From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 1 11:20:29 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA19524 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 10:52:27 -0800 Received: from westweb.com (www.westweb.com [192.207.47.87]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id KAA19519 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 10:52:22 -0800 Received: from localhost (klg@localhost) by westweb.com (8.6.5/8.6.6) id KAA21916 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 10:46:41 -0800 From: "Kevin L. Gross" Message-Id: <199504011846.KAA21916@westweb.com> Subject: test, pls ignore To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sat, 1 Apr 1995 10:46:41 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 296 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I sent a message last night and never received it. -Kevin L. Gross klg@westweb.com Disclaim THIS: ***************************************************************** "When I'm a good dog, they sometimes throw me a bone." --Pink Floyd From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 3 07:20:52 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id HAA23241 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 07:18:23 -0700 Received: from students.fct.unl.pt (students.fct.unl.pt [192.68.216.245]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id HAA23232 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 07:16:56 -0700 Received: (from pms@localhost) by students.fct.unl.pt (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA20588; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:14:29 -0100 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:14:19 -0100 From: Pedro Amorim To: LIST-MANAGERS@GREATCIRCLE.COM Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 3 11:33:09 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA26893 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:14:10 -0700 Received: from luey.cadvision.com (huey.cadvision.com [204.50.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id LAA26888 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:14:06 -0700 Received: from cad75.cadvision.com by luey.cadvision.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.04.tri.dcx) id AA21556; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 12:15:29 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 12:15:29 -0600 Message-Id: <9504031815.AA21556@luey.cadvision.com> X-Sender: myattj@huey.cadvision.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: myattj@cadvision.com (Justin "Kipper" Myatt) Subject: The Best List I've seen so far Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This is quite a nice list - I get to read it real quick like ..... ----------------------------------------------------------- Justin Myatt - Email Personage | Call me at 403 290 3262 GE Capital Technology Services | Fax me at 403 290 2566 435, 4th Ave SW | Email to: Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2P 3A8 | myattj@cadvision.com Brrr it's cold here today.... | CrudUServe(CIS)72234.23 ----------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 3 21:50:20 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA16094 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:32:54 -0700 Received: from uclink.berkeley.edu (uclink.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.155.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id VAA16089 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:32:52 -0700 Received: by uclink.berkeley.edu (8.6.10/1.33(web)-OV4) id VAA04582; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:32:57 -0700 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:32:57 -0700 (PDT) From: "Michael J. Osofsky" Subject: Re: The Best List I've seen so far To: Justin Kipper Myatt cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9504031815.AA21556@luey.cadvision.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Justin Kipper Myatt wrote: > > This is quite a nice list - I get to read it real quick like ..... > > What list is? List-Managers? mike From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 4 10:22:19 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA03852 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:55:18 -0700 Received: from luey.cadvision.com (huey.cadvision.com [204.50.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id JAA03843 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 09:55:15 -0700 Received: from cad72.cadvision.com by luey.cadvision.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.04.tri.dcx) id AA19900; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 10:56:39 -0600 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 10:56:39 -0600 Message-Id: <9504041656.AA19900@luey.cadvision.com> X-Sender: myattj@huey.cadvision.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: myattj@cadvision.com (Justin "Kipper" Myatt) Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #73 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Well I have great fun managing the mail coming in. Now I just need a replacment for Eudora that will let me creat rules (a la' cc:Mail windows client) to deal with some of my inbound mail. cheers Justin ----------------------------------------------------------- Justin Myatt - Email Personage | Call me at 403 290 3262 GE Capital Technology Services | Fax me at 403 290 2566 435, 4th Ave SW | Email to: Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2P 3A8 | myattj@cadvision.com Brrr it's cold here today.... | CrudUServe(CIS)72234.23 ----------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 4 11:53:28 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA07655 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:42:26 -0700 Received: from walt.disney.com (walt.disney.com [139.104.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id LAA07649 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:42:23 -0700 From: sullivan@fa.disney.com Received: from dalsdb by walt.disney.com with SMTP id AA11609 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.3 for List-Managers@greatcircle.com); Tue, 4 Apr 1995 11:42:36 -0700 Received: from joanna.wdp_animation by dalsdb with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0rwDYh-000006C; Tue, 4 Apr 95 11:42 PDT Message-Id: Date: Tue, 4 Apr 95 11:42 PDT To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Digest Format Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Is there a standard format for digests that I should be using so things like newsreaders can break up a digest? Where would I find out about this format? Thanks. Michael Sullivan sullivan@fa.disney.com Walt Disney Feature Animation +1 818 544 2683 (voice) Glendale, CA +1 818 544 4579 (fax) From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 4 12:22:22 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA08581 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 12:10:36 -0700 Received: from FSM-1.PICA.ARMY.MIL (fsm-1.pica.army.mil [129.139.164.101]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id MAA08576 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 12:10:33 -0700 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 95 15:13:23 EDT From: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer To: sullivan@fa.disney.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Digest Format Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Message-ID: <9504041513.aa15512@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michael Sullivan wrote: >Is there a standard format for digests that I should be using so things >like newsreaders can break up a digest? Where would I find out about >this format? Thanks. RFC 1153 has the info you need: Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer http://k-whiner.pica.army.mil/info-labview.html From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 08:20:38 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id IAA29608 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 08:01:54 -0700 Received: from luey.cadvision.com (huey.cadvision.com [204.50.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id IAA29597 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 08:01:48 -0700 Received: from cad68.cadvision.com by luey.cadvision.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.04.tri.dcx) id AA32110; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:03:10 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:03:10 -0600 Message-Id: <9504051503.AA32110@luey.cadvision.com> X-Sender: myattj@huey.cadvision.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe/Women Online), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: myattj@cadvision.com (Justin "Kipper" Myatt) Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #73 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Amy - it looks as if the commercial version will handle rules etc... Now I have to weigh this against Pegesus mail that has rules too and appears to deal with more forms of attachment. ta justin >>Well I have great fun managing the mail coming in. Now I just need a >>replacment for Eudora that will let me creat rules (a la' cc:Mail windows >>client) to deal with some of my inbound mail. > >Are you sure you can't do what you want with some of Eudora's extra >settings?? What is it you want and I'll check for you. > >--Amy >agoodloe@best.com > ----------------------------------------------------------- Justin Myatt - Email Personage | Call me at 403 290 3262 GE Capital Technology Services | Fax me at 403 290 2566 435, 4th Ave SW | Email to: Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2P 3A8 | myattj@cadvision.com Brrr it's cold here today.... | CrudUServe(CIS)72234.23 ----------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 08:24:55 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id IAA29705 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 08:05:54 -0700 Received: from luey.cadvision.com (huey.cadvision.com [204.50.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id IAA29692 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 08:05:49 -0700 Received: from cad68.cadvision.com by luey.cadvision.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.04.tri.dcx) id AA33878; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:07:11 -0600 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:07:11 -0600 Message-Id: <9504051507.AA33878@luey.cadvision.com> X-Sender: myattj@huey.cadvision.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "Alan Millar" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: myattj@cadvision.com (Justin "Kipper" Myatt) Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #73 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Yah - I loaded and the damm thing does not have any of the POP/SMTP server menus displayed...... I guess another trip through the manual is required. How does this compare with Eudora - commercial version ?? ta justin >> Well I have great fun managing the mail coming in. Now I just need a >> replacment for Eudora that will let me creat rules (a la' cc:Mail windows >> client) to deal with some of my inbound mail. > >I use Pegasus Mail for Windows. It is available for free from >ftp://risc.ua.edu/ > >It is a full Windows POP mail client, and also supports MHS and >Novell-LAN based mail. I'm using it for POP. > >It has very good rule-filtering capabilities built in. I highly >recommend it. > >You can take quite a few actions based on the contents of header >fields. Check it out! > >- Alan >---- >Alan Millar E-Mail: amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org >System Administrator Web: http://turnpike.net/metro/amillar > > ----------------------------------------------------------- Justin Myatt - Email Personage | Call me at 403 290 3262 GE Capital Technology Services | Fax me at 403 290 2566 435, 4th Ave SW | Email to: Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2P 3A8 | myattj@cadvision.com Brrr it's cold here today.... | CrudUServe(CIS)72234.23 ----------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 08:50:49 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id IAA00738 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 08:41:17 -0700 Received: from relay.rediris.es (relay.rediris.es [130.206.1.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id IAA00706 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 08:40:09 -0700 Received: from opalo.etsiig.uniovi.es by relay.rediris.es (PMDF V4.2-11 #4193) id <01HOZIHJRLIO8X1SNB@relay.rediris.es>; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 16:23:02 GMT+1 Received: from charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es by etsiig.uniovi.es (PMDF V4.3-10 #4541) id <01HOZIENSZ1S9OD07K@etsiig.uniovi.es>; Wed, 05 Apr 1995 16:20:49 +0100 (GMT) Received: by charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA19836; Wed, 5 Apr 95 16:22:57 +0100 Date: Wed, 05 Apr 1995 16:22:56 +0000 (WETDST) From: Oscar Fernandez Sierra Subject: Fail in Return-Path To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: <01HOZIENT8GI9OD07K@etsiig.uniovi.es> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello! I've installed majordomo under uid an gid "majordom". Now, when i send a mail to the list test, in the field Return-Path appears majordom@charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es instead of owner-test@charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es or something similar (test-owner). How can i solve this. I didn't find any related in FAQ, README nor resend.README. I have the standard majordomo.cf, without modifications. My system in an HP 715, running HP-UX 9.01. I send here a piece of /usr/lib/aliases *************************** [... deleted ...] # Local aliases # For majordomo majordomo: "|/users/majordom/wrapper majordomo" owner-majordomo: oscar majordomo-owner: oscar # For test **************** test: "|/users/majordom/wrapper resend -l test -h charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es test-outgoing" test-outgoing: :include:/users/majordom/lists/test owner-test: oscar test-owner: oscar test-request: "|/users/majordom/wrapper request-answer test" test-approval: oscar #End of aliases Thanks a lot in advance. +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Oscar Fernandez Sierra | | Escuela Tecnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales de Gijon | | Departamento de Construccion e Ingenieria de Fabricacion | | Ctra. de Castiello s/n 33204 | | Gijon (Spain) | | | | E-mail: oscar@charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es Phone: INT + 34 + 8 + 518.20.51 | | WWW: http://www1.uniovi.es/ FAX: INT + 34 + 8 + 533.85.38 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 09:20:56 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA01196 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:01:19 -0700 Received: from FSM-1.PICA.ARMY.MIL (fsm-1.pica.army.mil [129.139.164.101]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id JAA01190 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 09:01:16 -0700 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 12:03:33 EDT From: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer To: Oscar Fernandez Sierra , list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Fail in Return-Path Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Message-ID: <9504051203.aa22000@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I've installed majordomo under uid an gid "majordom". Now, when i send >a mail to the list test, in the field Return-Path appears > majordom@charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es >instead of > owner-test@charpy.etsiig.uniovi.es >or something similar (test-owner). How can i solve this. I didn't find By asking the majordomo list? This is the List-Managers list. majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer http://k-whiner.pica.army.mil/info-labview.html From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 11:51:11 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA05760 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 11:27:13 -0700 Received: from lnd.state.az.us (alris.lnd.state.az.us [159.87.160.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id LAA05754 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 11:27:10 -0700 Received: from tbird.lnd.az.gov ([159.87.160.174]) by lnd.state.az.us (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15309; Wed, 5 Apr 95 11:26:24 MST Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 11:26:24 MST From: mcollins@lnd.state.az.us (Micheal Collins Intern) Message-Id: <9504051826.AA15309@lnd.state.az.us> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: memory fault - 139? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Howdy- After setting up majordomo 1.93 on SunOps 4.x, Perl 4.036, I am getting the following messages from everyone who tries to subcribe to a list, or use "lists" from majordomo on host. ----- Transcript of session follows ----- sh: 15112 Memory fault 554 "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper majordomo"... unknown mailer error 139 Now this is what is strange. I (as owner) can use majordomo functions properly with this message sent to me AFTER it answers my requests or commands. For everyone else it sends the above message to them BEFORE it answers their request, and does not answer them. It just bounces their request right back at them. We are all going crazy here trying to figure this one out. Any help would be seriously appreciated! Thanks a bunch in advance, Michael Collins From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 14:50:48 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA11023 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:22:47 -0700 Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id OAA11009; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:22:41 -0700 Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by cais.cais.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA08213; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 17:22:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 17:22:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Roger Burns Reply-To: Roger Burns Subject: Re: memory fault - 139? To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM cc: list-managers-request@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9504051826.AA15309@lnd.state.az.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I subscribed to this group to read about general list-management issues. I keep reading here about majordomo technical issues, which don't interest me because I don't run a majordomo list. I am aware that there is a majordomo technical list. My interest in following this group is for reading only about non-software-specific issues, and I thought that was in the charter for this group. Could we please get a ruling from this group's list-owner about what is and is not appropriate for discussion here? I would like a distinction made clear between what is on- and off-topic for this group. -- Roger Burns cfs-news@cais.cais.com From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 14:53:24 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA11476 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:34:57 -0700 Received: from lnd.state.az.us (lnd.state.az.us [159.87.160.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id OAA11470 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:34:47 -0700 Received: from tbird.lnd.az.gov ([159.87.160.174]) by lnd.state.az.us (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16655; Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:34:01 MST Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:34:01 MST From: mcollins@lnd.state.az.us (Micheal Collins Intern) Message-Id: <9504052134.AA16655@lnd.state.az.us> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk get list-managers.9410 From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 14:56:33 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA11438 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:34:26 -0700 Received: from lnd.state.az.us (lnd.state.az.us [159.87.160.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id OAA11425 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:34:22 -0700 Received: from tbird.lnd.az.gov ([159.87.160.174]) by lnd.state.az.us (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16649; Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:33:34 MST Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:33:34 MST From: mcollins@lnd.state.az.us (Micheal Collins Intern) Message-Id: <9504052133.AA16649@lnd.state.az.us> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk get list-managers.9502 From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 15:02:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA11455 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:34:37 -0700 Received: from lnd.state.az.us (alris.lnd.state.az.us [159.87.160.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id OAA11447 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:34:32 -0700 Received: from tbird.lnd.az.gov ([159.87.160.174]) by lnd.state.az.us (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16652; Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:33:44 MST Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:33:44 MST From: mcollins@lnd.state.az.us (Micheal Collins Intern) Message-Id: <9504052133.AA16652@lnd.state.az.us> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk get list-managers.9503 From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 15:08:17 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA11494 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:35:06 -0700 Received: from lnd.state.az.us (alris.lnd.state.az.us [159.87.160.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id OAA11478 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 14:35:00 -0700 Received: from tbird.lnd.az.gov ([159.87.160.174]) by lnd.state.az.us (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16658; Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:34:09 MST Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 14:34:09 MST From: mcollins@lnd.state.az.us (Micheal Collins Intern) Message-Id: <9504052134.AA16658@lnd.state.az.us> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk get list-managers.9407 From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 15:20:45 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA13023 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 15:15:43 -0700 Received: from jazzie.com (p8.jazzie.com [192.147.229.18]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id PAA13018 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 15:15:39 -0700 Received: by jazzie.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #63) id m0rwdLn-000OXCC; Wed, 5 Apr 95 15:14 PDT Message-Id: From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) Subject: Mis-Use of List-Managers List To: cfs-news@cais.cais.com Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 15:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: from "Roger Burns" at Apr 5, 95 05:22:56 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 883 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Roger wrote: > I keep reading here about majordomo technical issues, which don't > interest me because I don't run a majordomo list. [...] > I would like a distinction made clear between what is on- and > off-topic for this group. I too would prefer to see this list focus on general rather than implementation-specific list issues, and believe that is clearly its intent. I don't see much malice on the part of those who are mis-using the list, though. Rather, they seem to genuinely be confused about the list's purpose. Dare I suggest that moving the list to a host other than greatcircle.com (the famous home of the majordomo software package) might help disambiguate its intended use? -- Sean Shapira sds@jazzie.com +1 206 443 2028 Sean's Home Page Serving the Net since 1990. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 5 17:23:38 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA16994 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 17:12:39 -0700 Received: from vhipub.vhi.com (VHIPUB.VHI.COM [167.18.73.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id RAA16989 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 17:12:36 -0700 Received: from [167.18.110.3] by vhipub.vhi.com with SMTP (5.65/1.2-eef) id AA05337; Wed, 5 Apr 95 20:11:58 -0400 Received: from paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com by av2.vrx.vhi.com (5.4R2.10/1.3) id AA09134; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 16:41:23 -0700 X-Organization: RxNet, Inc. Fresno, CA 800/447-9638 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul-Joseph de Werk Subject: Re: Mis-Use of List-Managers List X-Originating-Host: paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <1995Apr05.164234-0700@paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com> Date: 05 Apr 1995 16:41:13 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: BWMail for Windows Version 3.2 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk An ether being in cyberspace calling itself - Sean Shapira - uttered: | | Subject: Mis-Use of List-Managers List | Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 15:14:59 -0700 (PDT) | | Roger wrote: | > I keep reading here about majordomo technical issues, which don't | > interest me because I don't run a majordomo list. [...] | > I would like a distinction made clear between what is on- and | > off-topic for this group. What is on-topic and what is off-? Hmmm... Here's what a "lists" request returns me from "majordomo@greatcircle.com" maybe this will help. >>>> lists Majordomo@GreatCircle.COM serves the following lists: bounces For email addresses that have been bouncing firewalls Discussions of Internet "firewall" security systems firewalls-digest Discussions of Internet "firewall" security systems gca-announce Announcements for Great Circle Associates customers list-managers For people who manage Internet mailing lists list-managers-digest For people who manage Internet mailing lists majordomo-announce Announcements about the Majordomo package majordomo-docs For people working on Majordomo documentation majordomo-users For people using Majordomo majordomo-workers For people extending or developing Majordomo phonestation Discussions about computer-telephone integration phonestation-digest Discussions about computer-telephone integration wvfc-members For members of West Valley Flying Club Use the 'info ' command to get more information about a specific list. >>>> info list-managers Description =========== This list is for discussions of issues related to managing Internet mailing lists, including (but not limited to) software, methods, mechanisms, techniques, and policies. This list is an outgrowth of the "Mailing Lists" workshop session at the USENIX System Administration Conference (LISA VI) in Long Beach, CA, on October 22, 1992. [... remainder left off ...] Hmmm. Seems to me this being the list-managers group and all that on-topic would be anything having to do with managing a mailing list. | I too would prefer to see this list focus on general rather than | implementation-specific list issues, and believe that is clearly | its intent. | | I don't see much malice on the part of those who are mis-using | the list, though. Rather, they seem to genuinely be confused | about the list's purpose. | | Dare I suggest that moving the list to a host other than | greatcircle.com (the famous home of the majordomo software | package) might help disambiguate its intended use? Maybe they just need to add a list called "list-servers" or "majordomo-admin" for those people maintaining majordomo itself. __________________________________________________________________________ [ Paul-Joseph de Werk, B.S. \ RX Net, Inc. ] [ Systems Analyst II \ MIS Dept. ] [ \ vrx: paul@av2.vrx.vhi.com ] [ \ inet: paul%av2.vrx.vhi.com@vhipub.vhi.com ] [_______________________________\__________________________________________] From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 6 01:58:15 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id BAA18070 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 01:45:46 -0700 Received: from insite.parasoft.co.uk (insite.parasoft.co.uk [193.132.123.15]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id BAA18063 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 01:45:39 -0700 Received: (from root@localhost) by insite.parasoft.co.uk (8.6.10/8.6.10) id JAA08299 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:53:17 +0100 From: Peter Bowyer Message-Id: <199504060853.JAA08299@insite.parasoft.co.uk> Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #75 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:53:16 +0200 (BST) In-Reply-To: <199504060800.BAA16113@miles.greatcircle.com> from "list-managers-digest-owner@GreatCircle.COM" at Apr 6, 95 01:00:17 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 704 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk All, No, I'm not being lazy by not changing the reply subject; I'm *really* writing a reply about last night's digest. It contained *no* on-top information whatsoever. None. Not a scrap. There were people posting Majordomo questions, others telling them not to, some discussing what the list charter should be and where to find it. 2 posts were mis-directed administrivia. And there's an ongoing thread about Pegasus vs Eudora as a POP3 client. And now, I've gone and added to the noise factor by moaning about it. Come on, List managers - this used to be a good, low-volume, high-quality list. What can we do to restore it to its former glory? Peter -- Peter Bowyer peter@insite.parasoft.co.uk From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 6 10:27:45 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA04721 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:03:35 -0700 Received: from [198.102.244.36] (quadra.