ABOUT ANYTHING!!!! And there have been a lot of bug reports. ET> Then how come people on the Internet aren't asking for the 3500 existing ET> BITNET lists to be split in this fashion for their convenience? Try Mr. Dupuy just did. Others may follow. 3 ex-BITNET nodes have switched to whatever is that I have provided people with, one of them I think being NASA. AD> I believe that both implementations of LISTSERV support mail ET> This is exactly the kind of statement that I object to. The software you ET> are using is NOT an implementation of LISTSERV. It isn't compatible, it I suspect Mr. Dupuy refers to the CONCEPT and the IDEA of listserv. ET> it cannot connect to LISTSERV as a peer, it just does about the same sort of Let me just say that 2 sites have successfully peered their Internet lists (using we all know what) with BITNET ones; unfortunately, I do not have the specifics and cannot say that it works both ways, so Mr. Thomas may have a point, so some clarifications are invited as to why we cannot connect as a peer. Sincerely, Tasos From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 08:55:42 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15893; Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:55:42 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15886; Fri, 20 Nov 92 08:55:36 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA23292; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:55:50 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA09711; Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:55:47 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:55:47 -0500 Message-Id: <9211201655.AA09711@cs.bu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Cc: brent@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > "Michael H. Morse" writes: > I suggest "subscribe list-name realname" (happens to be the Bitnet > Listserv syntax). > > "Brent Chapman" replies: > The problem with that syntax is, there's no way to subscribe an > address other than the one the mail appears to come from. I totally object to this approach; all software should provide some means of security; this approach is an open invitation for chaos. Tasos PS: The upcoming version 6.0 of UNIX Listserv will let users change their address by using a password, IF the owner allows such changes to be made. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 09:01:58 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15912; Fri, 20 Nov 92 09:01:58 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA15905; Fri, 20 Nov 92 09:01:52 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA23486; Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:02:10 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA09870; Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:02:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:02:09 -0500 Message-Id: <9211201702.AA09870@cs.bu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, chk@alias.com Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > MBASes use right now. However, I disagree that compatibility with BITNET > LISTSERV is important. BITNET's LISTSERV was designed for BITNET, and it Please allow me to strongly disagree with these comments and reiterate Alex's suggestion that compatibility SHOULD be enforced. We are in the business of proliferating the idea of automating mailing lists, and not in the business of how each network's mailing lists are different from the other's. BITNET Listserv is the primary drive and example for the rest of us to follow. tasos From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 09:27:44 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16009; Fri, 20 Nov 92 09:27:44 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16000; Fri, 20 Nov 92 09:27:36 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa23777; 20 Nov 92 12:17 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15306; Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:18:48 EST Message-Id: <9211201718.AA15306@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 12:18:47 EST In-Reply-To: Anastasios Kotsikonas "Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests" (Nov 20, 11:55am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: Anastasios Kotsikonas , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Cc: brent@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I totally object to this approach; all software should provide some means > of security; this approach is an open invitation for chaos. Welcome to the Internet! :-) (I couldn't resist! Seriously, Tasos and I have gone many rounds on this, both understand each other, but seem to have different tolerence for chaos.) --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 10:23:07 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16109; Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:23:07 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16101; Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:23:03 PST Message-Id: <9211201823.AA16101@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 20 Nov 92 11:55:47 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:23:02 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) writes: # > "Michael H. Morse" writes: # > I suggest "subscribe list-name realname" (happens to be the Bitnet # > Listserv syntax). # > # > "Brent Chapman" replies: # > The problem with that syntax is, there's no way to subscribe an # > address other than the one the mail appears to come from. # # I totally object to this approach; all software should provide some means # of security; this approach is an open invitation for chaos. There is a level of security here. Requests which affect addresses other than the one the message comes from (or _appears_ to come from; we all know how easy that is to fake) require approval from the list owner; they don't just happen automatically. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 12:36:00 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16652; Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:36:00 PST Received: from sumax.seattleu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16645; Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:35:52 PST Received: by sumax.seattleu.edu id AA12996 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@greatcircle.com); Fri, 20 Nov 92 12:37:37 -0800 Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 12:37:36 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Garner Subject: Standard Mail Header format To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, brent@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211200908.AA07142@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> Message-Id: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am planning on just pulling down my entire mail folder to a Mac, and processing it there (to provide a pseudo listserv, digester, etc...). I'm just not up to learning Unix/Internet/scripting well enough to install majordomo or write my own stuff on the Unix end of things. So my question is this: where is the best source to get information about the current standards for Internet mail header formats? Thanks, Jeff -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jeff Garner Shoestring Software Products jgarner@seattleu.edu (206) 232-1096 Mercer Island, Washington jgarner@visual.spk.wa.us From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 13:05:02 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16691; Fri, 20 Nov 92 13:05:02 PST Received: from yonge.csri.toronto.