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.36]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id KAA04715 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:03:31 -0700 X-Sender: brent@miles.greatcircle.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 10:03:51 -0800 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: List-Managers is NOT the place for Majordomo support discussions Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Just to make it perfectly clear to everyone: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM is NOT the appropriate forum for support discussions related to a particular mailing list management package. Such discussions should be directed to that package's support mailing list. In the case of Majordomo, that's "Majordomo-Users@GreatCircle.COM"; other packages have their own lists hosted elsewhere, and should be mentioned in the documentation for the package. List-Managers is an appropriate place for discussions comparing multiple packages, or discussing mailing list management package features without regard to particular packages (for instance, discussing how various packages deal with bounced mail). -Brent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Apr 6 10:32:52 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA04325 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:58:08 -0700 Received: from [198.102.244.36] (quadra.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.36]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id JAA04310; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:58:03 -0700 X-Sender: brent@miles.greatcircle.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 09:58:24 -0800 To: Paul-Joseph de Werk , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: Re: Mis-Use of List-Managers List Cc: mcb@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:41 PM 4/5/95, Paul-Joseph de Werk wrote: >An ether being in cyberspace calling itself - Sean Shapira - uttered: >| >| Subject: Mis-Use of List-Managers List >| Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 15:14:59 -0700 (PDT) >| >| Roger wrote: >| > I keep reading here about majordomo technical issues, which don't >| > interest me because I don't run a majordomo list. [...] >| > I would like a distinction made clear between what is on- and >| > off-topic for this group. > >What is on-topic and what is off-? Hmmm... > >Here's what a "lists" request returns me from "majordomo@greatcircle.com" >maybe this will help. > >>>>> info list-managers >Description >=========== >This list is for discussions of issues related to managing Internet >mailing lists, including (but not limited to) software, methods, >mechanisms, techniques, and policies. This list is an outgrowth of >the "Mailing Lists" workshop session at the USENIX System Administration >Conference (LISA VI) in Long Beach, CA, on October 22, 1992. > >[... remainder left off ...] > >Hmmm. Seems to me this being the list-managers group and all that >on-topic would be anything having to do with managing a mailing list. The policy has always been that discussions specific to a single package, such as Majordomo, LISTSERV, LISTPROC, or whatever, should be sent to that package's support mailing list (for instance, Majordomo-Users@GreatCircle.COM), and that only discussions concerning software in general, or comparisons between different packages, or features in general, and so forth, are appropriate for the List-Managers mailing list. We'll update the info file for List-Managers to clarify that. We've been kind of busy around here lately, so many of our lists (including List-Managers) have been running more-or-less on autopilot, without anyone following postings to them too closely. >| I too would prefer to see this list focus on general rather than >| implementation-specific list issues, and believe that is clearly >| its intent. >| >| I don't see much malice on the part of those who are mis-using >| the list, though. Rather, they seem to genuinely be confused >| about the list's purpose. >| >| Dare I suggest that moving the list to a host other than >| greatcircle.com (the famous home of the majordomo software >| package) might help disambiguate its intended use? > >Maybe they just need to add a list called "list-servers" or >"majordomo-admin" for those people maintaining majordomo itself. Already exists, and has since before List-Managers: Majordomo-Users@GreatCircle.COM. -Brent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Apr 6 23:26:38 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id XAA02392 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 23:19:23 -0700 Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id XAA02387; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 23:19:18 -0700 Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by cais.cais.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id CAA26392; Fri, 7 Apr 1995 02:19:31 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 02:19:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Roger Burns Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #75 To: Brent Chapman cc: Peter Bowyer , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199504060853.JAA08299@insite.parasoft.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 6 Apr 1995, Peter Bowyer wrote: > No, I'm not being lazy by not changing the reply subject; I'm *really* writing > a reply about last night's digest. > > It contained *no* on-top information whatsoever. None. Not a scrap. > Come on, List managers - this used to be a good, low-volume, high-quality > list. What can we do to restore it to its former glory? I'd like to see a hands-on list-manager be assigned to monitor this list daily and to notify posters when their messages are off-topic. Yes, moderation. If an appropriate volunteer were available to take on this responsibility, would Brent be willing to assign them to be the list-manager/ moderator? -- Roger Burns cfs-news@cais.cais.com From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 9 21:57:35 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA10754 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 9 Apr 1995 21:49:24 -0700 Received: from westweb.com (www.westweb.com [192.207.47.87]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id XAA10233 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 1995 23:27:18 -0800 Received: from localhost (klg@localhost) by westweb.com (8.6.5/8.6.6) id XAA15197 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 31 Mar 1995 23:21:36 -0800 From: "Kevin L. Gross" Message-Id: <199504010721.XAA15197@westweb.com> Subject: Help! Digest goes to List too To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 23:21:35 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1724 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, Help! I've run out of ideas. I've tried to set up Majordomo lists using the _Managing_Internet_Information_Services_ book as an example. I have several lists that seem to be working well except for a couple of things: 1. The digest gets sent to not only the digest list, but to the regular list as well. This is what the aliases (minus owner-*) look like: planb: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l planb -h westweb.com \ planb-outgoing" planb-approval: owner-planb planb-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/planb, planb-archive, "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper digest -r -C -l planb-digest \ planb-digest-outgoing" planb-archive: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f \ /usr/local/majordomo/archive/planb" planb-request: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper request-answer planb" planb-digest: planb planb-digest-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/planb-digest planb-digest-request: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper majordomo -l planb-digest" planb-digest-approval: planb-approval 2. When I try to use the request-answer program in Majordomo1.93, there is no response at all. When I run this command: echo "subscribe klg planb" | /usr/local/majordomo/wrapper request-answer planb I get this error: Undefined subroutine "main'lopen" called at /usr/local/majordomo/majordomo.pl line 229, line 1. That sub is defined in shlock.pl but I get a still different error after adding this line to majordomo.pl: require 'shlock.pl'; Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, -Kevin L. Gross klg@westweb.com Disclaim THIS: ***************************************************************** " " -- Marcel Marceau From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 05:57:12 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id FAA18755 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 05:46:27 -0700 Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id FAA18749; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 05:46:23 -0700 Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by cais.cais.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id IAA11138; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 08:46:46 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 08:46:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Roger Burns Subject: what's on-topic? To: List Managers list , List Managers list , mcb@GreatCircle.COM, Brent Chapman cc: "Kevin L. Gross" Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Again we're seeing off-topic material. Are non-majordomo list managers like me welcome on this list? I'm cc'ing this to Brent & others once more, in hopes of getting a response to my request for moderation of this list. -- Roger Burns cfs-news@cais.cais.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 23:21:35 -0800 (PST) From: Kevin L. Gross To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Help! Digest goes to List too Hi, Help! I've run out of ideas. I've tried to set up Majordomo lists using the _Managing_Internet_Information_Services_ book as an example. I have several lists that seem to be working well except for a couple of things: 1. The digest gets sent to not only the digest list, but to the regular list as well. This is what the aliases (minus owner-*) look like: planb: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l planb -h westweb.com \ planb-outgoing" planb-approval: owner-planb planb-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/planb, planb-archive, "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper digest -r -C -l planb-digest \ planb-digest-outgoing" planb-archive: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper archive2.pl -a -m -f \ /usr/local/majordomo/archive/planb" planb-request: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper request-answer planb" planb-digest: planb planb-digest-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/majordomo/lists/planb-digest planb-digest-request: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper majordomo -l planb-digest" planb-digest-approval: planb-approval 2. When I try to use the request-answer program in Majordomo1.93, there is no response at all. When I run this command: echo "subscribe klg planb" | /usr/local/majordomo/wrapper request-answer planb I get this error: Undefined subroutine "main'lopen" called at /usr/local/majordomo/majordomo.pl line 229, line 1. That sub is defined in shlock.pl but I get a still different error after adding this line to majordomo.pl: require 'shlock.pl'; Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, -Kevin L. Gross klg@westweb.com Disclaim THIS: ***************************************************************** " " -- Marcel Marceau From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 06:27:07 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id GAA19017 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 06:05:33 -0700 Received: from ns.onramp.net (ns.onramp.net [199.1.11.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id GAA19012 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 06:05:29 -0700 Received: from [199.1.11.179] (stemmons15.onramp.net [199.1.11.179]) by ns.onramp.net (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id IAA03611 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 08:05:46 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 08:05:46 -0500 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: vick@Onramp.NET (Bill Vick) Subject: List Response Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm a newbie so please bear with my basic question. I have a list (digest) that goes out to 1,000 subscribers. I want to set it up so a subscriber can send back a number of a article or document recapped in the digest and automatically receive it something like fax on demand. Is this possible with majordomo? I know its being done with other kinds of lists but do not have a clue where or how to begin to implement this. Any help, ideas or suggestions greatly welcomed. Thanks - Bill Vick From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 06:57:33 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id GAA20231 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 06:44:40 -0700 Received: from FSM-1.PICA.ARMY.MIL (fsm-1.pica.army.mil [129.139.164.101]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id GAA20226 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 06:44:35 -0700 Date: Mon, 10 Apr 95 9:47:38 EDT From: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer To: Roger Burns cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: what's on-topic? Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Message-ID: <9504100947.aa02530@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Roger Burns >Again we're seeing off-topic material. Are non-majordomo list managers >like me welcome on this list? I dunno. I just unsubbed. I have better things to do with my time than deal with people who subscribe to a list called list managers and can't be bothered to send THEIR mail to the proper list. >like me welcome on this list? I'm cc'ing this to Brent & others once >more, in hopes of getting a response to my request for moderation of this >list. That would be nice. Do me a favor and drop me a note if it actually happens, OK? Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer http://k-whiner.pica.army.mil/info-labview.html From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 09:01:01 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id IAA24457 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 08:42:25 -0700 Received: from cs.umb.edu (cs.umb.edu [158.121.104.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id IAA24452 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 08:42:19 -0700 Received: from se.cs.umb.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA25909 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:42:15 -0400 Message-Id: <199504101542.AA25909@cs.umb.edu> To: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer Cc: Roger Burns , list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: How to keep on topic. In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 10 Apr 1995 09:47:38 EDT." <9504100947.aa02530@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:42:17 -0400 From: "John P. Rouillard" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <9504100947.aa02530@fsm-1.pica.army.mil>, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer writes: >Roger Burns >>Again we're seeing off-topic material. Are non-majordomo list managers >>like me welcome on this list? > >I dunno. I just unsubbed. I have better things to do with my time than deal >with people who subscribe to a list called list managers and can't be >bothered to send THEIR mail to the proper list. > >>like me welcome on this list? I'm cc'ing this to Brent & others once >>more, in hopes of getting a response to my request for moderation of this >>list. > >That would be nice. Do me a favor and drop me a note if it actually happens, >OK? Ok, this is a valid question. How do we deal with off topic postings? Is running to moderation the answer? How about automated filtering in the list management software? Looking for certain key words etc. Granted this is also moderation of a form, but seem to me to be more managable that total moderation. Is it a matter of education? As far as education, what I have been doing with the majordomo posts, is responding to the sender saying: Your post seems to deal with majordomo. Please send your message to majordomo-users@greatcirce.com, and NOT to list-managers@greatcircle.com. Hey if the current maintainer of majordomo telling them to post to the right list won't help, what will 8-). So is the above sufficient? Do you use a more strongly worded (%^$^#@#) response and shift the top row of typewriter keys 8-). Or is this something that can/should be done by end users using a delivery program such as procmail, deliver etc to search for "listname list-managers and found word majordomo" in incomming mail and dispose of properly. -- John John Rouillard Senior Systems Administrator IDD Information Services rouilj@dstar.iddis.com Waltham, MA (617) 890-7227 x337 (617) 487-3937 (Direct) Senior Systems Consultant (SERL Project) University of Massachusetts at Boston rouilj@cs.umb.edu (preferred) Boston, MA, (617) 287-6480 =============================================================================== My employers don't acknowledge my existence much less my opinions. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 10:01:42 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA25887 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 09:47:36 -0700 Received: from [198.102.244.36] (quadra.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.36]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id JAA25882; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 09:47:32 -0700 X-Sender: brent@miles.greatcircle.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 09:48:00 -0800 To: "John P. Rouillard" , Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: Re: How to keep on topic. Cc: Roger Burns , list-managers@greatcircle.com, mcb@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:42 AM 4/10/95, John P. Rouillard wrote: >In message <9504100947.aa02530@fsm-1.pica.army.mil>, >Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer writes: >>Roger Burns >>>Again we're seeing off-topic material. Are non-majordomo list managers >>>like me welcome on this list? Absolutely! >>I dunno. I just unsubbed. I have better things to do with my time than deal >>with people who subscribe to a list called list managers and can't be >>bothered to send THEIR mail to the proper list. >> >>>like me welcome on this list? I'm cc'ing this to Brent & others once >>>more, in hopes of getting a response to my request for moderation of this >>>list. We're considering it. The problem is, we're so buried around here right now that we don't even have time to consider ways to get unburied... I'll talk to MCB about it this week, and see what we can come up with. >Hey if the current maintainer of majordomo telling them to post to the >right list won't help, what will 8-). So is the above sufficient? Do >you use a more strongly worded (%^$^#@#) response and shift the top >row of typewriter keys 8-). > >Or is this something that can/should be done by end users using a >delivery program such as procmail, deliver etc to search for "listname >list-managers and found word majordomo" in incomming mail and dispose >of properly. I'm beginning to wish for a general-purpose regular-expression-matching rejection filter in Majordomo, where I could specify regular expressions on a per-list basis that should kick messages out for list-owner approval. There's already a fixed regular expression check in the guts of the code for keywords like "subscribe", to catch misdirected administrivia; I want the regular expression list brought out where the list manager can edit it. There are a number of circumstances where I'd use this (for instance, looking for Majordomo discussions in List-Managers, as mentioned above; also, looking for "Subject:.*satan" to stifle flame wars in Firewalls, looking for certain addresses or Received: lines to kill posting loops, etc.). -Brent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Apr 10 10:31:46 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA26194 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 10:02:28 -0700 Received: from [198.102.244.36] (quadra.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.36]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id KAA26189 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 10:02:23 -0700 X-Sender: brent@miles.greatcircle.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 10:02:52 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: Revised List-Managers charter; everyone should read Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've revised the charter statement for List-Managers to reflect the long-standing policy that questions about particular software packages (such as Majordomo, ListProc, LISTSERV, etc.) should be posted to the list dedicated to that package, NOT to List-Managers. We're in danger of destroying a valuable resource; folks who've contributed much to past discussions are unsubscribing from List-Managers because they're fed up with these misdirected support inquiries. My suggestions to everyone about how to handle the misdirected questions: respond by email to the originator directing them to the proper forum. Do NOT include List-Managers in your reply; that will only make the volume there worse. Do NOT answer the originator's question; they should not be rewarded for their mistake. Here is the revised charter: >This list is for discussions of issues related to managing Internet >mailing lists, including (but not limited to) methods, mechanisms, >techniques, policies, and software (in general; questions about >specific software packages should be directed to the mailing list >dedicated to that particular package). > >Technical questions regarding particular software packages (for >instance, Majordomo, LISTPROC, ListServ, etc.) are NOT appropriate >for the List-Managers mailing list. They should be directed to the >mailing list dedicated to that particular package (for instance, >for Majordomo, that's Majordomo-Users@GreatCircle.COM). Check the >documentation that came with the package to find out where the support >list for that package is hosted. > >This list is an outgrowth of the "Mailing Lists" workshop session >at the USENIX System Administration Conference (LISA VI) in Long >Beach, CA, on October 22, 1992. -Brent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Apr 10 12:00:21 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA02028 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 11:50:31 -0700 Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (frege-hg.math.ethz.ch [129.132.104.6]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id GAA27415 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 06:15:26 -0700 From: bollow@math.ethz.ch Received: from vaden.math.ethz.ch (bollow@vaden.math.ethz.ch [129.132.146.136]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.4/Main-mathdept-mailer) with ESMTP id PAA01379 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 15:15:32 +0200 Received: (bollow@localhost) by vaden.math.ethz.ch (8.6.9/D-MATH-client) id PAA12821; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 15:15:25 +0200 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 15:15:25 +0200 Message-Id: <199504041315.PAA12821@vaden.math.ethz.ch> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Questions: bounces FAQ, 'host unknown' bounces Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have recently agreed to take over a mailing list called "CHURCHPLANTERS" which targets missionaries and the like, i.e. people who don't necessarily know much about computers, networks, etc. For this reason I want to be a 'friendly' list admin, who tries to help people whose e-mail bounces as far as possible. I'm new to running mailing list, and I'm just figuring out some things. Is there a 'bounces FAQ' list somewhere? I have recently found out that with some of my 'host unknown' bounces I can actually telnet to the mailport of the recipient's machine like in the example below. What exactly is the reason for the 'host unknown' bounces under these circumstances? Norbert bollow@vaden:bollow> telnet ANSYS.COM 25 Trying 192.104.24.51 ... Connected to ansys.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 fea1.ansys.com.ansys.com Sendmail 4.1/SMI-4.1 ready at Tue, 4 Apr 95 08:49:53 EDT helo vaden.math.ethz.ch 250 fea1.ansys.com.ansys.com Hello vaden.math.ethz.ch, pleased to meet you mail from: 250 ... Sender ok vrfy stevej 250 rcpt to: stevej 250 stevej... Recipient ok data 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself Greetings in name of Jesus! As "list owner" of the CHURCHPLANTERS list I receive error messages when e-mail to one of the addresses on the CHURCHPLANTERS mailing list cannot be delivered. The listserver has registered your address as stevej@ANSYS.COM However, e-mail to that address bounces with error messages like the following: Error-For: stevej@ANSYS.COM Error-Code: 2 Error-Text: %MX-F-NOHOST, no such host -Retry count exceeded -(Via ANSYS.COM) I would suggest that you bring the problem to the attention of your local computer experts, and ask them to help you. Please notify me as soon as the problem has been sorted out. Until then I'll have to remove your address from the mailing list. (I'm sending this mail via interactive telnet to the mailport of your machine, if you wonder how it is possible at all for me to send you e-mail in these circumstances.) God bless, Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow, Zuerich, Switzerland. Admin of the CHURCHPLANTERS list. Email-To: bollow@math.ethz.ch PGP encrypted mail welcome. PGP public key available by 'finger bollow@gatekeeper.math.ethz.ch'. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 15:31:08 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA10769 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:18:30 -0700 Received: from cs.umb.edu (cs.umb.edu [158.121.104.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id PAA10760; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:18:18 -0700 Received: from se.cs.umb.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA16298 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Mon, 10 Apr 1995 18:18:34 -0400 Message-Id: <199504102218.AA16298@cs.umb.edu> To: Brent@greatcircle.com (Brent Chapman) Cc: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer , Roger Burns , list-managers@greatcircle.com, mcb@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: How to keep on topic. In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 10 Apr 1995 09:48:00 -0800." Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 18:18:36 -0400 From: "John P. Rouillard" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , Brent Chapman writes: >I'm beginning to wish for a general-purpose regular-expression-matching >rejection filter in Majordomo, where I could specify regular expressions on >a per-list basis that should kick messages out for list-owner approval. Um, Brent, this list isn't majordomo-workers, its list-managers ;-). That's why I wasn't more explicit in my original message 8-). >There are a number of circumstances where I'd use this (for instance, >looking for Majordomo discussions in List-Managers, as mentioned above; >also, looking for "Subject:.*satan" to stifle flame wars in Firewalls, >looking for certain addresses or Received: lines to kill posting loops, >etc.). Ok, so we have one vote for some sort of list manager administerable text filters. In the interest of research, and not mentioning my favorite MLM, how many packages out there offer this type of functionality? Also what level of selectivity would be required? Obviously selection by header field, received, subject, the pseudo header body which is the body of the message, and the pseudoheader any which is anywhere in the message. Are there other types of filters you would like to see in you MLM package? In specifying the filters, would unix shell type patterns be sufficient (i.e. alphanumeric characters and [a-z] for the letters a-z, ? for any character, and * for multiple characters)? So the Subject:.*satan would be written as: subject nocase *satan* to force the message with the word satan anywhere inthe subject to be bounced. The filter: subject nocase satan would only bounce a subject that had only the word satan in it (in regexp it would be /^satan$/). By the same token something like: body nocase,nomatch,lines=5 *firewall* would cause any message that does not have the word firewall somewhere in the first 5 lines of the body to be bounced. And of course the following filter would be put into list-managers: any nocase majordomo Oops, I guess this message wouldn't make it through now would it 8-). If the method above were used, would we need explicit beginning and end of line markers (as opposed to the implict ones that are there by default? Are full regular expressions needed? Quips, comments evasions, questions and answers welcome. Flames to /dev/null. -- John John Rouillard Senior Systems Administrator IDD Information Services rouilj@dstar.iddis.com Waltham, MA (617) 890-7227 x337 (617) 487-3937 (Direct) Senior Systems Consultant (SERL Project) University of Massachusetts at Boston rouilj@cs.umb.edu (preferred) Boston, MA, (617) 287-6480 =============================================================================== My employers don't acknowledge my existence much less my opinions. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 18:27:09 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA15868 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 18:13:01 -0700 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id SAA15863 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 18:12:56 -0700 Message-Id: <199504110112.SAA15863@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2971; Tue, 11 Apr 95 03:09:31 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with RFC822 id 9166; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 03:09:30 +0200 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 03:05:22 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: How to keep on topic. To: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 10 Apr 1995 18:18:36 -0400 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 10 Apr 1995 18:18:36 -0400 "John P. Rouillard" said: >And of course the >following filter would be put into list-managers: > > any nocase majordomo > >Oops, I guess this message wouldn't make it through now would it 8-). You got it. That's why such filters are next to useless. Another reason is that people aren't stupid. If they can't say "Majordomo" they'll say "M*jordomo" or "the M word" or whatever. They'll come up with new ways faster than you can filter them. Filters make sense when you're trying to catch mistakes from newbies who don't understand the difference between list and MLM address, or genuine one-time mistakes in general. Filters don't work for censorship. Guess where "durn", "darn" and the like come from? :-) Eric From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 19:56:48 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA19075 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 19:29:01 -0700 Received: from gagme.wwa.com (gagme.wwa.com [198.49.174.33]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id TAA19069 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 19:28:58 -0700 Received: by gagme.wwa.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #8) id m0ryVkm-000FDZC; Mon, 10 Apr 95 21:32 CDT Message-Id: From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: How to keep on topic. To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 21:32:31 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <199504102218.AA16298@cs.umb.edu> from "John P. Rouillard" at Apr 10, 95 06:18:36 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 581 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk John Rouillard asked, | Ok, so we have one vote for some sort of list manager administerable | text filters. In the interest of research, and not mentioning my | favorite MLM, how many packages out there offer this type of | functionality? I know of one (and, like John, I won't name names) that has pre-coded places for adding such extra processing if one wants or needs to. But as Eric Thomas posted, it would catch posts from people who don't know the rules, not from those who know them and work hard to circumvent them. The only way to handle that reliably is moderation. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 21:56:48 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA22101 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 21:47:11 -0700 Received: from bdt.bdt.com (bdt.com [140.174.173.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id VAA22095 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 21:47:08 -0700 Received: by bdt.bdt.com (/\oo/\ Smail3.1.29.1 #29.4) id ; Mon, 10 Apr 95 21:50 PDT Received: from noident@bakalite.bdt.com(204.182.11.62) by bdt via smap (V1.3bdt) id sma002157; Mon Apr 10 21:49:46 1995 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 21:46:18 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Bakalite@bdt.com (The Bakalite) Subject: Hello and Heeeelp! Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello, a bit of introduction. I manage a mailing list (for about 8 months) that deals with issues relating to macintosh digital audio workstations (daw-mac@netcom.com). It's been a lot of fun, but there have been a few problems. Netcom is oblivious to my mail, they periodically wipe or mangle the directory of the list, the mail is slow... you get the idea. What's more, they dont' provide www or slip, so I'm looking for another provider who will host my list. The problem is that I need a reliable provider, because I don't want to move the list around too many times (pointers on how to do this painlessly are greatly appreciated). Soo, you ask, why is this guy not following nettiquette and hanging out for a while before posting to a list he just subscribed to? The reason is that I am thinking of going with "community connection", a Berkeley based provider, but I wan tto make sure there isn't an obvious better choice. If there is some amazingly cool provider for mailing lists I could even keep my account at bdt and telnet in if it isn't local to Oakland (where I live). THanks in advance for any pointers. PS did I mention that netcom is still using version 1.6 something of majordomo and doesn't support dogests? (they do allow 5 lists per account though). Paul Braunbehrens Bakalite@bdt.com List Administrator daw-mac@netcom.com Ask me about the DAW-MAC mailing list From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 10 22:56:45 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id WAA23012 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 22:50:16 -0700 Received: from jazzie.com (p8.jazzie.com [192.147.229.18]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id WAA23007 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 1995 22:50:13 -0700 Received: by jazzie.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #63) id m0ryXsh-000OXGC; Mon, 10 Apr 95 21:48 PDT Message-Id: From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) Subject: Specifying List Filters To: rouilj@cs.umb.edu (John P. Rouillard) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 21:48:51 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <199504102218.AA16298@cs.umb.edu> from "John P. Rouillard" at Apr 10, 95 06:18:36 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 527 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk John Rouillard asked: > Are full regular expressions needed? It's hard to imagine being truly satisfied with anything less. Indeed, customizable filters based on installable macros, rather like any decent text editor provides, sure would be nice. (And while we're at it, can we standardize on Perl as the macro scripting language? ;-) -- Sean Shapira sds@jazzie.com +1 206 443 2028 Sean's Home Page Serving the Net since 1990. From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 04:56:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id EAA27005 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 04:54:40 -0700 Received: from SYSWRK.UCIS.Dal.Ca (syswrk.UCIS.Dal.Ca [129.173.2.108]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id EAA27000 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 04:54:36 -0700 Received: from AC.Dal.Ca by SYSWRK.UCIS.DAL.CA (PMDF V4.3-13 #6307) id <01HP7GKWCKCG004GIN@SYSWRK.UCIS.DAL.CA>; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:54:46 -0300 Received: from biome.bio.dfo.ca by AC.DAL.CA (PMDF V4.3-13 #6307) id <01HP7GKA7UCG009XF8@AC.DAL.CA>; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:54:15 -0300 Received: by biome.bio.dfo.ca (931110.SGI/931108.SGI.ANONFTP) for @ac.dal.ca:list-managers@greatcircle.com id AA20409; Tue, 11 Apr 95 08:54:18 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:54:18 -0300 (ADT) From: bill@biome.bio.dfo.ca (Bill Silvert) Subject: Getting off the topic To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: <9504111154.AA20409@biome.bio.dfo.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-length: 1930 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I seem to have missed something here. Eric Thomas writes: >You got it. That's why such filters are next to useless. Another reason >is that people aren't stupid. If they can't say "Majordomo" they'll say >"M*jordomo" or "the M word" or whatever. They'll come up with new ways >faster than you can filter them. Filters make sense when you're trying to >catch mistakes from newbies who don't understand the difference between >list and MLM address, or genuine one-time mistakes in general. Filters >don't work for censorship. Guess where "durn", "darn" and the like come >from? :-) I thought that the major problem we were dealing with was posters who sent Majordomo posts to this list because they didn't understand that the Majordomo list was the right place for such postings, not with vicious and malicious hackers who are trying to subvert this list by posting dumb questions about Majordomo. Sure filters don't work for censorship, but are we trying to implement censorship or do we just want to discourage inappropriate postings? Actually I think that Eric's post suggests a reasonable solution. Why not add a filter to bounce messages that contain the word "Majordomo"? Every so often we could post a reminder that this is not the right place to post Majordomo questions, but that if any subscriber wants to refer to Majordomo (as both Eric and I have done) we should use a code phrase like the ones that Eric suggests? Sure anyone can maliciously circumvent this, but it would be clear that they knew the rules and were deliberately breaking them. Of course if a lot of people do that, then we may have no other choice than to go along with Eric and impose real censorship. -- Bill Silvert, Habitat Ecology Div., Bedford Inst. Oceanography P. O. Box 1006, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CANADA B2Y 4A2 Personal InterNet Address: silvert@biome.bio.ns.ca HED runs a WWW server at URL=http://biome.bio.dfo.ca From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 07:57:27 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id HAA00557 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 07:30:11 -0700 Received: from hamp.hampshire.edu (newhamp.hampshire.edu [192.33.12.137]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id HAA00549 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 07:30:08 -0700 Received: by hamp.hampshire.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26981; Tue, 11 Apr 95 10:34:25 EDT Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:34:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Michelle Murrain Subject: An interesting AOL thing... To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199504110800.BAA24263@miles.greatcircle.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I found out from a subscriber of one of my lists (the one with lots of AOL subscribers) that if one is reading mail from a mailing list, there is a button, apparently, called "status" which when pressed, gives a list of all of the subscribers to a list who are on AOL. When I first heard about this I got quite upset, because this list is supposed to be a semi-private list, and I was concerned that a non-subscriber could get hold of the subscribers from AOL. It turns out that you have to be sent mail from the list first, but I still see problematic aspects to it. Anyway, I thought some list managers might want to know. Michelle --------------------------------------------------------------------- Michelle Murrain, Ph.D. email and finger: School of Natural Science mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu Hampshire College mmurrain@family.hampshire.edu Amherst, MA 01002 URL: http://www.hampshire.edu/Hampshire/ns/html/Murrain.html From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 09:04:43 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id IAA03383 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:39:37 -0700 Received: from vhipub.vhi.com (VHIPUB.VHI.COM [167.18.73.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id IAA03371 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:39:32 -0700 Received: from [167.18.110.3] by vhipub.vhi.com with SMTP (5.65/1.2-eef) id AA03082; Tue, 11 Apr 95 11:39:06 -0400 Received: from paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com by av2.vrx.vhi.com (5.4R2.10/1.3) id AA11257; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:39:47 -0700 X-Organization: RxNet, Inc. Fresno, CA 800/447-9638 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu From: Paul-Joseph de Werk Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... X-Originating-Host: paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <1995Apr11.083943-0700@paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com> Date: 11 Apr 1995 08:39:38 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: BWMail for Windows Version 3.2 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk An ether being in cyberspace calling itself - Michelle Murrain - uttered: | | Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:34:25 -0400 (EDT) | Subject: An interesting AOL thing... | | I found out from a subscriber of one of my lists (the one with lots of | AOL subscribers) that if one is reading mail from a mailing list, there | is a button, apparently, called "status" which when pressed, gives a list | of all of the subscribers to a list who are on AOL. When I first heard | about this I got quite upset, because this list is supposed to be a | semi-private list, and I was concerned that a non-subscriber could get | hold of the subscribers from AOL. It turns out that you have to be sent | mail from the list first, but I still see problematic aspects to it. If I read this correctly I think I can explain what the person meant. Let's assume that these three people are on a mailing list: person_a@aol.com person_b@aol.com person_c@somesite.somewhere.else What I think happens is that AOL stores the messages in a global pool and tags it as being for person_a and person_b. Now, person_a decides press the "Status" button. What they get is a list containing person_a and person_b. Person_c is not on the list because they are not on AOL. The "status" button doesn't return the people on the mailing list, but the people at AOL that received that particular posting. (If each person was sent a separate copy (mail person_a@aol.com; mail person_b@aol.com) then the "status" button wouldn't work. It only work when they are sent carbon copies (mail person_a@aol.com, person_b@aol.com). I guess AOL uses a tagged message format to conserve on disk space. I guess they assumed a lot of people would be using mailing lists. -Paul __________________________________________________________________________ [ Paul-Joseph de Werk, B.S. \ RX Net, Inc. ] [ Systems Analyst II \ MIS Dept. ] [ \ vrx: paul@av2.vrx.vhi.com ] [ \ inet: paul%av2.vrx.vhi.com@vhipub.vhi.com ] [_______________________________\__________________________________________] From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 09:58:00 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA05141 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 09:36:39 -0700 Received: from genome.lbl.gov (genome.lbl.gov [131.243.224.80]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id JAA05134 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 09:36:35 -0700 Received: from dnamo.lbl.gov.hgc by genome.lbl.gov (4.1/1.39) id AA00684; Tue, 11 Apr 95 09:36:22 PDT Received: by dnamo.lbl.gov.hgc (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06271; Tue, 11 Apr 95 09:34:19 PDT Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 09:34:18 -0700 (PDT) From: "Donn F. Davy" Subject: Filter off-topic msgs To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I wonder if reg exps is enough to filter out off-topic stuff. This appears to me to be a _very_ key need in online communications of all sorts, not just mailing lists: i.e. since there is an overwhelming amount of material of _potential_ interest out there, itself hidden in a torrent of less interesting stuff, most everyone needs agents with the savvy to figure out what I want and get the good stuff. Isn't this a job for a neural net, trained to individual needs, maybe assisted by regular expression specs? The software that could provide such a service in a general way, for multiple applications might be the next killer-app, even more useful than Web-browsers and Satan. Anyone heard of such a thing? Perhaps we (list-managers) are the environment out of which it could start. Donn Davy, Human Genome Center, Lawrence Berkeley Lab From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 10:01:58 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA05548 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 09:53:16 -0700 Received: from sunshine.eushc.org (sunshine.eushc.org [163.246.96.102]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id JAA05543 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 09:53:13 -0700 Received: from mind.org (root@mind.org [163.246.10.101]) by sunshine.eushc.org (8.6.10/EUSHC) with ESMTP id MAA11342; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 12:53:36 -0400 Received: by mind.org (8.6.11/mind.org) with UUCP id MAA16723; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 12:49:44 -0400 Received: by knex.mind.org (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Tue, 11 Apr 95 12:23:01 EDT for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... From: Gess Shankar Reply-To: gess@knex.mind.org (Gess Shankar) Message-ID: <60Fe4c1w165w@knex.mind.org> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 95 12:16:28 EST In-Reply-To: Organization: |<><>| Knowledge Exchange, GA, USA |<><>| Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Michelle Murrain writes: > I found out from a subscriber of one of my lists (the one with lots of > AOL subscribers) that if one is reading mail from a mailing list, there > is a button, apparently, called "status" which when pressed, gives a list > of all of the subscribers to a list who are on AOL. When I first heard > about this I got quite upset, because this list is supposed to be a > semi-private list, and I was concerned that a non-subscriber could get > hold of the subscribers from AOL. It turns out that you have to be sent > mail from the list first, but I still see problematic aspects to it. > If this is true, it is not so cool. Even if this "status" is restricted to the subscribers of a given list, I see problems for those people who do not wish to have their subscription status known (for whatever reason). Many MLMs provide options to turn "review" off so that a subscriber can stay off the listserver's own review lists. How does AOL collect these addresses? It seems they have to take some pains to keep such "status" updated... And isn't this some form of invasion of privacy etc... so to speak. After all this is email, even though it is a distribution list. GeSS -- Gess Shankar |<><>|Internet: gess@knex.mind.ORG |<><>| Knowledge Exchange|<><>|:::::::::::::::::::::::::|<><>| From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 11:27:31 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA08606 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:16:26 -0700 Received: from gagme.wwa.com (gagme.wwa.com [198.49.174.33]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id LAA08601 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:16:13 -0700 Received: by gagme.wwa.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #8) id m0rykXc-000FE8C; Tue, 11 Apr 95 13:19 CDT Message-Id: From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... To: gess@knex.mind.org Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 13:19:56 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <60Fe4c1w165w@knex.mind.org> from "Gess Shankar" at Apr 11, 95 12:16:28 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1783 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Gess Shankar asked, | How does AOL collect these addresses? It seems they have to take some | pains to keep such "status" updated... What they probably display is a list of the other recipients of that letter; you might even be able to try the `status' icon on a letter addressed to three AOL accounts, not through a mailing list, and see the other two names. I HIGHLY doubt that it consults the list maintainer's own database. What if the list is run at a UUCP site and has no direct Internet link, for example? If any AOL users who received the message have quit the mailing list since it was sent, or if any other AOL customers have joined it since that message was sent, the information would be out of date, since it would reflect only who else on AOL received that specific message, not who else on AOL will get the next message that comes from the list. MCI Mail used to convert all MCI Mail addresses in Bcc: headers to TO: headers; if you subscribed to a mailing list from an MCI Mail account, your mail from the list would include a TO: header for the list (or the original addressee if it was carboned to the list) plus a TO: header to you and an additional TO: header for every other MCI Mail account subscribed to the list. MCI Mail has stopped that practice; the Bcc: line to you appears in your mail as TO: but other Bcc: headers are not shown at all. | And isn't this some form of invasion of privacy etc... so to speak. In my opinion, it is. In a related opinion of mine, I'm sure that if MLM's that offer `review' commands or their equivalent had concealment as the default setting, just about no one would take the trouble to set noconceal. David W. Tamkin Box 3284 Skokie, Illinois 60076-6284 dattier@wwa.com MCI Mail: 426-1818 +1 312 714 5610 From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 12:02:23 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA08990 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:29:56 -0700 Received: from mail06.mail.aol.com (mail06.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.108]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA08984 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 11:29:53 -0700 From: PMDAtropos@aol.com Received: by mail06.mail.aol.com (1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA245245013; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:30:14 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:30:14 -0400 Message-Id: <950411143011_79517703@aol.com> To: mpmns@hamp.hampshire.edu, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In a message dated 95-04-11 11:02:11 EDT, mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu writes: >I found out from a subscriber of one of my lists (the one with lots of AOL >subscribers) that if one is reading mail from a mailing list, there is a >button, apparently, called "status" which when pressed, gives a list of all >of the subscribers to a list who are on AOL. When I first heard about this I >got quite upset, because this list is supposed to be a semi-private list, >and I was concerned that a non-subscriber could get hold of the subscribers >from AOL. It turns out that you have to be sent mail from the list first, but >I still see problematic aspects to it. > >Anyway, I thought some list managers might want to know. I'm afraid you've been duped, Michelle. The "Status" button is only available in the "Mail You've Sent" mailbox of AOL members. It only applies to those addresses who have specifically been included in the To: and CC: fields of a piece of outgoing mail, and only in the case of AOL members does it provide information (that being when the mail was read or ignored by the recipient). Internet addresses always show "not applicable", since we obviously cannot determine whether or not an Internet recipient has read a given piece of mail. The only way the list of subscribers can seen is if the entire list of subscribers is in the e-mail header. -- __ David B. O'Donnell (atropos@aol.net, PMDAtropos@aol.com) \/ AOL Internet Feedback/Response/Information Team Manager Tel. +1 703/556-3725 - FAX +1 703/883-1514 - "The spam stops here." Belief-L, GLB-News, SoftRevu List Owner/Editor From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 14:27:09 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA16550 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:22:47 -0700 Received: from cesium.clock.org (cesium.clock.org [17.255.4.43]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id OAA16545 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:22:44 -0700 Received: by cesium.clock.org with SMTP id <6951>; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:23:06 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:16:28 PDT." <60Fe4c1w165w@knex.mind.org> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:22:46 -0700 From: Jean Marie Diaz Message-Id: <95Apr11.142306pdt.6951@cesium.clock.org> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: Gess Shankar Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 10:16:28 -0700 How does AOL collect these addresses? It seems they have to take some pains to keep such "status" updated... I suspect it's nothing more harrowing than the RCPT TO command in SMTP, which will generally put as many recipients as possible when transferring a single mail message. It would make sense for AOL to internally store a single copy of the message with all the recipients pointing to it, just as I imagine they would if a message was generated locally and sent to more than one local user. Disclaimer: I do not claim to know what AOL IS doing -- I offer a guess at what they might be doing. AMBAR From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 15:57:58 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA19207 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:40:33 -0700 Received: from taz.hyperreal.com (taz.hyperreal.com [204.62.130.120]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id PAA19202 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:40:30 -0700 Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id PAA07783; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:40:32 -0700 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:40:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf To: Bill Silvert cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Getting off the topic In-Reply-To: <9504111154.AA20409@biome.bio.dfo.ca> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 11 Apr 1995, Bill Silvert wrote: > Actually I think that Eric's post suggests a reasonable solution. Why > not add a filter to bounce messages that contain the word "Majordomo"? > Every so often we could post a reminder that this is not the right place > to post Majordomo questions, but that if any subscriber wants to refer > to Majordomo (as both Eric and I have done) we should use a code phrase > like the ones that Eric suggests? Sure anyone can maliciously > circumvent this, but it would be clear that they knew the rules and were > deliberately breaking them. Better yet, if a message has the word "majordomo" in it, send it to majordomo-users@greatcircle.com instead! Only half-joking.... Brian From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 11 22:56:41 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id WAA26647 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 22:34:52 -0700 Received: from freeside.fc.net (freeside.fc.net [198.6.198.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id WAA26642; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 22:34:46 -0700 Received: (from kevintx@localhost) by freeside.fc.net (8.6.10/8.6.6) id AAA05372; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 00:36:35 -0500 From: Kevin at Freeside Support Message-Id: <199504120536.AAA05372@freeside.fc.net> Subject: best way to deliver large lists? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 00:36:34 -0500 (CDT) Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1677 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Two of the lists here are (what I consider to be) particularly large ones.. 1500 to 2000 addresses each.. that have given me headaches from time to time. The mail queue gets large, running sendmail processes (though they seem to spend most of their time just sitting around) choke the system into swap, etc. There must be a better way.. Does anyone here have suggestions for getting messages out to a large subscriber list (which invariably contains undeliverable addresses that seem to *drag* sendmail's delivery to the entire list down time after time) with a little more efficiency/brains than sendmail has wanted to do for me? I happen to use Majordomo 1.93 but I didn't consider this question to be Majordomo specific. Maybe some sendmail tweaking would help a lot. Some general things that I'd like to see.. * automatically remove "terminal" mail addresses (like "user unknown" or hosts that no longer exist), possibly after a few days of that.. * move others with delivery problems onto a "bounce" list where they have to stay until they confirm that their mail is working again and/or a certain amount of time (I understand Majordomo may already do this..) * sort easily deliverable mail addresses (and multiple addresses at the same mail host) toward the top of the list so these people can get each message swiftly without waiting on problematic addresses that happen to be ahead of them on the list. Am I dreaming? Thanks for any help or suggestions you can throw my way.. kevin -- kevintx@fc.net support@fc.net Freeside Communications 512-339-6094 (providing quality Internet access and services in beautiful Austin, Texas) From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 00:57:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id AAA29542 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 00:49:24 -0700 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id HAA29654 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 07:07:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199504111407.HAA29654@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4324; Tue, 11 Apr 95 16:03:05 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with RFC822 id 9706; Tue, 11 Apr 1995 16:03:05 +0200 Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 15:58:46 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Getting off the topic To: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 11 Apr 1995 08:54:18 -0300 (ADT) from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The people who posted Majordomo questions to this list and that I contacted privately said they did it because noone answered their question on the Majordomo-user list. At any rate, the use of a filter seems totally counter productive to me. All you have to do to catch people who genuinely don't know is require people to subscribe before they can post, and add this at the top of the welcome message: ************************************************************************* ******** THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT LIST TO ASK MAJORDOMO QUESTIONS! ********* ************************************************************************* And then give info on where to post such questions, etc. This should be sufficient for any literate subscriber to understand that Majordomo questions are not wanted, without requiring "honest" subscribers to escape the word every time they want to mention Majordomo in passing. Automatic filters, like any other attempt to make computers second guess human beings, are bound to create more problems than they will solve. Eric From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 11:29:20 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA09938 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 11:13:42 -0700 Received: from hamp.hampshire.edu (hamp.hampshire.edu [192.33.12.137]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id LAA09932 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 11:13:38 -0700 Received: by hamp.hampshire.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09403; Wed, 12 Apr 95 14:17:59 EDT Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 14:17:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Michelle Murrain Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199504120800.BAA29993@miles.greatcircle.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 12 Apr 1995 PMDAtropos@aol.com > I'm afraid you've been duped, Michelle. The "Status" button is only available > in the "Mail You've Sent" mailbox of AOL members. It only applies to those > addresses who have specifically been included in the To: and CC: fields of a > piece of outgoing mail, and only in the case of AOL members does it provide > information (that being when the mail was read or ignored by the recipient). > Internet addresses always show "not applicable", since we obviously cannot > determine whether or not an Internet recipient has read a given piece of > mail. > > The only way the list of subscribers can seen is if the entire list of > subscribers is in the e-mail header. Well, this is the response I got back from the AOL person who sent me the original message (who I trust, by the way, and is an AOL host of sorts) after I told them that someone from AOL said I was "duped": -------------------------- you can tell that high muckety muck they can kiss my ass :) right now, at this very instant i am logged on and the voice says "you've got mail". i select "read new mail" from the mail menu and my mailbox opens, showing me a list of all of my new mail. today, like most days it is full of [listname] mail, NONE OF WHICH I HAVE SENT. the way the new mail window looks on a mac is that you see the list of new mail and below it, still within the new mail window, there are several buttons showing. the buttons are: read, delete, status, keep as new and ignore. if i select *any* one of the letters in my box and click the "status" button i get a list of aol subscribers to [the list] and when they read their mail. it is the same whether "i" sent the mail to [the list] or not. for example. on 4/12/95 at 7:30am [someone@somwhere.universe] sent a letter to [the list] entitled Slow Mo... when i selct that letter in my mailbox (hi-lite it) and click the status button, this is what i see: Addressee When Read [a list follows of AOL screen names and times if the letter was read.] ------------------ A note. This mailing list is managed by SmartList, and the names on the list ARE NOT in the To: or cc: headers! So, what's up here? If individuals on the list do not want to be known to others, this is a privacy issue. It turns out that my list is one big happy family, and lots of folks already know one another (the semi-privacy of the list is really to keep most people out). But for some other lists, this could be a major issue. Of course most list management software allows subscribers (and non-subscribers) to get the subscriber lists. But I think it is important that list managers at least have some sense of control over thier subscriber lists. As well, AOL is right now the largest single service provider. (If this were netcom, or genie, etc, for example it wouldn't be such an issue, since most of us have a very few folks from these services. But AOL I think most lists have many AOL folk). Michelle --------------------------------------------------------------------- Michelle Murrain, Ph.D. email and finger: School of Natural Science mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu Hampshire College mmurrain@family.hampshire.edu Amherst, MA 01002 URL: http://www.hampshire.edu/Hampshire/ns/html/Murrain.html From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 12:27:29 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA10946 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:05:43 -0700 Received: from night.primate.wisc.edu (night.primate.wisc.edu [144.92.43.19]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA10938 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:05:37 -0700 Received: by night.primate.wisc.edu; id OAA19770; 8.6.10/41.8; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 14:08:33 -0500 From: Software Development Message-Id: <199504121908.OAA19770@night.primate.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: best way to deliver large lists? To: kevintx@fc.net (Kevin at Freeside Support) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 14:08:33 -0600 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199504120536.AAA05372@freeside.fc.net> from "Kevin at Freeside Support" at Apr 12, 95 00:36:34 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1521 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Two of the lists here are (what I consider to be) particularly large > ones.. 1500 to 2000 addresses each.. that have given me headaches from > time to time. The mail queue gets large, running sendmail processes > (though they seem to spend most of their time just sitting around) choke > the system into swap, etc. There must be a better way.. > > Does anyone here have suggestions for getting messages out to a large > subscriber list (which invariably contains undeliverable addresses that > seem to *drag* sendmail's delivery to the entire list down time after > time) with a little more efficiency/brains than sendmail has wanted to do > for me? I happen to use Majordomo 1.93 but I didn't consider this > question to be Majordomo specific. Maybe some sendmail tweaking would > help a lot. Some general things that I'd like to see.. I use Keith Moore's "bulk_mailer" program. It takes a list of addresses, a message file, sorts the address list by domain, splits the list up so that N domains appear in each section of addresses, and starts a sendmail for each one. This speeds up delivery time quite a bit because if you have connect to a host that's slow to respond, you only slow down the portion of the address list that's been assigned to that sendmail. The downside, of course, is that you end up with lots of sendmails soon after a message comes in. This can swamp a machine if you don't choose wisely how many domains each section of the address list gets. Paul DuBois dubois@primate.wisc.edu From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 12:30:41 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA10816 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 11:58:53 -0700 Received: from vhipub.vhi.com (VHIPUB.VHI.COM [167.18.73.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id LAA10810 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 11:58:49 -0700 Received: from [167.18.110.3] by vhipub.vhi.com with SMTP (5.65/1.2-eef) id AA09936; Wed, 12 Apr 95 14:58:27 -0400 Received: from paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com by av2.vrx.vhi.com (5.4R2.10/1.3) id AA27781; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 11:59:03 -0700 X-Organization: RxNet, Inc. Fresno, CA 800/447-9638 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu From: Paul-Joseph de Werk Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... X-Originating-Host: paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <1995Apr12.115902-0700@paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com> Date: 12 Apr 1995 11:58:55 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: BWMail for Windows Version 3.2 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk An ether being in cyberspace calling itself - Michelle Murrain - uttered: | | Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 14:17:59 -0400 (EDT) | Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... [... text deleted ...] | Well, this is the response I got back from the AOL person who sent me the | original message (who I trust, by the way, and is an AOL host of sorts) | after I told them that someone from AOL said I was "duped": | | -------------------------- | you can tell that high muckety muck they can kiss my ass :) | | right now, at this very instant i am logged on and the voice says "you've | got mail". i select "read new mail" from the mail menu and my mailbox | opens, showing me a list of all of my new mail. today, like most days it | is full of [listname] mail, NONE OF WHICH I HAVE SENT. the way the new | mail window looks on a mac is that you see the list of new mail and below | it, still within the new mail window, there are several buttons showing. | the buttons are: read, delete, status, keep as new and ignore. | | if i select *any* one of the letters in my box and click the "status" button | i get a list of aol subscribers to [the list] and when they read | their mail. it is the same whether "i" sent the mail to [the list] or not. | | for example. on 4/12/95 at 7:30am [someone@somwhere.universe] sent a | letter to [the list] entitled Slow Mo... when i selct that letter in my | mailbox (hi-lite it) and click the status button, this is what i see: | | Addressee When Read | | [a list follows of AOL screen names and times if the letter was read.] | | ------------------ It's like I stated before, When the *same* piece of email is sent to multiple people on AOL. AOL places it in a shared area and tags it with each of the users that it goes to, thus leaving only one copy of the email on the system. What the status button does is display all the names in that tag list. In order to make it a private email the list server would need to send a *separate* copy to each user on AOL. The drawback is that internet traffic would increase, assuming multiple people per site, and the system of the list server would bog down on sendmail processes, one per each user in the list. | A note. This mailing list is managed by SmartList, and the names on the | list ARE NOT in the To: or cc: headers! | | So, what's up here? If individuals on the list do not want to be known to | others, this is a privacy issue. It turns out that my list is one big | happy family, and lots of folks already know one another (the | semi-privacy of the list is really to keep most people out). But for some | other lists, this could be a major issue. Of course most list management | software allows subscribers (and non-subscribers) to get the subscriber | lists. But I think it is important that list managers at least have some | sense of control over thier subscriber lists. As well, AOL is right now | the largest single service provider. (If this were netcom, or genie, etc, | for example it wouldn't be such an issue, since most of us have a very | few folks from these services. But AOL I think most lists have many AOL | folk). It's a design problem of AOL (hence I don't subscribe to them). Yes, it is effiecient in disk storage, but having that *status* button breaks any right to privacy. I'd complain to AOL to have the button removed from the screen on the grounds of "Invasion of Privacy". But, then again, I can easily get a list of subscribers off of several listservers just by sending the right request. (Or by asking sendmail on the list's system to expand the out-going alias). But at least it isn't as simple as clicking on an icon. #include __________________________________________________________________________ [ Paul-Joseph de Werk, B.S. \ RX Net, Inc. ] [ Systems Analyst II \ MIS Dept. ] [ \ vrx: paul@av2.vrx.vhi.com ] [ \ inet: paul%av2.vrx.vhi.com@vhipub.vhi.com ] [_______________________________\__________________________________________] From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 12:58:32 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA11751 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:32:15 -0700 Received: from tango.rahul.net (tango.rahul.net [192.160.13.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id MAA11706 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:31:18 -0700 Received: from bolero.rahul.net by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA24213 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:31:03 -0700 Received: by bolero.rahul.net id AA21056 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5); Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:30:53 -0700 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:30:53 -0700 From: Bruce Perens Message-Id: <199504121930.AA21056@bolero.rahul.net> To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com, mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From: Michelle Murrain > Well, this is the response I got back from the AOL person who sent me the > original message... > > i select "read new mail" from the mail menu and my mailbox > opens, showing me a list of all of my new mail. today, like most days it > is full of [listname] mail, NONE OF WHICH I HAVE SENT. > > if i select *any* one of the letters in my box and click the "status" button > i get a list of aol subscribers to [the list] and when they read > their mail. it is the same whether "i" sent the mail to [the list] or not. There is a simple way to get around this. Make sure your list server generates a message to one recepient ONLY for each AOL subscriber (or for each subscriber if you have a small list). It is simple for AOL to keep a list of all the names provided to the SMTP "RCPT TO" command for a particular message. If you connect to AOL's SMTP and say "RCPT TO: user1, user2, user3", they will be able to see each others names. If you connect three times and say "RCPT TO: userN" each time, they won't be able to tell each user about the other user's names. Bruce Perens From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 13:03:53 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA12304 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:48:58 -0700 Received: from research.att.com (research.att.com [192.20.225.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id MAA12297 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:48:55 -0700 Received: by research.att.com; Wed Apr 12 15:43 EDT 1995 Received: from lexicon.info.att.com by big.info.att.com; id AA11617; Wed, 12 Apr 95 15:43:32 EDT Posted-Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:43:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: by lexicon.info.att.com (4.1/4.7) id AA26473; Wed, 12 Apr 95 15:43:31 EDT From: tal@big.att.com (Tom Limoncelli) Message-Id: <9504121943.AA26473@lexicon.info.att.com> Subject: Re: best way to deliver large lists? To: kevintx@fc.net (Kevin at Freeside Support) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:43:29 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com, majordomo-users@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <199504120536.AAA05372@freeside.fc.net> from "Kevin at Freeside Support" at Apr 12, 95 00:36:34 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 835 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Does anyone here have suggestions for getting messages out to a large > subscriber list (which invariably contains undeliverable addresses that > seem to *drag* sendmail's delivery to the entire list down time after > time) with a little more efficiency/brains than sendmail has wanted to do The standard answer to this question is, "Install Sendmail 8.x because it does all the sorting, grouping, etc. that you can imagine". Huge mailing lists suddenly use much less bandwidth because of all of this. If you have done this and are still seeing problems, ask your question again with more details. --tal -- Tom Limoncelli -- tal@big.att.com (work) -- tal@plts.org (play) "Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous impatience." --Admiral Hyman G. Rickover From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 13:10:16 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA12330 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:50:41 -0700 Received: from yukon.cren.org (yukon.cren.org [198.76.81.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA12325 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:50:36 -0700 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by yukon.cren.org with ESMTP id <79760-1>; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:50:33 -0400 To: Software Development cc: kevintx@fc.net (Kevin at Freeside Support), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: best way to deliver large lists? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 12 Apr 1995 14:08:33 MDT." <199504121908.OAA19770@night.primate.wisc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <17963.797716227.1@yukon.cren.org> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:50:27 -0400 Message-ID: <17964.797716227@yukon.cren.org> From: Marco Hernandez Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > Two of the lists here are (what I consider to be) particularly large > > ones.. 1500 to 2000 addresses each.. that have given me headaches from > > time to time. The mail queue gets large, running sendmail processes > > (though they seem to spend most of their time just sitting around) choke > > the system into swap, etc. There must be a better way.. > > That's not large :-) > > Does anyone here have suggestions for getting messages out to a large > > subscriber list (which invariably contains undeliverable addresses that > > seem to *drag* sendmail's delivery to the entire list down time after > > time) with a little more efficiency/brains than sendmail has wanted to do > > for me? I happen to use Majordomo 1.93 but I didn't consider this > > question to be Majordomo specific. Maybe some sendmail tweaking would > > help a lot. Some general things that I'd like to see.. > I run several lists (some over 35k subscribers) using the commercial listproc and ZMAILER as my mta. I've found though that the latest sendmail seems to do OK if you have enough RAM on your machine. What is enough ... 196+Meg for a large server would not be unreasonable if you want good performance. My limitted experience has shown me that Solaris (of SYSV) vs. SUNOS is the better of the two under heavy sendmail loads. The problem I've encountered with sendmail had to do with feeding it 110k recipeints in the time span of 40 minutes. This cuased it to fork too many processes and begin heavy paging/swapping. If the load is spread out, it seems to do OK. It appeared that Solaris had a superior paging subsystem and that made it hold it's own under heavy loads ... One site/customer is using sendmail to manage over 850 lists for a weekly total recipeints count of 1.4M. > I use Keith Moore's "bulk_mailer" program. It takes a list of addresses, > a message file, sorts the address list by domain, splits the list up > so that N domains appear in each section of addresses, and starts a sendmail > for each one. > Again, I think a good Mailing list manager will do this which makes delivery a bit more efficient. Although there is a processing penalty on the sending side, especially if the list of recipients is large and very dynamic. > This speeds up delivery time quite a bit because if you have connect to > a host that's slow to respond, you only slow down the portion of the address > list that's been assigned to that sendmail. > > The downside, of course, is that you end up with lots of sendmails soon > after a message comes in. This can swamp a machine if you don't choose > wisely how many domains each section of the address list gets. > Another way to do it is to control the number of recipeints per sendmail invocation. If your Mailing List Manager can connect to the localhost's sendmail and send it mail in groups of 100+ then you end up with less overhead ... i.e. HELO localhost Mail From: RCPT To: RCPT To: . . . and so on ... /Marco From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 13:27:32 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA12544 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 13:07:44 -0700 Received: from jazzie.com (p8.jazzie.com [192.147.229.18]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id NAA12539 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 13:07:40 -0700 Received: by jazzie.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #63) id m0rz7ky-000OXPC; Wed, 12 Apr 95 12:07 PDT Message-Id: From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) Subject: A frightening AOL thing... To: paul%av2.vrx.vhi.com@vhipub.vhi.com (Paul-Joseph de Werk) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 12:07:16 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <1995Apr12.115902-0700@paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com> from "Paul-Joseph de Werk" at Apr 12, 95 11:58:55 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1152 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Paul-Joseph wrote: > I'd complain to AOL to have the button removed > from the screen on the grounds of "Invasion of Privacy". It does seem to primarily be an issue between AOL and the customers for whom it provides this (dis-)service. It also secondarily effects list managers, though. If any are truly concerned, consider hacking your mail-handling software to separately deliver copies of the message to each AOL recipient, possibly with distinct Message-ID: headers or something. Of course this might defeat any attempt by AOL to save disk space by storing only one copy of the message. On the other hand, if they didn't fix the privacy issue (which I'm pretty sure they will) they would deserve what they got.... Finally, AOL users who are truly concerned might consider using a mail-forwarding address on another system, so that list mail would first go elsewhere on the Internet, and then get forwarded on to their AOL mailbox as a separate message. -- Sean Shapira sds@jazzie.com +1 206 443 2028 Sean's Home Page Serving the Net since 1990. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 13:57:54 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA13141 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 13:28:24 -0700 Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id NAA13136 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 13:28:21 -0700 From: PMDAtropos@aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA216168528; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:28:49 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:28:49 -0400 Message-Id: <950412162843_80915037@aol.com> To: mpmns@hamp.hampshire.edu, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In a message dated 95-04-12 14:37:15 EDT, mpmNS@hamp.hampshire.edu writes: >the way the new >mail window looks on a mac is that you see the list of new mail and below >it, still within the new mail window, there are several buttons showing. >the buttons are: read, delete, status, keep as new and ignore. AHA. This explains (most of) everything. I don't use my Mac very often, and the "Status" button described to you does NOT show up on the Windows client (which is what 75% of AOL members use). I checked by subbing to a list briefly, and *some* of the AOL members of the list *did* get listed when I clicked on Status (some = half a dozen, a small percentage of the total number of AOL users subscribed to the list). Why this is happening is beyond me, but it should not be there at all and certainly should not be uncovering names of people! I will be bringing this matter up with the Mail system and Mac Client people as soon as I send this message out. My apologies to you and your informant! >So, what's up here? If individuals on the list do not want to be known to >others, this is a privacy issue. [ ... ] I agree; I run a list on which all members are "concealed", and this snafu violates the privacy of the list. I don't know who implemented the change, or when it was implemented, but I'm going to do my best to get it taken out immediately. -- __ David B. O'Donnell (atropos@aol.net, PMDAtropos@aol.com) \/ AOL Internet Feedback/Response/Information Team Manager Tel. +1 703/556-3725 - FAX +1 703/883-1514 - "The spam stops here." Belief-L, GLB-News, SoftRevu List Owner/Editor From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 15:27:32 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA15242 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:24:40 -0700 Received: from taz.hyperreal.com (taz.hyperreal.com [204.62.130.120]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id PAA15232; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:24:24 -0700 Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id PAA07397; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:24:44 -0700 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 15:24:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf To: Tom Limoncelli cc: Kevin at Freeside Support , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: best way to deliver large lists? In-Reply-To: <9504121943.AA26473@lexicon.info.att.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 12 Apr 1995, Tom Limoncelli wrote: > > Does anyone here have suggestions for getting messages out to a large > > subscriber list (which invariably contains undeliverable addresses that > > seem to *drag* sendmail's delivery to the entire list down time after > > time) with a little more efficiency/brains than sendmail has wanted to do > > The standard answer to this question is, "Install Sendmail 8.x > because it does all the sorting, grouping, etc. that you can > imagine". Huge mailing lists suddenly use much less bandwidth > because of all of this. Er, yes, it uses ESMTP, but you still have to do delivery to N domains, and given that it takes an average of M seconds per domain (which given a fat enough pipe doesn't vary with what else is going over that pipe) that's N*M seconds to complete the job. A better solution is to split up the lists into X well-balanced sublists, so that delivery takes N*M/X seconds instead (modulo variations in delivery time based on what heuristic you used to create those sublists). Sounds like that's what bulk_mailer does. Brian From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 12 19:27:30 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA17459 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 19:09:48 -0700 Received: from [198.102.244.39] (pm-ppp-1.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.39]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id TAA17454; Wed, 12 Apr 1995 19:09:36 -0700 X-Sender: brent@miles.greatcircle.