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16682; Fri, 20 Nov 92 13:04:49 PST Received: from alias by yonge.csri.toronto.edu with UUCP id <14477>; Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:04:08 -0500 Received: from dino.alias.com by barney.alias.com with SMTP id AA24260 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for tasos@cs.bu.edu); Fri, 20 Nov 92 15:49:10 -0500 Received: by dino.alias.com id AA28444 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Fri, 20 Nov 92 15:49:06 -0500 From: chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) Message-Id: <9211202049.AA28444@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests To: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:49:04 -0500 Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211201702.AA09870@cs.bu.edu> from "Anastasios Kotsikonas" at Nov 20, 92 12:02:09 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL8] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2166 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In <9211201702.AA09870@cs.bu.edu>, tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) writes: > I (Harald Koch) write: > > MBASes use right now. However, I disagree that compatibility with BITNET > > LISTSERV is important. BITNET's LISTSERV was designed for BITNET, and it > > Please allow me to strongly disagree with these comments and reiterate Alex's > suggestion that compatibility SHOULD be enforced. We are in the business of > proliferating the idea of automating mailing lists, and not in the business > of how each network's mailing lists are different from the other's. > > BITNET Listserv is the primary drive and example for the rest of us to follow. BITNET Listserv is a bad example to follow. It was written for a rigidly controlled, rigidly standardized network. It assumes, for example, that the headers in a mail message contain the correct reply address. Unfortunately, the Greater Internet Area is not like that. There's dumb UUCP hosts, there's gateways to Compuserve, MCI Mail, Genie, X.400 networks, DECNet, and so on. It's all very nice to say "all these gateways should be following the standards", but they don't. That's reality, and we have to live with it. As a result, we need some way for users to be able to specify their *real* mailling address. There are two ways to do this: Use the BITNET LISTSERV "standard", and then kludge around it with additional commands (like address chk@alias.com), or we can fix it properly *now*, while we're still "proliferating the idea of automated mailing lists". As for security concerns, it's simplicity to ask the list maintainer to verify requests whose From: address is different from the subscription address. Majordomo does this, for example. Besides, it's *trivially easy* to forge electronic mail on the Internet; security concerns in this environment are misplaced at best. -- Main's Law: For every | C. Harald Koch Alias Research, Inc. Toronto, ON action, there is an equal | chk@alias.com (work-related mail) and opposite goverment | chk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (permanent address) program. | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA (AMPRNet) From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 13:49:06 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16816; Fri, 20 Nov 92 13:49:06 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA16795; Fri, 20 Nov 92 13:47:53 PST Message-Id: <9211202147.AA16795@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: Jeff Garner Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Standard Mail Header format In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 20 Nov 1992 12:37:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 13:47:52 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk # So my question is this: where is the best source to get information # about the current standards for Internet mail header formats? RFC822, as amended by RFC1123. The Internet RFC series is available for anonymous FTP from lots of sites, including ftp.uu.net, directory "inet/rfc". -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 16:42:58 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17693; Fri, 20 Nov 92 16:42:58 PST Received: from noc2.dccs.upenn.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17686; Fri, 20 Nov 92 16:42:51 PST Received: from GYNKO.CIRC.UPENN.EDU by noc2.dccs.upenn.edu id AA29223; Fri, 20 Nov 92 19:43:08 -0500 Received: by gynko.circ.upenn.edu id AA02218; Fri, 20 Nov 92 19:42:51 EST From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) Posted-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 19:42:50 EST Message-Id: <9211210042.AA02218@gynko.circ.upenn.edu> Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests To: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 19:42:50 EST Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, chk@alias.com In-Reply-To: <9211201702.AA09870@cs.bu.edu>; from "Anastasios Kotsikonas" at Nov 20, 92 12:02 pm Organization: GSP Whitewater Slalom Racing Team X-Queued-Mail: 1007 pending mail messages (1742213 characters) X-Last-River: Spring Creek X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >BITNET Listserv is the primary drive and example for the rest of us to follow. That's a pretty bold statement to make in the absence of substantial supporting evidence. While I like some of the things that Bitnet Listserv's are capable of, by no means do I consider them the be-all and end-all of automated mail handling agents. I see no reason at this point to annoint it as "the primary drive and example", especially since it does not cope well with some of the nuances of the diverse Internet/Usenet/Fidonet/ environment. ---Rsk From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 17:20:18 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17849; Fri, 20 Nov 92 17:20:18 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA17842; Fri, 20 Nov 92 17:20:08 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA22884; Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:20:26 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA09390; Fri, 20 Nov 92 20:20:24 EST Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 20:20:24 EST Message-Id: <9211210120.AA09390@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> From: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy - CS type militant) To: LSTSRV-L@uga.cc.uga.edu Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, unix-listserv@stormking.com In-Reply-To: <9211201352.AA08472@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> (message from Eric Thomas on Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:25:45 +0100) Subject: Large list processing - battle of the LISTSERVs Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > And my reply was that if you want to talk bandwidth or resources in general, > then let's talk bandwidth/resources, and the conclusion is that a usenet > group with only 10k subscribers is a waste of resources and bandwidth due to > the tremendous amount of hosts which will get information they are not > interested in, batched or not batched. I don't have the usenet arbitron stats available to me at the moment, but my impression was that an average newsgroup had roughly 40,000 readers. So a 10,000 reader initial base is farly respectable, especially given that many others are likely to subscribe to a newsgroup that might never sign up for a mailing list. As for the supposed waste of bandwidth involved in hosts getting articles they are not interested in, that is the point of my apples vs. oranges comment. Usenet is based on the idea that some people have resources (bandwidth, cpu, disk space) that they don't mind "wasting". When I say that usenet is efficient for large discussion groups, I say that not because it uses less resources overall, but because it makes better use of limited resources at the expense of wasting some which are abundant. Hosts which are happy to waste bandwidth will get fairly complete newsfeeds and won't care about articles that nobody reads. Hosts on dialup UUCP links that care about their bandwidth will only carry the newsgroup if there are users at their site who are interested, and if they do, news will be more efficient than mail for them. me> The only people who can adequately judge that are the administrators of me> the INTERBIT MAILER in question. > Which you will recall is exactly what I said - it is for UB to decide. Well, I'm not an expert on BITNET, but I thought that there were only two public INTERBIT gateways on BITNET (you said there were more on EARN). In the case of UB, their MAILER may use UB's Internet connection, but in the case of a large list on a non-Internet-connected site, the burden would fall on one of the two public INTERBIT MAILERs. > You got it wrong. I have no problem with the existence of 200 unix list > managers, as long as they don't call themselves 'unix listserv version x.y' > and don't claim in their documentation to be a 'port of the bitnet > listserver'. As I said before, I don't care about the naming issue. me> ...the INTERBIT mail gateway only has to expand one address, and the me> peered Unix LISTSERVs can spread the mail load amongst themselves more me> easily than appears to be the case with BITNET LISTSERV and the INTERBIT me> gateways. > And you're the one complaining about apple vs orange comparisons? Give me a > break. Of course a peered unix list is more parallel than a non-peered > BITNET list, but what makes you think the same thing can't be done just as > easily by peering the lists between BITNET LISTSERV's? In addition, this > would keep the "single logical list" vision and automatically send new > subscribers off to the best site. I'm aware that peering a