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 19:09:04 -0800 To: Roger Burns From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #75 Cc: Peter Bowyer , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, mcb@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 02:19 4/7/95, Roger Burns wrote: >On Thu, 6 Apr 1995, Peter Bowyer wrote: > >> No, I'm not being lazy by not changing the reply subject; I'm *really* >>writing >> a reply about last night's digest. >> >> It contained *no* on-top information whatsoever. None. Not a scrap. > >> Come on, List managers - this used to be a good, low-volume, high-quality >> list. What can we do to restore it to its former glory? > >I'd like to see a hands-on list-manager be assigned to monitor this list >daily and to notify posters when their messages are off-topic. Yes, >moderation. If an appropriate volunteer were available to take on this >responsibility, would Brent be willing to assign them to be the list-manager/ >moderator? I've thought about it, and I've decided that I'm uncomfortable turning over the list to somebody I don't know. So, I guess my answer is "it depends on who it is". One problem with moderation is that it's essentially a permanent decision, and it's a big commitment on the part of the moderator. If you moderate a list, people come to rely on it being moderated; if the moderator gets too busy to deal with it, or goes out of town for a couple of weeks, or something, the list suffers. Finding a replacement moderator, temporarily or permanently, can be a big hassle. All of the GreatCircle.COM lists currently follow an "occasionally moderated" model. That is, they're normally unmoderated, but we moderate them on a temporary basis when necessary in order to quench flame wars or kill mailer loops. Originally, I did all the moderation. As my tutorial and consulting business grew (to the point where I'm now on the road 2-3 weeks each month), I became unable to keep up with the load. I thought I'd solved this problem by hiring Michael Berch on a part-time basis to act as GreatCircle.COM's Postmaster, Majordomo-Owner, *-Approval, and so forth. Now, however, Michael's other activities (in particular, his launch of Infobahn magazine; see http://www.postmodern.com for details) have reduced the amount of time he has available for me, and made it much less regular (he can't do GreatCircle.COM work every day, the way he used to), and the problem has come up again. I don't think throwing another person at it (even a volunteer) is the right answer; that merely postpones the problem, and ensures that we'll have to address it again (and again and again) in the future. I'm not sure what the right answer is, but I don't think that's it; it may, unfortunately, be the best answer. -Brent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Apr 13 03:27:59 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id DAA24856 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 03:21:02 -0700 Received: from insite.parasoft.co.uk (insite.parasoft.co.uk [193.132.123.15]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id DAA24851 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 03:20:58 -0700 Received: (from root@localhost) by insite.parasoft.co.uk (8.6.10/8.6.10) id LAA01502 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 11:25:22 +0100 From: Peter Bowyer Message-Id: <199504131025.LAA01502@insite.parasoft.co.uk> Subject: Bulk_mailer? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 11:25:22 +0200 (BST) In-Reply-To: <199504130800.BAA22619@miles.greatcircle.com> from "list-managers-digest-owner@GreatCircle.COM" at Apr 13, 95 01:00:13 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 351 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I use Keith Moore's "bulk_mailer" program. It takes a list of addresses, > a message file, sorts the address list by domain, splits the list up > so that N domains appear in each section of addresses, and starts a sendmail > for each one. This sounds really useful - where can it be found? Peter -- Peter Bowyer peter@insite.parasoft.co.uk From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 13 13:56:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA06336 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 13:27:44 -0700 Received: from cc.joensuu.fi (cc.joensuu.fi [128.214.14.12]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id NAA06325 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 13:27:37 -0700 Received: (from mtoivane@localhost) by cc.joensuu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA21915; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 23:30:25 +0300 Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 23:30:24 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Toivanen To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM cc: Michelle Murrain Subject: Re: An interesting AOL thing... In-Reply-To: <199504120800.BAA29993@miles.greatcircle.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 11 Apr 1995, Michelle Murrain wrote: > I found out from a subscriber of one of my lists (the one with lots of > AOL subscribers) that if one is reading mail from a mailing list, there > is a button, apparently, called "status" which when pressed, gives a list > of all of the subscribers to a list who are on AOL. When I first heard > about this I got quite upset, because this list is supposed to be a > semi-private list, and I was concerned that a non-subscriber could get > hold of the subscribers from AOL. It turns out that you have to be sent > mail from the list first, but I still see problematic aspects to it. Actually, this may not be only an AOL problem (if it is). When I get mail from a Bitnet list through a Bitnet node nearby, it puts a "X-Envelope-To: " header having the addresses of the people on the list from my site on it, which would be a problem if we didn't want each other to know that we're on the list. Marko * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Marko Toivanen * * * * * * * * * * co-moderator in FEYERABEND of mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi * * * * * * majordomo@lists.village.virginia.edu http://www.joensuu.fi/~mtoivane/ * finger mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi for info From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 13 22:56:37 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id WAA14005 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 22:54:36 -0700 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id WAA14000 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 22:54:33 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id BAA10138; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 01:51:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199504140551.BAA10138@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: Peter Bowyer cc: List-Managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 13 Apr 1995 11:25:22 +0200." <199504131025.LAA01502@insite.parasoft.co.uk> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 01:51:21 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I use Keith Moore's "bulk_mailer" program. It takes a list of > > addresses, a message file, sorts the address list by domain, splits > > the list up so that N domains appear in each section of addresses, > > and starts a sendmail for each one. > This sounds really useful - where can it be found? look in ftp://cs.utk.edu/pub/moore/email/ for files bulk_mailer.{c,README,Makefile} No warranty, but if people tell me about bugs I'll try to fix them. One gotcha: if the message doesn't have a To: header, sendmail will add an Apparently-To header for every address in the envelope. (Someday I'll fix bulk_mailer to add a dummy To: header if one is missing.) Keith Moore From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 11:56:46 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA22493 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 11:37:42 -0700 Received: from freeside.fc.net (freeside.fc.net [198.6.198.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA22488 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 11:37:39 -0700 Received: (from kevintx@localhost) by freeside.fc.net (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA03536 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:39:41 -0500 From: Kevin at Freeside Support Message-Id: <199504141839.NAA03536@freeside.fc.net> Subject: email file server? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:39:40 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 370 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Can anyone suggest a good email file server? Seems like overkill to use a mailing list program's file abilities when there isn't a list involved. Please reply in email as this is off-topic for the list.. kevin -- kevintx@fc.net support@fc.net Freeside Communications 512-339-6094 (providing quality Internet access and services in beautiful Austin, Texas) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 12:28:18 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA23220 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 12:23:28 -0700 Received: from copper.cmp.com (copper.cmp.com [198.80.26.247]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA23215 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 12:23:19 -0700 Received: from mailgate.cmp.com ([198.80.26.5]) by copper.cmp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.14/16.2) id AA042707463; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 15:24:23 -0400 Received: by mailgate.cmp.com with Microsoft Mail id <2F8EF5B2@mailgate.cmp.com>; Fri, 14 Apr 95 15:22:42 PDT From: Plyaskin Sergey To: list-managers Subject: RE: email file server? Date: Fri, 14 Apr 95 15:22:00 PDT Message-Id: <2F8EF5B2@mailgate.cmp.com> Encoding: 17 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Please cc: to splyaski@cmp.com ---------- From: list-managers-owner To: list-managers Subject: email file server? Date: Friday, April 14, 1995 1:39PM Can anyone suggest a good email file server? Seems like overkill to use a mailing list program's file abilities when there isn't a list involved. Please reply in email as this is off-topic for the list.. kevin -- kevintx@fc.net support@fc.net Freeside Communications 512-339-6094 (providing quality Internet access and services in beautiful Austin, Texas) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 12:31:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA22998 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 12:03:15 -0700 Received: from gagme.wwa.com (gagme.wwa.com [198.49.174.33]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id MAA22981 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 12:02:53 -0700 Received: by gagme.wwa.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #8) id m0rzqgf-000FDhC; Fri, 14 Apr 95 14:05 CDT Message-Id: From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 14:05:49 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <199504140551.BAA10138@wilma.cs.utk.edu> from "Keith Moore" at Apr 14, 95 01:51:21 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 925 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Keith Moore wrote, | (Someday I'll fix bulk_mailer to add a dummy To: header if one is | missing.) That's a precaution every mailing list and bulk mailer should take. I scrapped (yes, `scrapped' with two p's is intentional) together my own method for the lists I manage, and about three weeks ago someone sent an article to one of them with no To: header. Everyone (except subscribers on the site where it that list runs) received a complete detail of Apparently-To: headers with all members' email addresses (again, except those on the site where the list runs). No one complained about it, but I immediately corrected the problem so that it wouldn't recur on either of my lists. The emabarrassing part is that I had previously told another list manager that lack of a To: header was the cause of the same problem when it had happened on his list and told him that his MLM software should take care of that situation. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 13:27:12 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA24466 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:15:48 -0700 Received: from chinacat.unicom.com (chinacat.unicom.com [192.108.105.34]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id NAA24453 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:15:39 -0700 Received: (from chip@localhost) by chinacat.unicom.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA22346; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 15:15:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Chip Rosenthal Message-Id: <199504142015.PAA22346@chinacat.unicom.com> Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? To: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 15:15:54 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "David W. Tamkin" at Apr 14, 95 02:05:49 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1118 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk David W. Tamkin writes: > and about three weeks ago someone sent an article to > one of them with no To: header. Everyone (except subscribers on the site > where it that list runs) received a complete detail of Apparently-To: headers > with all members' email addresses Wow...good point. [But what does this have to do with Mojordomo :-) :-)] Was the problem a lack of To: header, or a lack of any of the RFC-822 recipient headers? RFC-822 says, for example, that a Cc: would be legal and sufficient. (It also says Bcc: (even a blank one) would be sufficient, but depending upon Bcc: handling is playing with fire.) Also, since you said entire list, I assume it was your local transport (sendmail?) that did this. I've been thinking of modifying my (home grown) list redistributor to reject messages missing a Subject:. I probably should add these checks at the same time. -- Chip Rosenthal "This world is full of creeps like me." -Lyle Unicom Systems Development For a good time: http://www.unicom.com/john-hiatt/ PGP key: http://www.unicom.com/personal/chip.html From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 13:56:48 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA25138 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:43:05 -0700 Received: from flash (flash.flashback.com [199.227.19.33]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id NAA25133 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 13:42:52 -0700 Received: from monday.FlashBack.COM by flash (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA22022; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:39:06 +0500 Received: by monday.FlashBack.COM (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA00309; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:38:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:38:40 -0400 From: flash@FlashBack.COM (FlashBack) Message-Id: <9504142038.AA00309@monday.FlashBack.COM> To: dattier@wwa.com Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII content-length: 415 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk what's the best format of a 'dummy' header to use when sending bulk mail ? I send mail to a mailing with a custom program. I use a Bcc: field to refer to the 'batch' of receipients. I address the mail to alias (which is not the real alias name). I get 1 message for each 'batch'. Is there a mail header format that will (a) not cause a message and (b) not cause the Apparently-To fields to be generated ? -johnj From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 15:26:51 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA27311 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 15:25:40 -0700 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id PAA27306 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 15:25:34 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id SAA01175; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 18:19:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199504142219.SAA01175@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: flash@flashback.com (FlashBack) cc: dattier@wwa.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:38:40 EDT." <9504142038.AA00309@monday.FlashBack.COM> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 18:19:31 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > what's the best format of a 'dummy' header to use when sending > bulk mail ? I like to add: To: undisclosed-recipients:; It fulfills the RFC 822 requirement, and fools sendmail into not generating the Apparently-To header. Some sendmail configs will (incorrectly) try to rewrite the address, but that doesn't usually cause problems. (And when it does, it only causes problems for sites downstream from the broken mailer). Keith Moore From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 16:28:27 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id QAA28913 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:17:59 -0700 Received: from aspensys (aspensys.aspensys.com [198.77.70.104]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id IAA29108 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 08:38:51 -0700 Received: from smtpinet.aspensys.com by aspensys (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA12947; Thu, 13 Apr 1995 11:38:36 +0500 Received: from cc:Mail by smtpinet.aspensys.com id AA797798478 Thu, 13 Apr 95 11:41:18 EST Date: Thu, 13 Apr 95 11:41:18 EST From: jmeritt@smtpinet.aspensys.com (Meritt, Jim) Message-Id: <9503137977.AA797798478@smtpinet.aspensys.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: HELP!!!! trouble starting list content-length: 666 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have the listproc 6.0c, and it has been working fine. Yesterday I added a new list to the configure and added a couple of lines to the owners file and used the src/start -k and src/start, just like always. And instead of taking off and making the needed directories & files for the new list it (apparently) did nothing. And now NONE of the lists are up, and the listproc isn't even up to answer the simple queries (like lists). Can someone advise? REAL soon? i.e. HHHHEEEEELLLLLLLPPPPPPPP!!!!!!!! Jim Meritt (heck - it was just about to the point of being able to ignore it. dang!) From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 14 18:56:49 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA02237 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 18:50:21 -0700 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id SAA02232 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 18:50:19 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id VAA01575; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 21:47:33 -0400 Message-Id: <199504150147.VAA01575@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 21:47:27 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Okay, I hacked my bulk_mailer program to add a To: undisclosed-recipients:; header to any message which lacks a To, Cc, or Bcc header. More general header-munging would be nice, but probably goes in a separate program. ftp://cs.utk.edu/pub/moore/email/bulk_mailer.* -- Keith Moore http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ Computer Science Dept. / Univ of Tenn / 107 Ayres Hall / Knoxville TN 37996 From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 15 05:56:39 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id FAA11166 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 05:52:02 -0700 Received: from netcom17.netcom.com (netcom17.netcom.com [192.100.81.130]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id FAA11161 for ; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 05:51:59 -0700 Received: from [192.187.167.52] by netcom17.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom) id FAA25502; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 05:52:13 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: Level Seven Design X-PGP-KeyID-Fprnt: 4AAF00E5 - 30D81F3484E6A83F 6EC8D7F0CAB3D265 X-PGP-KeyLocation: ftp.netcom.com:/pub/dd/ddt/crypto/ddtPGPkey.txt Date: Sat, 15 Apr 1995 05:52:30 -0800 To: Peter Bowyer From: Dave Del Torto Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #75 Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A while back at 11:53 PM on 4/5/95, Peter Bowyer wrote: >Come on, List managers - this used to be a good, low-volume, high-quality >list. What can we do to restore it to its former glory? I suggest an X-Header in every msg sent out by the MLM softwre that announces that this list is only for topics about List-Management NOT Majordomo-specific questions. How does that idea grab you folks? I can filter out those headers when it read it, but maybe it would bug some-a youse. On the other hand, if it does something to keep the list on-topic, maybe it's worth the header noise... dave (just catching up on my list mail after a short vacation :) From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 15 07:26:41 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id HAA11561 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 07:19:00 -0700 Received: from ulise.cs.pub.ro ([141.85.37.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id HAA11509 for ; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 07:05:27 -0700 Received: by ulise.cs.pub.ro (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA19366; Sat, 15 Apr 95 17:04:56 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Apr 95 17:04:56 -0400 From: pr93018@ulise.cs.pub.ro (Daniel Mocanu) Message-Id: <9504152104.AA19366@ulise.cs.pub.ro> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi to you ! We are two students from Romania and we are going to present you our situation. We are students at the "Politehnica" University in Bucharest Romania (Eastern Europe), the Computer Science Department. Our common hobby is the computer programming and we are here asking for your help. We work very late : the situation here for us is critical; the computers we work on are some IBM PS/2 (80286) that doesn't have any hard disk (believe it-we have to live with it!). To compile a C++ program we have to wait minutes ! I don't want to mention Windows ! There are a lot of nights we have spent in one of our University rooms. ( I am scared to think how many) and this is because we can't have a computer of our own! Now look why we are asking for your help: in your country computers like 80286 or 80386 are out of use for long time now , but we cannot afford such things here. If you have such a computer and you want to give it away or you know somebody who have such a computer (please contact him!) and want to get rid of it we are asking desperately for your help! The way we are communicating with you is a real miracle: we have here a machine with access in Internet and for a year we had tried to get an account. Please respond us (whatever your response is) to: pr93018@ulise.cs.pub.ro or pr93026@ulise.cs.pub.ro Yours, Daniel Mocanu Lica Laurentiu Energiei Str.,No.34,Sc.D,Ap.11 Eroilor Str.,No.32 Bacau 5500 , ROMANIA Curtea de Arges 0450,ROMANIA ______________________________________________________________________________ From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 15 10:56:46 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA14248 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 10:49:06 -0700 Received: from ub-gate.UB.com (ub-gate.UB.com [128.203.50.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id KAA14235 for ; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 10:49:02 -0700 Received: from bolis.UUCP by ub-gate.UB.com (4.1/SMI-4.1[UB-1.9.1]) id AA28970; Sat, 15 Apr 95 10:49:19 PDT Received: from amillar by hock.bolis.sf-bay.org with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0s0BqB-000CnNC; Sat, 15 Apr 95 10:41 PDT Message-Id: From: "Alan Millar" Organization: The Bolis Group To: Dave Del Torto , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 15 Apr 1995 09:29:00 -800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: List-Managers-Digest V4 #75 Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I suggest an X-Header in every msg sent out by the MLM softwre that > announces that this list is only for topics about List-Management NOT > Majordomo-specific questions. It seems to me that most of the Majordomo-specific questions or similar off-topic questions come from people who are not regular readers of the list, and quite often by their own admission aren't even subscribers to list-managers. IMHO Changing the list to accept postings only from list members will probably be the most effective. I have found that on the lists I run, allowing postings only from subscribers takes care of most of the "junk" postings. It catches off-topic random postings, spams, and misc. administrivia requests. (I usually have a file of a few "extra" addresses allowed also, for the few minor exceptions). - Alan ---- Alan Millar E-Mail: amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org System Administrator Web: http://metro.turnpike.net/metro/amillar From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 16 17:26:52 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA06181 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 17:00:05 -0700 Received: from [158.152.139.213] (g-circle.demon.co.uk [158.152.139.213]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id QAA06127; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 16:59:37 -0700 X-Sender: (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:59:00 -0800 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: The natural life of mailing lists. Cc: mcb@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Picked up off the net; thought it might be of interest here. I'd say "List-Managers" is somewhere about stage 6b, with occasional flirtations with 5 and 6a... :-) -Brent --- begin forwarded text Forwarded-by: cgw@io.com (christopher williams) Forwarded-by: Mark S. Bailen Forwarded-by: Friese Greg [author unknown] THE NATURAL LIFE CYCLE OF MAILING LISTS Every list seems to go through the same cycle: 1. Initial enthusiasm (people introduce themselves, and gush alot about how wonderful it is to find kindred souls). 2. Evangelism (people moan about how few folks are posting to the list, and brainstorm recruitment strategies). 3. Growth (more and more people join, more and more lengthy threads develop, occasional off-topic threads pop up). 4. Community (lots of threads, some more relevant than others; lots of information and advice is exchanged; experts help other experts as well as less experienced colleagues; friendships develop; people tease each other; newcomers are welcomed with generosity and patience; everyone -- newbie and expert alike -- feels comfortable asking questions, suggesting answers, and sharing opinions). 5. Discomfort with diversity (the number of messages increases dramatically; not every thread is fascinating to every reader; people start complaining about the signal-to-noise ratio; person 1 threatens to quit if *other* people don't limit discussion to person 1's pet topic; person 2 agrees with person 1; person 3 tells 1 & 2 to lighten up; more bandwidth is wasted complaining about off-topic threads than is used for the threads themselves; everyone gets annoyed). 6a. Smug complacency and stagnation (the purists flame everyone who asks an 'old' question or responds with humor to a serious post; newbies are rebuffed; traffic drops to a doze-producing level of a few minor issues; all interesting discussions happen by private email and are limited to a few participants; the purists spend lots of time self-righteously congratulating each other on keeping off-topic threads off the list). OR 6b. Maturity (a few people quit in a huff; the rest of the participants stay near stage 4, with stage 5 popping up briefly every few weeks; many people wear out their second or third 'delete' key, but the list lives contentedly ever after). --- end forwarded text ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 16 17:56:42 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA06924 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 17:43:27 -0700 Received: from taz.hyperreal.com (taz.hyperreal.com [204.62.130.120]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id RAA06919 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 17:43:24 -0700 Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id RAA25186; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 17:43:54 -0700 Date: Sun, 16 Apr 1995 17:43:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf To: "Donn F. Davy" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Filter off-topic msgs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 11 Apr 1995, Donn F. Davy wrote: > I wonder if reg exps is enough to filter out off-topic stuff. This > appears to me to be a _very_ key need in online communications of all > sorts, not just mailing lists: i.e. since there is an overwhelming amount > of material of _potential_ interest out there, itself hidden in a torrent > of less interesting stuff, most everyone needs agents with the savvy to > figure out what I want and get the good stuff. It's really going to be a long time, if ever, before an algorithm can be devised which efficiently determines some coefficient of what "user X" might like of a piece of content comprised of words and other media. What *will* work, and what works informally today, is a system of inference - one where you filter information based on the subjective ratings given that content by users you trust. "Collaborative filtering" will let you say "I trust Donn's and Brent's opinions of what where good posts on list-managers, so highlight every post that they gave a good rating to". Mail, news, and WWW user agents that make it easy to attach seals of approval to content will come into play as soon as the protocols support it (actually, it's a chicken-and-egg syndrome - what we need are some large-scale tests of this thesis). That, at least, is what I'll use to determine the "good stuff" :) Brian From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 16 19:56:44 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA08773 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 19:42:41 -0700 Received: from nii.ncb.gov.sg (nii.ncb.gov.sg [160.96.6.237]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id TAA08768 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 19:42:33 -0700 Received: from gremlin.nii.ncb.gov.sg by nii.ncb.gov.sg (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17087; Mon, 17 Apr 95 10:45:22 SST Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 10:10:53 +0800 (SST) From: Adrian Ho Subject: Posting Filters To: Alan Millar Cc: Dave Del Torto , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, 15 Apr 1995, Alan Millar wrote: > IMHO Changing the list to accept postings only from list members will > probably be the most effective. I have found that on the lists I > run, allowing postings only from subscribers takes care of most of > the "junk" postings. It catches off-topic random postings, spams, > and misc. administrivia requests. (I usually have a file of a few > "extra" addresses allowed also, for the few minor exceptions). That would work for everyone except subscribers going through local list exploders, which I've heard being widely trumpeted as A Good Thing. Were this to happen, people subscribed through list exploders would not be able to post anymore, unless the local MTA could be configured to rewrite the From: address to the local exploder address, *based on the To: address*. If the local list exploder were a simple sendmail-style alias, doing this would be Very Difficult Indeed. If the exploder were itself a list manager (eg. Maj*rd*m* 8-), it would have to do two things: (1) Rewrite the To: address of all incoming list mail to point to the exploder itself, to ensure that replies to all receipients go by default to the exploder rather than to the main list. (2) Rewrite the From: address of all outgoing list mail to point to the exploder, so that it passes the main list filter check. >From what I've seen, this will require patches to all the list managers I know of. It may also violate some principles of good list management that I don't know about. 8-) In summary, this filtering of incoming list traffic seems to cause problems for those local administrators who choose to reduce general list traffic by operating local exploders -- unless they choose to put even more work into their exploders. Am I way off base, or is the above essentially correct? - Adrian Ho IT Architect, Infrastructure Group NII Division, National Computer Board Singapore Internet: adrianho@nii.ncb.gov.sg From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 16 20:56:46 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id UAA09259 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 20:26:52 -0700 Received: from genome.lbl.gov (genome.lbl.gov [131.243.224.80]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id UAA09240 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 20:26:46 -0700 Received: from dnamo.lbl.gov.hgc by genome.lbl.gov (4.1/1.39) id AA26914; Sun, 16 Apr 95 20:26:46 PDT Received: by dnamo.lbl.gov.hgc (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07036; Sun, 16 Apr 95 20:24:42 PDT Date: Sun, 16 Apr 1995 20:24:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Donn F. Davy" Subject: Re: Filter off-topic msgs To: Brian Behlendorf Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > It's really going to be a long time, if ever, before an algorithm can be > devised which efficiently determines some coefficient of what "user X" might > like of a piece of content comprised of words and other media. What *will* > work, and what works informally today, is a system of inference - one where > you filter information based on the subjective ratings given that content by > users you trust. "Collaborative filtering" will let you say "I trust Donn's > and Brent's opinions of what where good posts on list-managers, so highlight > every post that they gave a good rating to". Mail, news, and WWW user agents > that make it easy to attach seals of approval to content will come into play > as soon as the protocols support it (actually, it's a chicken-and-egg > syndrome - what we need are some large-scale tests of this thesis). > > That, at least, is what I'll use to determine the "good stuff" :) > Brian > I wonder if the development of a neural-net with on-going training, in combination with your "approval seals" by "respected peers" might not provide a high-enough yield of "the good stuff" that its use would become widespread. The training could include records of what was accessed, by whom, working as a sort of trail-marking, so a "seal of approval" would not have to be an active process, but formed simply in the act of access itself. Thanks for your thought-provoking comment. - Donn From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 16 21:56:47 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA10602 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 21:52:50 -0700 Received: from ub-gate.UB.com (ub-gate.UB.com [128.203.50.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id VAA10595 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 1995 21:52:46 -0700 Received: from bolis.UUCP by ub-gate.UB.com (4.1/SMI-4.1[UB-1.9.1]) id AA14352; Sun, 16 Apr 95 21:53:18 PDT Received: from amillar by hock.bolis.sf-bay.org with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0s0ikJ-000ClnC; Sun, 16 Apr 95 21:49 PDT Message-Id: From: "Alan Millar" Organization: The Bolis Group To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 16 Apr 1995 20:36:46 -800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Posting Filters Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: Adrian Ho > On Sat, 15 Apr 1995, Alan Millar wrote: > > IMHO Changing the list to accept postings only from list members will > > probably be the most effective. I have found that on the lists I > > run, allowing postings only from subscribers takes care of most of > > the "junk" postings. It catches off-topic random postings, spams, > > and misc. administrivia requests. (I usually have a file of a few > > "extra" addresses allowed also, for the few minor exceptions). > > That would work for everyone except subscribers going through local list > exploders, which I've heard being widely trumpeted as A Good Thing. Were > In summary, this filtering of incoming list traffic seems to cause > problems for those local administrators who choose to reduce general list > traffic by operating local exploders -- unless they choose to put even > more work into their exploders. > > Am I way off base, or is the above essentially correct? Yes, your summary is correct. The possible exception would be the philosophical question of whether or not local exploders really are a Good Thing, but that's a different discussion :-) I have few, if any, local exploders on my lists so I overlooked their impact. Thanks for pointing it out. One thing I do is keep a list of extra addresses to allow to post for situations like this. I'll commit the list-managers heresy of mentioning a majordomo-specific config, but I do this in the majordomo 1.93 config file with: restrict_post = listname:listname-digest:listname.extra If you have many local exploders, this would be a pain to maintain, but with only a few it is not bad. - Alan ---- Alan Millar E-Mail: amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org System Administrator Web: http://metro.turnpike.net/metro/amillar From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 00:56:40 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id AAA12716 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:40:42 -0700 Received: from nii.ncb.gov.sg (nii.ncb.gov.sg [160.96.6.237]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id AAA12711 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:40:31 -0700 Received: from gremlin.nii.ncb.gov.sg by nii.ncb.gov.sg (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08264; Mon, 17 Apr 95 15:43:12 SST Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:08:42 +0800 (SST) From: Adrian Ho Subject: Re: Posting Filters To: Alan Millar Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sun, 16 Apr 1995, Alan Millar wrote: > One thing I do is keep a list of extra addresses to allow to post > for situations like this. I'll commit the list-managers heresy of > mentioning a majordomo-specific config, but I do this in the > majordomo 1.93 config file with: > restrict_post = listname:listname-digest:listname.extra > If you have many local exploders, this would be a pain to maintain, > but with only a few it is not bad. I may be missing something here, but I don't quite see how the above solves the local exploder problem. Since you're (presumably) filtering on the From: line, wouldn't you still have to know who's on the exploder distribution list? One possible remedy is to filter on just the domain part of the From: line, assuming you've identified which domains sport local exploders for your list. It's not very accurate, but I suppose it should suffice for most purposes. - Adrian Ho IT Architect, Infrastructure Group NII Division, National Computer Board Singapore Internet: adrianho@nii.ncb.gov.sg From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 01:27:54 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id BAA13300 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 01:12:27 -0700 Received: from tango.rahul.net (tango.rahul.net [192.160.13.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id BAA13295 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 01:12:24 -0700 Received: from bolero.rahul.net by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA21326 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 17 Apr 1995 01:12:58 -0700 Received: by bolero.rahul.net id AA29207 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM); Mon, 17 Apr 1995 01:12:57 -0700 Message-Id: <199504170812.AA29207@bolero.rahul.net> To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Posting Filters In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 17 Apr 95 01:12:56 -0700 From: Michelle Dick Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Adrian wrote: > On Sun, 16 Apr 1995, Alan Millar wrote: > > One thing I do is keep a list of extra addresses to allow to post > > for situations like this. I'll commit the list-managers heresy of > > mentioning a majordomo-specific config, but I do this in the > > majordomo 1.93 config file with: > > restrict_post = listname:listname-digest:listname.extra > > If you have many local exploders, this would be a pain to maintain, > > but with only a few it is not bad. > > I may be missing something here, but I don't quite see how the above > solves the local exploder problem. Since you're (presumably) filtering on > the From: line, wouldn't you still have to know who's on the exploder > distribution list? Correct, but folks who want to post (generally a small fraction of readers, especially for large lists with exploders) ever want to post. They tell you what their address is and you add it. This also works for folks who are subscribed under one address and want to post via another. SmartList (another mailing list package) also has provisions for maintenance of a second list of addresses approved for posting. -- Michelle Dick artemis@rahul.net East Palo Alto, CA Owner, FATFREE Vegetarian Mailing List From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 02:57:16 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id CAA15543 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 02:32:04 -0700 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id CAA15538 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 02:32:01 -0700 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id CAA07554 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 02:32:15 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: Women-Online@agoodloe.vip.best.com Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 02:31:17 -0800 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe/Women Online) Subject: Re: Posting Filters Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:36 PM 4/16/95, Alan Millar wrote: >Yes, your summary is correct. The possible exception would be the >philosophical question of whether or not local exploders really are >a Good Thing, but that's a different discussion :-) > >I have few, if any, local exploders on my lists so I overlooked >their impact. Thanks for pointing it out. Is there a way to tell, just by looking at who's subscribed to your list, whether or not any of them are "local exploder" addresses? All of my lists are closed and are restricted to certain people -- but I suppose they could be being "exploded" somewhere without my knowledge. Is that the case? Is there any way to avoid this??? --Amy +:-:+-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+:-:+ Amy T. Goodloe Director, Women Online, San Francisco CA agoodloe@best.com Internet and Macintosh Consulting Services for Women - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lists moderated: internet-women-info, internet-women-help, iw-volunteers women-online-news, lesbian-studies, ba-cyberdykes, lesac-net URL: http://www.best.com/~agoodloe/home.html From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 12:14:08 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA01736 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 11:59:51 -0700 Received: from night.primate.wisc.edu (night.primate.wisc.edu [144.92.43.19]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA01731 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 11:59:48 -0700 Received: by night.primate.wisc.edu; id OAA17696; 8.6.10/41.8; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 14:04:04 -0500 From: Software Development Message-Id: <199504171904.OAA17696@night.primate.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: Bulk_mailer? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 14:04:04 -0600 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <199504140551.BAA10138@wilma.cs.utk.edu> from "Keith Moore" at Apr 14, 95 01:51:21 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 790 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > This sounds really useful - where can it be found? > > look in ftp://cs.utk.edu/pub/moore/email/ > for files bulk_mailer.{c,README,Makefile} > > No warranty, but if people tell me about bugs I'll try to fix them. > > One gotcha: if the message doesn't have a To: header, sendmail will > add an Apparently-To header for every address in the envelope. > (Someday I'll fix bulk_mailer to add a dummy To: header if one is > missing.) I've made some slight changes to this program to allow it to accept the number of domains per sendmail invocation from the command line, and to allow the default domain (for addresses that are missing one) and the sendmail command to be parameterized in the Makefile. If anyone wants the changes I can mail them. Paul DuBois dubois@primate.wisc.edu From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 16:14:22 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA08718 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:57:01 -0700 Received: from taz.hyperreal.com (taz.hyperreal.com [204.62.130.120]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id PAA08713; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:56:58 -0700 Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id PAA07546; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:56:55 -0700 Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:56:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf To: Brent Chapman cc: "Donn F. Davy" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Filter off-topic msgs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 17 Apr 1995, Brent Chapman wrote: > At 17:43 4/16/95, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > >"Collaborative filtering" will let you say "I trust Donn's > >and Brent's opinions of what where good posts on list-managers, so highlight > >every post that they gave a good rating to". > > Sure, no problem, as long as you're willing to wait a few days or weeks for > me to get around to reading it sometimes... :-) Of course - but there will be those who will, by virtue of being "recognized", want to filter it every day as they know their filtering work is appreciated. In fact there may be those who are willing to sell their streams of seals of approval for a small fee... Ecology of information, anyone? Brian From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 16:16:57 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA08393 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:48:55 -0700 Received: from [158.152.139.213] (g-circle.demon.co.uk [158.152.139.213]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id PAA08386; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:48:42 -0700 X-Sender: (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 23:47:10 +0000 To: Brian Behlendorf , "Donn F. Davy" From: Brent@GreatCircle.COM (Brent Chapman) Subject: Re: Filter off-topic msgs Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 17:43 4/16/95, Brian Behlendorf wrote: >"Collaborative filtering" will let you say "I trust Donn's >and Brent's opinions of what where good posts on list-managers, so highlight >every post that they gave a good rating to". Sure, no problem, as long as you're willing to wait a few days or weeks for me to get around to reading it sometimes... :-) -Brent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For info about the Internet Security Firewalls Tutorial and a schedule of upcoming dates, please send email to Tutorial-Info@GreatCircle.COM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Apr 17 18:43:41 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA12315 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 18:14:12 -0700 Received: from ub-gate.UB.com (ub-gate.UB.com [128.203.50.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id SAA12305 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 18:14:04 -0700 Received: from bolis.UUCP by ub-gate.UB.com (4.1/SMI-4.1[UB-1.9.1]) id AA06519; Mon, 17 Apr 95 18:14:01 PDT Received: from amillar by hock.bolis.sf-bay.org with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0s11tu-000ClnC; Mon, 17 Apr 95 18:16 PDT Message-Id: From: "Alan Millar" Organization: The Bolis Group To: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe/Women Online), List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 17:03:13 -800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Posting Filters Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >Yes, your summary is correct. The possible exception would be the > >philosophical question of whether or not local exploders really are > >a Good Thing, but that's a different discussion :-) > Is there a way to tell, just by looking at who's subscribed to your list, > whether or not any of them are "local exploder" addresses? All of my lists > are closed and are restricted to certain people -- but I suppose they could > be being "exploded" somewhere without my knowledge. Is that the case? Is > there any way to avoid this??? There is no way to know for certain. If you see a list member address whose local part is the same as your list name, that's probably a dead giveaway. Of if you see submissions from one or more people at particular domain, who aren't members, that may be a clue. There are other gimmicks to try, such as SMTP VRFY, but such things only occaisionally help. There really is no definitive way to know for sure. You can set it in policy up front, saying "no local exploders allowed", and threaten violators with removal from the list. This is done by other list ownerss currently. Peer pressure seems to be the most effective in the long run. - Alan ---- Alan Millar E-Mail: amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org System Administrator Web: http://metro.turnpike.net/metro/amillar From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 18:49:00 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA12314 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 18:14:10 -0700 Received: from ub-gate.UB.com (ub-gate.UB.com [128.203.50.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id SAA12304 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 18:14:03 -0700 Received: from bolis.UUCP by ub-gate.UB.com (4.1/SMI-4.1[UB-1.9.1]) id AA06512; Mon, 17 Apr 95 18:13:52 PDT Received: from amillar by hock.bolis.sf-bay.org with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0s11lq-000Cm5C; Mon, 17 Apr 95 18:08 PDT Message-Id: From: "Alan Millar" Organization: The Bolis Group To: Adrian Ho , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 16:54:52 -800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Posting Filters Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > One thing I do is keep a list of extra addresses to allow to post > > for situations like this. > > If you have many local exploders, this would be a pain to maintain, > > but with only a few it is not bad. > I may be missing something here, but I don't quite see how the above > solves the local exploder problem. Since you're (presumably) filtering on > the From: line, wouldn't you still have to know who's on the exploder > distribution list? Sorry, I wasn't clear. You are right, my solution does not explicitly automatically allow all members of the local exploder to post to the list. It only creates a facility where you can decided to add *by hand* any members of a local exploder to the "extra" list, so that in the future they can post unimpeded. In practice, I find that on my lists there are far fewer posters than readers, so I wouldn't need to add all of the exploder members, only the few regular posters. Also, in practice, I find that most of bounced non-member submissions I get are pretty obvious right away whether they are relevant on-topic messages or just plain junk. Your mileage may vary. If they look on-topic, I usually just approve them. If I see an address recurring regularly, I assume it is from an exploder or a list member's alternative address, and add it to the "extra" file. Other list owners may not wish to operate this way. If it turns out that I approved their on-topic message but they really aren't list members, I don't care. If they don't see the replies because they aren't subscribers, too bad. (I mightnote that I don't approve non-member messages if they say "please reply directly because I'm not a member"; I send them the subscription info file instead). > One possible remedy is to filter on just the domain part of the From: > line, assuming you've identified which domains sport local exploders for > your list. It's not very accurate, but I suppose it should suffice for > most purposes. One of the reasons I like to limit postings to members is to filter out non-delivery notices (NDN's) from gatewayed mail systems that send their notices to the From: or Reply-To: address instead of the envelope sender. From: Oddball Administrator To: entire list instead of sender Subject: could not deliver to bozo-net You know what I mean... :-) In my experience, I would include gateways to local news groups or local conferencing systems in the exploder category, and it seems to me that these sorts of gateways are more often the offenders in sending NDN's to the wrong place. In other words, such exploders are more likely to be bad NDN senders than non-exploders. The key here is that the problem is caught and mail loop avoided if the sender of the NDN ("admin@bozo.net" in my example, or sometimes Postmaster or Mailer-Daemon) is NOT a member of the list, and not allowed to post. Filtering on domain-only would not catch these problems. It depends on how much you worry about such an occurance happening. If you haven't had a problem like that, be glad :-) I had some nasty cleanup after a weekend of mail loops because of one of these problems, and several *caught and avoided* after I closed the list to members-only. - Alan ---- Alan Millar E-Mail: amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org System Administrator Web: http://metro.turnpike.net/metro/amillar From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 17 22:43:26 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id WAA18734 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 22:21:49 -0700 Received: from chinacat.unicom.com (chinacat.unicom.com [192.108.105.34]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id WAA18729 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 1995 22:21:45 -0700 Received: (from chip@localhost) by chinacat.unicom.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id AAA24325; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 00:21:42 -0500 (CDT) From: Chip Rosenthal Message-Id: <199504180521.AAA24325@chinacat.unicom.com> Subject: looking for a Jackson Browne list champion To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 00:21:42 -0500 (CDT) Cc: flashherm@aol.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1044 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I run a mailing list for singer/songwriter John Hiatt. Many of my subscribers are from AOL.COM. A bunch of these AOLers have some sort of private discussion group setup for Jackson Browne. They would like to see the thing promoted into a full-fledged Internet mail list. I checked PAML, but didn't see one there. I told them I cannot run the list myself, but I'd ask if there was anybody out there who would like to do so. So, if you are a Jackson Browne fan, I can line you up with a bunch of folks who would provide the critical mass subscribership to get the thing going. If these folks are anything like the AOLers on my list, I think you'll find they are a reasonably cluefull (albiet green) bunch. If this sounds at all interesting, please contact . Thanks. -- Chip Rosenthal They said I was just a dumb cowpoke. Unicom Systems Development I didn't want to make a fuss. - Robert Earl Keen For a good time: http://www.unicom.com/john-hiatt/ PGP key: http://www.unicom.com/personal/chip.html From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 18 01:14:19 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id BAA20555 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 01:12:45 -0700 Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id BAA20550 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 01:12:41 -0700 Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA05200 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for greatcircle.com!list-managers); Tue, 18 Apr 1995 02:51:50 -0500 Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA07245; 18 Apr 95 01:38:56 CDT (Tue) Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id BAA07242 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 01:38:56 -0500 From: Stephanie da Silva Message-Id: <199504180638.BAA07242@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: Re: Posting Filters To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 01:38:55 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1380 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Is there a way to tell, just by looking at who's subscribed to your list, > whether or not any of them are "local exploder" addresses? Not easily. One time a local BBS operator set up an exploder on my list from the mail that one of his users was receiving without my knowledge. I found out about that one when the sysop wrote to complain about the high volume of the list. Recently someone on Portal wrote saying "Please subscribe my other account, disney-afternoon@cup.portal.com," but that was too easy because someone on Portal's tried to set up an exploder before. > All of my lists > are closed and are restricted to certain people -- but I suppose they could > be being "exploded" somewhere without my knowledge. Is that the case? Is > there any way to avoid this??? Best you can do is make a policy that no local exploders are allowed on your list and if you find one, kick it off your list. My list is fairly small and I'm an active participant so it's easy for me to notice anything strange. My decision to disallow exploders came when a few people posted some off-topic messages through one I knew about. Upon querying them, they weren't even aware that it was a mailing list gateway they were posting to, nor did they understand what the topic of discussion was. I decided they were too much trouble after that and dropped them all (I had like three). From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 18 02:43:41 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id CAA22536 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 02:35:36 -0700 Received: from disperse.demon.co.uk (disperse.demon.co.uk [158.152.1.77]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id CAA22531 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 1995 02:35:32 -0700 Received: from post.demon.co.uk by disperse.demon.co.uk id aa20685; 18 Apr 95 10:35 GMT-60:00 Received: from stonewall.demon.co.uk by post.demon.co.uk id ab27515; 18 Apr 95 10:35 GMT-60:00 From: Nigel Whitfield Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 09:41:30 BST In-Reply-To: list-managers-digest-owner@greatcircle.com's message 'List-Managers-Digest V4 #85' of Tue 18 Apr Reply-To: Nigel Whitfield X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Posting Filters Message-ID: <9504180941.aa02837@fags.stonewall.demon.co.uk> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: Michelle Dick > Date: Mon, 17 Apr 95 01:12:56 -0700 > Subject: Re: Posting Filters > > SmartList (another mailing list package) also has provisions for > maintenance of a second list of addresses approved for posting. The glp list software (used for a few motss lists in the UK) also supports lists of approved addresses. Nigel. -- [Nigel Whitfield nigel@stonewall.demon.co.uk] [For details on the uk-motss mailing list mail uk-motss-request@dircon.co.uk] [****** All demon.co.uk sites are independently run internet hosts ******] From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 20 10:15:01 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA07114 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 09:48:39 -0700 Received: from insite.parasoft.co.uk (insite.parasoft.co.uk [193.132.123.15]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id JAA07104 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 09:48:35 -0700 Received: (from root@localhost) by insite.parasoft.