list amongst BITNET LISTSERVs is a very good way of spreading the BITNET subscribers around (in fact, it probably does a better job of spreading BITNET subscribers around than Un*x L*STSERV does with Internet subscribers, since the BITNET topology is more static and visible than the Internet topology). But you yourself pointed out that BITNET LISTSERV's idea of the best peer for Internet subscribers was likely to be an EARN site (not very optimal for lists with mostly U.S. Internet subscribers), and have proposed various roundrobin schemes to deal with the fact that on most peered BITNET LISTSERV lists, all the Internet subscribers end up on one peer. > Then how come people on the Internet aren't asking for the 3500 existing > BITNET lists to be split in this fashion for their convenience? ... If they > liked the unix list servers so much, they would start a revolution and move > all the lists to unix - wouldn't they? Probably because most Internet subscribers don't know very much about mail-based server technology. Un*x L*STSERV is relatively recent, and the interactive features have only become available in the latest release. I would guess that most BITNET LISTSERV subscribers don't even know that there are other mail-based subscription mechanisms out there. And I'm not proposing that all the existing LISTSERV lists be moved to Unix, only that some lists may want to provide gatewayed Un*x L*STSERV lists as an option for their subscribers. me> I believe that both implementations of LISTSERV support mail ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > This is exactly the kind of statement that I object to. The software you > are using is NOT an implementation of LISTSERV. It isn't compatible, it > cannot connect to LISTSERV as a peer, it just does about the same sort of > things. Internet people normally say "implementation of X" only when they > have a piece of software which complies to some RFC or other standard; > however they seem to make an exception for LISTSERV. Even if there were an RFC, it would probably specify only the end-user mail interface. and not the peer interface. And given the different natures of the BITNET and Internet architectures, I think it is pointless to try and find one peering interface which works for both of them. Since most users don't ever see the peering interface, I don't see this as a problem. It might be nice to have an RFC for the Internet peering mechanism, though. > I have trouble thinking of Alex as an end user rather than a CS-type > militant. I like this! Thanks for the compliment! I do favor strongly typed languages. > But you really don't need to worry about me: since unix is unanimously > considered to be the system of the future and my code only works on > dinosaurs, you can safely ignore it and develop your own protocols. Which I > am sure you will do no matter what my advice might be. Which is what is happening, especially with other Unix mail-based subscription managers. I find it ironic that Tasos and I are the ones arguing for as much subscriber-interface compatibility as possible between the BITNET and Internet worlds, while you and most of the rest of the Internet list-managers seem content to ignore each other's work, rather than trying to create a more powerful synthesis of the two (and no, this doesn't mean I want to force everybody's mail servers to be running the same implementation). @alex From List-Managers-Owner Fri Nov 20 20:42:57 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18291; Fri, 20 Nov 92 20:42:57 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA18284; Fri, 20 Nov 92 20:42:50 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA04906; Fri, 20 Nov 92 23:43:02 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA01558; Fri, 20 Nov 92 23:43:02 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 23:43:02 -0500 Message-Id: <9211210443.AA01558@cs.bu.edu> To: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu, tasos@cs.bu.edu Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, chk@alias.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > of automated mail handling agents. I see no reason at this point to > annoint it as "the primary drive and example", especially since it > does not cope well with some of the nuances of the diverse > Internet/Usenet/Fidonet/ environment. Please keep in mind that I am referring to the ideas that the BITNET listserv has introduced on list management, not how it does things. When building a system, any system, you simply cannot ignore what has already been done on the subject. This is how research works; you study what other people have done, point out weaknesses and errors, and build something better according to your taste. Unless you introduce a totally radical new idea, you cannot help but be influenced by existing studies on the subject. And I invite people to tell us what system they think does mailing list management best in a conceptual way!!! Tasos From List-Managers-Owner Sat Nov 21 06:45:13 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19048; Sat, 21 Nov 92 06:45:13 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA19039; Sat, 21 Nov 92 06:43:33 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA19440; Sat, 21 Nov 92 09:42:26 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Sat, 21 Nov 92 02:14:47 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 02:05:15 UTC In-Reply-To: <9211210042.AA02218@gynko.circ.upenn.edu> Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes: > >BITNET Listserv is the primary drive and example for the rest of us to follo > > That's a pretty bold statement to make in the absence of substantial > supporting evidence. While I like some of the things that Bitnet Listserv's > are capable of, by no means do I consider them the be-all and end-all > of automated mail handling agents. I see no reason at this point to > annoint it as "the primary drive and example", especially since it > does not cope well with some of the nuances of the diverse > Internet/Usenet/Fidonet/ environment. > > ---Rsk Amen. On at least two occasions I've seen LISTSERV refuse valid commands from valid users because of wrinkles in headers. In my case, my mail was rerouted through another host and LISTSERV at uiuc.edu was unable to recognize my SIGNOFF command. This problem has again taken up bandwidth on WX-TALK in the last week or so. Any piece of software should adapt to the user's way of working. It's my opinion that LISTSERV is, at least from the user's point of view, singularly obnoxious in demanding the user adapt to the program's way of working. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "When you ski, you dance with the mountain -- | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | and the mountain always leads." | From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 08:42:05 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04388; Mon, 23 Nov 92 08:42:05 PST Received: from VM1.NoDak.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04381; Mon, 23 Nov 92 08:41:53 PST Received: from SDSUVM.BITNET by VM1.NoDak.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4722; Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:41:23 CST Received: from SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU (MUSIC) by SDSUVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 5504; Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:37:41 CST Message-Id: <23NOV92.11477858.0040.MUSIC@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:37:39 CST From: Joe Moore To: Subject: List Managers Digest V1 #23 In-Reply-To: In reply to your message of SAT 21 NOV 1992 03:10:06 CST Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I (Harald Koch) write: > > > MBASes use right now. However, I disagree that compatibility with BITNET > > > LISTSERV is important. BITNET's LISTSERV was designed for BITNET, and it > > > > Please allow me to strongly disagree with these comments and reiterate Alex' > > suggestion that compatibility SHOULD be enforced. We are in the business of > > proliferating the idea of automating mailing lists, and not in the business > > of how each network's mailing lists are different from the other's. > > > > BITNET Listserv is the primary drive and example for the rest of us to follo > > BITNET Listserv is a bad example to follow. It was written for a rigidly > controlled, rigidly standardized network. It assumes, for example, that the .. rest of message deleted .. Then use the ADD command to add a subscription with a different address. Sorry, but I'm just a poor end user. I want some coherence in the world. I don't want (and won't) learn the syntax for a dozen different list servers. The command set used by Eric T's LISTSERV is well known. Please try to stick with it unless there is a GREAT reason not to. Joe Moore cc19@sdsumus.sdstate.edu From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 10:01:05 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04860; Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:01:05 PST Received: from note2.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04841; Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:00:41 PST Received: from z.nsf.gov by Note2.nsf.gov id aa24951; 23 Nov 92 11:57 EST Received: by z.nsf.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05628; Mon, 23 Nov 92 11:58:51 EST Message-Id: <9211231658.AA05628@z.nsf.gov> From: "Michael H. Morse" Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 11:58:50 EST In-Reply-To: Joe Moore "List Managers Digest V1 #23" (Nov 23, 10:37am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: List Managers Digest V1 #23 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Then use the ADD command to add a subscription with a different > address. > Sorry, but I'm just a poor end user. I want some coherence in the > world. I don't want (and won't) learn the syntax for a dozen > different list servers. The command set used by Eric T's LISTSERV > is well known. Please try to stick with it unless there is a GREAT > reason not to. Before we get too far into this, perhaps Tasos would be kind enough to post his summary of the meltdown of the Internet committee charged with harmonizing the commands of all the Listserv's. To say that there were strong feelings on both sides would be an understatement. I'm sure Majordomo's author would enjoy Eric's flame against people who try to replace over 400 hefty REXX modules (BITNET's Listserv) with a couple of hundred lines of Perl, and have the nerve to call it "Listserv"! I'm not saying we shouldn't try to resolve these differences and come up with a single syntax, I just want to point out that really good, sincere, people have tried and failed before us. --Mike From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 10:08:51 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04911; Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:08:51 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA04894; Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:08:18 PST Message-Id: <9211231808.AA04894@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: "Michael H. Morse" Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: List Managers Digest V1 #23 In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 23 Nov 1992 11:58:50 EST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:08:17 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Michael H. Morse" writes: # I'm sure # Majordomo's author would enjoy Eric's flame against people who try to # replace over 400 hefty REXX modules (BITNET's Listserv) with a couple # of hundred lines of Perl, and have the nerve to call it "Listserv"! Actually, I _don't_ call Majordomo "Listserv" any more. I did for a a month or so while it was under development, and when it was initially deployed at USENIX.ORG for the SAGE lists, but I decided that was a mistake and renamed it. The "listserv" alias at USENIX.ORG still exists (it points to "Majordomo"), but that's mainly because "listserv@usenix.org" appeared in print in a few places. All the Majordomo mail from USENIX.ORG now appears to come from "Majordomo@USENIX.ORG", and that's the address that's currently published for subscription to the SAGE lists. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 15:35:12 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00192; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:35:12 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00169; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:35:01 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA07487; Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:13:06 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA14324; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:13:04 EST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:13:04 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211232013.AA14324@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Cc: mmorse@z.nsf.gov In-Reply-To: <9211231658.AA05628@z.nsf.gov> (mmorse@z.nsf.gov) Subject: historical background Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michael Morse wrote: > Before we get too far into this, perhaps Tasos would be kind enough to > post his summary of the meltdown of the Internet committee charged with > harmonizing the commands of all the Listserv's. To say that there were > strong feelings on both sides would be an understatement. I'm sure > Majordomo's author would enjoy Eric's flame against people who try to > replace over 400 hefty REXX modules (BITNET's Listserv) with a couple > of hundred lines of Perl, and have the nerve to call it "Listserv"! Actually, I think Eric doesn't really mind Majordomo, since it doesn't use the name listserv anywhere. He seems to think a lot of the ethics of the Mailbase people, which sounds like an interesting system, even if the description John Martin posted: > The service is based on a large RDBMS - Ingres on a Sun4/470 - and is > written in C/ESQLC, bourne shell and now perl. makes it seem even heavier-weight than BU Un*x L*STSERV, or even the 400-odd modules of REXX in LISTSERV. Still, some of the features like sublists sound quite useful. @alex From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 15:35:29 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00214; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:35:29 PST Received: from cs.columbia.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00189; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:35:14 PST Received: from tiemann.cs.columbia.edu by cs.columbia.edu (5.65c/0.6/jba+ad) with SMTP id AA06450; Mon, 23 Nov 1992 14:49:12 -0500 Received: by tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+) id AA14276; Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:49:08 EST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:49:08 EST From: dupuy@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Message-Id: <9211231949.AA14276@tiemann.cs.columbia.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, unix-listserv@stormking.com Subject: Large list processing - battle of the LISTSERVs Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk There used to be an ARPANET "list of lists" (and may still be), but I think what Joe is referring to is some way to have the various mailing list software packages update some list automatically. @alex ----- Begin Included Message ----- From @VM1.NoDak.EDU:CC19@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU Mon Nov 23 11:28:39 1992 Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 10:25:00 CST From: Joe Moore To: Subject: Large list processing - battle of the LISTSERVs What the end users need more than anything is an automated clearinghouse for lists. Eric has done a good job of this with the LISTSERV LISTS file. We don't much care about peering or any of the guts. We want to know if there is a list on chinese mushrooms. Please work with the other unix list managers to create such a beast. If you don't know what I mean please ask. There should also be the option to set up a list that does NOT advertise itself. Joe Moore South Dakota State University cc19@sdsumus.sdstate.edu ----- End Included Message ----- From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 15:39:07 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00313; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:39:07 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00306; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:39:01 PST Received: from CS.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA14920; Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:02:15 -0500 From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Received: by cs.