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA01909 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 17:51:12 +0100 From: Peter Bowyer Message-Id: <199504201651.RAA01909@insite.parasoft.co.uk> Subject: Delivery times To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 17:51:12 +0200 (BST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 835 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi all, I'd be interested to know what level of delivery delays would be regarded as 'normal' when a list of, say, 500 addresses is mailed out. Of course, I'm aware that there are many factors - loading of server, congestion, speed of processor, which delivery agent is used, etc etc, but it would be interesting to read what others regard as the norm. And also, does anyone have any particluar 'hated' domains, which often take several attempts to deliver, thus slowing down the overall process? This is always going to be dynamic, of course, but it might be interesting to see if there's any consistency. This could lead to some pre-processing of lists to group 'slow' domains together in their own delivery queue to avoid slowing up the majority of deliveries. Regards Peter Bowyer -- Peter Bowyer peter@insite.parasoft.co.uk From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 20 11:45:25 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA10712 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 11:18:14 -0700 Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA10692 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 11:18:09 -0700 Received: from loiosh.kei.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.10/SMI-4.1/Brent-950108) id LAA15047; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 11:17:25 -0700 Received: (from ckd@localhost) by loiosh.kei.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id OAA20590; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:16:09 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:16:09 -0400 From: Christopher Davis Message-Id: <199504201816.OAA20590@loiosh.kei.com> To: Peter Bowyer Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Delivery times In-Reply-To: <199504201651.RAA01909@insite.parasoft.co.uk> References: <199504201651.RAA01909@insite.parasoft.co.uk> X-Attribution: ckd Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk PB> == Peter Bowyer PB> And also, does anyone have any particluar 'hated' domains, which often PB> take several attempts to deliver, thus slowing down the overall process? Well, historically, .mil was always one of my biggest headaches when I was still running the eff-news list. I actually did something like what bulkmailer does (only by hand ;-) inasmuch as I split the list into three chunks as I added users: all .edu addresses all .com addresses everything else This grouped "same domain" mail into the same file (allowing multiple RCPTs in the SMTP transaction) and even takes some advantage of V8's MX piggybacking (many .com domains have UUNET connections and thus have relay1 and relay2 as their only MXes). From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 20 12:43:48 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA14626 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 12:37:56 -0700 Received: from liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk (livbird.liv.ac.uk [138.253.31.12]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA14621 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 12:37:47 -0700 Received: from liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk by liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk via Local channel id <11140-0@liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk>; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:37:38 +0100 Subject: Re: Delivery times To: peter@insite.parasoft.co.uk (Peter Bowyer) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 20:37:35 +0100 (BST) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <199504201651.RAA01909@insite.parasoft.co.uk> from "Peter Bowyer" at Apr 20, 95 05:51:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 822 From: Alan Thew Message-ID: <"liverbird.li:111420:950420193740"@liverbird.liverpool.ac.uk> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In the last mail, Peter Bowyer wrote: > > Hi all, > > > And also, does anyone have any particluar 'hated' domains, which often > take several attempts to deliver, thus slowing down the overall process? > This is always going to be dynamic, of course, but it might be interesting > to see if there's any consistency. This could lead to some pre-processing of > lists to group 'slow' domains together in their own delivery queue to avoid > slowing up the majority of deliveries. > I used to have real problems with the .tw , .ar and .br domains Some of the Internet start ups also cause problems as in no mail shifts for days and days, but these usually get fixed. -- Alan Thew alan.thew@liv.ac.uk ...!uknet!liv!alan.thew Tel: +44 151 794-4497 University of Liverpool, Computing Services Fax: +44 151 794-4442 From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 06:49:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id GAA12116 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 06:21:32 -0700 Received: from tta.com (tta.com [198.65.128.193]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id GAA12111 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 06:21:30 -0700 Received: (from stan@localhost) by tta.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id IAA08903 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 08:22:44 -0500 From: stan@tta.com (Stan Hanks) Message-Id: <199504211322.IAA08903@tta.com> Subject: Re: Delivery times To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 08:22:44 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <199504210800.BAA05964@miles.greatcircle.com> from "list-managers-digest-owner@GreatCircle.COM" at Apr 21, 95 01:00:11 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 603 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk With a subscriber base of close to 1000, I found that average delivery time for a message was close to 4 hours. In Feb of last year, I cut over to a modified version of the bulkmailer program (discussed here last week) and saw that drop to under 20 minutes. With close to 2000 subscribers now, delivery time was creeping up again, but a newer BIND with a very much larger cache improved that again... Stan Porschephiles ListMeister -- Stanley P. Hanks Principal, OMNInet Communications P.O. Box 2087, Bellaire Texas 77402-2087 e-mail: stan@tta.com direct voice: (713) 661-2084 fax: (713) 665-4118 From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 07:19:49 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id HAA13152 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 07:08:09 -0700 Received: from sws5.CTD.ORNL.GOV (sws5.ctd.ornl.gov [128.219.128.125]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id HAA13147 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 07:08:06 -0700 Received: (from de5@localhost) by sws5.CTD.ORNL.GOV (8.6.10/8.6.9) id OAA02769; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 14:08:11 GMT Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 14:08:11 GMT From: Dave Sill Message-Id: <199504211408.OAA02769@sws5.CTD.ORNL.GOV> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Delivery times In-Reply-To: <199504201651.RAA01909@insite.parasoft.co.uk> References: <199504201651.RAA01909@insite.parasoft.co.uk> X-Mailer: VM Version 5.72.L (beta) with GNU Emacs 19.11 XEmacs Lucid of Sat Sep 10 1994 on liasg5 (irix) Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA X-Disclaimer: My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my employer Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Peter Bowyer wrote: > >I'd be interested to know what level of delivery delays would be regarded as >'normal' when a list of, say, 500 addresses is mailed out. The last mailing to the ~630 addresses subscribed to the decstation-managers list attempted first delivery to all addresses with an hour an a half. The system running this list is a DECstation 5000/200 running sendmail 8.6.10. I sort the list by domain, split it into four equal-sized pieces, and pass each piece onto sendmail. The ~1440 recipient alpha-osf-managers list takes a little under three hours. I tried bulk_mailer once but for some reason it was much slower. -Dave From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 08:46:21 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id IAA15387 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 08:28:03 -0700 Received: from vhipub.vhi.com (VHIPUB.VHI.COM [167.18.73.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id IAA15380 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 08:27:54 -0700 Received: from [167.18.110.3] by vhipub.vhi.com with SMTP (5.65/1.2-eef) id AA02468; Fri, 21 Apr 95 11:26:53 -0400 Received: from paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com by av2.vrx.vhi.com (5.4R2.10/1.3) id AA14743; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 08:27:39 -0700 X-Organization: RxNet, Inc. Fresno, CA 800/447-9638 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul-Joseph de Werk Subject: Bulk mailer (was Re: Delivery times) X-Originating-Host: paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com In-Reply-To: <199504211322.IAA08903@tta.com> Message-Id: <1995Apr21.082732-0700@paul.mis.vrx.vhi.com> Date: 21 Apr 1995 08:27:29 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: BWMail for Windows Version 3.2 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk An ether being in cyberspace calling itself - Stan Hanks - uttered: | | Subject: Re: Delivery times | Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 08:22:44 -0500 (CDT) | | With a subscriber base of close to 1000, I found that average delivery | time for a message was close to 4 hours. In Feb of last year, I cut over | to a modified version of the bulkmailer program (discussed here last week) | and saw that drop to under 20 minutes. With close to 2000 subscribers now, | delivery time was creeping up again, but a newer BIND with a very much | larger cache improved that again... Where can I find this bulk-mailer? Thanks in advance. -Paul -- #include __________________________________________________________________________ [ Paul-Joseph de Werk, B.S. \ RX Net, Inc. -- 800/447-9638 x162 ] [ Systems Analyst II \ MIS Dept. ] [ \ vrx: paul@av2.vrx.vhi.com ] [ \ inet: paul%av2.vrx.vhi.com@vhipub.vhi.com ] [_______________________________\__________________________________________] GCS/O d--@ H+>++ s g+(-) p? au+>* a- w+ (!)v C++++ UL/V/C++++$ P++++$ L++$>+++$ 3 E>++ N++ K W++> M- V-- -po+ Y+>++ t+(+++) 5++ j+(++) R+(++) G' tv+ b++(+++) D+ B-- e++(*)>--- u+(++)(-) h-- f r++ (!)n-(+)(----) x++++ From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 09:49:04 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA16978 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:38:47 -0700 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail1.netcom.com [163.179.3.50]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id JAA16970 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:38:42 -0700 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id JAA10165; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 09:38:29 -0700 Received: from [198.211.96.103] by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA10148; Fri, 21 Apr 95 08:25:13 -0700 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 95 08:25:13 -0700 Message-Id: <9504211525.AA10148@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Re: Delivery times Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >The last mailing to the ~630 addresses subscribed to the >decstation-managers list attempted first delivery to all addresses >with an hour an a half. The system running this list is a DECstation >5000/200 running sendmail 8.6.10. I sort the list by domain, split it >into four equal-sized pieces, and pass each piece onto sendmail. > An hour and a half? Wow. Last I checked SmartList took a little over six minutes to get a mailing out to the 600+ members of the pci-sig mailing list. This is with a 386/33 with 16MB of RAM running ISC UNIX, talking over a 14.4K dedicated SLIP line. >I tried bulk_mailer once but for some reason it was much slower. -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 10:48:06 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA18983 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:39:07 -0700 Received: from night.primate.wisc.edu (night.primate.wisc.edu [144.92.43.19]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id KAA18974 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:39:03 -0700 Received: by night.primate.wisc.edu; id MAA07081; 8.6.10/41.8; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 12:41:57 -0500 From: Software Development Message-Id: <199504211741.MAA07081@night.primate.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: Delivery times To: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 12:41:57 -0600 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9504211525.AA10148@znyx.com> from "Alan Deikman" at Apr 21, 95 08:25:13 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1002 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >The last mailing to the ~630 addresses subscribed to the > >decstation-managers list attempted first delivery to all addresses > >with an hour an a half. The system running this list is a DECstation > >5000/200 running sendmail 8.6.10. I sort the list by domain, split it > >into four equal-sized pieces, and pass each piece onto sendmail. > > > > An hour and a half? Wow. Last I checked SmartList took a little over > six minutes to get a mailing out to the 600+ members of the pci-sig > mailing list. This is with a 386/33 with 16MB of RAM running ISC UNIX, > talking over a 14.4K dedicated SLIP line. Pretty quick! Is it actually connecting to the remote sites and delivering mail, or just sending the delivery information to some other site and letting it deliver the mail? 100 messages/minute seems pretty fast for a SLIP connection. Well, I guess it'd be fewer than that if host collapsing is used. How many unique hosts are there in that list? Paul DuBois dubois@primate.wisc.edu From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 11:17:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA19242 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:46:03 -0700 Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id KAA19237 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 10:46:00 -0700 From: PMDAtropos@aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA107886364; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 13:46:05 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 13:46:05 -0400 Message-Id: <950421134558_91251874@aol.com> To: lstsrv-l@searn.sunet.se, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: "Good Times" Virus Scare a Hoax Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk About six months ago, a virus scare made its way around the net, claiming that an America Online member was distributing a virus called "Good Times" in e-mail. This simply was not true. Unfortunately, someone has once again started the rumor, which is again growing out of proportion. In the hopes that we can put a quicker stop to this latest scare, I'm posting to these lists. It's likely that at some point, some of your list members will come across this scare and some of them will probably not realise how impossible the situation outlined in the scare message is. To help answer questions, I've prepared the following text. Please feel free to use it or a modified form of it to answer any questions your list members might have. If anyone has further questions about the "Good Times" virus scare, please feel free to punt them my way. Thanks for your time and assistance, everyone. -- __ David B. O'Donnell (atropos@aol.net, PMDAtropos@aol.com) \/ AOL Internet Feedback/Response/Information Team Manager Tel. +1 703/556-3725 - FAX +1 703/883-1514 - "The spam stops here." Belief-L, GLB-News, SoftRevu List Owner/Editor ----- A message has been making the rounds of the Internet, claiming that a virus called "Good Times" is being distributed by an unnamed America Online member. This virus, which is allegedly being transmitted in plaintext, has the unbelievable ability to destroy hard drives, send CPUs into death knells and propagate itself by co-opting mail systems. This scare is similar to one which made the rounds of the Internet about six months ago, also claiming that a virus called "Good Times" was being distributed in e-mail. To the best of our knowledge, this simply is not possible. For the message now being distributed to be true, the viral code would have to be in plaintext ASCII and somehow know how to: (1) propagate itself by coopting dozens of different mail systems (2) activate itself on a wide variety of computers (VM, VMS, *NIX, DOS, Windows, Mac, et cetera) (3) erase the file systems on this same variety of computers (Windows NT, OS/2, Mac, *NIX, VMS, VM, etc.) (4) throw CPUs into a "loop" which would eventually disable the system. This would all have to be written -- again, in ASCII -- within the constraints of an outgoing mail message from AOL, which is presently a maximum of 32k. What is most likely the -real- cause of this scare is a chain letter titled "Good Times", which has been floating around the Internet and online services for several years. As the Internet is opened up to larger populations of "average people", chain letters are increasingly becoming a problem. It's entirely possible that the original "Good Times" scare was nothing more than an advisory intended to stop the spread of the chain letter. Unfortunately, as with many rumors it has grown completely out of proportion. If you or anyone you know receives a chain letter from an America Online member -- be it "Good Times", "MAKE MONEY FAST", or any of the dozens of annoying variations on the theme -- forward a complete copy to postmaster@aol.com. Distribution of chain letters is a violation of America Online's Terms of Service, and appropriate action will be taken to prevent further distribution of the chain letter. If you have additional questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to send mail to David O'Donnell at atropos@aol.net or PMDAtropos@aol.com. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 11:51:14 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA21188 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 11:40:13 -0700 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA21183 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 11:40:10 -0700 Received: from postmodern.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP id QQymlm08168; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 14:37:56 -0400 Received: by postmodern.com (5.0/SMI-SVR4/950404-mcb1) id AA12281; Fri, 21 Apr 95 11:35:25 PDT Message-Id: <9504211835.AA12281@postmodern.com> From: mcb@postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 11:35:25 -0700 In-Reply-To: <9504211525.AA10148@znyx.com> X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Delivery times content-length: 1425 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan Deikman writes: > >The last mailing to the ~630 addresses subscribed to the > >decstation-managers list attempted first delivery to all addresses > >with an hour an a half. The system running this list is a DECstation > >5000/200 running sendmail 8.6.10. I sort the list by domain, split it > >into four equal-sized pieces, and pass each piece onto sendmail. > > An hour and a half? Wow. Last I checked SmartList took a little over > six minutes to get a mailing out to the 600+ members of the pci-sig > mailing list. This is with a 386/33 with 16MB of RAM running ISC UNIX, > talking over a 14.4K dedicated SLIP line. I think we're talking apples and oranges here. Does your mailer resolve every address individually and send it directly over the Internet, or do you just send all your mail to a relay host? If the latter, I can believe 6 minutes; but I don't think that even with a T-1 you could get DNS responses on 600+ addresses in 6 minutes (that's more than 1 per second!), let alone open SMTP connections with each of them. The biggest time-sink in list processing that I see is not dealing with the address list, or pumping out the message data, or even doing DNS lookups (although the latter takes quite a bit of time); it's waiting for SMTP servers to answer. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com / mcb@greatcircle.com Visit the INFOBAHN Magazine home page --> http://www.postmodern.com/ From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 16:44:57 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id QAA03086 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:36:57 -0700 Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id QAA03075 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:36:54 -0700 Received: (from oliver@localhost) by panix.com (8.6.12/8.6.10+PanixU1.0) id TAA23408; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:36:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:36:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Oliver Garfield To: Alan Deikman cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Delivery times In-Reply-To: <9504211525.AA10148@znyx.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk What is Smartlist and where can I get information about it? *********************************************************************** *Oliver Garfield email: oliver@panix.com * *World Health Foundation phone: 212-877-4230 * *125 Riverside Drive * *New York, NY 10024 * * * *********************************************************************** From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 17:46:01 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA06030 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:42:20 -0700 Received: from tango.rahul.net (tango.rahul.net [192.160.13.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id RAA06020 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:42:17 -0700 Received: from bolero.rahul.net by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA29583 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:42:21 -0700 Received: by bolero.rahul.net id AA27540 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for list-managers@greatcircle.com); Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:42:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199504220042.AA27540@bolero.rahul.net> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: "Good Times" Virus Scare a Hoax In-Reply-To: <950421134558_91251874@aol.com> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 95 17:42:20 -0700 From: Michelle Dick Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I think I posted this here before, but one of my list rules has cut down drastically on the urban legend mail posted to my 2300 member list (that has a high proportion of newbies). I have about 6 main rules for the list and this is one of them. It is sent out to all new subscribers. 1. Don't Forward General Messages to FATFREE No forwarding of general internet/warning/rumor/good samaritan/ etc etc type letters to FATFREE. If you receive a message somewhere via any means that asks you to pass it along to everyone you know and every mailing list etc etc ... it is explicitly against list policy to post it here. I don't care how laudible the subject, whether it's about viruses, $250 cookie recipes, charities, missing kids, get well cards, gangs, sick children in hospitals, Trojan horse computer programs, ponzi schemes, get rich quick schemes, bills in Congress, action alerts etc. Good intentions are irrelevant. Whether it helps people/saves people from disaster/etc is irrelevant. Whether it's actually true or is a hoax is irrelevant. Whether this is the only place they might read it is irrelevant. (You will be assimilated). If the messages says to forward it, its content is irrelevant: DON'T POST IT HERE. Furthermore, any such messages will be deleted from the digest. -- Michelle Dick artemis@rahul.net East Palo Alto, CA Owner, FATFREE Vegetarian Mailing List From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 17:48:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA05167 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:19:06 -0700 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail3.netcom.com [163.179.3.53]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id RAA05153 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:19:01 -0700 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id RAA07913; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:18:46 -0700 Received: from [198.211.96.103] by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA12372; Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:05:38 -0700 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 95 16:05:38 -0700 Message-Id: <9504212305.AA12372@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Guilty as charged -- I think Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk As to the following: >Pretty quick! Is it actually connecting to the remote sites and delivering >mail, or just sending the delivery information to some other site and >letting it deliver the mail? >Paul DuBois and >A simple question needs to be asked if you are getting those kinds of speeds... >Where are you REALLY delivering mail to? Are you doing delivery to 600+ >addresses, or are you doing delivery to just a few addresses and having >you service provider really deliver the mail. I have a really strong suspision >that you are doing the later. >--gene and finally >The biggest time-sink in list processing that I see is not dealing with >the address list, or pumping out the message data, or even doing DNS >lookups (although the latter takes quite a bit of time); it's waiting >for SMTP servers to answer. > >-- >Michael C. Berch Actually, what appears to be happening is a combination of both -- the choplist utility takes the distribution list, sorts it by superior/ inferior domain, and seems to automatically parcel out addresses. By looking at the output of netstat, some addresses are connected to directly, and others seem to be relayed by the service provider, netcom. I haven't had the time to figure out how this works. I think the author of SmartList reads list-managers. Maybe Mr. van der Berg (sp?) can provide some information on this. To me the key issue in setting up the list is mostly what equipment I have to buy/rent/own/use to run it. I pay for the service from netcom, which has the heavy iron to handle nearly any message load that I require. This arrangement gets the most out of a 14.4Kb bottleneck since Smartlist is smart enough to send very few copies out through that bottleneck. -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 20:15:22 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA09469 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:53:13 -0700 Received: from jazzie.com (p8.jazzie.com [192.147.229.18]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id TAA09464 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:53:09 -0700 Received: by jazzie.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #63) id m0s2VIz-000OXRC; Fri, 21 Apr 95 19:52 PDT Message-Id: From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) Subject: Re: Guilty as charged -- I think To: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9504212305.AA12372@znyx.com> from "Alan Deikman" at Apr 21, 95 04:05:38 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 768 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan wrote: > some addresses are connected to > directly, and others seem to be relayed by the service provider This is amazingly clever! Many SMTP servers out there will accept mail for arbitrary Internet addresses. So one could pick a victim site, send a single copy of the message to that site with all list recipients specified, and then let their cpu iron and net pipes do the dirty work! I'm just kidding, of course! ;-) Although I'm replying to a message Alan wrote, I am in no way implying he or anyone else on this list might do anything untoward along these lines. -- Sean Shapira sds@jazzie.com +1 206 443 2028 Sean's Home Page Serving the Net since 1990. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 21 23:44:51 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id XAA12863 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 23:24:25 -0700 Received: from news1.crl.com (news1.crl.com [165.113.1.23]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id XAA12858 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 23:24:22 -0700 Received: from ephsa.UUCP by news1.crl.com with UUCP id AA24836 (5.65c/IDA-1.502 for GreatCircle.com!list-managers); Fri, 21 Apr 1995 23:17:36 -0700 Received: by ephsa.alamo.net (Smail3.1.28.1 #2) id m0s2YA8-0003pZC; Sat, 22 Apr 95 00:55 CDT Received: by fezzik.endicor.com (8.6.12/Endicor) id AAA09052; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 00:35:08 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Xref: endicor.com endicor.lists.list-managers:1586 Newsgroups: endicor.lists.list-managers From: tsarna@endicor.com (Ty Sarna) Subject: Re: Guilty as charged -- I think Message-Id: Organization: Endicor Technologies, Inc., San Antonio, Texas References: Date: Sat, 22 Apr 1995 05:32:08 GMT Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In article , Sean Shapira wrote: > This is amazingly clever! Many SMTP servers out there > will accept mail for arbitrary Internet addresses. So one > could pick a victim site, send a single copy of the message > to that site with all list recipients specified, and then > let their cpu iron and net pipes do the dirty work! Or you could be even more clever, and piggyback one or two (or n) extra addresses along with each regular connection, and cut your delivery time in half (third, nth). Since the extra load on each individual host would be small, they might very well never notice. Think of it as a Salami Slice attack, SMTP-style. > I'm just kidding, of course! ;-) Although I'm replying to Of course, I wouldn't advocate really doing this... -- Ty Sarna "I thought you were wrong before, but compared tsarna@endicor.com to now you were right" -- Exit 57 From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 22 11:45:01 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA19497 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 11:21:28 -0700 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA19492 for ; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 11:21:25 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id OAA16375; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 14:17:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199504221817.OAA16375@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: Dave Sill cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Delivery times In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Apr 1995 14:08:11 GMT." <199504211408.OAA02769@sws5.CTD.ORNL.GOV> Date: Sat, 22 Apr 1995 14:17:23 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > The last mailing to the ~630 addresses subscribed to the > decstation-managers list attempted first delivery to all addresses > with an hour an a half. The system running this list is a DECstation > 5000/200 running sendmail 8.6.10. I sort the list by domain, split it > into four equal-sized pieces, and pass each piece onto sendmail. [...] > I tried bulk_mailer once but for some reason it was much slower. Perhaps it split the delivery across too many "jobs". (where a "job" is an SMTP envelope handed to the local sendmail) The current bulk_mailer MAX_DOMAINS (per "job") was derived for na-net, which has a lot of recipients in faraway places (with intermittent connectivity and/or slow links). For na-net, the probability that a particular host will be unavailable is fairly high (say 10-20%). Each unavailable host delays delivery for everyone else in that "job". On the other hand, if you partition delivery into too many "jobs", your system will run out of resources. In the next day or so I'll put out a patched version of bulk_mailer that lets you set MAX_DOMAINS from the command-line, and also fixes a bug that caused bulk_mailer not to work on some systems. Keith From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 22 19:44:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA24181 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 19:16:24 -0700 Received: from taz.hyperreal.com (taz.hyperreal.com [204.62.130.120]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id TAA24176 for ; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 19:16:21 -0700 Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id TAA24149; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 19:16:15 -0700 Date: Sat, 22 Apr 1995 19:16:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf To: Sean Shapira cc: Alan Deikman , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Guilty as charged -- I think In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, 21 Apr 1995, Sean Shapira wrote: > Alan wrote: > > some addresses are connected to > > directly, and others seem to be relayed by the service provider > > This is amazingly clever! Many SMTP servers out there > will accept mail for arbitrary Internet addresses. So one > could pick a victim site, send a single copy of the message > to that site with all list recipients specified, and then > let their cpu iron and net pipes do the dirty work! > > I'm just kidding, of course! ;-) Although I'm replying to > a message Alan wrote, I am in no way implying he or anyone > else on this list might do anything untoward along these > lines. But what if - I'm on a server in America and I have 80 subscribers to a list in the UK on 60 different UK addresses. I could deliver the message to each host separately, going across the transatlantic link 60 times, or I could choose a really well connected site there (like, say, smtp.ja.net) and deliver the message once. I've just cut the transatlantic bandwidth I took up by 98%, and if the site was well chosen enough not increased the bandwidth consumption on the UK side. Bounces would still be delivered to my server, I think. So, this could be a Good Thing - pretty much transparent to the recipient and mailing list manager. Is there a way to automate that "well chosen site"? Well, I suppose you could flood the internet with traceroutes and analyze paths and ping times, but that's not guaranteed to be accurate. And besides, even if it does overalll result in a net savings for the internet as a whole, it's using the resources of another machine for your purposes. However, sites could create "contracts", whereby I agree to distribute a huge chunk of say demon.co.uk's bulk mailing to US sites if they agree to take on my bulk mailings to UK sites. Now all we need is some way for the mail delivery agent (Sendmail or smail) to support this at an easy to use level... Brian From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 22 22:14:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id WAA25717 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 22:04:04 -0700 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id WAA25712 for ; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 22:04:01 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id BAA17093; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 01:00:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199504230500.BAA17093@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: Brian Behlendorf cc: Sean Shapira , Alan Deikman , list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Guilty as charged -- I think In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 22 Apr 1995 19:16:15 PDT." Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 01:00:18 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A few years ago there was a proposal floating around for a "bulk mail exchanger" (BMX) record in the DNS. That is, any domain could advertise one or more hosts that would accept "bulk mail" for that domain. (where bulk mail is defined as being a message addressed to more than N recipients at the same BMX host) Naturally, you could have wildcard BMX records to designate bulk mail exchangers for every host in your domain. Presumably, bulk mail exchangers would be provided by network service providers. They win because they don't have to carry so much traffic, and the list members win because the mail gets delivered faster than it would have had it been expanded at the source. Keith From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 22 23:44:58 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id XAA26576 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 22 Apr 1995 23:40:56 -0700 Received: from jazzie.com (p8.jazzie.com [192.147.229.18]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id VAA11382 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 1995 21:10:47 -0700 Received: by jazzie.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #63) id m0s2WWB-000OXRC; Fri, 21 Apr 95 21:10 PDT Message-Id: From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) Subject: Re: "Good Times" Virus Scare a Hoax To: PMDAtropos@aol.com Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 21:10:03 -0700 (PDT) Cc: lstsrv-l@searn.sunet.se, list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <950421134558_91251874@aol.com> from "PMDAtropos@aol.com" at Apr 21, 95 01:46:05 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1744 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk David wrote: > To help answer questions, I've prepared the following text. Since we're sharing, appended below is my take on how to calm people down. My personal pet theory is that the "Good Times" virus warning was a carefully crafted piece of work, generated by someone who fully understands the psychology of chain letters, in a misguided (or at least, failed) attempt to introduce an anti- virus that would snuff the original "Good Times" chain letter. -- Sean Shapira sds@jazzie.com +1 206 443 2028 Sean's Home Page Serving the Net since 1990. | Cara asked: | > What do you tell people to calm them down? | | Some attempt to explain the real situation might be a good | place to start. | | First, talk about chain letters. Most people have the real- | world experience of receiving one, and many well-educated | knowledge workers are annoyed (rather than co-opted) by them. | | Second, explain that there are email equivalents, and talk | about how they're even worse because the cost of duplicating | an email message (i.e. forwarding) is so low. | | Third, draw the parallel between chain letters and biological | viruses. This can be hard, but is an important part of the | overall message. | | Then say there really was a "Good Times" chain letter email | message. And suggest that one explanation for the message | they received is that someone was trying to warn people about | the original "Good Times" chain letter. | | That's about where you have to leave it, I think. As Cara | indicated, the desired result is to calm people down, and | providing a rational explanation like the one above ought | (IMHO) to help. From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 23 14:14:50 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA10708 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 13:46:43 -0700 Received: from suntan.Tandem.com (suntan.tandem.com [192.216.221.8]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id NAA10691 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 13:46:40 -0700 Received: from adm.loc3.tandem.com by suntan.Tandem.com (4.1/suntan5.950313) for list-managers@greatcircle.com id AA18962; Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:46:18 PDT Received: from zorch.loc3.tandem.com by adm.loc3.tandem.com (4.1/6main.940209) id AA21971; Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:46:17 PDT Received: by zorch.loc3.tandem.com (4.1/6leaf.940209) id AA24273; Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:46:16 PDT Date: Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:46:16 PDT From: scott@loc3.tandem.com (mueller_scott) Message-Id: <9504232046.AA24273@zorch.loc3.tandem.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Guilty as charged -- I think X-Envelope-To: brian@hyperreal.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >However, sites could create "contracts", whereby I agree to distribute a >huge chunk of say demon.co.uk's bulk mailing to US sites if they agree to >take on my bulk mailings to UK sites. Now all we need is some way for the >mail delivery agent (Sendmail or smail) to support this at an easy to use >level... Sounds like what BITNET's LISTSERV does. Anyone for MVS? \scott From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 23 16:44:47 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id QAA13871 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 16:41:54 -0700 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id QAA13866 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 16:41:50 -0700 Message-Id: <199504232341.QAA13866@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2294; Mon, 24 Apr 95 01:37:48 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with RFC822 id 6725; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 01:37:48 +0200 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 01:33:02 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Guilty as charged -- I think To: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: Message of Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:46:16 PDT from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:46:16 PDT mueller_scott said: >>However, sites could create "contracts", whereby I agree to distribute >>a huge chunk of say demon.co.uk's bulk mailing to US sites if they >>agree to take on my bulk mailings to UK sites. Now all we need is some >>way for the mail delivery agent (Sendmail or smail) to support this at >>an easy to use level... > >Sounds like what BITNET's LISTSERV does. Correct. >Anyone for MVS? Let me set the record straight. LISTSERV does not run on MVS. LISTSERV currently runs on VM, VMS, unix, Windows NT and Windows 95. I expect a MTE/IX version to become available RSN, depending on how soon our partner finishes the interface to HP's mail system. We're also considering ports to the Mac, and, yes, to MVS, but right now LISTSERV doesn't run on these systems. Eric From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 23 17:44:54 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA14351 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 17:30:22 -0700 Received: from yarrina.connect.com.au (yarrina.connect.com.au [192.189.54.17]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id RAA14344 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 17:30:11 -0700 Received: (from root@localhost) by yarrina.connect.com.au with UUCP id KAA09495 (8.6.11/IDA-1.6 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM); Mon, 24 Apr 1995 10:30:10 +1000 Received: from eyrling (eyrling [203.2.211.46]) by fulcrum.com.au (8.6.11/8.6.11) with ESMTP id KAA06635 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 10:14:32 +1000 Message-Id: <199504240014.KAA06635@fulcrum.com.au> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Sending mail to relay host for exploding (was: Guilty as charged -- I think) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 22 Apr 1995 19:16:15 MST." Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 10:15:11 +1000 From: Rik Harris Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sun, 23 Apr 1995 GMT, Brian Behlendorf wrote: [talk about using a site on one side of a long pipe to deliver all mail from a site on the other side of the long pipe - deleted] > Is there a way to automate that "well chosen site"? Well, I suppose you > could flood the internet with traceroutes and analyze paths and ping > times, but that's not guaranteed to be accurate. And besides, even if it > does overalll result in a net savings for the internet as a whole, it's > using the resources of another machine for your purposes. However, sites > could create "contracts", whereby I agree to distribute a huge chunk of > say demon.co.uk's bulk mailing to US sites if they agree to take on my > bulk mailings to UK sites. Now all we need is some way for the mail > delivery agent (Sendmail or smail) to support this at an easy to use > level... Sendmail wouldn't have too much problem handling this, I imagine. With Sendmail 8, in the .mc file: LOCAL_RULE_0 R$* < @ $* . ac . uk . > $* $#relay $@ relayhost.org.ac.uk $: $1 < @ $2 . ac . uk . > $3 or something like that (I haven't actually tested it). This will cause your sendmail to send all messages destined for hosts in the .ac.uk. domain to relayhost.org.ac.uk. You could probably also build something more general which used a database map. The BMX stuff sounded interesting, but I haven't heard of it actually being implemented yet. have fun, rik. -- The Fulcrum Consulting Group o ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rik Harris - rik.harris@fulcrum.com.au +61 3 9621-2100 (BH) /\ 12th Floor, 10-16 Queen St. Melbourne VIC 3000. +61 3 9621-2724 (Fax) From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 24 07:13:51 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id HAA29368 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:11:58 -0700 Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.225.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id HAA29336 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 07:10:59 -0700 Received: from tabaqui (tabaqui.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (4.1/campino-6) id AA03850; Mon, 24 Apr 95 16:03:27 +0200 Received: by tabaqui (4.1/POOLMH.3) id AA04953; Mon, 24 Apr 95 16:02:46 +0200 Message-Id: <9504241402.AA04953@tabaqui> From: berg@pool.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 16:02:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: Alan Deikman's message as of 1995 Apr 21 Fri 16:05. <9504212305.AA12372@znyx.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: SmartList (Re: Guilty as charged -- I think) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan Deikman wrote: >Actually, what appears to be happening is a combination of both -- the >choplist utility takes the distribution list, sorts it by superior/ >inferior domain, and seems to automatically parcel out addresses. By Choplist (a utility program that comes with SmartList) currently accomplishes roughly the same task as bulkmailer. The only difference with bulkmailer is that the number of addresses that go into a group will depend on the actual addresses involved. >looking at the output of netstat, some addresses are connected to >directly, and others seem to be relayed by the service provider, >netcom. I haven't had the time to figure out how this works. SmartList doesn't do anything special here. That's your s(end)mail performing the magic. For those interested, there is a mailinglist that specifically deals with SmartList issues: send your subscription request to SmartList-request@informatik.rwth-aachen.de The package can be picked up through: ftp://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/packages/procmail/SmartList.tar.gz -- Sincerely, berg@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). "I have a *cunning* plan!" From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 24 14:00:36 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA14656 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 13:15:02 -0700 Received: from bogart.dowling.edu (dowling.edu [149.72.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id NAA14648 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 13:14:53 -0700 Received: from admin1.dowling.edu by bogart.dowling.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/3.1.090690-Dowling College) id AA29631; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 16:11:39 -0400 Received: from ADMIN1/SpoolDir by admin1.dowling.edu (Mercury 1.21); 24 Apr 95 16:17:25 -500 Received: from SpoolDir by ADMIN1 (Mercury 1.21); 24 Apr 95 16:17:08 -500 From: "Mitchell Langbert" Organization: Dowling College To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 16:16:57 EDT Subject: Re: Mailing List Software Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v3.22 Message-Id: <1C1192B7868@admin1.dowling.edu> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi! My name is Mitchell Langbert, and I am the owner of a mailing list, soc-econ, which serves the Society for the Advancement of Socioeconomics, an organization that pursues interdisciplinary research in economics and sociology. The mailing list software we have been using is an old version of Listserv (I think) that has quite a few quirks. We have been wondering if there is software out there that can work on a P.C. and that is state-of-the-art? Thanks Mitchell. Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D. Assistant Professor School of Business Dowling College Oakdale, New York 11769-1999 E-mail: Langberm@Admin1.Dowling.Edu Telephone: 516-244-3416 From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 28 09:45:10 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA13406 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 09:19:19 -0700 Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id JAA13323 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 09:13:12 -0700 Received: from kasvpc15.joensuu.fi by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HPVMUHZ8HC001Y5E@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 16:13:17 +0200 (EET) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 19:14:18 -0700 From: Marko Toivanen Subject: Unsubscription bounces - sites sending unsubsription commands instead of DFNs To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi Message-id: <01HPVMUI3H1U001Y5E@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla/1.0N (Windows) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk How do you folks feel about sites trying to send automatic unsu**cription commands instead of delivery failure notifications when bouncing list mail because of non-existent users? A future paradise for list-managers or more heat to the usual purgatory of list management? I've only seen this once, when a BBS to which some mailing lists were supposed to be relayed into tried automatically to send a variety of unsubscription commands. Only, it sent them to the original senders of the list mail, not to any guess of the mailing list management software's address. It looks like there's already someone wanting to do that, Who knows if it'll be a trend. What do you think about that? Regards, Marko ************************************************************************** Marko Toivanen * mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi ******* co-moderator in FEYERABEND http://www.joensuu.fi/~mtoivane/ * of majordomo@lists.village.virginia.edu Spoon Collective: http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/ ************* > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > unsubscribing ex-users from lists automagically? > > From: mis@world.std.com (Mark Seiden) > Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 18:30:12 GMT > Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA > Newsgroups: comp.mail.list-admin.software, comp.mail.headers, > comp.mail.misc > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > around 50% of mail traffic at one of my clients (a large > commercial site) originates from various list mailers. > > the user population has a significant turnover. > > we would like to specially process undeliverable mail (which we would > bounce, normally) to generate unsubscribe messages for users who are > really gone, (as opposed to "just temporarily"). > > while we haven't studied this exhaustively, in fact, we've > just started, the practical problems seem to be: > > a. figuring out which flavor of listserver sent the mail. (there does > not seem to be a uniform way of detecting this, but we shudder at the > apparent need to use heuristics like grepping the last "Received" > line). > > b. then generating a flavor-specific unsubscribe. > (it's hard to gather the information about all of the servers, > and the unsubscribe mechanism is equally non-uniform, when a > third-party unsubscribe is supported at all). > > c. It appears that the practice, not the standard, is to interpret > Precedence: bulk or Precedence: junk (and possibly other values) > to decide what to do after a delivery error. Has this been codified? > e.g. with no delivery error reflected to a MLM the mail just keeps > on coming, which is not the socially desireable outcome. > > has anyone else been through this exercise? > > (based on the faq in > ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.answers/mail/list-admin/software-faq > it appears that a number of the MLMs (e.g. LISTSERV, ListProc, > SmartList) try to handle delivery failures already.) > > does anyone know if there's rfc or ietf activity in this > area? > > thanks for any pointers. > > -- mark seiden, mis@seiden.com, 1-(415) 592 8559 (voice) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 28 21:15:00 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id UAA04236 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 20:51:36 -0700 Received: from mail04.mail.aol.com (mail04.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.53]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id UAA04231 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 20:51:33 -0700 From: PMDAtropos@aol.com Received: by mail04.mail.aol.com (1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA021977511; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:51:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:51:51 -0400 Message-Id: <950428235150_100327496@aol.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Unsubscription bounces - sites sending unsubsription commands instead of ... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In a message dated 95-04-28 20:25:04 EDT, mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi writes: >It looks like there's already someone wanting to do that, >Who knows if it'll be a trend. What do you think about that? Well, assuming there is some way to determine that the mail delivery atte= mpt is really for a mailing list, and that the mailing list software used (if= any) supports unsubscription commands, I think it's reasonable. In fact, if we take America Online as an example, it would be great to be= able to have the service mail system automatically issue SIGNOFF * (GLOBA= L to LISTSERV for extinct user accounts. It certainly would save *me* a lot of= time and effort for GLB-News, Belief-L and SoftRevu (which generate about= 2,000 AOL-related bounce messages a week if I don't keep right on top of things -- that 2,000/wk figure is about 20% of the total amount of bounce= mail I get). OTOH, if there's no reasonable way to determine the software package whic= h is sending the mail to the non-existant user, there will be problems. Sites which insist on calling their software LISTSERV but which in fact run something altogether different are going to be problems (for example, Net= com, which runs Majordomo but uses LISTSERV as its server 'name'). On another hand, I think it would be a big step forward in making mailing= lists more accessible to list users and their administrators if a more co= mmon set of commands and syntax were developed. Starting with a simple, generi= c "leave the list" command that is applicable for all list packages is a go= od start. My 2=A2... -- __ David B. O'Donnell (atropos@aol.net, PMDAtropos@aol.com) \/ AOL Internet Feedback/Response/Information Team Manager Tel. +1 703/556-3725 - FAX +1 703/883-1514 - "The spam stops here." Belief-L, GLB-News, SoftRevu List Owner/Editor From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 28 22:14:57 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA05620 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 21:57:25 -0700 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id VAA05615 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 1995 21:57:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199504290457.VAA05615@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7868; Sat, 29 Apr 95 06:53:47 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with RFC822 id 8554; Sat, 29 Apr 1995 06:53:46 +0200 Date: Sat, 29 Apr 1995 06:23:08 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Unsubscription bounces - sites sending unsubsription commands instead of ... To: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:51:51 -0400 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:51:51 -0400 PMDAtropos@aol.com said: >In fact, if we take America Online as an example, it would be great to >be= able to have the service mail system automatically issue SIGNOFF * >(GLOBA= L to LISTSERV for extinct user accounts. With the amount of users you have this would kill LISTSERV immediately and I would have to distribute an emergency patch to eliminate this command once and for all. I've come this close to doing it for several releases. Eventually I will, it's only a matter of time. This command was developed a long, long time ago, when the network was much smaller. It doesn't scale up and it cannot be made to scale up. You can't have thousands of sites (approximate number of universities) generating tens of thousands of netwide signoff requests each a year (approximate number of accounts that expire) to tell the world that, in case for any reason they had Joe on their list, well, Joe is gone for good. That's tens of millions of Joes a year for each server to look up or just 27k per day. If you're willing to sacrifice 10% of your entire machine to that, which I doubt most people would, the queries have to complete in 0.3 sec, counting everything - SMTP receipt and all. But in reality that's an optimistic scenario. All the academic account removals will be concentrated at semester end. So in fact it's more like you'll get the 10M Joes in the space of one month or > 300k a day and 30ms each. If you have a program that can run SMTP at that rate, I have a job for you :-) The only reason netwide SIGNOFF isn't doing any of that is that virtually noone uses it because virtually noone knows about it. It remains as a kind of "privilege" for the LISTSERV users who were there in the BITNET days and know about it. Because, indeed, it is convenient. The only way to make it scale up would be to have each organization run a server that stored the subscriptions to all its users all over the world. These servers would run the search and extract the 0.1% of matches and notify just the servers in question, indicating which lists are affected. It still wouldn't work for concealed subscriptions, though. >2,000 AOL-related bounce messages a week if I don't keep right on top of >things -- that 2,000/wk figure is about 20% of the total amount of >bounce= The real problem is that AOL's bounces are not parsed by the mail managers. If they were, the users would get deleted and everyone would be happy. And this scales up because only users actually on the lists result in a delivery error. Eric