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA13117; Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:02:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:02:07 -0500 Message-Id: <9211231902.AA13117@cs.bu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, mmorse@z.nsf.gov Subject: Re: List Managers Digest V1 #23 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Before we get too far into this, perhaps Tasos would be kind enough to > post his summary of the meltdown of the Internet committee charged with > harmonizing the commands of all the Listserv's. To say that there were > strong feelings on both sides would be an understatement. I'm sure > ... > I'm not saying we shouldn't try to resolve these differences and come > up with a single syntax, I just want to point out that really good, > sincere, people have tried and failed before us. Unfortunately all of the above are true. So what are we left with? Let's see; we have had no consensus in the past, and I have serious doubts that we will ever have. However, we can still try to minimize differences. So my call is one to the "common sense" (as I see it); try to stick with conventions adopted by other people as much as you can; we will all benefit. If you do not agree with this, perhaps you can convince the rest of us to follow you. If you're not inclined to do that, we understand. Try to remember what happens when there are two video recording formats combined with 4 TV systems, and the current status of HDTV vs. DHDTV and the Japanese vs. the American vs. the European HDTV formats. And a word of caution: no flames please (to anyone); not that there have been any, but just in case; the ietf committee discussions broke down primarilydue to heated discussions where people could not keep their temper. Tasos From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 15:47:56 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00446; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:47:56 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00438; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:47:49 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA02755; Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:01:46 CST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:01:46 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211231901.AA02755@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Anastasios Kotsikonas's message of Fri, 20 Nov 92 23:43:02 -0500 <9211210443.AA01558@cs.bu.edu> Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 23:43:02 -0500 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk And I invite people to tell us what system they think does mailing list management best in a conceptual way!!! Grapevine and its successors! Bill From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 15:48:08 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00460; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:48:08 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00444; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:47:56 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA02752; Mon, 23 Nov 92 12:59:49 CST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 12:59:49 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211231859.AA02752@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: C. Harald Koch's message of Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:49:04 -0500 <9211202049.AA28444@dino.alias.com> Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk chk@alias.com (C. Harald Koch) writes: As for security concerns, it's simplicity to ask the list maintainer to verify requests whose From: address is different from the subscription address. Majordomo does this, for example. Besides, it's *trivially easy* to forge electronic mail on the Internet; security concerns in this environment are misplaced at best. Here is what I do with my homebrew list maintaining scripts (pre-Majordomo days). An incoming request can specify *ANY* address it so desires for adding OR deleting. The request is checked for correctness (adding: is the address already on the list, deleting: is the address really on the list). Once it is accepted, it is added to a file containing requests in machine-readable form and an acknowledgement is sent back to the address that the request came from (paying attention to "reply-to" fields in the header). Requests are actually processed only once a day (right around midnight). When the request is PROCESSED, an explanatory message (either "welcome" or "goodbye") is sent to the address AFFECTED and NOT to the address the request came from. So if jack@foo.com requests "delete jill@bar.com", an initial confirmation of receipt is sent to "jack@foo.com", then once the address is actually removed, a "goodbye" message is sent to "jill@bar.com". After much consideration, I decided that this was the best all-around approach. It minimized my workload while still providing enough feedback. If someone maliciously removed someone else's address, the victim would be duly informed and would be able to add him/herself right back on. Well, I guess it wouldn't be "right back on"---they'd be off the list for 24 hours. One additional thing that my request software does is: if a request to remove an address does not specify an address that appears verbatim in the list of addresses, it tries to generate a list of nearby addresses. It does this by extracting a portion of the host field (either the last 2 or 3 comonents of an Internet-style address) and does an "egrep [@.]name" against the main list. The resulting addresses are sent back to the requester along with an explanation that says, basically, "try again". I don't know if Majordomo does something like this or not. Why do I go to such great contortions? Back when I was still struggling with doing requests by hand, I discovered that it was VERY common for a request to come in for an address that didn't match exactly, but usually had a close match, say "joe@foo.bar.com" instead of "joe@belch.bar.com". Also, I got quite a few requests to remove, say, "joe@big.com", and the only address I could find was something like "sun-managers-incoming@big.com". I wanted to be able to handle as many of these abnormal "human intervention required" problems without involving me. Yes, I'm assuing that people will behave themselves. But as Mr. Koch points out: someone can always forge a From address or even an envelope FROM address. My scheme could probably be improved by sending out two initial confirmations of removal: one to the request's sender and one to the requested address (if they are different). William LeFebvre Sun-managers maintainer Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Northwestern University From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 15:54:48 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00558; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:54:48 PST Received: from hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu (hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca) by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00551; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:54:42 PST Received: from localhost by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2806>; Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:54:54 -0500 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, mmorse@z.nsf.gov Subject: Re: List Managers Digest V1 #23 In-Reply-To: tasos's message of Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:02:07 -0500. <9211231902.AA13117@cs.bu.edu> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:54:52 -0500 From: Chris Siebenmann Message-Id: <92Nov23.185454est.2806@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I think the most important thing a mailing list management program must do is cough up copious and clear help whenever asked, or whenever the user sends it something that's an error. Not even BITNET Listserv manages this; every time I sign up to a new listserv list I have to fight several layers of helpfiles to tell it that I really *do* want it to send me a copy of my own messages to the list. - cks From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 16:12:33 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00763; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:12:33 PST Received: from pex.eecs.nwu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00754; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:12:26 PST Received: by pex.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-NWU-2) id AA04668; Mon, 23 Nov 92 18:12:47 CST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 18:12:47 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Message-Id: <9211240012.AA04668@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: William LeFebvre's message of Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:01:46 CST <9211231901.AA02755@pex.eecs.nwu.edu> Subject: Re: Michael Morse's suggestion for standardizing subscription requests Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 13:01:46 CST From: phil@pex.eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 23:43:02 -0500 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk And I invite people to tell us what system they think does mailing list management best in a conceptual way!!! Grapevine and its successors! Well, I take that back. Not "best". Just that it does it "well". Bill From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 16:46:16 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01137; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:46:16 PST Received: from owl.nstn.ns.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA00963; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:27:04 PST Received: from cogs.ns.ca (sun1.cogs.ns.ca) by owl.nstn.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA20191; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:30:49 AST Received: by cogs.ns.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21575; Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:37:34 AST From: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Message-Id: <9211231937.AA21575@cogs.ns.ca> Subject: Subscribers Lists To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:37:34 AST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A question of etiquette. I want to make a list of subscribers available to everyone on the mailing list, but I'm not sure how much info I should release. It strikes me that whereas some folks might be perfectly willing to chat on the mailing list, they might not want individual mail. On the other hand, it doesn't make much sense to just send off names and institutions does it? How do the rest of you'all release subscriber's lists, and what info do you include? =========================================================================== Roger Mosher Phone (902)584-2226 College of Geographic Sciences Fax (902)584-7211 50 Elliott Road email roger@sun1.cogs.ns.ca Lawrencetown N.S. B0S 1P0 =========================================================================== From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 16:54:25 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01209; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:54:25 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA01200; Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:54:21 PST Message-Id: <9211240054.AA01200@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subscribers Lists In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:37:34 AST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:54:20 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) writes: # A question of etiquette. I want to make a list of subscribers available to # everyone on the mailing list, but I'm not sure how much info I should # release. It strikes me that whereas some folks might be perfectly willing # to chat on the mailing list, they might not want individual mail. On the # other hand, it doesn't make much sense to just send off names and institutions # does it? # # How do the rest of you'all release subscriber's lists, and what info do # you include? Majordomo as currently distributed will let anybody do a "list " command, which will send back the whole current list. Some folks have made changes to Majordomo so that a given list can be set so that only members of a list can issue the "list" command (i.e., you can only see the list if you're on it), but I haven't integrated these changes into the release yet. I don't think it's that big a deal. Even if I can't get the list of addresses out of Majordomo, I can probably dig it out of Sendmail with the "vrfy" command. One problem is the same one that Bill LeFebvre mentioned in another context earlier today: matching addresses. How does a program decide if "user@foo.bar.com" and "user@blech.bar.com" are the same person? How about "user@foo.bar.com" and "user@bar.com"? And what about "user@bar.com" versus "list-redist@bar.com". -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 23 20:44:47 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02930; Mon, 23 Nov 92 20:44:47 PST Received: from noc2.dccs.upenn.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA02923; Mon, 23 Nov 92 20:44:42 PST Received: from GYNKO.CIRC.UPENN.EDU by noc2.dccs.upenn.edu id AA08122; Mon, 23 Nov 92 23:44:43 -0500 Received: by gynko.circ.upenn.edu id AA23049; Mon, 23 Nov 92 23:44:11 EST From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) Posted-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 23:44:10 EST Message-Id: <9211240444.AA23049@gynko.circ.upenn.edu> Subject: Re: Subscribers Lists To: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 23:44:10 EST Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211231937.AA21575@cogs.ns.ca>; from "Roger Mosher" at Nov 23, 92 3:37 pm Organization: GSP Whitewater Slalom Racing Team X-Queued-Mail: 1022 pending mail messages (1815574 characters) X-Last-River: Spring Creek X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >How do the rest of you'all release subscriber's lists, and what info do >you include? I don't release subscriber lists, and I've arranged things so that sendmail's VRFY doesn't cough them up. (Then again, I use pretty primitive mailing list software.) Anyway, I figure that if people want to silently listen in, then I should not disturb them or disrupt their privacy by announcing their presence to the rest of the list (or anyone else). Of course, anyone who contributes to the list announces themselves, but I figure that's their choice. ---Rsk From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 24 04:21:30 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05929; Tue, 24 Nov 92 04:21:30 PST Received: from cheviot.ncl.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA05922; Tue, 24 Nov 92 04:21:17 PST Received: from turing.ncl.ac.uk by cheviot.ncl.ac.uk id (5.65cVUW/NCL-CMA.1.35 for ) with SMTP; Tue, 24 Nov 1992 12:20:26 GMT From: "John Martin" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Subscribers Lists To: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 12:20:13 WET Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9211231937.AA21575@cogs.ns.ca>; from "Roger Mosher" at Nov 23, 92 3:37 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello, Re: > How do the rest of you'all release subscriber's lists, and what info do > you include? > I have appended the response to sending the command 'review nisp' to our Mailbase server ('nisp' is one of our lists). To obtain this information, either: - the list is 'open' for review by non-members OR - the list is 'closed' for review by non-members but the person requesting the information is a member. Also, a member may ask to be 'hidden' so that their name does not appear on a 'review'. A list owner can see hidden and non-hidden members using the option 'total' on the review command: 'review total listname' Regards, John %%%%%%%%%%%%% begin included file %%%%%%%%%%%%% 24/11/92 12:02:41 Review of the nisp list: Current Attributes ------------------ For this list non-members may: Subscribe direct: yes Contribute mail: yes Request review: yes Request files: yes This list is moderated: no Contributions to this list are archived: yes Replies to a message in this list are sent to the list rather than to the message-sender: no Description ----------- This is the distribution list for The Networked Information Services Project, NISP. List Owner(s) ------------- Cliff Spencer c.spencer@uk.ac.newcastle Cristy Emmett cristyn.emmett@uk.ac.newcastle Jill Foster jill.foster@uk.ac.newcastle John Martin john.martin@uk.ac.newcastle List Members ------------ Shafiq Ahmed suqahmed@uk.ac.rdg.am.cms Wallace Anderson j.w.anderson@uk.ac.aberdeen John Bagnall li11@uk.ac.dundee.primeb Jason Bain jason.bain@uk.ac.newcastle Malcolm Bain mb@uk.ac.st-andrews ...etc -- AKA: postmaster@mailbase.ac.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------- John Martin Computing Laboratory 091 222 8087 University of Newcastle upon Tyne John.Martin@newcastle.ac.uk Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ------------------------------------------------------------------- From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 24 06:22:39 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06701; Tue, 24 Nov 92 06:22:39 PST Received: from TWNMOE10.EDU.TW by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA06694; Tue, 24 Nov 92 06:22:25 PST Received: from NCTU.edu.tw by TWNMOE10.EDU.TW (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 24 Nov 92 22:23:41 EST Received: from ccserv.cc.nctu.edu.tw by NCTU.edu.tw with SMTP (16.8/16.2) id AA02059; Tue, 24 Nov 92 22:18:40 +0800 Received: from ccsun9.nctu-cc (ccsun9.cc.nctu.edu.tw) by cc.nctu.edu.tw (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13544; Tue, 24 Nov 92 22:31:30 CST From: u8023090@cc.nctu.edu.tw Message-Id: <9211241431.AA13544@cc.nctu.edu.tw> Subject: To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 22:31:28 WST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk sub list-managers From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 24 12:31:29 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09735; Tue, 24 Nov 92 12:31:29 PST Received: from charlie.CES.CWRU.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09728; Tue, 24 Nov 92 12:31:22 PST Received: by charlie.CES.CWRU.Edu (5.64+/ane.09.11.90.2) id AA04130; Tue, 24 Nov 92 15:31:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 15:31:14 -0500 From: Aydin Edguer Message-Id: <9211242031.AA04130@charlie.CES.CWRU.Edu> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Software for List Managment Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Does anyone know of any electronic mailing list management software? I am familiar with the following but am wondering about other options. Package-Name: Majordomo Description: mailing list management software Author: Brent Chapman Ftp: FTP.GreatCircle.COM:/pub/majordomo.tar.Z Package-Name: Mailbase Description: mailing list management software Author: Package-Name: LISTSERV Description: IBM mailing list management software Author: Eric Thomas Package-Name: listserv Description: mailing list management software Author: tasos@cs.bu.edu (Anastasios Kotsikonas) Ftp: ftp.uu.net:/networking/mail/listserv/listserv5.5sh.Z Package-Name: MX Description: VMS electronic mail software (includes VMSSERV mail server) Author: Matt Madison Ftp: ftp.spc.edu:[ANONYMOUS.MX.MX031]MX031_SRC.BCK_Z Package-Name: mailagent Description: rule based mail filtering Author: Raphael Manfredi From: ftp.eff.org:/pub/net-tools/perl-mailagent-2.9@12.tar.Z Package-Name: distribute Description: reforward incoming messages to a mailing list Author: Steve Miller Ftp: ftp.umiacs.umd.edu:/pub/distribute.tar.Z Thanks, Aydin Edguer From List-Managers-Owner Tue Nov 24 12:54:15 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09968; Tue, 24 Nov 92 12:54:15 PST Received: from livbird.liv.ac.uk by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09961; Tue, 24 Nov 92 12:54:06 PST Received: from localhost.liv.ac.uk by liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk with Local-SMTP (PP) id <01272-0@liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk>; Tue, 24 Nov 1992 20:52:51 +0000 To: roger@cogs.ns.ca (Roger Mosher) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subscribers Lists In-Reply-To: The Message of "Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:37:34 -0400." Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 20:52:44 GMT Message-Id: <1270.722638364@livbird.liv.ac.uk> From: Alan Thew Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:37:34 AST Roger Mosher wrote: >A question of etiquette. I want to make a list of subscribers available to >everyone on the mailing list, but I'm not sure how much info I should >release. It strikes me that whereas some folks might be perfectly willing >to chat on the mailing list, they might not want individual mail. On the >other hand, it doesn't make much sense to just send off names and institutions >does it? We have a list whose very existence is private, at the other extreme is the "anyone can join,mail to, review" list. People who join a list are made aware of the review policies of that particular list (this is the EARN LISTSERV code -- for those who don't know, this is an "official" version based largely on Eric Thomas' earlier code). Alan Thew From List-Managers-Owner Thu Nov 26 08:08:00 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03117; Thu, 26 Nov 92 08:08:00 PST Received: from uu3.psi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA03110; Thu, 26 Nov 92 08:07:52 PST Received: from wxsat.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) id AA22633; Thu, 26 Nov 92 09:50:42 -0500 Received: by ssg.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 26 Nov 92 14:49:43 UTC for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Subscribers Lists From: rick@ssg.com (Rick Emerson) Message-Id: <1ePuuB1w165w@ssg.com> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 92 14:43:23 UTC In-Reply-To: <1270.722638364@livbird.liv.ac.uk> Organization: System Support Group Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan Thew writes: > On Mon, 23 Nov 92 15:37:34 AST Roger Mosher wrote: > >A question of etiquette. I want to make a list of subscribers available to > >everyone on the mailing list, but I'm not sure how much info I should > >release. It strikes me that whereas some folks might be perfectly willing > >to chat on the mailing list, they might not want individual mail. On the > >other hand, it doesn't make much sense to just send off names and institutio > >does it? > We have a list whose very existence is private, at the other extreme is > the "anyone can join,mail to, review" list. People who join a list are > made aware of the review policies of that particular list (this is the > EARN LISTSERV code -- for those who don't know, this is an "official" > version based largely on Eric Thomas' earlier code). I resent junk mail, be it electronic or paper. I also resent seeing my name show up on pieces of mail that I know I never asked for - people who sell names and addresses are not welcome in my life. To that end I have the strict policy of not divulging subscribers' names or addresses. My weather satellite list supports a NOAA service and I do report information back to NOAA but only after getting approval from the subscribers. Any requests to not have a name forwarded are honored. There's an increasingly cavilier attitude towards personal information on nets. I think we're obliged to respect our subscribers' electronic privacy. Rick | Richard B. Emerson | Replies may be sent to: | | System Support Group | rick@ssg.com | | 940 Delaware Avenue |-------------------------------------------------+ | Lansdale, PA 19446 USA | "When you ski, you dance with the mountain -- | | Voice: 215.855.1607 | and the mountain always leads." | From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 30 16:27:27 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09458; Mon, 30 Nov 92 16:27:27 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09444; Mon, 30 Nov 92 16:27:15 PST Message-Id: <9212010027.AA09444@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: "no such user" ping-pong tournaments... In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 13 Nov 92 01:01:34 EST Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 16:27:13 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk bahainvs!johnw@cs.UMD.EDU (John Wiegley) writes: # Is it possible to set up a "default" account, where all mail can # go to if it's addressed to a non-existant user? I've got a UUCP # connection set up right now, and if someone sends mail to a # non-existant user on my domain, it ping-pongs 17 times between the # 'bahainvs' and 'mimsy.cs.umd.edu'. This can be a REAL pain. Is # there anyway for mail to be instantly trapped, and sent to a default # somebody, like postmaster? It depends on your mailer. With Sendmail, what you desire is typically the default action (although Postmaster will typically get only the headers of the message, not the whole message). It would also be possible with Sendmail to set up your "known users" as a class, then match against that class on local delivery for deciding whether to deliver the mail to that user or to a generic user. I wouldn't want to do this unless the list of "known users" didn't change very often. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 30 18:10:08 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09880; Mon, 30 Nov 92 18:10:08 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA09872; Mon, 30 Nov 92 18:10:02 PST Message-Id: <9212010210.AA09872@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 19 Nov 92 01:27:42 +0100 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 18:10:00 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Peter Svanberg writes: # Quoting: Olle Jarnefors # > # > This is a solution that can handle both mailers following the # > new rules of RFC 1123 and the old rules of RFC 822, I think: # > # > 1) Change the SMTP sender to the preferred address for error # > messages. # > # > 2) Change the "Sender:" field to the same address. Both good ideas. # > 3) Add an "Errors-To:" field with the same address. (At least # > I don't think that this can hurt, although this isn't a # > standardized header field.) Errors-To seems to be a sendmail-ism; it's not defined in RFC822, and doesn't seem to work properly or reliably in sendmail even. I've had so many problems with it that I've stopped using it. # > 4) If the original message already contained a "Sender:" field: # > Transform it to an "Original-Sender:" field. RFC822 states that in such a circumstance, you should leave the original "Sender:" field alone and add a "Resent-Sender:" field with the new information. # To add to the above list (this is what we do): # # 5) If the original message did not contain a "Reply-To:" field, add # one containing the list address. I don't really like that, but I don't feel to strongly one way or the other. For most of the mailing lists I run, I _prefer_ that most replies go to the list, but I'm not sure I want to push the issue. If I was running something high-volume like Sun-Managers, I'd definitely prefer that replies go the the originator, and might be tempted to add an appropriate "Reply-To:" on the way through the gateway. # 6) Remove any "Return-Receipt-To:" field. # # Do you consider this OK? "Return-Receipt-To: ADDR" makes Sendmail # send a receipt to ADDR upon "final delivery" to the recipients # mailbox. To use this on a mailing list is normally not advisable as # you may end up with hundreds of receipts. I wouldn't remove the field if it's there. Somebody had to make a special effort to get it there in the first place, and if they really want all that mail back, so be it... # 7) Add a field on this form: # # X-Mailing-List: [list name/description]*[sequence number] <[list address]> # # Example: # # X-Mailing-List: Mailing list admin*207 # # This is something we would like to promote. It is useful for (at # least) three purposes: # # a) It identifies the message as a mailing list ditto and makes it # easy for an incoming-mail-sorter. # # b) It serves as a loop detector - any incoming message containing # this field with the correct list address can be dumped. # # c) The sequence number faciliates for a subscriber to find out if # he missed some message on the list. Also, it is easier for # anyone to refer to a number than to a long message-id. That's not a bad idea. Someday I might implement it! :-) # Other things that could be useful (we don't do this): # # 8) Add a Message-Id field if not present (and append "(added)" to make # it possible to find out that it isn't an original id). Sendmail does this for me, as the message is received (though it doesn't mark it as "(added)"). # 9) Put envelope contents in X-Envelope-From: and X-Envelope-To: and # the received date (the date on the From_ line) in X-Received-Date. You can get sendmail to stuff most of this into a Received: line, if you care. -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 30 19:12:04 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10180; Mon, 30 Nov 92 19:12:04 PST Received: from cs-mail.bu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10173; Mon, 30 Nov 92 19:11:57 PST Received: from CSD.BU.EDU by cs-mail.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.0.3) id AA00341; Mon, 30 Nov 92 22:12:13 -0500 From: jbw@cs.bu.edu (Joe Wells) Received: by csd.bu.edu (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA28011; Mon, 30 Nov 92 22:12:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 22:12:12 -0500 Message-Id: <9212010312.AA28011@csd.bu.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: <9212010210.AA09872@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> References: <9212010210.AA09872@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Sent-Via: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "Brent" == Brent Chapman writes: Brent> Errors-To seems to be a sendmail-ism; it's not defined in RFC822, and Brent> doesn't seem to work properly or reliably in sendmail even. I've had Brent> so many problems with it that I've stopped using it. What kind of problems, other than it not having any effect? Has it had a bad effect? Brent> # > 4) If the original message already contained a "Sender:" field: Brent> # > Transform it to an "Original-Sender:" field. Brent> RFC822 states that in such a circumstance, you should leave the Brent> original "Sender:" field alone and add a "Resent-Sender:" field with Brent> the new information. Right, but we're trying to deal with the problems caused by non-RFC822-conformant mailers out there. Brent> # 6) Remove any "Return-Receipt-To:" field. Brent> # Brent> # Do you consider this OK? "Return-Receipt-To: ADDR" makes Sendmail Brent> # send a receipt to ADDR upon "final delivery" to the recipients Brent> # mailbox. To use this on a mailing list is normally not Brent> # advisable as Brent> # you may end up with hundreds of receipts. Brent> I wouldn't remove the field if it's there. Somebody had to make a Brent> special effort to get it there in the first place, That's not necessarily the case. Many people have it automatically added, and don't realize the problem it will cause when they send e-mail to a list. Brent> and if they really Brent> want all that mail back, so be it... This is the kind of thing that causes massive failures, so I'm in favor of stripping the Return-Receipt-To header on all mailing-list submissions. -- Joe Wells Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- send e-mail for details From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 30 20:05:05 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10563; Mon, 30 Nov 92 20:05:05 PST Received: from mp.cs.niu.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10554; Mon, 30 Nov 92 20:04:56 PST Received: by mp.cs.niu.edu with SMTP id AA32163 (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Mon, 30 Nov 1992 22:05:16 -0600 To: Brent Chapman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 30 Nov 92 18:10:00 PST." <9212010210.AA09872@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 22:05:14 -0600 Message-Id: <19701.723182714@mp.cs.niu.edu> From: Neil W Rickert Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ># 6) Remove any "Return-Receipt-To:" field. ># ... >I wouldn't remove the field if it's there. Somebody had to make a >special effort to get it there in the first place, and if they really >want all that mail back, so be it... You should ALWAYS remove "Return-Receipt-To:" for mailing lists. The single exception is when the mailing list manager himself uses this header for testing. It is almost certain that when the message originator added this header, they only expected an acknowledgement that it was received by the mailing list. They really didn't want to be clobbered with an acknowledgement from every subscriber. -NWR From List-Managers-Owner Mon Nov 30 20:32:07 1992 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10726; Mon, 30 Nov 92 20:32:07 PST Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-921015) id AA10712; Mon, 30 Nov 92 20:31:59 PST Message-Id: <9212010431.AA10712@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Header fields to change or add before distributing In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 30 Nov 92 22:12:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 92 20:31:58 -0800 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk jbw@cs.bu.edu (Joe Wells) writes: # >>>>> "Brent" == Brent Chapman writes: # # Brent> Errors-To seems to be a sendmail-ism; it's not defined in RFC822, and # Brent> doesn't seem to work properly or reliably in sendmail even. I've had # Brent> so many problems with it that I've stopped using it. # # What kind of problems, other than it not having any effect? Has it had a # bad effect? Yes, two bad effects. First, sendmail isn't very good about adding only one "Errors-To" field. It seems to add another one every time it adds a "Received:" line, if at least one already exists (in other words, it won't add "Errors-To" fields to messages that don't already have them, but it will add one for each "Received:" lines to messages that do). Second, what it puts in the "Errors-To:" field is often totally bogus. In my case, it put the contents of my .forward file (i.e., Errors-To: "|/usr/ucb/vacation brent", \brent), which is utterly useless; if something tries to reply to those addresses, Sendmail will bounce the message as a security violation. # Brent> # > 4) If the original message already contained a "Sender:" field: # Brent> # > Transform it to an "Original-Sender:" field. # # Brent> RFC822 states that in such a circumstance, you should leave the # Brent> original "Sender:" field alone and add a "Resent-Sender:" field with # Brent> the new information. # # Right, but we're trying to deal with the problems caused by # non-RFC822-conformant mailers out there. I don't think making more non-RFC822-conformant mail is a good solution, though -Brent -- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041